BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Gloria Romero, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 2083
AUTHOR: Committee on Education
AMENDED: April 15, 2010
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: June 23, 2010
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Daniel Alvarez
SUBJECT : School Accountability - Persistently Lowest
Achieving Schools list.
KEY POLICY ISSUE
Should the Legislature clarify the methodology used in
development of the state's persistently lowest-achieving
schools list, as it relates to high schools?
SUMMARY
This bill clarifies that the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI) and the State Board of Education (SBE) use
the closest possible approximation of high school graduation
rate information, calculated for each of the previous three
years, using existing data for purposes of determining high
schools on the persistently lowest achieving schools list.
BACKGROUND
Current law requires SPI and SBE to develop a list of the
persistently lowest-achieving schools according to a
specified methodology that includes any high school that has
had a graduation rate that is less than 60 percent in each of
the previous three years, as defined by the federal
government in Section 200.19 (b) of Title 34 of the Code of
Federal regulations. (Education Code 53201)
Current law requires the SPI to notify the governing board of
a school district, county superintendent of schools, or the
governing body of a charter school that one or more of the
schools in its jurisdiction have been identified as a
persistently lowest-achieving school. (EC 53201.5)
Current law requires the governing board of a school
AB 2083
Page 2
district, county superintendent of schools, or the governing
body of a charter school to implement one of the four
specified reform interventions in any school identified as
persistently lowest achieving using the statutorily specified
methodology, unless the SPI and SBE determine, to the extent
allowable under federal law, that the school has implemented
an equivalent reform within the last two years and is showing
significant progress in turning around that school. (EC
53202)
Federal law uses the same list developed, pursuant to Race to
the Top methodology, for identifying persistently lowest
achieving schools for purposes of states applying for funding
under the School Improvement Fund (formerly known as School
Improvement Grants or SIG) or School Fiscal Stabilization
Funds.
ANALYSIS
This bill clarifies that the Superintendent of Public
Instruction (SPI) and the State Board of Education (SBE) use
the closest possible approximation of high school graduation
rate information, calculated for each of the previous three
years, using existing data for purposes of determining high
schools on the persistently lowest achieving schools list.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill . SB 1 (5th Extraordinary Session,
Chapter 2, Statutes of 2010) specified the methodology
to be used to identify the persistently lowest-achieving
schools, which included a component that any high school
with a graduation rate less than 60 percent in each of
the last three years as defined in federal regulations.
However, according to the California Department of
Education (CDE), the data to calculate the graduation
rate using this methodology are not available. By using
the best available approximation of the specified
graduation rate in each of the three previous years, the
SPI and SBE would be able to identify high schools
having a graduation rate less than 60 percent pursuant
to statute and consistent with the intent of the
Legislature.
2) CDE and available federal funding . In March 2010, CDE
released a list of PLAS for purposes of the federal
School Improvement Fund Program. The federal School
AB 2083
Page 3
Improvement Fund Program is a grant program under the
federal Title I program, which provides funds to poor
and needy pupils. Under this program, local education
agencies (LEAs) receive funding (up to $2 million per
school) to address the needs of schools in improvement,
corrective action, and restructuring under the federal
Title I program with the goal of improving student
achievement. Grant funds are used to change and improve
technical assistance through LEAs targeting activities
towards measurable student outcomes.
In order for the state to apply for federal School
Improvement funds, it is required to identify the
state's lowest five percent of schools (i.e.,
persistently lowest-achieving schools). The CDE
developed a methodology for identification and the SBE
approved this methodology and the resulting list on
March 11, 2010. There are 188 schools identified on the
persistently lowest achieving schools list. Local
educational agencies with schools on this list under
their jurisdiction are now eligible to apply to CDE for
federal School Improvement Funds, once the state is
approved by the federal government for its application.
3) Federal Race to the Top . In February 2009, the federal
U.S. Department of Education (USDE) issued an invitation
to the States to compete for approximately $4.4 billion
of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)
one-time funding known as Race to the Top (RTTT) grants.
The RTTT grants are to be issued in two competitive
rounds. California was not successful in its first
attempt. As of June 1, California submitted an
application for the second round of funding. In late
August / early September Phase 2 grant recipients will
be announced.
RTTT is a competitive grant program designed to
encourage and reward States that are creating the
conditions for education innovation and reform;
achieving significant improvement in student outcomes,
including making substantial gains in student
achievement; closing achievement gaps; improving high
school graduation rates; and ensuring student
preparation for success in college and career; and
implementing ambitious plans in four core education
reform areas:
AB 2083
Page 4
Adopting high quality standards and
assessments to prepare students for higher
education or work.
Recruiting, developing, retaining and
rewarding effective teachers and principals.
Creating data systems to measure student
success and support instruction.
Turning around the lowest performing schools.
4 Turning around persistently lowest-achieving schools is
one of the four major components of RTTT, which requires
states to have legal, statutory or regulatory authority
to intervene in persistently lowest-achieving schools,
identify persistently lowest-achieving schools, and show
how the state will support LEAs identified as
persistently lowest-achieving in implementing one of
four intervention models as follows:
Turnaround model: Replace the principal and
50 percent of the existing staff; implement
strategies to recruit, place and retain staff with
the skills necessary to meet the needs of students;
use data to improve instructional programs; provide
high-quality professional development that is
aligned with the school's instructional program;
among others.
Restart model: Convert a school to a charter
school, or close and reopen a school under a
charter school operator, a charter management
organization, or an education management
organization.
School closure: Close a school and enroll the
students in other higher achieving schools in the
local education area.
Transformation model: Similar to the
Turnaround model, replace the principal and develop
strategies focusing on principal and teacher
effectiveness, instructional reform, increasing
learning time and creating community-oriented
schools, and providing operational flexibility and
AB 2083
Page 5
support.
5) Previous legislation . SB 1 of the Fifth Extraordinary
Session (Steinberg, Chapter 2, 2010), was enacted with
the goal of making California's RTTT application(s)
competitive for federal funding. The bill addressed the
four RTTT policy reform areas of standards and
assessments, data systems to support instruction, great
teachers and leaders, and turning around the
lowest-achieving schools.
SUPPORT
Small School Districts' Association
California School Boards Association
OPPOSITION
None received.