اینترنت

برچسب: the

  • Campaign for College Opportunity’s new president on tackling the transfer process 

    Campaign for College Opportunity’s new president on tackling the transfer process 


    Jessie Ryan, president of the Campaign for College Opportunity

    Courtesy of the Campaign for College Opportunity

    One of California’s top higher education advocacy groups, the Campaign for College Opportunity, has a new leader.

    Jessie Ryan, who took over as president of the organization on July 1, has worked at the campaign for 19 years, most recently as an executive vice president. 

    Under Ryan’s predecessor, Michele Siqueiros, the campaign sponsored legislation making it easier for community college students to skip remedial math and English classes and enroll immediately in transfer-level courses. The organization has also advocated for reforming the state’s financial aid program and backed legislation intended to make it easier for students to transfer from a community college to a four-year university. 

    Ryan, who is a product of the Los Rios Community College District and San Francisco State University, recently spoke with EdSource about her priorities and how she plans to build on the campaign’s work around remedial education, improving transfer and expanding financial aid, among other topics.

    The following conversation has been edited for clarity and length.

    What are your main priorities as the campaign’s new president?

    I’d love to share with you a little bit about my journey because I think it connects to my priorities as well. 

    I was raised by a single mother who always dreamed of going to college, and she did not succeed in reaching her college dream. We moved around a lot and struggled with homelessness and food insecurity. She really instilled in me from the time I was 4 or 5 years old that a college education was going to be my pathway out of poverty. 

    When I went to a community college, I had no clue as to how to access financial aid, how to develop an education plan so that I could transfer — all of these key things that would be building blocks to lifetime success. And just by luck, I ended up finding a counselor who really changed my life. Because of her, instead of going into remedial math, I had access to statistics. Because of her, I got an education plan to transfer and worked 35 hours a week and went to three campuses simultaneously to transfer. 

    When I did transfer, my mother became homeless again, and I was faced with this question of, do I drop out? And I did not have an associate’s degree to show for my work because the requirements to transfer did not align with the requirements to get an associate’s degree.

    And years later, I would find out that these were the experiences of millions of community college students across the state. Students being put into remedial sequences from which they could never recover based on one high-stakes test. Or having to repeat coursework because the requirements to transfer didn’t align with the requirements to get an associate degree, and sometimes dropping out and having nothing to show for their work.

    Those have been two of the bedrock policies that we have worked on at the campaign over the years, alongside a host of other issues. The campaign is going to continue to be at the forefront of policy transformation. 

    The Campaign for College Opportunity previously sponsored Assembly Bill 705 and co-sponsored Assembly Bill 1705, bills meant to make it easier for community college students to skip remedial math and English classes and access transfer-level coursework right away. How do you assess the implementation of those bills, and do you expect there could be additional legislation?

    We are not currently looking at additional legislation, but I wouldn’t say it is off the table, should it be necessary moving forward. AB 705 was one of most significant equity levers in ensuring that students are completing college-level math and English, accessing college-level math and English. There is significant data that has supported why this reform was necessary. But despite that, what we have marveled at is the level of continued opposition. 

    We’ve been really lucky to have, through former (California Community Colleges) Chancellor Eloy Oakley and now Chancellor Sonya Christian, champions who are committed to this issue. But it has been a fight year after year, more recently with the pandemic. A lot of people want to say that because of the pandemic, students are less prepared than ever before. And yet what we have seen from the most recent data is that students who access transfer-level math and English have done as well as in the prior years or even slightly better. 

    I think that the next iteration of this work is going to be, how do we implement equitable access to college-level math and English for our STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) students and for our ESL (English as a second language) students? Because those are the last two pieces of 705 and 1705 that need to be addressed and built out. The chancellor’s office is already talking with us at the campaign about helping to guide what the successful ESL implementation would look like for our multilingual learners.

    Where I think there’s potential for additional legislation and potential for additional budget investment is around co-requisite. Students who take co-requisite courses alongside transfer-level math and English succeed at higher rates. And so I think where we are is, how do we analyze evidence-based high quality co-requisite and resource it at scale? Because then it allows us to celebrate not just a 100% access to transfer-level math and English, but stronger throughput, stronger completion rates.

    Last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed AB 1291 to create a pilot program in which students seeking to transfer to UCLA will get priority admission if they complete an associate degree for transfer starting in 2026-27. The campaign at the time said it appreciated the legislation but called it only a first step. Do you have plans to try to further improve transfer to the University of California?

    We have over the years struggled with the reality that UC, while they’ve made some significant progress in meeting the needs of transfer students, can and should do more. They have had transfer admission guarantees, but they’re not at all campuses. And for community college students who are trying to prepare, they want to be able to use the associate degree for transfer, not just for admissions consideration, but for an admissions guarantee, if not to the campus of choice, to the system at large. 

    With 1291, the original bill was not a pilot. But it was amended to a pilot in the final stages of the legislative cycle. It is a first step. I appreciate that it’s a first step and that UCLA would be an important campus. 

    But at the end of the day, that pilot should be used to take the associate degree for transfer to scale. It should not live in isolation. How do we make sure that with UCLA’s new leadership, this is prioritized in such a way that sets it up for success and applicability for other campuses across the state? I hope that that will be the case. 

    Lawmakers and advocacy groups for years have said they want to reform the Cal Grant to make it simpler and make more students eligible for aid, but it hasn’t happened yet because of the state’s fiscal woes. Is Cal Grant reform still a goal of the campaign?

    We’ve been in touch, me and the new head of the California Student Aid Commission, Daisy Gonzales. She brought together a small group of partners to talk about how we can begin looking ahead to do what we need to so that we don’t find ourselves in this position again. Recognizing that there’s not going to be the kind of funding we need to actualize the Cal Grant Equity Framework this year, how do we start thinking about alternative funding sources and a multi-year approach that might allow us to take on pieces of the Cal Grant Equity Framework until we get to a place of full funding?

    What kinds of alternate funding have been discussed?

    We’re very early in conversations about alternative funding sources, but right now I’m encouraged because Daisy and the California Student Aid Commission are saying we need to think big. Is there the possibility of going after new dollars? Could we even be talking about seeing if there could be a tax that would be able to fund the kind of financial aid that would drastically expand access for students across the state? 

    But they’re early conversations. Nothing is moving yet. What I will say, though, is, for me, having done this work for nearly 20 years, sometimes the greatest innovation comes at a moment of desperation. Or a moment of budget malaise. And so instead of just standing on the sidelines, I really think there is power in folks in the education equity community, our higher ed institutional partners and our Student Aid Commission saying, ‘Here are the suite of options that we’re looking at,’ recognizing that this is going to take a few years to be able to see into fruition.

    Do you have any specific goals or priorities related to the California State University system?

    At the CSU system, we are seeing that there have been some really strong practices adopted around inclusive hiring, cluster hiring to ensure that faculty and leadership reflect the diversity of the state. There has been some really good work that has happened to support Black learner excellence and innovation. I would say an example of that right now is what we’re seeing with Sac State developing the first Black Honors College in the nation and what is going to be the house to a dedicated $2 million fund to support Black learner success systemwide. We want to really work with the system and accelerate those efforts because I think the challenge here is we know that some campuses have done well and others have not. And really the key to equity moving forward is going to be to ensure that all CSU campuses offer the same type of quality experience for our Black and Latinx students that some leaders on campuses are prioritizing. I think it becomes even more important that we elevate those high-impact practices like cluster hiring and dedicating funding to ensure welcoming campuses right now than ever before, because students and families are questioning the value of college. 

    In response to the Supreme Court ban on race-conscious admissions, California people have said, ‘Well, we’ve had Proposition 209 for quite some time. So does this really affect us?’ But the reality is we have seen that there is a chilling effect often after these types of decisions. Students and families are questioning the value of college. Students and families are wondering whether or not college is affordable, accessible, worth enrolling in at this time. And so I do believe that given the size, the significance of the CSU system, we have a huge opportunity to say we’re going to do more than ever before in the Graduation Initiative, to make sure that those gains are actually resulting in not just real number gains for all student populations and racial and ethnic subgroups, but closing of equity gaps.





    Source link

  • Why civic engagement must be integrated into the school dashboard

    Why civic engagement must be integrated into the school dashboard


    State Superintendent of Instruction Tony Thurmond and Chief Justice Patricia Guerrero honored Kennedy High in Anaheim for its outstanding civic learning programs.

    Credit: Courtesy Anaheim Union HSD

    The State Seal of Civic Engagement, approved by the State Board of Education in 2020, marked a vital progression in developing students who are not only academically strong but also civically active and socially aware.

    However, the absence of this seal in the College and Career Indicators (CCI) of the California School Dashboard represents a missed opportunity — until now. Recently, the State Board of Education has requested that the California Department of Education incorporate the seal into the CCI. By incorporating it, we can incentivize schools to cultivate civic responsibility, enhance the relevance of education and elevate student voices. This initiative offers a powerful chance to foster active citizenship, connect learning to real-world challenges, and inspire students to engage meaningfully with their communities.

    The Seal of Civic Engagement, which is affixed to a student’s diploma or certificate of completion, should be added alongside other key indicators like the State Seal of Biliteracy, ensuring it receives the attention it deserves. With local criteria including a minimum GPA of 2.0 in all social science courses and the completion of a civic engagement project, schools would now be held accountable to a higher standard of civic instruction. The inclusion of the civic engagement seal on the California School Dashboard is not only a recognition of student accomplishments but also a catalyst for broader shifts in educational practices that prioritize civic education.

    Incorporating the California Seal of Civic Engagement into the school dashboard will encourage schools to shift away from traditional instructional models and move toward more student-centered approaches. One of the primary benefits is the emphasis on elevating student voice and agency. Rather than positioning students as passive recipients of knowledge, the seal incentivizes schools to create opportunities for students to take on leadership roles, participate in community-based projects and engage in civic dialogue, and ultimately give students a reason to vote and participate in our democracy.

    Student-driven learning experiences will become a central focus, allowing students to take ownership of their education and the role they play in society. This shift fosters not only a deeper understanding of democratic principles but also a sense of responsibility and empowerment. As students take on active roles in addressing real-world challenges, they develop leadership, critical thinking and problem-solving skills, all while becoming more engaged in their communities.

    The connection between civic engagement and student well-being is becoming increasingly evident through research at UCLA and USC. By embedding service learning into the curriculum, schools can create more holistic learning experiences that connect academic content with community service. Civic engagement projects offer students a sense of purpose and belonging, which can significantly contribute to their mental health.

    When students work on projects that address real-world problems, they not only learn about the issues but also engage emotionally and intellectually with the material. Service learning provides an avenue for students to apply what they’ve learned in the classroom to make a tangible impact in their communities, which can enhance their sense of agency and improve their emotional well-being. Schools will be encouraged to develop instructional models that prioritize these types of experiences, ultimately supporting the mental and emotional health of students in ways that extend beyond traditional academic instruction.

    One of the most exciting opportunities provided by the California Seal of Civic Engagement is the potential to integrate civic engagement with career exploration. Schools can align civic projects with career pathway programs, providing students with hands-on learning experiences that are directly related to potential college majors and career interests.

    For example, students interested in public service, environmental sustainability or health care could engage in civic projects that allow them to explore these fields while still in high school. By linking civic engagement with career pathways, schools not only make learning more relevant but also provide students with early exposure to future career opportunities. This shift in instructional focus ensures that students are better prepared for both post-secondary education and the workforce.

    A key feature of the Seal of Civic Engagement is its potential to drive instructional shifts that address pressing societal issues. With its inclusion in the dashboard, schools will be incentivized to create project-based learning opportunities that tackle local and global challenges such as climate change, affordable housing, health care access and mental health.

    By engaging in civic projects that address these critical issues, students develop the skills necessary to analyze problems, research potential solutions and implement action plans. These hands-on experiences prepare students to think critically and creatively, making their learning more meaningful and applicable to real-world contexts. The seal encourages schools to foster a learning environment where students can connect their education to the challenges facing their communities and the world.

    The Seal of Civic Engagement also promotes active citizenship by encouraging schools to design lessons that emphasize democratic participation, voter registration and civic responsibility. By embedding these democratic practices into the curriculum, schools can ensure that students are not only knowledgeable about the issues but also understand the importance of participating in democratic processes.

    This instructional shift prepares students to be informed and engaged citizens beyond graduation, helping to create a more active and participatory democracy. Students who understand the value of their voice and their vote are more likely to carry those values into adulthood, becoming lifelong advocates for their communities and society at large.

    By nudging schools to prioritize civic education, we can prepare a generation of students who are not only academically accomplished but also socially conscious and ready to engage with the challenges of the modern world. From promoting student well-being to encouraging career exploration and addressing critical societal issues, including the Seal of Civic Engagement in the state’s accountability system is a vital step toward creating a more equitable and empowered future.

    •••

    Michael Matsuda is superintendent of Anaheim Union High School District in Southern California.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. We welcome guest commentaries with diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Where Did Trump Get the Nutty Idea of Reopening Alcatraz?

    Where Did Trump Get the Nutty Idea of Reopening Alcatraz?


    Have you visited Alcatraz? It’s a fun way to spend time in San Francisco. You take a boat ride with other tourists and get a guided visit around the infamous prison. It sits on a 22-acre island known as “The Rock.” To describe Alcatraz as dilapidated would be an understatement. You learn about the notorious gangsters who were locked up there (including Al Capone and Machine Gun Kelly), about the many efforts by prisoners to escape, and you see the tiny, grim cells they lived in. Then you visit the gift shop for souvenirs and books about Alcatraz.

    While it’s often said that no one ever escaped Alcatraz, despite many attempts, three men built a raft and took off undetected in 1962: Frank Morris and the Anglin brothers. They were never seen again, so authorities think they must have drowned. But it’s possible they they made it to the mainland and started new lives. No one knows.

    Trump announced that he wants to reopen Alcatraz because it is time to get tough on hardened criminals. He said he was reacting to the madness of judges ruling that criminals were entitled to due process. This was impossible, he said, because he wanted to toss out millions of criminals, and there are not enough judges to give due process to so many criminals.

    At its height, Alvarez housed fewer than 350 prisoners.

    Malcolm Ferguson of The New Republic thinks he found out why Trump suddenly discovered Alcatraz as a solution. He saw a movie about Alcatraz!

    Ferguson writes in The New Republic

    President Trump may have gotten his half-brained idea to reopen and expand the infamous Alcatraz prison from a movie that aired on WLRN this past weekend. 

    “REBUILD, AND OPEN ALCATRAZ! For too long, America has been plagued by vicious, violent, and repeat Criminal Offenders, the dregs of society, who will never contribute anything other than Misery and Suffering. When we were a more serious Nation, in times past, we did not hesitate to lock up the most dangerous criminals, and keep them far away from anyone they could harm. That’s the way it’s supposed to be,” the president wrote on Truth Social Sunday evening. 

    “I am directing the Bureau of Prisons, together with the Department of Justice, FBI, and Homeland Security, to reopen a substantially enlarged and rebuilt ALCATRAZ, to house America’s most ruthless and violent Offenders,” he continued. “We will no longer be held hostage to criminals, thugs, and Judges that are afraid to do their job and allow us to remove criminals, who came into our Country illegally. The reopening of ALCATRAZ will serve as a symbol of Law, Order, and JUSTICE. We will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”  

    A Bluesky user provided some more details on this seemingly random announcement. 

    “I may have context for this! Last night WPBT in Palm Beach broadcast the 1979 Clint Eastwood film ‘Escape from Alcatraz,’” they wrote. Trump was in Palm Beach on the night in question. 

    Trump potentially making major policy decisions based on the last movie he watched is bleak but unsurprising. Alcatraz is a dilapidated full-time museum off the coast of San Francisco that closed in the 1960s because it was too expensive to operate and many of the buildings were falling apart. Getting it back to a full-time jail would be incredibly costly and labor intensive. 

    “Alcatraz closed as a federal penitentiary more than sixty years ago. It is now a very popular national park and major tourist attraction,” California Representative Nancy Pelosi wrote on X. “The President’s proposal is not a serious one.”

    Rachel Maddow had a different theory about why Trump suddenly wanted to revive Alcatraz. She thinks he purposely distracts the public and the media. Toss out a shiny object for people and the media to get excited about, and it distracts them from serious policy failures. Alcatraz is bread & circus for the rubes, like the proposal to rename the Gulf of Mexico. Better to have them talk about something silly than to talk about Pete Hegseth’s latest mess at the Pentagon or RFK Jr.’s relentless war against modern science.



    Source link

  • A guide to what a $10 billion construction bond on the ballot could mean for your school

    A guide to what a $10 billion construction bond on the ballot could mean for your school


    West Contra Costa Unified’s Stege Elementary School in Richmond.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    More than 1 in 4 school districts are asking local voters to approve a record $39 billion in school construction bonds on the Nov. 5 ballot. Those that pass will jockey for some of the $10 billion in matching state funding that Gov. Gavin Newsom and the Legislature are asking voters to approve by passing Proposition 2.

    The facility needs of districts are huge and growing, even as the state’s overall enrollment is projected to decline over the next two decades.

    Decades-old “portable” classrooms are falling apart; many air conditioners are malfunctioning, and classrooms without them are sweltering. Roofs leak, plumbing is corroding, wiring is fraying. 

    Parents worry about open access to insecure campuses. Schools lack room for new transitional kindergarten classes and plans for climate-resilient, energy-efficient buildings. Increasingly popular career and vocational education programs need up-to-date spaces.

    Districts’ priorities will vary, and so will their capacity to pay for them. As in the past, districts with high property values, which often correlate to higher-than-average incomes of homeowners, will have a leg up on their property-poor neighbors in terms of what they can ask their taxpayers to approve. Some districts will check off items on their wish list; other districts will resort to triage, fixing what’s most falling apart.

    In March 2020, amid first reports of a new pandemic on the horizon, statewide voters defeated a state construction bond with an unlucky ballot number. As a result, the state fell further behind in helping districts repair and rebuild school facilities.

    “The defeat of Proposition 13 in 2020 and the pandemic made local districts more hesitant to put bonds on the ballot in 2022, so there is a lot of pent-up need,” said Sara Hinkley, California program manager for the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley, which has extensively analyzed facilities needs in the state. 

    “The number of bond measures and the total amount reflect the aging and deferred maintenance of California schools, as well as the increasing urgency of HVAC and schoolyard upgrades to grapple with extreme heat.”

    The center estimates that 85% of classrooms in California are more than 25 years old; 30% are between 50 and 70 years old, and about 10% are 70 years old or older.

    Proposition 2 won’t significantly reform a first-come, first-served funding system if it passes, but it will clear out a backlog of unfunded school projects and partially replenish a state-building fund that has run dry.

    With so much on the ballot competing for attention, Proposition 2 may escape many voters’ attention. Here are answers to questions that should help you fill out your ballot.  

    What’s on the ballot this year?

    School districts have placed 252 bond proposals to raise $39.3 billion; 15 community college districts are asking voters to pass $10.6 billion worth of bonds, for a total of 267 proposed bonds valued at $49.9 billion. They range from a proposed $9 billion bond issue in Los Angeles, the state’s largest district, to $3 million sought by Pleasant View Elementary School District for repairs to its only school in Porterville.

    How is school construction funded?

    Unlike school districts’ operating money, which mostly comes from the state’s general fund, school construction and repairs remain largely a local responsibility, paid for by bonds funded by property taxes. Over the past 20 years, voters approved $181 billion in local bonds for public school and community college facility projects, according to the Legislative Analyst’s Office.  

    That compares with $31.8 billion over the same period in state facilities bonds passed for school district and community college construction, plus $4.6 billion from the general fund that Gov. Gavin Newsom directed toward school construction. Altogether, the state has chosen to bear only 17% — one-sixth — of the total costs of school construction since 2001.

    Bonds are essentially loans that are paid back, commonly over 25 or 30 years, with interest. In the past 10 years, interest rates have ranged from about 2% to nearly 5% and now are coming down again. The Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates it would cost the general fund about $500 million annually for 35 years to pay back Proposition 2’s principal and interest.

    What does it take to pass a bond?

    The passage of a local bond requires a 55% approval rate. Despite the higher threshold than a simple majority, voters have approved 80% of local bonds on the ballot since 2001, according to CaliforniaFinance.com. The exception was in 2020, when voters defeated about half of local bonds, along with Proposition 13. The passage rate bounced back in 2022 to 72% — perhaps a good omen for proposals on Nov. 5 . 

    It takes only a 50% majority to pass a state construction bond. A voter survey in September by the Public Policy Institute of California found that 54% of likely voters said they would vote yes on Proposition 2, with 44% voting no.

    The bulk of state funding for school and community college construction came in the early 2000s, during fast-growing enrollment and boom years for the state economy. However, the state issued no state bonds for a decade after 2006. The 2016 bond, Proposition 51, the last that voters approved, allocated $7 billion for K-12 and $2 billion for the state’s 115 community colleges. All of that funding has been distributed. 

    Are there limits to how much districts can tax property owners for school bonds?

    Yes. Property taxes from school construction are capped at $60 per $100,000 of assessed valuation for unified districts, $30 per $100,000 for elementary or high school districts, and $25 per $100,000 for community college districts. A person whose home assessed value is at $400,000 (often significantly less than the market value) could pay up to $240 in annual property taxes in a unified district to pay off bonds’ principal and interest. Districts will stretch out the timeline for projects to stay under the limit.

    How will Proposition 2 be divvied up?

    The $10 billion will split:

    • $1.5 billion for community colleges
    • $8.5 billion for TK-12 districts, allocated as follows:
      • $4 billion for repairs, replacement of portables at least 20 years old, and other modernization work
      • $3.3 billion for new construction
      • $600 million for facilities for career and technical education programs
      • $600 million for facilities for charter schools
      • $115 million set aside to remove lead in school water

    Will all of this money go toward new projects?

    No. 

    Unfunded projects left over from Prop. 51 in 2016 that are deemed eligible for funding will go to the front of the line. That’s how the system worked in the past when there wasn’t enough money to go around, and the Legislature applied the same language to Prop. 2. The rationale is that districts spent time and money hiring architects and engineers and drawing up plans, and shouldn’t be penalized for efforts done in good faith.

    Those existing projects could consume half of the $8.5 billion for TK-12 funding. As of Aug. 31, the Office of Public Instruction, which tracks projects for funding, reported 1,000 school projects requesting $3.9 billion were already in line, with requests dating back to 2022. These break down to 812 modernization projects potentially eligible for $2.6 billion and 189 new construction projects eligible for $1.3 billion. The deadline for school districts to apply is Oct. 31, so the list may yet grow. 

    The Office of Public Construction cautioned that although the districts have filed paperwork, they have not been evaluated and approved for funding by the State Allocation Board under the rules in effect for Proposition 51. Some may have been built with local funding and are waiting for a state match.

    With $40 billion in local projects on the ballot and probably a net of $4 billion available for modernization and new construction, there likely will not be enough to fund more than a portion, leading to the establishment of a new list of unfunded projects.

    How does the match work?

    The state awards matching money to districts to defray the qualifying cost of individual school projects; it does not provide a lump sum award for all of the districts’ requests.  The state pays a uniform amount per student based on a school’s enrollment. Districts with growing enrollment, buildings over 75 years old, and a shortage of space can receive funding for new construction. 

    As with past state bonds, the state will split the cost of new construction; the state will contribute a higher match for modernization projects — 60% by the state and 40% by the district.

    A new feature in Proposition 2 will provide a slightly larger state match — up to an additional 5 percentage points on a sliding scale system to districts with both high rates of low-income students, foster children and English learners, and, to a lesser extent, with a small bonding capacity per student, another measure of ability to issue construction bonds. Low-income districts like Fresno Unified and Los Angeles Unified will be eligible for 65% state assistance for renovations and 55% for new construction, lowering their share to 35% and 45%, respectively.

    Is the formula fair?

    Analyses by the Public Policy Institute of California and the Center for Cities + Schools at UC Berkeley have concluded that the current system favors property-wealthy districts. Property-poor districts serving low-income families can’t afford bonds to qualify for state modernization subsidies to repair and upgrade schools. 

    The center’s data showed that the quintile of districts with the lowest assessed property value — those with a median of $798,000 of assessed value per student — received $2,970 per student in state modernization funding from 2000 to 2023, while the districts in the highest quintile, where the median assessed property value was $2.3 million per student, received $7,910 per student — more than two-and-a-half times as much. 

    Another factor is that matching money is distributed first-come, first-served, which favors large districts and small property-wealthy districts with an in-house staff of architects and project managers adept at navigating complex funding requirements.

    Does Proposition 2 address these complaints?

    To an extent, yes.

    • Proposition 2 would dedicate 10% of new funding for modernization and new construction to small districts, defined as those with fewer than 2,501 students. First-come, first-served wouldn’t apply to them.
    • Proposition 2 would expand financial hardship assistance in which the state pays for the total cost of projects in districts whose tax bases are too low to issue a bond. Eligibility would triple the threshold for hardship aid from a maximum of $5 million to $15 million in total assessed value; additional dozens of mostly rural districts would become eligible. Some have never issued a bond to fix schools that urgently need attention. Since 1998, about 3% of state bond money has been spent on hardship aid.
    • The higher state match for districts with large proportions of low-income students and English learners is a step toward addressing inequalities. However, critics led by the public interest law firm Public Advocates charge that it does not go far enough and uses flawed measures. Districts like 3,500-student Del Norte in the far north of the state  and 46,000-student San Bernardino Unified in Southern California would need an 80% to 90% state match to raise enough money to fix critical conditions and add facilities that property-wealthy districts take for granted, they argue.

    What else is new in Proposition 2?

    The bond will allow districts to seek a supplemental grant to construct or renovate transitional kindergarten classrooms and build gyms, all-purpose rooms, or kitchens in schools that lack them.

    Districts must write an overall plan documenting the age and uses of all facilities when submitting a proposal for Prop. 2 funding. The lack of data has made it difficult to determine building needs statewide.

    What would happen if Proposition 2 is defeated?

    In the last 30 years, voters have nixed state construction bonds twice, but never twice in a row. If voters do that next month, the unmet building needs of districts struggling to address them will mount. The price to fix them will rise, forcing difficult choices on how to scale back and reorder priorities.

    The $9 billion bond issue passed in 2016 would cost $11.8 billion to cover the same work in 2024, 31% more, according to a U.S. inflation calculator. A $10 billion bond passed in 2002 would require $17.5 billon in funding today.

    The escalation in materials and labor costs since the pandemic may continue to soar — or maybe not. Voters on Prop. 2 will have to decide whether to take that gamble.

    “We believe that voters will understand the value of making the critical repairs and classroom upgrades that our students need and deserve,“ said Rebekah Kalleen, legislative advocate for the Coalition for Adequate School Housing or CASH, the lobby representing school districts and school construction contractors campaigning for Prop. 2.





    Source link

  • 252 districts place bonds on the ballot; here’s how two would spend the money

    252 districts place bonds on the ballot; here’s how two would spend the money


    El Camino Fundamental High School principal Evelyn Welborn explains how rainwater leaks through hallway windows, causing teachers to use trash cans to collect the water.

    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Renovating a high school that swelters in summer and gushes leaks in winter is a priority of a large Sacramento-area district. Replacing an undersized gym with no air conditioning is a priority of a small high school district in Kern County.

    The to-do list varies among the hundreds of school districts that have placed construction bonds before voters on Nov. 5, but urgency is what they share in common. In California, the list of school buildings needing attention is long and growing, compounded by climate change that is exposing more of the state to unprecedented levels of heat and unhealthy air.

    In 2020, anxiety about an unknown virus, Covid-19, led voters to defeat half of the local bonds on the ballot that year and discouraged many districts from placing bonds before voters in 2022. The suppressed demand has resulted in a record 252 school districts seeking $40 billion worth of renovation and new construction projects, including classrooms for the youngest students, transitional kindergartners, and space for “maker labs” and innovative career explorations for high schoolers.

    Many of the districts are hoping to seek financial help from Proposition 2, a $10 billion state construction bond for TK-12 and community colleges, that the Legislature also has put on the Nov. 5 statewide ballot. Passage would begin to replenish state assistance, which has run dry from the $9 billion bond passed in 2016, and create a new list of projects eligible for state help in the future.

    This report is the first day of a two-day look at a sampling of districts from different parts of the state that are asking their voters to pass local bonds. First, we visit San Juan Unified and Wasco Union High School District. Tuesday, read about Modesto City Schools, Fresno Unified and neighboring Central Unified.

    San Juan Unified School District

    San Juan Unified
    • Sacramento County
    • 49,840 students
    • 61% low-income, foster and English learner students
    • $22,243 bonding capacity per student*

    * Bonding capacity is the maximum amount of general obligation bonds a school district can issue at a given time. A district can never go over the ceiling.  For unified districts, it is 2.5% of total assessed valuation; the median in California is $25,569 per student.

    El Camino Fundamental High School in Sacramento was quiet Thursday as temperatures rose to 103 degrees. Few of the school’s 1,300 students lingered in the halls, where there is no air conditioning and open windows provide the only air circulation.

    Even air conditioning in classrooms is not always reliable. Teachers and their students have had to double up with other classes at times when some systems fail.

    The upcoming rainy season won’t offer much relief at the 70-year-old school. Water from leaks travels down walls and into lockers in the halls and drenches expensive machinery in the metal shop.

    In one particularly bad spot, teachers have taken to tying a garbage can to one window with a rope, to collect the water before it floods the hallway floor. 

    School staff must regularly snake out a sewer access that has spewed sewage across walkways students must traverse to enter a classroom.

    Renovating the school is one of the priorities of San Juan Unified School District if voters pass Measure P, a $950 million general obligation bond. The measure will update classrooms, repair leaky roofs, improve school security, provide safe drinking water, and remove asbestos and lead paint from the district’s aging schools.

    The bond will cost homeowners $60 per $100,000 of their home’s value — $300 a year for a house worth $500,000.

    The improvements will improve education and retain teachers, said Superintendent Melissa Bassanelli in a message on the district website.

    “Quality classrooms and good teachers are essential to student learning,” Bassanelli wrote. “If passed by voters, Measure P funds will help the district upgrade career technical education classrooms, math and science labs and ensure that students have access to a well-rounded education including music, visual and performing arts.”

    During a tour of El Camino Fundamental, principal Evelyn Welborn pointed out a crowded biology classroom where 36 students sat elbow to elbow with little space or updated equipment for lab work.

    “We have fantastic programs going on,” Welborn said. “Unfortunately, our building was built in the 1950s, so we’re doing, trying to do 21st century learning in a 20th century building, which doesn’t always work.”

    If the bond passes, El Camino Fundamental could have some buildings renovated and others razed and replaced, potentially with a two-story building, said Frank Camarda, chief operations officer for the district. The buildings that are renovated would be gutted and have new windows, ceilings, lighting, flooring, plumbing and electrical, he said.

    The San Juan district needs $3.5 billion to complete all the work needed at its 64 schools, Camarda said, adding that district leaders expect to get $90 million in facilities funds from the state’s Proposition 2, a public education facilities bond, if it passes on Nov. 5.

    If Measure P does not pass, the district — in a worst-case scenario — would have to focus on repairing and maintaining roofs, heating and air conditioning units, and electrical systems at its schools, Camarda said.

    The district passed a $750 million bond measure eight years ago and used the funds to update schools like Dyer-Kelly Elementary School, located just three miles from the high school. The old elementary school was razed and replaced with a two-story school five years ago.

    Dyer-Kelly Elementary teacher Hallie Lozano engages with a kindergarten student during outdoor playtime.
    Credit: Andrew Reed / EdSource

    Dyer-Kelly Elementary teacher Hallie Lozano remembers the leaky roofs, failing air conditioner, lack of storage and limited number of bathrooms in the 70-year-old school before it was torn down and replaced.

    “That was a big deal, Lozano said. “It was really hard (for teachers) to just get into the bathroom before your next period.” 

    Now teachers and students at the K-5 school have access to numerous bathrooms, assemble in a modern amphitheater and take part in drama productions on a stage in the cafeteria.

    Spacious classrooms now have whiteboards, television sets, bulletin boards and ample storage.

    The school, with about 97% of its 800 students from low-income families and 60% English learners, has become the centerpiece of the community.

    Principal Jamal Hicks says about 150 people show up outside the school each evening to visit and watch their children play on the school lawn and sidewalks. He says the school provides safe, well-lit space that isn’t readily available elsewhere in the community.

    “The school is like a beacon for the entire community,” Hicks said. 

    Updating school facilities at San Juan Unified, a district of 40,000 students, has to be a comprehensive step-by-step long-term process, Camarda said. 

    “You can’t do it all at once,” he said. “You have to keep everything functioning, but you also have to start making some bold moves and replacing the oldest of your inventory. … So we’ve changed our philosophy, and it seems to be working really well.” 

    Wasco Union High School District

    When it rains or gets hot in Wasco — and it’s often scorching — Wasco Union High School often has to resort to a backup plan for P.E. classes because of the state of its current gym. 

    WAsco Union High School District
    • Kern County
    • 1,807 students
    • 89% low-income, foster and English learner students
    • $31,672 bonding capacity per student*

    * Bonding capacity per student is the maximum amount of general obligation bonds a school district can issue at a given time. A district can never go over the ceiling. For high school districts it is 1.25% of total assessed valuation; the median in California is $25,569.

    “Anytime we cannot be outside, (the students) have to sit in the bleachers and do online assignments,” said Millie Alvarado, P.E. department head.

    A new gym with air conditioning is a key project that Wasco Union High School District is promoting as a part of Measure D, a $35.4 million education bond measure on the ballot in this rural Kern County community this November. The bond will cost homeowners $30 per $100,000 of their home’s value – $94 a year for a house worth $314,000, the median value in Wasco, according to Zillow.

    A warm, sunny climate has made Wasco a national leader in rose production, but temperatures that soar above 90 degrees for a third of the year also make it unsafe for students to do anything physically rigorous outside. 

    That wouldn’t be such a problem if Wasco Union High School had an air-conditioned gymnasium, like most high schools in Kern County.

    Wasco’s lone comprehensive high school gym just has swamp coolers, with an evaporative cooling system that is no match for the triple digit heat that hits the region with increasing regularity.

    “We’re trying to really help the community to understand the safety component of it,” said Superintendent Kevin Tallon. “It’s just not a safe campus when you look at the safety standards that other facilities have in most Kern County schools.”

    This year, paramedics were called when a student passed out due to heat during P.E., Tallon added. Athletes who rely on the gym for games, after-school practice or summer conditioning feel the effects acutely.

    “You feel like you’re suffocating,” said Rosalia Sanchez, a senior and varsity volleyball player.

    Principal Rusvel Prado said the roof has been patched over many times but still leaks when it rains. 

    Even when the weather cooperates, the gym does a poor job accommodating the nearly 1,700 students who attend Wasco Union High. For school pep rallies, about half of the student body overflows outdoors. Locker rooms are cramped and unventilated, which Alvarado says is not ideal when 200 to 300 students are changing into and out of gym clothes each class period.

    Measure D was developed with community feedback, Tallon said. The district was able to pass a bond measure in 2008 that modernized and upgraded heating and air conditioning systems for much of the campus, which was built in 1915. But two follow-up bond measures failed — one by a fraction of a percentage point in 2018, and one by 3.3 points in March 2020.

    In the 2008 bond, classrooms took priority over the gymnasium, which dates back to the 1950s. Tallon said that if the new bond proposal passes, it would allow for 80% of the campus to be modernized over the next 20 years.

    Campus security has become a bigger priority for schools in recent years. The bond measure will also go toward upgrading door locks, alarms, cameras, lighting and emergency communication systems. The west section of campus, where career technical and dual enrollment courses are held, is unfenced — a major safety concern in an era of mass shootings, Tallon said. 

    Pathways to college and career have received a renewed focus in California, bringing new facility needs. Wasco Union High’s construction program has a cramped shop without air conditioning. The building that will ultimately house dual enrollment students was set on fire by an arsonist who attacked local schools, according to local news reports. The district owns an off-campus farm that trains agricultural students, but there is no plumbing or safe drinking water — something the bond money aims to address.

    The measure is asking for nearly the full amount of the $36 million bonding capacity of the community. Wasco Union High School District plans to apply for Proposition 2 funds, if it passes. The proposition will prioritize districts like Wasco, where its residents’ incomes are low — 88% of students qualify as socioeconomically disadvantaged. However, Tallon doesn’t believe that proposition or other state funding sources will be sufficient to help the district.

    “We’re sensitive to the fact that it’s a tough economic time right now when it comes to inflation,” Tallon said. “But we also try to provide as much information as we can about the cost of the bond measure to the homeowner. For what you get in return for the quality of schools, we feel it’s money well spent.”





    Source link

  • Understanding California’s test scores could hold the key to student improvement

    Understanding California’s test scores could hold the key to student improvement


    Credit: Alison Yin/EdSource

    As states across the nation release their annual data from tests administered to students in the 2023-24 school year, we’re beginning to get a clearer picture of how far along we are in our post-pandemic recovery. The release of California test data today shows our public schools are continuing to turn the corner on pandemic recovery, with gains on most assessments, while highlighting areas where we have more work to do.

    Overall, the percentages of California students meeting or exceeding the proficiency standards for English language arts (ELA), mathematics, and science increased. This is encouraging given that the population of socioeconomically disadvantaged students tested increased again over the past year — as it has for each of the last three years — this time from 63% to 65% — an increase of more than 60,000 students. The number of students experiencing homelessness also rose once again. Despite the challenges they face, achievement levels for socioeconomically disadvantaged students increased more than the statewide average in all three subjects at every grade level. 

    Furthermore, Black and Latino students showed positive score trends in mathematics across all grades, and the stubborn achievement gaps long experienced by Black students began to close with gains larger than the statewide averages in math and ELA at several grade levels. The same was true for foster youth.

    These gains for California’s most vulnerable students are likely due in large part to the investments made by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s administration and efforts to target inequities in life circumstances and educational opportunities. These include programs like the California community schools initiative that provides wraparound whole child supports, the expanded learning opportunities program (ELO-P) that provides academic support and enrichment after school and over the summer, the literacy coaching initiative, and the equity multiplier — all targeted to high-poverty schools. Attracting and keeping better prepared teachers in these schools has also been enabled by the Golden State Teacher Grants for new teachers and incentives for accomplished veterans who are National Board certified. 

    It is encouraging that overall scores are up, but there is more work needed. And an accurate understanding of what’s being measured and what the scores mean is critically important for diagnosing and improving student learning.

    Smarter Balanced assessments are administered in California and 11 other states and territories that helped develop the tests. California’s Smarter Balanced assessments are more rigorous than those in most other states as they focus on higher-order skills and critical thinking, and measure more standards.

    For example, whereas most states’ English language arts assessments test only reading and use only multiple-choice questions, California’s tests include reading, writing, listening, and even research, as well as open-ended questions and performance tasks that require students to analyze multiple sources of evidence and explain their conclusions.

    Each Smarter Balanced assessment measures grade-level content along a continuum. Higher test score performance represents a student’s ability to handle greater complexity as they use evidence, analyze and solve real-world problems, and communicate their thinking.

    Smarter Balanced defines benchmarks at levels 2, 3 and 4 respectively as foundational, proficient, or advanced levels of grade-level skills, while a “1” shows “inconsistent” demonstrations of grade-level skills. In the case of English language arts, students as early as grade three who achieve levels 2 or above are reading, writing and demonstrating research skills.

    As an example, a sixth-grade writing prompt asks students to research and explain the impact of the 1893 World’s Fair, and different levels of performance show different levels of sophistication, from communicating a few facts to elaborating on how the activities of the fair led to other human accomplishments with long-term impact:

    To understand where improvements are most needed, educators can look at “claim scores” on the assessment — measures of what students have shown they know and can do on specific topics. These show, for example, that 25% of students statewide score below the standard in reading, but 31% score below the standard in writing — an area for greater focus. Since research shows that writing improves reading, ensuring that students are receiving regular writing instruction and practice will improve performance in both areas of literacy.  

    Similarly, in mathematics, California assessments are more sophisticated than those in many other states, as they measure math concepts and procedures (where many state tests begin and end), plus data analysis, problem-solving, and how well students communicate their reasoning through additional performance tasks in which students must solve a complex real-world problem and communicate their reasoning.  

    The states that created and use these assessments believe that when students are asked to learn and show higher-order skills, they are better prepared for later schooling and life than if they were only prepared to bubble in answers on a multiple-choice test.

    A recent study from Washington state provided evidence for this belief. The study found that over half of students who scored a “Level 2 / Nearly Meets” on the Smarter Balanced high school mathematics test (and more than one-third of those who scored a 1) successfully enrolled in post-secondary learning without additional remedial courses, and the large majority succeeded. Among those who scored a 3 or 4, 70% and 82% respectively attended college, and nearly all were successful.

    We hope that educators, parents and policymakers will not only understand and act on what they learn from these assessments, but also use the evidence productively for improving teaching and learning. Smarter Balanced assessments include lesson plans and interim assessments teachers can choose to examine student learning and adjust their teaching throughout the year. The score reports also provide information about the levels at which students are reading and computing, linked to resources parents can access directly to support their children — supplemented by what they know authentically about what their children are learning and doing at home and school. 

    Students’ engagement, parents’ observations, teachers’ reports and classroom-based assignments will always provide more detailed, timely and useful information about individual students’ interests, needs and progress. Hopefully, these assessments can provide a useful adjunct if we know what they mean and how to use them productively. 

    •••

    Linda Darling-Hammond is the president of the California State Board of Education.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Teachers are still leaving, but these aspiring educators are excited to join the profession

    Teachers are still leaving, but these aspiring educators are excited to join the profession


    A teacher shows 12th grade students how to construct a small animal house.

    Credit: Allison Shelley for American Education

    Amid a statewide teacher shortage, talk of teachers leaving the profession or simply not going into it in the first place is widespread. In a 2022 UCLA study, 1 in 5 California teachers said they would probably or definitely leave the profession in the next three years because of burnout, low pay and student apathy and misbehavior.

    But what about the teachers who are joining the profession? What motivates Gen Z students to go into teaching today, when it’s seemingly less lucrative and less attractive than ever? 

    One reason students like Katherine Osajima Pope — a recent University of California Santa Cruz graduate who is earning her master’s degree and teaching credential at Stanford University — decide to become teachers is to effect change. Osajima Pope wants to have a positive impact on her students, and, by extension, her community, “even if that’s one person at a time, or one classroom at a time.” 

    Chloe Decker, a rising senior at UC Berkeley, has noticed an increase in students who approach teaching from an advocacy perspective. As a peer adviser in UC Berkeley’s CalTeach program, through which undergraduates can gain teaching experience and even get their credentials, Decker regularly meets with students considering the teaching profession.

    “I have seen so many inspired students excited for student advocacy. They want to change people’s lives, they want to be there for the kids, they want to be one person of influence that can change minds as to how they view education,” Decker said. 

    CalTeach and other undergraduate and graduate credential programs place a heavy emphasis on the role of teaching in equity and social justice. One of the required courses for CalTeach’s program focuses on equity in urban schools, and the program lists increasing “access, equity, and inclusion for STEM learning” as one of its core principles. Osajima Pope said she was “pleasantly surprised” by Stanford’s commitment to educating its students on anti-racism and equity.

    Decker, who aims to become a teacher and then a school social worker, said she has seen a change in “what school actually means.” Beyond “just emphasizing academic requirements,” schools now see themselves as a support and social system for kids — and Decker and many of her peers are excited to engage in this aspect of the job. 

    “It’s just deeper than having them learn what one plus one is,” she said.

    Excited by the idea that educators can do more than teach facts and figures, many future teachers plan to bring their own educational experiences into the classroom, while parting ways with some aspects of traditional pedagogy. 

    Osajima Pope has been working with children for years, volunteering at schools and libraries since she was a child. She called her educational experience growing up in Oakland “transformative,” and said she wants to go back as an ethnic studies teacher to “teach to the same person that (she) was.”

    Susana Espinoza said her high school Spanish teacher exposed her to the world of Chicano/Latino studies, and she wants to similarly broaden students’ horizons. Espinoza, who is currently studying at UC Berkeley, remembers that Spanish class as the first time she saw herself reflected in the classroom, or in “any type of story that was told.” 

    Espinoza hopes to be “that one steppingstone” that allows students to achieve their dreams, as her teacher did for her.

    While equity and access to education are powerful motivators, some future teachers are just as excited by the potential of a job that allows for creative expression and deep interpersonal connections. For Lindsay Gonor, a recent Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo graduate who is now earning a teaching credential there, it was working at a theater camp through her teen years that led her to education. Gonor said the experience contrasted with what she heard from her parents about their jobs, and specifically her father, who was a lawyer.

    “I would ask (my dad) how work was, and he’d be like, ‘They don’t call it going to fun.’ And I was like, well, that’s not what I want to do. I work at the theater camp, and work is fun,” Gonor said.

    These Gen Z-ers are not ignorant of the challenges that come with teaching. Decker said that each time CalTeach hosts a teacher panel, at least one speaker discourages the students from joining the profession — citing the common problems of low pay and long hours.

    Gonor even acknowledged that her credential program is not a good “bang for your buck.” However, Gonor said, “The people that want to be teachers want to be teachers.” 

    Osajima Pope said she’s confronted with the realities of the job practically every time she tells someone her intended field, and she’s met with resistance. But for her, a part of the desire to teach is intrinsic, and possibly inexplicable. 

    “For me, my job isn’t about the money I make, it’s about what I feel passionate about,” Osajima Pope said. “It’s definitely hard to explain choosing happiness over money just because those two are equated so frequently, but I guess it was just (that) there’s literally nothing else I could see myself doing. Like, absolutely nothing else.”

    Clara Brownstein is a third-year student studying English, Spanish and journalism at UC Berkeley, and a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps.





    Source link

  • Can a final push save San Francisco State’s marine research campus on the bay?

    Can a final push save San Francisco State’s marine research campus on the bay?


    Katharyn Boyer, the interim executive director of San Francisco State University’s Estuary and Ocean Science Center, walks the grounds of the Romberg Tiburon campus on Feb. 13, 2025.

    Amy DiPierro, EdSource

    Top Takeaways
    • University says attempts to make the Romberg Tiburon campus financially self-sustaining have fallen short.
    • The likely closure shows the challenges facing some Cal State campuses amid tepid enrollment, anticipated state budget cuts and a maintenance backlog.
    • One researcher’s specialty is studying eelgrass, a plant important to sustaining the bay ecosystem.

    To the untrained eye, the eelgrass in San Francisco Bay is unremarkable, a slimy marine plant easily mistaken for seaweed. But to the ecologist, it is essential: a natural carbon storage system, a hedge against climate change, and a protector of shorelines threatened by rising seas.

    That’s why Katharyn Boyer, a biology professor who leads San Francisco State University’s estuary and ocean science center in Marin County, has spent much of her career studying how to restore and maintain the bay’s underwater meadows of ribbon-like eelgrass. It’s an effort growing more urgent as climate change nudges sea levels ever higher.

    Working for the past two decades at the marine research campus, a 13-mile drive north of San Francisco, Boyer and her colleagues have trained the next generation of scientists and conservationists. Budding researchers hone their field skills at the site, where saltwater tanks act as a temporary home for eelgrass plants waiting to be replanted in the bay. “You really have to treat the plants well while you’re doing this restoration work,” Boyer said. “Having this nice, cool, natural supply of water — it’s the perfect kind of condition.”

    Seawater tanks provide a temporary home for eelgrass before replanting.
    Seawater tanks at Romberg Tiburon provide a temporary home for eelgrass.

    But the 53-acre marine research campus where Boyer works could soon close as the university contends with declining enrollment and a likely cut to state funding.

    San Francisco State says it can no longer afford to keep the lights on at the site, a former Navy base now called the Romberg Tiburon campus. Since the university announced plans to close Romberg Tiburon in February, Boyer has redoubled efforts to secure enough outside funding to save it. As of last week, Boyer said, San Francisco State finance officials have indicated that the funds she has raised are not enough. The site would start to wind down over the coming months unless a last-minute solution emerges.

    “You can bring in the grant money, but you have trouble with covering your basic operations costs,” Boyer said while walking the property on a blustery day. “I don’t think it’s a unique problem here. It just has gotten to the point where our university is just struggling so much financially that it’s hard to justify the costs of it.

    “That’s very hard for us to take because we think that we do — and we know that the community thinks what we do — is really valuable,” Boyer added, as a gust of wind blew her ball cap from her head. 

    The plan to close Romberg Tiburon is one sign of how lower enrollments are setting off a financial domino effect at some California State University campuses. While some campuses, especially those in Southern California, attract a growing student body, San Francisco State’s enrollment fell 26% between 2015 and 2024. That means San Francisco State will receive less money not only from student tuition but also from the 23-campus Cal State system. All of that could be crunched further by Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal to reduce funding to CSU and the University of California by almost 8%.

    Reductions are surfacing in varied forms at CSU campuses. Sports teams and the geology department are among the cuts proposed at Sonoma State University. Cal State East Bay will close its downtown Oakland conference and classroom center when its lease ends in June. Sacramento State, where enrollment is up 2% year-to-year, plans to cut $24 million from its department of academic affairs over the next two years. Even Cal State San Marcos, among the system’s fastest-growing campuses, is offering retirement incentives to manage a tight budget.

    Amy Sueyoshi, San Francisco State’s provost, said her campus is “scaling back everywhere,” with at least 30 faculty members leaving each year and only a handful joining to replace them.

    “At this point, with our limited resources, it’s actually not OK for us to have so much of our resources flowing in a direction that doesn’t serve our undergraduate students directly,” she said.

    Romberg Tiburon — named for Paul Romberg, who was president of San Francisco State when the university took over the site — is also an example of the worsening condition of facilities across CSU. San Francisco State estimates the Romberg Tiburon campus needs about $4 million in critical safety repairs. Such expenses barely scratch the surface of the roughly $8 billion maintenance backlog around the Cal State system. 

    What happens next to the marine campus is uncertain. Boyer continues to seek donors or nonprofits interested in leasing the site. San Francisco State plans to give all estuary and ocean science faculty an opportunity to relocate to the main campus, though lab space is limited. But Boyer says the transition only guarantees lab space to tenured faculty and may leave nontenured faculty, in effect, “homeless,” complicating things for their graduate students.

    “There’s a lot of people’s careers and livelihoods that are at stake,” she said.

    A marine lab ‘in the middle of gritty San Francisco Bay’

    In mid-February, Boyer walked the grounds of the Tiburon campus wearing a parka and baseball cap, a stadium umbrella tucked under one arm in case the scattered drizzle turned into a downpour. To the north, the ghostly outline of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge emerged from the fog like a half-finished sketch leading east to the unseen Chevron refinery on the opposite side of the bay.

    Marine laboratories tend to be located in remote places, where scientists study life in pristine ecosystems relatively untainted by human interference. Romberg Tiburon breaks that mold.

    “This one is in the middle of the gritty San Francisco Bay, with all of the problems of the large population that we have here, all of the impacts that that creates, all the opportunities for restoration and conservation that that creates,” Boyer said. 

    Boyer pointed out barracks and other holdovers from the site’s past lives as a Navy base, coaling station and nautical training school. San Francisco State established a research beachhead at Tiburon in 1978, taking over ownership from the federal government. Today, researchers work out of Delta Hall, a converted warehouse from the 1940s. 

    A former coal trestle frames a barracks building at the Romberg Tiburon campus on Feb. 13, 2025.
    Amy DiPierro, EdSource

    Working along the shoreline makes it possible to offer hands-on classes in wetlands ecology and biological oceanography, including for undergraduates, Boyer said. “It’s an amazing place to do that, because [students] can do experiments here,” she said. “They can develop a hypothesis and test it from start to finish over the course of a semester.”

    The marine research campus currently hosts about 30 graduate students, Boyer said, and as many as 100 undergraduates use the Tiburon campus in a typical year. Recent master’s students have landed jobs at places like the Environmental Protection Agency and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. Even with those success stories, Sueyoshi said a master’s program through the estuary and ocean science center has already been discontinued due to a lack of students.

    The campus is also showing its age and a lack of upkeep. Signs emblazoned “DANGER” and “RESTRICTED AREA” urge visitors to stay away from buildings whose chipped paint exposes wood beneath. 

    As recently as 2019, San Francisco State sketched blueprints to redevelop and repurpose buildings on the site. One plan suggested a reinvigorated campus could “amplify SF State’s social justice legacy” and proposed building new housing and academic space while refurbishing existing facilities.

    Such ambitions would require a private developer to purchase and invest in the campus, Sueyoshi said, adding that San Francisco State has also explored returning the site to the federal government or persuading other universities to take it over. 

    A view of San Francisco Bay from the Romberg Tiburon campus on Feb. 13, 2025.
    Amy DiPierro, EdSource

    ‘You can’t just rebuild it’

    As the financial pressures on San Francisco State have grown, many faculty at the Romberg Tiburon campus now raise the money to pay their own salaries through state and federal grants, Boyer said, rather than relying on San Francisco State. The Tiburon campus also earns money by leasing space, including an onsite conference center, to third parties.

    Entrepreneurial efforts aside, the Tiburon campus still counts on San Francisco State for some important costs, including the salaries of facilities and administrative staff members as well as tenured faculty, a university statement noted.

    A tight budget has not stopped San Francisco State from investing in other campus improvements. The university combined funding from CSU and private donors to build a new 125,000-square-foot science and engineering building on its main campus, which opened last year. In April, it unveiled a new student housing project that includes a health center and dining hall, funded in part by a state grant.

    But the lack of long-term funding for Romberg Tiburon leaves Boyer’s eelgrass projects in limbo. She expects to continue the work at Tiburon through the fall, “but after this field season, basically, I don’t know,” she said. 

    A chain of interconnected life relies on eelgrass to thrive. As the ocean absorbs carbon dioxide released by burning fossil fuels, it becomes less hospitable to oysters and, in turn, less welcoming to birds like the appropriately-named black oystercatcher. But beds of spindly green eelgrass capture carbon, creating a refuge for native oysters and a marine buffet for birds of prey.  

    Once lost, it is an ecosystem that can be labor-intensive to restore. It’s the kind of work that Marilyn Latta, a project manager at the California State Coastal Conservancy, said requires “early mornings, wetsuits, boat access, all sorts of hard work that’s best suited for a shoreline, marine science location on the water” like the Romberg Tiburon campus. 

    “If we were to lose that expertise,” she said, “you can’t just rebuild it.”





    Source link

  • Cellphone bans don’t solve the real problem — addictive social media

    Cellphone bans don’t solve the real problem — addictive social media


    Courtesy: Ednovate Charter School

    Recently, Instagram unveiled new policies designed to address what we all see: teenagers suffering the adverse effects of addictive social media apps. The new policies include making teen accounts private by default, stopping notifications at night, and including more adult supervision tools for parents. 

    While this is a first step, as school leaders and parents, we know the addiction is bigger than just Instagram. This is a larger reflective moment for us as educators, parents and caretakers of tomorrow’s leaders. We must go beyond platform-by-platform fixes.

    I’ve been an educator for more than 20 years. Now, as a school leader of seven high schools in Southern California, reaching nearly 3,000 students from historically underserved communities in Los Angeles and Orange counties, I see the impact that technology has had on our teenagers, and how captivating social media and gaming apps have become. It has taken a long time to teach myself the self-regulation skills to manage social media and more, and I am in my 40s. Now imagine trying to learn it at 13, unaware of all the tools working to hook us.

    Jonathan Haidt, author of the book “The Anxious Generation: How the Great Rewiring of Childhood Is Causing an Epidemic of Mental Illness,” argues that girls who “spend five or more hours each weekday on social media are three times as likely to be depressed as those who report no social media time.”

    It is overwhelming for parents, teachers or anyone who cares about the future leaders of our communities.

    Just a few weeks ago, it seemed like every week another school district or state was announcing a sweeping cellphone ban, but no one was asking a critical question: Are America’s youth hooked on phones, or are they addicted to the social media and gaming apps that have become central to their social lives and to staying informed? How do we break the spell that these companies have cast over teenage minds?

    Cellphones themselves aren’t the problem. Notice that we don’t need to ban the Calculator, Camera app, Google search, or many other tools, because those tools don’t have the intentional captivating pull of direct messaging, new posts or endless scrolling.

    It seems to me that social media apps and games that are optimized for long-term addiction should be banned or significantly altered before banning cellphones, which are ultimately a great learning and communication tool. Cellphones can promote the development of a student’s necessary sense of independence. 

    This calls for collective action. We must work together and continue listening to our teachers, acknowledging the challenges and burden that cellphones present in the classroom for them. But the first step should be to tackle what is distracting students on their cellphones before banning the phone outright. Maybe our time as educators is better spent pushing for balanced policies that protect our kids rather than working tirelessly to police our kids and their phones. Instead of focusing on cellphone use or hoping for each platform to announce their individual fixes, school leaders from across the nation need to come together and demand answers from social media and addictive gaming companies. Instagram is the first company to make a move, but the rest of these companies are actively recruiting users as young as 13 years old with minimal verification, and watching these cellphone bans from a comfortable distance. Surely, educators and social media apps can partner to create an innovative solution to the real problem.

    As school leaders, we should call on social media companies and gaming companies to meet with us, to come up with practical solutions to the addictive technologies they have created.

    •••

    Oliver Sicat is the CEO of Ednovate, a network of free, public charter high schools in Los Angeles and Orange County. Ednovate primarily serves first-generation college-bound students from underrepresented and underserved communities.

    The opinions in this commentary are those of the author. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • Thom Hartmann: Trump and the Death of Our Ideals

    Thom Hartmann: Trump and the Death of Our Ideals


    Thom Hartmann sums up what Trump is: a malignant narcissist intent on destroying every shred of our democracy and our ideals. we knew from his first term that he was a liar and a fraud. Yet here he is, acting with even more rage, vengeance, and destruction than before.

    Let us not forget that Trump is enabled by the Republican Party. By their slim majorities in Congress. They have meekly watched as he terminated departments and agencies authorized by Congress. They have quietly given the power of the purse to Trump and Musk. They have watched as he turned himself into an emperor and made them useless. They could stop him. But they haven and they won’t.

    He writes:

    The Trump administration just gutted Meals on Wheels.

    Seriously. Meals on Wheels!

    Donald Trump didn’t just “disrupt” America; he detonated it. Like a political Chernobyl, he poisoned the very soil of our democratic republic, leaving behind a toxic cloud of cruelty, corruption, and chaos that will radiate through generations if we don’t contain it now.

    He didn’t merely bring darkness; he cultivated it. He made it fashionable. He turned cruelty into currency and made ignorance a political virtue.

    This man, a grotesque cocktail of malignant narcissism and petty vengeance, ripped the mask off American decency and showed the world our ugliest face. He caged children. Caged. Children. He laughed off their cries while his ghoulish acolytes used “Where are the children?” as a punchline for their next QAnon rally.

    He welcomed white supremacists with winks and dog whistles, calling them “very fine people,” while spitting venom at Black athletes who dared kneel in peaceful protest.

    He invited fascism to dinner and served it on gold-plated Trump steaks. He made lying the lingua franca of the right, burning truth to the ground like a carnival barker selling snake oil from a flaming soapbox.

    And let’s not forget the blood on his hands: 1,193,165 dead from COVID by the time he left office, 400,000 of them unnecessarily, dismissed as nothing more than “a flu,” while he admitted — on tape — that he knew it was airborne and knew it was lethal. His apathy was homicidal, his incompetence catastrophic.

    He tried to overthrow a fair election. He summoned a violent mob. He watched them beat cops with American flags and screamed “Fight like hell!” while cowering in the White House, delighting in the destruction like Nero fiddling as Rome burned.

    And now, like some grotesque twist on historical fascism, Trump’s regime is quietly disappearing even legal U.S. residents — snatched off the streets by ICE and dumped into El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison, a dystopian nightmare of concrete and cruelty.

    One such man, Kilmar Ábrego García, had legal status and a home in Maryland. But Trump’s agents defied a federal court order and deported him anyway, vanishing him into a foreign hellhole so brutal it defies comprehension.

    This isn’t policy: it’s a purge. A test run for authoritarian exile. And if Trump’s not stopped by Congress, the courts, or We The People in the streets, it won’t end there.

    But somehow, he’s still here, waddling across the political stage like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man of authoritarianism, bloated with power, empty of soul, and reeking of spray tan and sulfur.

    Donald Trump didn’t just bring darkness: he’s a goddamn black hole, a gravity-well of cruelty sucking the light out of everything he touches.
    This is a man who desecrates everything good.
    Empathy? He mocks it. Truth? He slanders it. Democracy? He’d bulldoze it for a golf course.
    And if we let him continue, he won’t just end democracy — he’ll make damn sure it never rises again.

    So the question is: are we awake yet?

    Or will we let this orange-faced death-cult leader finish the job he started, grinning over the corpse of the America we once believed in?

    Now is not the time to kneel: it’s the time to rise. Stay loud, stay vigilant, and show up. Every protest, every march, every call to DC, every raised voice chips away at the darkness.

    Democracy isn’t a spectator sport: it’s a fight, and we damn well better show up for it.



    Source link