اینترنت

برچسب: What

  • What to know about free money waiting in state-funded savings accounts | Quick Guide

    What to know about free money waiting in state-funded savings accounts | Quick Guide


    hept27 / iStock

    Este artículo está disponible en Español. Léelo en español.

    Over 3.6 million school-aged children across the state qualify for at least $500 in savings with the California Kids Investment and Development Savings program (CalKIDS), a state initiative to help children from low income families save money for college or career. 

    However, many families are unaware of CalKIDS or face challenges accessing the accounts once they learn of them. The money is automatically deposited into the savings account under a student’s name, but families must claim the accounts by registering online. 

    Here is information you should know about the state-funded accounts: 

    What is CalKIDS? 

    The CalKIDS program was created to help students, especially those from underserved communities, gain access to higher education. It helps families save for post high school training by opening a savings account and depositing between $500 and $1,500 for eligible low-income students in the public school system. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who launched the program in August 2022, invested about $1.9 billion in the accounts.

    Who qualifies? 

    Low-income students and all newborns qualify. 

    According to program details, low-income public school students are awarded $500 if they:

    • Were in grades 1-12 during the 2021-22 school year 
    • Were enrolled in first grade during the 2022-23 school year, or 
    • Will be in first grade in subsequent school years. 

    An additional $500 is deposited for students identified as foster youth and another $500 for students classified as homeless. 

    For newborns, 

    • Children born in California after June 2023, regardless of their parents’ income, are granted $100. 
    • Those born in the state between July 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023, were awarded $25 before the seed deposit increased to $100. 
    • Newborns get an additional $25 when they claim the account and an additional $50 if parents link the CalKIDS account to a new or existing ScholarShare 529 college savings account. 

    The California Department of Education determines eligibility based on students identified as low income under the state’s Local Control Funding Formula or English language learners. The California Department of Public Health provides information on newborns.

    How can students use the money? 

    The money can be used at eligible higher education institutions across the country, including community colleges, universities, vocational or technical schools and professional schools, according to CalKIDS. 

    The funds can be used for: tuition and fees, books and supplies, on or off-campus room and board as well as computer or other required equipment, according to the CalKIDS program guide. 

    Click here to search for schools that qualify as an eligible higher ed institution. 

    Does the CalKIDS account have restrictions similar to those for a 529 savings account? 

    CalKIDS accounts are a part of the ScholarShare 529 program — California’s official tax-advantaged college savings plan — and administered by the state’s ScholarShare Investment Board. 

    Transportation and travel costs are usually not considered qualified expenses for 529 savings accounts. 

    According to the guide for CalKIDS, if a student has no account balance with their higher education institution — which receives the CalKIDS distribution check —  the institution can pay the funds directly to the student. 

    Does the money in the CalKIDS accounts earn interest? 

    The deposits grow over time because CalKIDS accounts are interest-bearing.

    How aggressive that growth is depends on the age of the student, said Joe DeAnda, communications director with the California State Treasurer’s Office, which oversees the CalKIDS program. 

    “If it’s a newborn, (the seed deposits are) invested in a fairly aggressive portfolio that assumes 18 years of investing time,” DeAnda said. “If they are school-aged, they’re invested in a more conservative portfolio that assumes a shorter investing timeline and is a more secure portfolio.”  

    Even among students, the younger a child is, the more aggressive the savings portfolio will be. The investment provides “opportunity to grow savings while the child is younger and better safeguard savings against market fluctuations when the child nears college age,” according to the CalKIDS program guide.

    Specifically, accounts for newborns, each new class of first graders and students in grades 1-5 during the 2021-22 school year are invested in a portfolio that corresponds to the year that they’re expected to enter a program after high school, or at age 18. The portfolio will become more conservative as the child gets older. 

    For students in grades 6-12 during the 2021-22 school year, the accounts are invested with a guaranteed, or fixed, rate of return on the investment. 

    Can I add to the account? 

    No, you cannot add money to the CalKIDS account. Parents or guardians can open a ScholarShare 529 account, which can be linked to the CalKIDS account so they can view the accounts in one place. 

    In fact, CalKIDS encourages families to open a ScholarShare 529 college savings account, which is a way for families to save even more money for their children, DeAnda said. 

    What if my student already graduated? What happens to unclaimed money? 

    The accounts remain active under a student’s name until the student turns 26 years old. Up until that age, students can claim the money. 

    If the account is not claimed by age 26, the account closes, and the money is reallocated to others in the CalKIDS program, DeAnda said. 

    What if I’m not sure if my child is considered low income? 

    CalKIDS has sent notification letters of program enrollment to over 3.3 million eligible students and nearly 270,000 students in last school year’s class of first graders. 

    Without the letters, to check student eligibility, families must enter students’ Statewide Student Identifier (SSID), a 10-digit number that appears on student transcripts or report cards, according to the CalKIDS website. 

    The California Department of Education provides CalKIDS with data on first graders in the late spring or early summer and asks parents to wait until then before checking for their child’s eligibility. 

    How do I access that SSID number to check eligibility or to register the account? 

    The SSID may be found on the parent’s or student’s school portal, transcript or report card. 

    The CalKIDS website instructs families to contact their child’s school or school district if they’re unsure of how or unable to locate the number.

    How do I access or ‘claim’ the account? 

    The notification letter that CalKIDS sends families contains a unique CalKIDS Code that can be used to register the accounts. Even without the code, families can register the accounts. 

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpyvh5aBgRE

    To claim the student account: 

    1. Visit the CalKIDS registration page to claim the account. Click here to register. 
    2. Enter the county where the student was enrolled (for a student in grades 1-12 in the 2021-22 school year; for a first grader, where the student was enrolled in 2022-23 or subsequent years)
    3. Enter student’s date of birth
    4. Enter the SSID or CalKIDS Code from the notification letter
    5. Click Register
    6. Set up the account, either as the child or as the parent/guardian, with a username and password

    To claim the newborn account, which should be available about 90 days after birth: 

    1. Visit the CalKIDS registration page to claim the account.
    2. Enter the county where the child was born
    3. Enter child’s date of birth 
    4. Enter the Local Registration Number on the child’s birth certificate or CalKIDS Code from the notification letter 
    5. Click Register
    6. Set up the account, either as the child or as the parent/guardian, with a username and password
    I still need help. How do I get additional support? 

    Contact CalKIDS at (888) 445-2377 or https://calkids.org/contact-us/ 

    How does my high school graduate make a withdrawal to use the money?

    According to the CalKIDS program guide, to request a distribution, log into the claimed CalKIDS account and request a distribution, which doesn’t have to be for the entire amount. The funds are tax-free for the qualified expenses of tuition, books, fees, computers and equipment. 

    The student must be at least 17 years old and enrolled at an eligible institution. 

    The CalKIDS money, which will be sent to the institution, is considered a scholarship from the state of California.





    Source link

  • Why Global Talent is Turning Away from U.S. Higher Education—and What We’re Losing – Edu Alliance Journal


    In 2025, much of my professional focus has been on small colleges in the United States. But as many of you know, my colleague and Edu Alliance co-founder, Dr. Senthil Nathan, and I also consult extensively in the international higher education space. Senthil, based in Abu Dhabi, UAE—where Edu Alliance was founded was asked by a close friend of ours, Chet Haskell, about how the Middle East and its students are reacting to the recent moves by the Trump Administration. Dr. Nathan shared a troubling May 29th article from The National, a UAE English language paper titled, “It’s not worth the risk”: Middle East students put US dreams on hold amid Trump visa crackdown.

    The article begins with this chilling line:

    “Young people in the Middle East have spoken of their fears after the US government decided to freeze overseas student interviews and plan to begin vetting their social media accounts. The directive signed by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and sent to diplomatic and consular posts halts interview appointments at US universities.”

    The UAE, home to nearly 10 million people—90% of whom are expatriates—is a global crossroads. Many of their children attend top-tier international high schools and are academically prepared to study anywhere in the world. Historically, the United States has been a top choice for both undergraduate and graduate education.

    But that is changing.

    This new wave of student hesitation, and in many cases fear, represents a broader global shift. Today, even the most qualified international students are asking whether the United States is still a safe, welcoming, or stable destination for higher education. And their concerns are justified.

    At a time when U.S. institutions are grappling with enrollment challenges—including a shrinking pool of domestic high school graduates—we are simultaneously sending signals that dissuade international students from coming. That’s not just bad policy. It’s bad economics.

    According to NAFSA: Association of International Educators, international students contributed $43.8 billion to the U.S. economy during the 2023–2024 academic year and supported 378,175 jobs across the country. These students fill key seats in STEM programs, support local economies, and enrich our campuses in ways that go far beyond tuition payments.

    And the stakes go beyond higher education.

    A 2024 study found that 101 companies in the S&P 500 are led by foreign-born CEOs. Many of these executives earned their degrees at U.S. universities, underscoring how American higher education is not just a national asset but a global talent incubator that fuels our economy and leadership.

    Here are just a few examples:

    • Jensen Huang: Born in Taiwan (NVIDIA) – B.S. from Oregon State, M.S. from Stanford
    • Elon Musk: Born in South Africa (Tesla, SpaceX) – B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania
    • Sundar Pichai: Born in India (Alphabet/Google) – M.S. from Stanford, MBA from Wharton
    • Mike Krieger: Born in Brazil (Co-founder of Instagram) B.S. and M.S. Symbolic Systems and Human-Computer Interaction, Stanford University
    • Satya Nadella: Born in India (Microsoft) – M.S. from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, MBA from the University of Chicago
    • Max Levchin: Born in Ukraine (Co-founder of PayPal, Affirm), Bachelor’s in Computer Science, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
    • Arvind Krishna: Born in India (IBM) – Ph.D. from the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
    • Safra Catz: Born in Israel (Oracle) – Undergraduate & J.D. from University of Pennsylvania
    • Jane Fraser: Born in the United Kingdom (Citigroup) – MBA from Harvard Business School
    • Nikesh Arora: Born in India  (Palo Alto Networks) – MBA from Northeastern
    • Jan Koum: Born in Ukraine (Co-founder of WhatsApp), Studied Computer Science (did not complete degree) at San Jose State University

    These leaders represent just a fraction of the talent pipeline shaped by U.S. universities.

    According to a 2023 American Immigration Council report, 44.8% of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or their children, including iconic firms like Apple, Google, and Tesla. Together, these companies generate $8.1 trillion in annual revenue and employ over 14.8 million people globally.

    The Bottom Line

    The American higher education brand still carries immense prestige. But prestige alone won’t carry us forward. If we continue to restrict and politicize student visas, we will lose not only potential students but also future scientists, entrepreneurs, job creators, and community leaders.

    We must ask: Are our current policies serving national interests, or undermining them?

    Our classrooms, campuses, corporations, and communities are stronger when they include the world’s brightest minds. Let’s not close the door on a future we have long helped build.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on international partnerships and market evaluations.



    Source link

  • Thomas Edsall: What Scholars Say About Trump’s Reign of Error and Chaos

    Thomas Edsall: What Scholars Say About Trump’s Reign of Error and Chaos


    Thomas Edsall writes a regular feature for The New York Times. In this stunning article, he recounts the views of numerous scholars about what Trump has done since his Inauguration.

    This is a gift article, meaning you can open the link and finish reading the article, which is usually behind a paywall.

    Edsall writes:

    One thing stands out amid all the chaos, corruption and disorder: the wanton destructiveness of the Trump presidency.

    The targets of President Trump’s assaults include the law, higher education, medical research, ethical standards, America’s foreign alliances, free speech, the civil service, religion, the media and much more.

    J. Michael Luttig, a former federal appeals court judge appointed by President George H.W. Bush, succinctly described his own view of the Trump presidency, writing by email that there had never

    been a U.S. president who I consider even to have been destructive, let alone a president who has intentionally and deliberately set out to destroy literally every institution in America, up to and including American democracy and the rule of law. I even believe he is destroying the American presidency, though I would not say that is intentional and deliberate.

    Some of the damage Trump has inflicted can be repaired by future administrations, but repairing relations with American allies, the restoration of lost government expertise and a return to productive research may take years, even with a new and determined president and Congress.

    Let’s look at just one target of the administration’s vendetta, medical research. Trump’s attacks include cancellation of thousands of grants, cuts in the share of grants going to universities and hospitals and proposed cuts of 40 percent or more in the budgets of the National Institutes of Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Science Foundation.

    “This is going to completely kneecap biomedical research in this country,” Jennifer Zeitzer, the deputy executive director at the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, told Science magazine. Georges Benjamin, the executive director of the American Public Health Association, warned that cuts will “totally destroy the nation’s public health infrastructure.”

    I asked scholars of the presidency to evaluate the scope of Trump’s wreckage. “The gutting of expertise and experience going on right now under the blatantly false pretext of eliminating fraud and waste,” Sean Wilentz, a professor of history at Princeton, wrote by email, “is catastrophic and may never be completely repaired.”

    I asked Wilentz whether Trump was unique in terms of his destructiveness or if there were presidential precedents. Wilentz replied:

    There is no precedent, not even close, unless you consider Jefferson Davis an American president. Even to raise the question, with all due respect, is to minimize the crisis we’re in and the scope of Trump et al.’s. intentions.

    Another question: Was Trump re-elected to promote an agenda of wreaking havoc, or is he pursuing an elitist right-wing program created by conservative ideologues who saw in Trump’s election the opportunity to pursue their goals?

    Wilentz’s reply:

    Trump’s closest allies intended chaos wrought by destruction which helps advance the elite reactionary programs. Chaos allows Trump to expand his governing by emergency powers, which could well include the imposition of martial law, if he so chose.

    I asked Andrew Rudalevige, a political scientist at Bowdoin, how permanent the mayhem Trump has inflicted may prove to be. “Not to be flip,” Rudalevige replied by email, “but for children abroad denied food or lifesaving medicine because of arbitrary aid cuts, the answer is already distressingly permanent.”

    From a broader perspective, Rudalevige wrote:

    The damage caused to governmental expertise and simple competence could be long lasting. Firing probationary workers en masse may reduce the government employment head count, slightly, but it also purged those most likely to bring the freshest view and most up-to-date skills to government service, while souring them on that service. And norms of nonpoliticization in government service have taken a huge hit.

    I sent the question I posed to Wilentz to other scholars of the presidency. It produced a wide variety of answers. Here is Rudalevige’s:

    The comp that comes to mind is Andrew Johnson. It’s hardly guaranteed that Reconstruction after the Civil War would have succeeded even under Lincoln’s leadership. But Johnson took action after action designed to prevent racial reconciliation and economic opportunity, from vetoing key legislation to refusing to prevent mob violence against Blacks to pardoning former members of the Confederacy hierarchy. He affirmatively made government work worse and to prevent it from treating its citizens equally.

    Another question: How much is Trump’s second-term agenda the invention of conservative elites, and how much is it a response to the demands of Trump’s MAGA supporters?

    “Trump is not at all an unwitting victim,” Rudalevige wrote, “but those around him with wider and more systemic goals have more authority and are better organized in pursuit of those goals than they were in the first term.”

    In this context, Rudalevige continued, the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025

    was not just a campaign manifesto but a bulwark against the inconsistency and individualism its authors thought had undermined the effectiveness of Trump’s first term. It was an insurance policy to secure the administrative state for conservative thought and yoke it to a cause beyond Trump or even Trumpism.

    The alliance with Trump was a marriage of convenience — and the Trump legacy when it comes to staffing the White House and executive branch is a somewhat ironic one, as an unwitting vehicle for an agenda that goes far beyond the personalization of the presidency.

    In the past, when presidential power has expanded, Rudalevige argued,

    it has been in response to crisis: the Civil War, World War I, the Depression and World War II, 9/11. But no similar objective crisis faced us. So one had to be declared — via proclamations of “invasion” and the like — or even created. In the ensuing crisis more power may be delegated by Congress. But the analogue is something like an arsonist who rushes to put out the fire he started.

    One widely shared view among those I queried is that Trump has severely damaged America’s relations with traditional allies everywhere.

    Mara Rudman, a professor at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center, wrote in an email:

    The most lasting impact of this term will be felt in the damage done to the reputation of the United States as a safe harbor where the rule of law is king and where the Constitution is as sacred a national document as any country has developed.

    Through his utter disregard for the law, Trump has shown both how precious and how fragile are the rules that undergird our institutions, our economic and national security and the foundation for our democracy.

    To finish this excellent article, please open the link.



    Source link

  • Colleges and cannabis: What institutions can and cannot do | Quick Guide

    Colleges and cannabis: What institutions can and cannot do | Quick Guide


    Cannabis has been legal in the state of California since 2016. With California universities adopting cannabis courses that allow students to explore all facets of the developing industry, federal roadblocks that restrict what kinds of courses can be offered remain.

    What kinds of cannabis courses can California colleges offer?

    Since legalization, several of California’s public universities have implemented courses exploring topics of business, law and public policy related to cannabis. However, the question of cultivation courses within agricultural programs remains a complex one. 

    Cal Poly Humboldt is one of the California universities that spearheaded the jump into cannabis courses after legalization, adding a cannabis studies major program in the fall of 2023. Concentrations under this major include environmental stewardship and equity and social justice.

    What are colleges unable to do because of federal law?

    Despite the major, neither Cal Poly Humboldt — nor any other plant science department in California colleges — can offer classes in which students handle the plant. Doing so may risk federal student aid, including Pell grants, which support primarily underserved groups like first-generation and minority students.

    “Cannabis remains a federally controlled Schedule I substance,” said Dominic Corva, director of cannabis studies at Cal Poly Humboldt. “The lawyers in the Cal State and UC systems, as well as every other university, argue that it’s federally illegal, and students’ federal aid could be in danger if we allow this.”

    Corva is the founder of the Interdisciplinary Institute for Marijuana Research at Cal Poly Humboldt; around the time of state legalization, Corva was working with his colleagues to develop a curriculum for a cannabis studies major. This major, explained Corva, falls within the university’s sociology department. 

    “The main reason I landed in sociology is because the College of Natural Sciences and College of Professional Studies didn’t want anything to do with it,” Corva said. “CNRS literally couldn’t wrap their heads around how to approach cannabis education without actually doing natural science with it. We were operating in an institutional framework where it was close to impossible for it to happen in any other kind of department.”

    This raises the question of whether cannabis cultivation courses will ever fall within plant science and agricultural departments at universities. 

    UC Davis, which is ranked No. 1 in the nation for agriculture, doesn’t offer any related courses, Gail Taylor, department chair of plant sciences, said. 

    “We have run a seminar course on cannabis in the past with invited speakers but have nothing on the books at the moment. We have run a professional short course on hemp, too,” Taylor said. 

    However, general plant science courses may provide students interested in cannabis cultivation with knowledge they need for a future career in the industry. 

    “Most of the ‘plant sciences’ majors are relevant to cannabis production,” Taylor said. Courses offered may help by “providing generic knowledge that the graduating students can take into multiple industries.”

    Scott Steinmaus is a professor and the department head of plant sciences at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo. As a plant science professor, he said that his plant physiology courses are applicable to a range of plants, including cannabis.

    “Plant growth is essentially determined by photosynthesis, and all plants photosynthesize with the same enzymes, with a few nuances that are quite easy to figure out,” Steinmaus said. “We provide our students the resources and experiences to understand how to best grow plants, no matter what those plants are; whether it’s tomatoes, strawberries, grapes, avocados or cannabis.”

    In his plant physiology classes, Steinmaus sometimes uses cannabis in examples, although without physically handling the plant. 

    “The compliance requirements for cultivation and sales of cannabis products are very stringent,” Steinmaus said of state regulations. “We currently do not offer courses where cannabis plants are grown on campus because of the compliance restrictions and that it is not federally legal. That doesn’t mean we couldn’t do so in the future when it does become legal at the federal level.”

    What about hemp?

    Similar roadblocks exist for the cultivation of hemp, a closely related plant that is legal because it contains less than 3% tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), the main psychoactive compound in cannabis. 

    Several public institutions of higher learning in the United States, including Santa Rosa Junior College, offer hemp-growing courses. However, these courses are touchy for universities to offer because of compliance regulations. 

    The 2018 federal farm bill clarified that while hemp and its derivatives are no longer considered Schedule I controlled substances, institutions that offer hemp courses must apply for a hemp research license through the state. 

    At Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, Steinmaus said the university doesn’t offer hemp courses yet. 

    In the future, if universities were able to legally offer cannabis cultivation courses as well, these would look different depending on the school and where it is in the state, Corva said. 

    “I know that here at Cal Poly Humboldt, it will probably look a lot more like regenerative agricultural program, where students are learning about how to be sustainable with their cannabis,” Corva said. “That’s way off, even if we’re allowed to do it, because there continue to be a lot of firewalls between the industry, state and federal laws.”

    Arabel Meyer is a fourth-year journalism major at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo and a member of EdSource’s California Student Journalism Corps. 





    Source link

  • Getting California kids to read: What will it take?

    Getting California kids to read: What will it take?


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xd4Alvvblo

    Leading literacy experts agreed that more young California students need to learn how to read, but they couldn’t reach a concensus on how to make it happen.

    While several participants in EdSource’s May 14 Roundtable discussion, “Getting California Kids to Read: What Will It Take?” suggested they would work together to pass a literacy bill, they also acknowledged that their disagreements remain in the details.

    Moderated by EdSource reporters John Fensterwald and Zaidee Stavely, the lively hourlong roundtable focused on how to achieve literacy for California children. The panel grappled with a myriad of thorny issues including state policy dynamics, the needs of dual-language learners and long-standing disagreements over how best to teach reading amid rising illiteracy rates. 

    Putting the needs of children and their teachers first should be the North Star when trying to solve the deepening literacy crisis, panelists agreed.

    The bottom line is grim. In 2023, just 43% of California students were reading at grade level by third grade, state data shows. Worse still, far fewer Black and Latino students met that standard.  

    “This is also a matter of civil rights,” said Kareem Weaver, an NAACP activist, co-founder of the literacy advocacy group FULCRUM and a key figure in the “The Right to Read” documentary, who has long argued that literacy is a matter of social justice too often obscured by esoteric debates about pedagogy. “Kids need access to prepared teachers, and communities like ours, I feel like we’re bearing the brunt.”

    Against the backdrop of an ongoing battle over state policy and crippling pandemic learning loss, the stakes are perilously high for children who graduate from high school unable to read. They struggle to navigate the world, from job applications to rental agreements, and studies point to the connection between illiteracy and incarceration. 

    “We’re counting on reasonable people to come together and figure this stuff out,” said Weaver. “These decisions that are made, they do fall on real kids, real communities.”

    What will it take to make sure that all kids, including English learners, read by third grade?

    While the state has taken some steps to get all kids to grade level, such as funding for tutors and testing students for dyslexia, a reading disability, there is no comprehensive plan. Given local control policies, districts decide how reading is taught, and many use methods that have been debunked by some experts. That’s a problem because consensus is key to reform, experts say. 

    “You want to make sure that whether you’re in the district office or you are a teacher in the classroom, you’re singing the same song,” said Penny Schwinn, former Tennessee education commissioner, who led that state’s renowned reading reform initiative, Reading 360. “The curricular materials are aligned, the professional development is aligned. All of that has to row in the same direction. Otherwise, you have people who are all doing different things in different ways and kids get confused.”

    What’s standing in the way of systemic change in California? One key question underpinning this debate is whether a statewide approach can meet the needs of English learners.

    “I do have to say that many times students and biliteracy programs are not included in the literacy conversation,” said Martha Hernández, executive director of Californians Together, an advocacy group. “Our literacy policy must have a focus on student-responsive teaching. I will say that multi-literacy is really the way of the future, particularly for our diverse state in this 21st century. It must be a cornerstone of literacy, biliteracy education policy in California.”

    Another key obstacle is the resistance to any top-down mandate that the state imposes on schools. 

    “When you do not have educators at the center of this, along with parents and students, it is set up to fail,” said David B. Goldberg, president of the California Teachers Association. “Frankly, going and passing legislation that reinforces a top-down approach, it’s antithetical to what all of our goals are about: really having all students succeed.”

    In hopes of giving the state a comprehensive plan focusing on phonics and other skills like vocabulary and reading comprehension, supporters backed Assembly Bill 2222 authored by Assemblymember Blanca Rubio, D-Baldwin Park. It also had the support of the California State PTA, state NAACP and more than 50 other organizations. But the bill died last month in committee before it could even get a hearing, succumbing to opposition from the state teachers union and English language advocates.

    Getting a literacy bill passed, as hard as that may be, is just the beginning, experts warn.

    “That is the easiest part of the process,” said Schwinn. “You can pass legislation, but implementation is the hardest thing you’ll ever do, because you have to win hearts and minds and you have to make sure you do it with respect and make sure you are operating with extreme dignity and professionalism and with a high quality bar for the people who are in the profession every day.”

    In a state as big and diverse as California, consensus can be elusive, noted Claude Goldenberg, emeritus professor of education in the Graduate School of Education at Stanford University. While almost everyone agrees that literacy instruction should be culturally relevant and content-rich as well as foundational, there remain disagreements about what exactly that looks like in the classroom. 

    “One of the big problems is when we speak at this level, there’s a lot of agreement,” said Goldenberg, “but we know the devil is in the details. … Time is limited in schools. Six hours tops, maybe six and a half, maybe five and a quarter. … We’ve got to make some choices and we’ve got to make some priorities at different stages of reading development. And that’s where the conversation kind of breaks down, because it gets very weedy, it gets very difficult. … We end up looking like we agree, but the subtext here is we’re still disagreeing.”

    One of the big hurdles is over whether the state should embrace what is known as the science of reading, which refers to research on how the brain learns how to read. In response to a question from moderator Fensterwald on what is irrefutable about that research, Goldenberg said there was no doubt about how children need to be taught how to read.

    “We have research on what to do when kids are having difficulty getting traction in beginning reading, whether they’re in Spanish reading programs or in English reading programs as English language learners,” said Goldenberg. “We know that there’s a reason they’re called foundational literacy skills. Because if you don’t have these skills, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to become literate.”

    While she agreed on many broad themes, Hernandez pointed out that children have differing needs. 

    “Of course, you know, science is never settled,” said Hernandez. “What works for one student may not work for another.”

    As the president of the state’s largest teachers union, Goldberg, for his part, noted that any approach that does not center the expertise of teachers is likely to be a non-starter. Teachers must have a seat at the table, he argued.

    “We have had decades of disinvestment in public education,” said Goldberg. “So when we hear educators, when our voice is constantly not listened to … when educators do not feel like their agency is respected, like the fact that we are educating many kids with diverse language needs, all kinds of issues, not the flavor of the month … it has to have deep engagement at the very base level to get educators to buy in.” 

    He is also concerned that the voices of students of color will be overlooked in the debate.

    “As a bilingual educator, how it comes across is that bilingual students, students of color in particular, their needs are always being pushed into silence,” said Goldberg.  “And so I hear what you’re saying, but if these programs have any legitimacy, they must put the needs of the most vulnerable people at the center.”  

    Megan Potente, co-state director of Decoding Dyslexia CA, an advocacy group, suggested that a statewide literacy initiative could be more akin to guardrails than a mandate. Certainly, many other states, including those with substantial bilingual populations, from Florida and Mississippi to Tennessee, have already launched comprehensive state policy reforms to change the way reading is taught, with impressive results. 

    “It’s not about one-size-fits-all because, just like in other states, there would be many choices of reading professional development and instructional programs,” said Potente. “And the choices would be vetted by state experts to ensure that they provide what California kids need to learn.”

    She argues that it’s actually the most vulnerable kids who may have the most to gain from a comprehensive literacy plan. Her organization fought long and hard for dyslexia screening legislation, for example, that only recently passed.

    “It took eight years and four bills to make it happen. We are in this for the long haul because we know that matters,” said Potente, a veteran teacher and the mother of a dyslexic child.  “We talk about structured literacy a lot. … It really needs to be the standard of care. Non-negotiable. Why is it not? That’s really what sticks with me. Why is it so hard to find access to evidence-based instruction that works for all kids? Why?” 





    Source link

  • How California can achieve what the public actually wants from education

    How California can achieve what the public actually wants from education


    Three high school Linked Learning pathway students don lab coats as they collaborate on a hands-on science experiment, bringing classroom learning to life through real-world application.

    Courtesy: Linked Learning Alliance

    California’s Golden State Pathways Program is a historic commitment to career-connected learning.

    In January 2025, $470 million in grants began flowing to hundreds of school communities across the state. These are huge investments, based on a proven approach to education called Linked Learning, which carefully integrates rigorous, college-bound academics with hands-on career learning experiences and strong student supports — all connected by an industry theme that meets workforce needs within the local community.

    For example: In Porterville Unified School district, which serves California’s rural central valley, nearly every high school student is enrolled in a Linked Learning college and career preparatory pathway related to thriving local occupations, including those in energy, aviation, agricultural technology, and other fields. The district has an impressive 99% graduation rate, 94% of its alumni enroll in postsecondary education, and 25% percent of students earn industry-recognized certificates while still in high school. Similarly, by offering Linked Learning pathways focused on health sciences, information technology, child development and other high-growth careers, the more urban Oakland Unified School District has boosted its rates of high school graduation and completion of college-preparatory credits, and reduced absenteeism and discipline issues.

    Both the extraordinary new Golden State Pathways Program (GSPP) funding and the California Master Plan for Career Education, recently released to guide educators and labor market leaders across the state, empower school leaders to build such learning pathways for their students. We wholeheartedly affirm this work.

    But truly effective Linked Learning practice — the kind that extensive third-party research links to excellence and equity — requires more than working through a checklist of courses and activities. It takes intentional integration of each aspect of student experience, thoughtful measurement and supportive policy.

    To this end, we offer three key recommendations: 

    1. District leaders should push for true college and career integration. Rather than maintain the long-standing divide between college prep curricula and career-technical education, Golden State Pathways Program resources can be applied to make core academic subjects more engaging and useful by connecting them to themed pathways focused on the high-opportunity, high-wage careers that correspond to real workforce needs in each region. Classroom learning should sync with similarly themed sequential career-technical education courses and work-based learning, like internships and apprenticeships. Districts should engage students and families to ensure pathway options are well understood, aligned with student interests, and connected to workforce demands. As modeled in Porterville and Oakland, the right industry themes bring learning to life in very tangible ways, and they build skills and mindsets that translate to success in any field of future study or employment.

    2. Researchers should inform and strengthen program implementation. Rather than wait for parents and legislators to ask, “did this pathways investment work?” participating regions should develop a robust and proactive research agenda in coordination with local communities to begin generating evidence that improves outcomes along the way. Understanding student experiences, opportunities and outcomes in pathways is essential for strengthening the program over time. Research on the conditions that return the strongest results can help spread best practices across rural, suburban and urban communities.

    3. Policymakers should remove barriers to effective implementation. We cannot keep asking high schools to do everything they currently do and layer additional tasks on top of it all. State and local policies that enable waivers, flexibility, or alternatives to A–G requirements for UC/CSU admissions would increase time and space in students’ schedules to engage in work-based learning. Policymakers should also build in incentives for collaboration and coordination between K–12 and postsecondary institutions to enable purposeful dual-enrollment opportunities that accelerate all students toward a valuable credential. To further our recommendation in point two above, policymakers should also ensure data systems that tag students in pathways to lower the barriers and costs of high-quality research on program outcomes. 

    Washington DC and California are moving in dramatically different directions on education. Where the nation is pulling back, we are charging ahead. We must continue to see this progress through. By acting on these recommendations, we prove a point: that government can respond in good faith to the public it serves. And we do not fail to miss the point of it all: that our future depends on getting education right for young people.

    •••

    Ash Vasudeva is president and CEO of ConnectED: The National Center for College and Career, an organization that partners with school, district, and community leaders to transform education through Linked Learning pathways.

    Anne Stanton is president and CEO of the Linked Learning Alliance, an organization that leads the movement toward educational excellence and equity for every adolescent through high-quality college and career preparation.

    Editors’ note: Anne Stanton is a member of the EdSource board of directors. EdSource maintains sole editorial control over the content of its coverage. 

    The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us.





    Source link

  • What Can the Federal Government Do to Promote Learning?

    What Can the Federal Government Do to Promote Learning?


    On May 10, Dana Goldstein wrote a long article in The New York Times about how education disappeared as a national or federal issue. Why, she wondered, did the two major parties ignore education in the 2024 campaign? Kamala Harris supported public schools and welcomed the support of the two big teachers’ unions, but she did not offer a flashy new program to raise test scores. Trump campaigned on a promise to privatize public funding, promote vouchers, charter schools, religious schools, home schooling–anything but public schools, which he regularly attacked as dens of iniquity, indoctrination, and DEI.

    Goldstein is the best education writer at The Times, and her reflections are worth considering.

    She started:

    What happened to learning as a national priority?

    For decades, both Republicans and Democrats strove to be seen as champions of student achievement. Politicians believed pushing for stronger reading and math skills wasn’t just a responsibility, it was potentially a winning electoral strategy.

    At the moment, though, it seems as though neither party, nor even a single major political figure, is vying to claim that mantle.

    President Trump has been fixated in his second term on imposing ideological obedience on schools.

    On the campaign trail, he vowed to “liberate our children from the Marxist lunatics and perverts who have infested our educational system.”Since taking office, he has pursued this goal with startling energy — assaulting higher education while adopting a strategy of neglect toward the federal government’s traditional role in primary and secondary schools. He has canceled federal exams that measure student progress, and ended efforts to share knowledge with schools about which teaching strategies lead to the best results. A spokeswoman for the administration said that low test scores justify cuts in federal spending. “What we are doing right now with education is clearly not working,” she said.

    Mr. Trump has begun a bevy of investigations into how schools handle race and transgender issues, and has demanded that the curriculum be “patriotic” — a priority he does not have the power to enact, since curriculum is set by states and school districts.

    Actually, federal law explicitly forbids any federal official from attempting to influence the curriculum or textbooks in schools.

    Education lawyer Dan Gordon wrote about the multiple laws that prevent any federal official from trying to dictate, supervise, control or interfere with curriculum. There is no sterner prohibition in federal law than the one that keeps federal officials from trying to dictate what schools teach.

    Of course, Trump never worries about the limits imposed by laws. He does what he wants and leaves the courts to decide whether he went too far.

    Goldstein continued:

    Democrats, for their part, often find themselves standing up for a status quo that seems to satisfy no one. Governors and congressional leaders are defending the Department of Education as Mr. Trump has threatened to abolish it. Liberal groups are suing to block funding cuts. When Kamala Harris was running for president last year, she spoke about student loan forgiveness and resisting right-wing book bans. But none of that amounts to an agenda on learning, either.

    All of this is true despite the fact that reading scores are the lowest they have been in decades, after a pandemic that devastated children by shuttering their schools and sending them deeper and deeper into the realm of screens and social media. And it is no wonder Americans are increasingly cynical about higher education. Forty percent of students who start college do not graduate, often leaving with debt and few concrete skills.

    “Right now, there are no education goals for the country,” said Arne Duncan, who served as President Barack Obama’s first secretary of education after running Chicago’s public school system. “There are no metrics to measure goals, there are no strategies to achieve those goals and there is no public transparency.”

    I have been writing about federal education policy for almost fifty years. There are things we have learned since Congress passed the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in 1965. That law was part of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s agenda. Its purpose was to send federal funds to the schools enrolling the poorest students. Its purpose was not to raise test scores but to provide greater equity of resources.

    Over time, the federal government took on an assertive role in defending the rights of students to an education: students with disabilities; students who did not speak English; and students attending illegally segregated schools.

    In 1983, a commission appointed by President Reagan’s Secretary of Education Terrell Bell declared that American schools were in crisis because of low academic standards. Many states began implementing state tests and raising standards for promotion and graduation.

    President George H.W. Bush convened a meeting of the nation’s governors, and they endorsed an ambitious set of “national goals” for the year 2000. E.g., the U.S. will be first in the world by the year 2000; all children will start school ready to learn by 2000. None of the goals–other than the rise of the high school graduation rate to 90%–was met.

    The Clinton administration endorsed the national goals and passed legislation (“Goals 2000”) to encourages states to create their own standards and tests. President Clinton made clear, however, that he hoped for national standards and tests.

    President George W. Bush came to office with a far-reaching, unprecedented plan called “No Child Left Behind” to reform education by a heavy emphasis on annual testing of reading and math. He claimed that because of his test-based policy, there had been a “Texas Miracle,” which could be replicated on a national scale. NCLB set unreachable goals, saying that every school would have 100% of their students reach proficiency by the year 2014. And if they were not on track to meet that impossible goals, the schools would face increasingly harsh punishments.

    In no nation in the world have 100% of all students ever reached proficiency.

    Scores rose, as did test-prep. Many untested subjects lost time in the curriculum or disappeared. Reading and math were tested every year from grades 3-8, as the law prescribed. What didn’t matter were science, history, civics, the arts, even recess.

    Some schools were sanctioned or even closed for falling behind. Schools were dominated by the all-important reading and math tests. Some districts cheated. Some superintendents were jailed.

    In 2001, there were scholars who warned that the “Texas Miracle” was a hoax. Congress didn’t listen. In time the nation learned that there was no Texas Miracle, never had been. But Congress clung to NCLB because they had no other ideas.

    When Obama took office in 2009, educators hoped for relief from the annual testing mandates but they were soon disappointed. Obama chose Arne Duncan, who had led the Chicago schools but had never been a teacher. Duncan worked with consultants from the Gates and Broad Foundations and created a national competition for the states called Race to the Top. Duncan had a pot of $5 billion that Congress had given him for education reform.

    Race to the Top offered big rewards to states that applied and won. To be eligible, states had to authorize the creation of charter schools (almost every state did); they had to agree to adopt common national standards (that meant the Common Core standards, funded wholly by the Gates Foundation and not yet completed); sign up for one of two federally funded standardized tests (PARCC or Smarter Balanced) ; and agree to evaluate their teachers by the test scores of their students. Eighteen states won huge rewards. There were other conditions but these were the most consequential.

    Tennessee won $500 million. It is hard to see what, if anything, is better in Tennessee because of that audacious prize. The state put $100 million into an “Achievement School District,” which gathered the state’s lowest performing schools into a new district and turned them into charters. Chris Barbic, leader of the YES Prep charter chain in Houston was hired to run it. He pledged that within five years, the lowest-performing schools in the state would rank among the top 20% in the state. None of them did. The ASD was ultimately closed down.

    Duncan had a great fondness for charter schools because they were the latest thing in Chicago; while superintendent, he had launched a program he called Renaissance 2010, in which he pledged to close 80 public schools and open 100 charter schools. Duncan viewed charters as miraculous. Ultimately Chicago’s charter sector produced numerous scandals but no miracles.

    I have written a lot about Race to the Top over the years. It was layered on top of Bush’s NCLB, but it was even more punitive. It targeted teachers and blamed them if students got low scores. Its requirement that states evaluate teachers by student test scores was a dismal failure. The American Statistical Association warned against it from the outset, pointing out that students’ home life affected test scores more than their teachers.

    Duncan’s Renaissance 2010 failed. It destroyed communities. Its strategy of closing neighborhood schools and dispersing students encountered growing resistance. The first schools that Duncan launched as his exemplars were eventually closed. In 2021, the Chicago Board of Education voted unanimously to end its largest “school turnaround” program, managed by a private group, and return its 31 campuses to district control. Duncan’s fervent belief in “turnaround” schools was derided as a historical relic.

    Race to the Top failed. The proliferation of charter schools, aided by a hefty federal subsidy, drained students and resources from public schools. Charter schools close their doors at a rapid pace: 26% are gone in their first five years; 39% in their first ten years. In addition, due to lax accountability, charters have demonstrated egregious examples of waste, fraud, and abuse.

    The Common Core was supposed to lift test scores and reduce achievement gaps, but it did neither. Conservative commentator Mike Petrilli referred to 2007-2017 as “the lost decade.” Scores stagnated and achievement gaps barely budged.

    So what have we learned?

    This is what I have learned: politicians are not good at telling educators how to teach. The Department of Education (which barely exists as of now) is not made up of educators. It was not in a position to lead school reform. Nor is the Secretary of Education. Nor is the President. Would you want the State legislature or Congress telling surgeons how to do their job?

    The most important thing that the national government can do is to ensure that schools have the funding they need to pay their staff, reduce class sizes, and update their facilities.

    The federal government should have a robust program of data collection, so we have accurate information about students, teachers, and schools.

    The federal government should not replicate its past failures.

    What Congress can do very effectively is to ensure that the nation’s schools have the resources they need; that children have access to nutrition and medical care; and that pregnant women get prenatal care so that their babies are born healthy.



    Source link

  • LAUSD safety concerns are growing. Here’s what the board members have to say.

    LAUSD safety concerns are growing. Here’s what the board members have to say.


    Credit: Julie Leopo/EdSource

    Members of the Los Angeles Unified School District school board continued to discuss student safety Tuesday — and are still a ways away from determining whether to revamp its police presence on individual campuses.

    A safety task force — which previously recommended each campus choose whether to have police stationed at its site — made a presentation about LAUSD’s approach to student safety, including community-based safety methods such as restorative justice. They will continue to meet in the coming school year.

    Discussions about reintroducing police to individual LAUSD campuses are taking place for the first time since George Floyd’s murder amid a 45% increase in incidents between 2017-18 and 2022-23, including suicide risk, fighting/physical aggression, threats, illegal/controlled substances and weapons. 

    Here’s what the board members said at Tuesday’s meeting. Their remarks have been edited for length and clarity. 

    School board President Jackie Goldberg: ‘Not really desirous of having armed police on campus’

    I spent 17 years teaching in Compton. … We had two sets of gangs. … We then hired school police to come onto campus. The problem was that there were two (officers). The problem was that when the gangs came over the fences, they came over in 10s and 20s. … How did they have guns? They came over in sufficient numbers to disarm the police. So, I’m not really desirous of having armed police on campus. …

    LAUSD Board Member Jackie Goldberg

    What do I think school police can do? I think school police can be in neighborhoods where most of the problems happen. … What we mostly had to do was to have them in the community around the school and for us to be able to find out from trusted — usually — graduates of ours when trouble was about to happen. And so, (police) could be not in twos, but they could be sent in fours and fives to neighborhoods where things were about to come down. 

    … If you want to stop drug abuse, are you going to have a police officer sitting in the bathrooms because that’s where the exchanges take place?  No, we’re not. We’re not going to put a police officer to sit in classrooms. Do we want school police on campus when there’s a fight? Yeah, that may be useful. 

    … Most of the fights are not bad. And I think as we keep statistics, I would like us to have a notion of what the types of fights were. Was this two or three kids who … called your mother something and they’re fighting and it gets stopped? I think they should be counted, but I think they aren’t the problem. The problem is the massive fights, and those do need to be treated differently. 

    Secondly, we do not have restorative justice in this district. Period. I visited all 151 of the schools I represent, several of them several times, and in only a handful of them did I see anything that resembled restorative justice. 

    School board Vice President Scott Schmerelson: ‘I also believe in school police’ 

    Let me just tell you what really bothers me: when people think that school police are supposed to do discipline at school. They’re not supposed to be doing discipline at school. That’s the teacher’s job. That’s my job as the principal, or the assistant principal, or the dean. … 

    LAUSD Board Member Scott Schemerelson
    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    I do believe that we need climate advocates at school. Absolutely — all the help that we can get at making peace at school. Very, very important. … Yes, I do believe in restorative justice. I do. Our kids need to see what they’ve done wrong and how to make amends for what they have done. Very, very important. I also believe in school police. 

    We are responsible from the minute the kids leave home to the minute they get to school. And, we’re responsible from the minute they leave school to the minute they go home. … That’s why safe passage is really so important too. Kids need to have check-in points along the way home to and from school. Extremely important. Everybody has a job at school, and we should not be pushing people under the bus whether you’re a school police officer, or a climate control officer.

    Board Member Rocio Rivas: ‘We do have the data on what we need to do’

    We’re not the same since the pandemic. Things have changed. Our students are suffering. They have high anxiety. There’s increase of suicidal ideation. 

    LAUSD Board Member Rocio Rivas

    … We have (positive behavior intervention and support) and restorative justice, but they’re not strengthened. They’re not bolstered. So, the district does have that system in place where we can create safe, loving, culturally responsive schools, but we’re not giving the investments or the support that our schools need.

    … The area that needs that support are middle schools. … That is where we start seeing the suicide ideation, when we start seeing the fights, when we start seeing our students needing to medicate themselves. 

    … We love our kids, and at early ed centers, we love them; we want to protect them. But once they leave those early ed centers, it’s almost as if they lost that system of love and compassion and care. And we put in other systems, and we look at them (as though) all these kids are deviants. No, they are children. They are children until even after they’re 18 … because their brains are still developing. 

    … We know exactly what we need to do, but we’re not putting the money or the strength or the emphasis. … We’re talking about test scores, but you know what? You are not going to see increases … in student achievement unless that child feels that they’re being heard, that that school cares about them, that they have somebody in there. 

    … We do have the data on what we need to do. We have the funds. We just don’t have the buy-in from this district, from this building, because it’s so disconnected from our schools and from our communities.

    Board Member Tanya Ortiz Franklin: ‘We’ll keep the conversations going’

    LAUSD Board Member Tanya Ortiz Franklin

    I’ll just bring our attention back to the Community Based Safety Resolution. The last resolve does ask us … to strengthen community-based safety approaches … and resources as a primary means of cultivating and maintaining positive school climates and keeping school communities safe even in emergency situations. 

    … We need the (restorative) training throughout for all of the staff members — as many folks can come back before the school year starts. We’ve got $350 million invested in people who are focused exclusively on safety. If we can focus on this community, restorative approach as the primary means — really shifting away from that punitive, traditional, policing model —  I think we’ll get even closer to the vision of this resolution that we all passed. I think we’ll keep the conversations going next year in the school safety committee. 

    Board Member Kelly Gonez: ‘It’s about creating a true infrastructure around community-based safety’

    I was looking just at the (Local Control and Accountability Plan) information for our meeting later, and it highlights different demographic groups of students and the percent of students reporting that they feel safe in the school experience survey, and there are significant gaps — like for our Black students, who are rating the lowest in terms of whether or not they feel safe, which obviously is very concerning, as well as the number of students who feel like they are part of their school. 

    LAUSD Board Member Kelly Gonez
    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    Those numbers, it looks like, took a significant dip in the wake of the pandemic and have not really fully recovered, and I would just surmise that there’s a connection between feeling disconnected or not seen at your school site and whether or not there is true safety and belonging for students. 

    … It’s not just about restorative justice and the practices, but it’s about creating a true infrastructure around community-based safety. And, I think that’s inclusive of a number of staffing positions as well — beyond, just for example, your restorative justice teachers and beyond the partnerships with community based organizations, which are also integral. It’s about, for example, our classified staffing positions. We know that a number of our incidents happen during lunch, during dismissal. 

    … I would just ask that in any plan … that we’re providing for the necessary staffing and supervision that our schools and our students really deserve — and especially looking at our secondary schools, because we know that’s where the majority of these incidents are happening. 

    Board Member Nick Melvoin: ‘The glaring omission (is) … the data on the fights.’ 

    LAUSD Board Member Nick Melvoin
    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSourc

    Regardless of our views of what’s happening outside of the school, our responsibility is for school safety on the school campus, and we have different ideas. … But I do think really the glaring omission (is) … the data on the fights. 

    … I’m trying to understand where we can trace that based on grade levels, and Covid, and the effects of the pandemic and the success or lack thereof of our positive behavioral intervention supports and restorative justice. … (and) on school campuses with the current deployment model, which is not having police there, except for rare emergencies.

    … We have different ideas … and I just hope that we can engage, starting from the premise that we all want kids to be safe and talk to each other and not just about or past each other. 

    And then the last thing, too. … I just want to make sure that the city and the county aren’t off the hook for this — and that as we’re talking amongst each other, we’re also bringing them in. 

    Board Member George McKenna: ‘We still haven’t come to grips with the reality of what makes the schools safe’ 

    I’ve been in this for 62 years — I’ve never seen police criminalize the children. I’ve seen them respond.

    … Do you know that there is no guideline in a teacher’s contract — or even an administrator’s contract — that says you must go break up a fight? The only one that has to do that is someone who’s trained to do that. And that will be a school police officer. 

    Board Member Dr. George J. McKenna III
    Credit: Julie Leopo / EdSource

    … I have no problem with the climate coaches or whatever they’re called, in addition to the people that have been there in uniform with the licensure and the legal responsibility for student safety … And the only people that have voted for the safety of school police being on campus are people who have been on the campus as administrators, including principals. … The most important people in the school district are the people who run the school, that’s the principal.

    … The most police officers we’ve ever had on the campus … is two, and I think it’s understaffed if you only put one on it because they have no backup. They need to be visible in order to assist the students and the prevention of incidents that occur because … the students will confide in them. 

    ….We’re not OK the way we are. And we still haven’t come to grips with the reality of what makes the schools safe and whether or not our school safety officers are a benefit to us. When you start with the premise and use the word the “punitive school police” and that’s the way you introduce it, you are already biased because that means you don’t understand what they do. And you can fill up the room with your accolades and your people that you’ve encouraged to be here, but we have to go to the schools on a regular basis. It makes a school safe.





    Source link

  • Add personal finance to what every California high school graduate must learn

    Add personal finance to what every California high school graduate must learn


    Tim Ranzetta, sponsor of the personal finance initiative and proponent of legislation that Gov. Newsom says he will sign, presents signatures for the initiative at the Secretary of State’s office in March. With him are state Controller Malia Cohen, center, and personal finance teacher Crystal Rigley Janis.

    Credit: Californians for Financial Education

    Soon, all California high school students will learn about college grants and loans, how tax rates work, the benefits of insurance and how interest high rates can blow your budget when you miss a payment on a credit card.

    This week, legislators rushed to pass legislation that would make California the 26th state to require a course in personal finance as a requirement for high school graduation as of 2030-31. A semester of personal finance must be offered in all high schools starting in 2026-27.

    “It’s often the students who need financial literacy the most that receive it the least. Parents of low-income students are far less likely to be financially literate themselves, which means they can’t pass that knowledge down to their children,” Kayvon Banankhah, a high school junior from Modesto, said June 19 during testimony at a Senate Education Committee hearing on the bill. “I truly believe this bill is one of the most impactful and feasible ways we can combat wealth inequality in our state.”

    Assembly Bill 2927 “will benefit countless future generations of Californians,” said Tim Ranzetta, a Palo Alto marketing and finance entrepreneur and crusader for personal finance instruction. As co-founder of the nonprofit Next Gen Personal Finance, which provides free curriculum and teacher training in personal finance education, he also financed a successful effort to place a nearly identical personal finance initiative on California’s November ballot.

    With a written assurance from Gov. Gavin Newsom that he’d sign the bill, Ranzetta agreed to pull his initiative from the ballot Thursday, the deadline for final changes to initiatives.

    The bill includes one significant difference, which was a response to arguments that imposing more graduation requirements, along with ethnic studies, another coming requirement, will further limit students’ course flexibility and schedules.

    AB 2927 will allow students to substitute personal finance for economics, a semester-long graduation requirement that seniors usually take together with civics, another requirement. The bill also will permit a district to substitute personal finance for another local graduation requirement. The initiative would have added personal finance and left economics intact.

    Economics teachers argued that they, too, support personal finance and often include it in their courses to personalize economic principles, but it should not be added at the expense of economics. They predicted that enrollment would plummet as a result.

    “Economics encourages us to think about our systems and address factors too large for any single individual to address, such as poverty, income, inequality, innovation and generational wealth,” said Joshua Mitton, chief programs officer for the California Council for Economic Education, during testimony on the bill. “Economics prepares students with additional skills that improve all decisions, not simply those that pertain to finance. And it is an integral part of social studies helping prepare a literate and civically engaged electorate.”

    Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas, D-Los Angeles, said she felt conflicted because she supports ensuring students are getting individual knowledge that they need as a necessary life skill while also understanding “economic policies and the impacts on communities on a more macro level.”

    Assemblymember Kevin McCarty, D-Sacramento, compared the dilemma to adding another dish to an already full Thanksgiving table. “Sometimes you have to take something off the plate, right? There’s only so much time during the day, only so many electives. And so that’s one of the trade-offs that we made,” he said, adding that students will be able to take both economics and personal finance.

    The economics teachers council indicated a willingness to revise the economics course framework to include more personal finance content to meet a new requirement. However, Ranzetta insisted on a stand-alone personal finance offering as a condition for pulling his initiative.

    Under the bill, the Instruction Quality Commission, which reports to the State Board of Education, will create a curriculum guide and resources for a personal finance course by May 31, 2026.

    The course will include these topics:

    • Fundamentals of personal banking, including savings and checking accounts
    • Budgeting for independent living
    • Financing college and other career options
    • Understanding taxes and factors that affect net income
    • Credit, including credit scores and the relation of debt to credit
    • Consumer protection skills like identifying scams and preventing identity theft
    • Charitable giving
    • Principles of investing and building wealth, including pensions and IRAs, stocks, bonds, and mutual funds

    “For many of my peers, investing in stocks might as well be as complicated and convoluted as rocket science or calculus in our case,” said Banankhah. “The reality is they’re not being taught about this in school, and a lot of my peers don’t even know what they’re missing out on.”

    The bill will allow several years to train teachers in the new curriculum. Teachers who hold credentials in social science, business, mathematics, or home economics will be authorized to teach personal finance. The Commission on Teacher Credentialing can also establish supplementary authorization to teach the course.

    The bill and the initiative had widespread support in the business community, as well as from State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, the Association of California School Administrators, and the youth activism group GENup. The Legislature passed AB 2927 without opposition.

    At the hearing last week on the bill, Sen. Dave Cortese, D-San Jose, said that economic conditions were the driving force behind homelessness annually for 15,000 high school graduates. Those conditions, he said, “can come rather suddenly,” and personal finance education will provide tools for survival.

    “It almost seems like a high school student needs to be ready at any time to be fending for themselves these days,” he said. 





    Source link

  • What happens now that West Contra Costa school board failed to pass budget?

    What happens now that West Contra Costa school board failed to pass budget?


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

    Photo: Andrew Reed/EdSource

    Most school districts across California have already approved budgets for the upcoming school year along with a required planning document that gives a road map on how funds should be spent. It’s a routine process that by state law must happen by June 30, the end of the fiscal year.

    But what happens when a board fails to approve both by the deadline?

    After the West Contra Costa school board last month voted down the planning document, better known as the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP), Contra Costa County Office of Education officials are stepping in to support the district as it works to secure approval. The board didn’t get to vote on the budget at the June 26 meeting because the LCAP must be approved first. 

    The accountability plan, which also includes district goals to improve student outcomes and how to achieve them, and the budget are linked; one cannot exist without the other. There’s $64.8 million of funding in the LCAP that can’t be used until the plan is approved by the board.

    “You have to adopt the plan first before you can adopt the budget,” said Michael Fine, chief executive officer of the state’s Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT).

    “The budget becomes subsidiary to the plan in that it just becomes a supporting role to the plan, it’s one of the mechanisms that facilitates getting the plan done and implemented.”

    Although the West Contra Costa Unified School District doesn’t currently have an adopted accountability plan or budget, the district is using its $484 million 2024-25 proposed budget in the interim to pay salaries and general operating costs, said Marcus Walton, director of communication at the county office of education. Previously, district officials thought they would revert to using the 2023-24 budget, but that has since changed.

    At the June 26 meeting, district officials and some board members had the same concern — that rejecting the 203-page LCAP and not voting on a budget would mean losing local control. At the time, district staff didn’t have all the answers about what would happen next because they had never dealt with this situation. One district consultant even asked the board to consider voting on the LCAP again because without one, it would put the district in an unprecedented situation.

    West Contra Costa is not losing local control.

    The county office of education isn’t taking control of the LCAP or budget, confirmed Lynn Mackey, the county superintendent of schools. Since the vote, Mackey said she’s spoken with district Superintendent Chris Hurst, and the county and district’s LCAP teams have met. But there are no plans to re-create the LCAP or budget for the district, she said. 

    This isn’t a scenario where a district would need to be taken over, Mackey said. That happens when a district goes insolvent and runs out of cash. 

    “The LCAP can be a very complex document, it’s a beast,” Mackey said. “They’re (district staff) doing a great job, and they have done a great job. We will be meeting with them and supporting them as it goes back to the district for a vote.”

    The next board meeting is set for July 17, but it’s unlikely the accountability plan will be brought back for a vote then, Mackey said. Key West Contra Costa staffers who work on the plan have been on vacation and are just starting to return. There won’t be enough time to post the LCAP before the meeting, which is a requirement, Mackey said. Neither the budget nor LCAP are currently on the agenda to be discussed or voted on at that meeting.

    What happens if the board rejects the LCAP again? 

    “Unfortunately, the California education code does not address what happens when an LCAP is not adopted by a school district,” Hurst said in his message to community members. “This is an unprecedented event in the state of California.”

    Mackey said she would need to confer with state officials for next steps.

    In a message to the community, district Superintendent Hurst said the county has advised the district to pass the accountability plan by Aug. 15, the county’s deadline to review LCAPs. After school boards pass them, the county must make sure the plans comply with the requirements, then give final approval.

    The county then has until Aug. 30 to respond to districts if they have questions or need clarifications on the documents, Mackey said.

    If the board approves the accountability plan and the budget by the Aug. 15 deadline, Mackey said, it signals to the county that major revisions aren’t necessary. However, the county still needs to impose that budget because it wasn’t passed before the June 30 deadline required in the state education code. 

    The county could bill the district for helping it get the LCAP and budget approved, Mackey said, but the county has no intention of doing that.

    What happens if the board does not pass a budget? 

    Mackey said the county would review the proposed budget, and as long as it meets all requirements, that budget would be imposed by her office. 

    It would be “foolish” for the board not to approve a budget, Fine said. “They need to approve the budget because that would give the county superintendent information, plus, then the district owns its budget. And that’s important.” 

    Passing the LCAP

    Between now and when the accountability plan will return for a vote, district officials are working to get it to a place where the board will approve it.

    The two district board members who voted down the LCAP — Leslie Reckler and Mister Phillips — said a major problem for them was the lack of transparency in the document. Board President Jamela Smith-Folds was the only “yes” vote. Otheree Christian abstained, and Demetrio Gonzalez Hoy was absent. 

    Many parents and other community members addressed the board during the June 26 meeting, asking the board to reject the LCAP and the budget, saying community input wasn’t reflected in the document. Public commenters said there was a lack of transparency in both proposals, that neither met student needs, and that they disenfranchised low-income students, English learners and students of color. Some speakers questioned whether the accountability plan complied with the law. 

    It’s rare for districts to turn in an accountability plan that fully complies with the law, Mackey said. However, when a board approves it, the county can work with districts to bring the documents into compliance. 

    Trustee Phillips said community concerns and not having a balanced budget were other reasons he voted down the LCAP. 

    “I want to be very clear: The community needs to be heard,” Phillips said. “That’s not me saying everything the community wants should be put in there, but they are supposed to be heard, and I don’t feel like that happened.”

    Some trustees have called the vote a failure of the board, but Phillips said that’s not accurate. 

    “It was an opportunity for me to put brakes on another unbalanced budget. That’s why I did what I did. But it was not a failure,” Phillips said. “It was a conscious decision, I did it on purpose.”

    District officials are projecting a $31.8 million budget deficit over the next three school years, with about $11.5 million in shortfalls projected for the upcoming school year. The plan was to use reserve funds over three school years to make up the deficit, which is a typical move, Fine said.

    West Contra Costa has been in “financial distress for quite a while,” Fine said. “They were deep in distress, and they are working their way out of that hole.”

    In an emailed statement, Reckler said the district should now “retool their presentation to the board and public and re-present it, tailoring it to specific questions” raised by board members and the District Local Control Accountability Plan Committee (DLCAP), which consists of parents and members of community organizations.

    The board can then give district staff comments and direct it to take any additional steps, Reckler said.

    Christian also said he abstained from voting on the accountability plan because the document lacked transparency and failed to include parent feedback. He said the document should plainly state how money is being spent to meet district goals and how programs are benefiting students, which hasn’t happened. 

    “Those who get paid the big bucks should be the ones to make sure this stuff is done right,” Christian said. “Let’s do it right, let’s make it right, let’s not have hidden agendas, and let’s spell it out.”

    If there are substantial changes to the LCAP, it could mean big changes to the budget. It’s too soon to know what kind of changes are being made, but Mackey said even if money needs to be shifted around, it doesn’t appear there will be major revisions.

    “It’s challenging,” Mackey said. “As much work as you do on transparency, I do feel like there’s always going to be somebody who doesn’t feel the LCAP is very transparent.”

    Even if the accountability plan meets all the state requirements, some boards want more or for staff to go “above and beyond, which is understandable,” Mackey said.

    “My hope is that they (board members) don’t hold it hostage for things that you can’t go back and fix,” Mackey said. “If they want something different in the future, set that up now so as the LCAP writers are going forward, they know exactly what is expected so this doesn’t happen again.”





    Source link