BILL ANALYSIS SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Gloria Romero, Chair 2009-2010 Regular Session BILL NO: AJR 39 AUTHOR: Torlakson AMENDED: May 10, 2010 FISCAL COMM: No HEARING DATE: June 16, 2010 URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Lynn Lorber SUBJECT : Common core standards: history-social science and science. KEY POLICY ISSUES Should the Legislature call upon the National Governors Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to develop common core standards in social studies and science? Should the Legislature call upon these entities to consider the development of common core standards in other subject areas, such as foreign language, the arts, physical education and career technical education? Is this resolution necessary when the NGA and CCSSO have already indicated they plan to develop common core standards in science and possibly other subject areas? SUMMARY This resolution calls upon the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers to replicate the process used to develop English language arts and mathematics common core standards to now develop common core standards for social studies and science. BACKGROUND Academic content standards define the knowledge, concepts, and skills that pupils should acquire at each grade level. California has adopted content standards as follows: English language arts - 1997 Mathematics - 1997 AJR 39 Page 2 History-Social Science - 1998 Science - 1998 English Language Development - 1999 Visual and Performing Arts - 2001 Physical Education - 2005 Career Technical Education - 2005 Health - 2008 The development of common core standards in English language arts and math, i.e., academic standards that are meant to be used by states (voluntarily) across the nation, has been undertaken by the National Governors Association's Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers, reportedly in consultation with teachers, parents, content experts and administrators. Forty eight states (all but Texas and Alaska), the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have signed on as participants in the development of the common core standards. States that participate in the development of the standards are not required to adopt the final common core standards. The final draft of the English language arts and mathematics common core standards were released on June 2, 2010. These standards also include standards for literacy in history-social studies, science and technical subjects (understand words and phrases, learn to pay attention to details, and read diagrams and charts). These literacy standards are meant to cover the academic language used in those subjects but do not cover the subject matter content of history-social science or science standards. These common core standards are not national standards per se, as they were not developed by the United States Department of Education nor are states required to adopt these standards. However, the United States Department of Education is promoting this initiative through the Race to the Top grant, for which applicant states can score points for adopting common core standards. SB 1 of the Fifth Extraordinary Session (Steinberg, Chapter 2, 2010), which relates to the Race to the Top grant, among other things, established a 21-member Academic Content Standards Commission (Commission) for the purpose of developing academic content standards in English language arts and mathematics (at least 85% of these standards must be the common core academic standards). SB x5 1 established the following deadlines: AJR 39 Page 3 The Commission must present the standards it develops to the State Board of Education (SBE) by July 15, 2010. The SBE must either adopt or reject these standards by August 2, 2010. (Education Code 60605.8) The first meeting of the Academic Content Standards Commission is scheduled for June 17, 2010. In addition to making statutory changes relative to common core standards, California has expressed a commitment to consider adopting common core standards via the state's applications for Race to the Top grant funding (in applications for both the first and second rounds). California's second round application states, "California became a committed participant in the development of common core standards in English-Language Arts and mathematics by submitting a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on May 28, 2009, with the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers. The MOA was signed by the Governor, the California State Board of Education President, and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. The MOA clearly stated an intention to adopt common core standards as long as they 'meet or exceed our own.' The State intends to submit evidence of adoption on or before August 2, 2010." ANALYSIS This resolution calls upon the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers to replicate the process used to develop English-language arts and mathematics common core standards to now develop common core standards for social studies and science. This resolution further calls upon the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to also examine the viability of developing common standards in other subject areas, including but not limited to foreign language, the arts, physical education, and career technical education. STAFF COMMENTS 1) Need for the bill : According to the author, the Common AJR 39 Page 4 Core Standards Initiative does not currently include efforts to develop standards for other core subject areas. "Each new generation of students needs to be equipped with the knowledge of history, geography, economics and government, skills needed to make informed decisions about complex public issues, attitudes that support democratic practices, commitment to engage in civic life, a strong understanding of the physical world, including biology, chemistry, geology, astronomy and physics, and a firm grasp of the scientific method of discovery." 2) Only English and math ? The Common Core State Standards Initiative website states, "English-language arts and math were the first subjects chosen for the common core state standards because these two subjects are skills, upon which students build skill sets in other subject areas. They are also the subjects most frequently assessed for accountability purposes. Of course, other subject areas are critical to young people's education and their success in college and careers. Once the English-language arts and math standards are developed, CCSSO and NGA Center, on behalf of the states, plan to develop a common core of standards in science and potentially additional subject areas." Considering this plan to develop common core standards in science and possibly other subjects, is this resolution necessary? 3) Prior legislation . AB 97 (Torlakson, 2009) would have required the Superintendent of Public Instruction to convene Academic Content and Performance Standards Review panels for the purpose of reviewing and recommending changes to the academic content standards for English language arts and mathematics. AB 97 is on the inactive file on the Senate Floor. SB 1097 (Torlakson, 2008) would have established a process for review and revision of the reading/language arts and history/social science academic content standards. SB 1097 was vetoed by the Governor, whose veto message read: The original academic content standards were AJR 39 Page 5 adopted through a public and inclusive process involving teachers, educators and content experts from around the state. The authorizing statute provided that the Governor retain a majority of appointments to the Standards Commission, followed by the Superintendent and leadership in the legislature and correctly held the Governor ultimately accountable to ensure a balance of expertise and stakeholders participated in such a critical endeavor. This bill proposes to dilute the role of the Governor. SB 1097 also deletes a provision codified by the original statute that explicitly authorized the State Board of Education (Board) to modify any proposed content standards prior to adoption. Instead, it only allows the Board to accept or reject proposed changes. The Board would not have authority to make even minor corrections to the panel's recommended changes. I see no compelling reason to alter the balance established by the original statute in determining the composition of the commission that reviewed the academic content, or the process that provided for recommendations to the Board for consideration, modification, and approval. Furthermore, while I would welcome participation by teachers, the measure does not define "recent public classroom experience" and thereby raises the possibility of controversy regarding whether or not certain members of the panel are duly AJR 39 Page 6 authorized to participate. I cannot support the dilution of the authority of the Governor or the State Board of Education. California's content standards are too important to allow for unnecessary ambiguity that could call into question the very process of a historic review and possible modification. SUPPORT Association of California School Administrators California Alliance for Arts Education California Association for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance California Council for the Social Studies California Language Teachers Association California Science Teachers Association California State PTA OPPOSITION None received.