BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   March 30, 2011

                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                                Julia Brownley, Chair
                 AB 224 (Bonilla) - As Introduced:  February 2, 2011
           
          SUBJECT  :   School accountability: Academic Performance Index

           SUMMARY  :   Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction 
          (SPI), in consultation with the State Board of Education (SBE), 
          to incorporate both previously specified and additional measures 
          of performance into the Academic Performance Index (API), using 
          the best available data and commencing in fiscal year (FY) 
          2012-13.  Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Deletes the requirement that attendance rates be incorporated 
            into the API.

          2)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the SBE, to incorporate 
            into the API by FY 2012-13, for schools with any of grades 8 
            through 12, each of the following indicators using the best 
            available data; also requires the SPI to derive these measures 
            as specified.

             a)   High school graduation rates as defined in current law. 

             b)   The rates at which pupils complete a course of study 
               that fulfills University of California and California State 
               University admission requirements. 

             c)   The rates at which pupils complete a course of study 
               that provides the skills and knowledge necessary to attain 
               entry-level employment upon graduation from high school.

          3)Requires that the weighting of components of the API shall be:

             a)   Until July 1, 2013 - at least 60% on the results of the 
               achievement tests specified.

             b)   Between July 1, 2013 and June 30, 2016 - at least 50% on 
               the results of the achievement tests specified.

             c)   On or before June 30, 2016 - 50% on the results of the 
               achievement tests specified in current law, and 50% on the 
               elements listed in 2) above; in addition, requires that 








                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  2

               each of the elements in 2) above receive equal weight, 
               while the rate at which pupils meet both elements in 2) b) 
               and 2) c) is required to be given additional weight.

          4)Authorizes the SPI to convene an advisory committee to provide 
            recommendations for the implementation of these provisions, 
            and to develop recommendations for the inclusion of multiple 
            measures in the API of middle and junior high schools.

           EXISTING LAW  requires:  

          1)The SPI to develop the API to measure the performance of 
            schools, and to include a variety of indicators in that 
            measure, including, but not limited to, achievement test 
            results, attendance rates, and graduation rates.  

          2)School districts to offer to all otherwise qualified pupils in 
            seventh through twelfth grades both of the following:

             a)   A course of study fulfilling the requirements and 
               prerequisites for admission to California's public 
               institutions of postsecondary education. 

             b)   A course of study that provides an opportunity to attain 
               entry-level employment skills in business or industry upon 
               graduation from high school.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Senate Appropriations 
          Committee analysis of a substantially similar bill in 2007:

          1)Costs for the California Department of Education (CDE) related 
            to developing new indicators, facilitating the advisory 
            committee and subcommittee meetings, and providing for the 
            attendance of appropriate experts at these meetings.  

          2)Additional costs related to the collection and incorporation 
            of college preparation and career technical education 
            coursework data.  

          3)Significant costs, unknown but potentially in the millions, 
            for districts to compile this information and report it to the 
            CDE, to the extent that local education agencies do not 
            already collect this data.

           COMMENTS  :   The SPI established, pursuant to SB 1 X1 (Alpert), 








                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  3

          Chapter 3, Statutes of 1999-2000 First Extraordinary Session, an 
          advisory committee to advise the SPI and the SBE on all 
          appropriate matters relative to the creation of the API.  SB 1 
          X1 also requires the SPI, with the approval of the SBE, to 
          develop the API to measure the performance of schools, and to 
          include a variety of indicators in that measure, including, but 
          not limited to, achievement test results, attendance rates, and 
          graduation rates.  Currently only achievement test results are 
          incorporated into the API, and the API is configured to produce 
          scores measuring a school's static performance at each grade 
          level, in each content area, in each year, at one point in time.

          Having an API that focuses solely on achievement test results 
          may be too narrow in that it does not reflect information about 
          other student outcomes (e.g., dropout and graduation rates, 
          college readiness, preparation for the workplace) that are 
          important as measures of the performance of districts, schools 
          and subgroups.  In addition, focusing solely on test scores may 
          actually lead to conclusions that are incorrect; as a perverse 
          example, a school that sees an increase in the number of 
          students dropping out could easily see a resulting increase in 
          test scores, and thus in the API for that school or district (if 
          the students dropping out tended to have below average test 
          scores), yet most would agree that this increase in test scores 
          and API are not reflective of an improvement in performance or 
          the quality of education in that school or district.  The 
          solution to this problem would be to broaden the set of measures 
          that are composited to form the API.  The Legislature foresaw 
          this when it initially authorized the development of the API to 
          be an index (i.e., a composite number reflecting a number of 
          component measures) based on data from multiple measures, 
          including achievement test results, attendance rates, and 
          graduation rates.

          According to the author, "The purpose of this bill is to expand 
          and incorporate multiple measures into the API to allow for 
          accurate measuring of school district and student academic 
          performance.  We must move away from focusing exclusively on 
          standardized test results and high school exit exams, which do 
          not reveal information about student outcomes such as 
          dropout/graduation rates or college/workforce readiness."

          Opponents of a substantially similar bill in 2007 argued that 
          including data on dropouts and availability of course offerings 
          that fulfill admission requirements to California's public 








                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  4

          universities would skew the emphasis of the API toward high 
          schools, resulting in the focusing of more resources at that 
          level to the detriment of elementary and middle schools. 
          However, since the Legislature can target the use of resources 
          by grade span as well as by API ranking, this effect, to the 
          extent that it would exist, could be easily moderated.

          Though inclusion of graduation rates in the API is current law, 
          authority was provided to the SPI to determine when data on 
          graduation rates would be included in the API; at this point in 
          time, test scores remain as the only data on which the API is 
          based.  Opponents of past proposals similar to this bill have 
          argued that data on graduation rates are not robust enough for 
          this type of use, and that it is unclear how the state would 
          collect data on courses of study fulfilling university admission 
          requirements or data showing how well schools and districts 
          prepare students for the workplace.  In fact, this bill, by 
          requiring the inclusion of graduation rates by 2012-13, only 
          makes the inclusion of a currently required component of the API 
          time certain.  In addition, information on student course-taking 
          that fulfills university admission requirements is already 
          measured and reported annually on the School Accountability 
          Report Card that is constitutionally required of every school 
          and district in the state.  The bill also provides detailed 
          direction on the measurement of the extent to which schools 
          offer a course of study that provides the skills and knowledge 
          necessary to attain entry-level employment.

          The author concludes that, "There is much more that we value 
          from our public school system than simply test scores. Student 
          outcomes are just as important as test scores and our 
          accountability system must measure and reflect that."

          This bill also proposes to delete the current requirement that 
          attendance rates for pupils in elementary schools, middle 
          schools and secondary schools be included in the API.  All other 
          data elements currently included in the API, as well as those 
          proposed by this bill, focus on student, school and district 
          outcomes; attendance rates are not a measure of achievement or 
          outcome, instead they are more a measure of input into the 
          education process and thus are different from other measures 
          included in the API.  Deletion of attendance rates, as proposed, 
          would clearly define the API to be a measure of educational 
          outcomes.









                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  5

          Committee amendments:  Committee staff recommends the following 
          amendments:

          1)Clarify that only test scores of pupils counted as enrolled in 
            the California Basic Education Data System (CBEDS),  California 
            Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), or any 
            successor data system  be included in the API; CBEDS data 
            collections have been transitioned to CALPADS, and additional 
            data system upgrades could occur in the future.

          2)Delete the requirement that the SPI determine the extent to 
            which data are reported to the state and are accurate before 
            including high school graduation rates in the API.  This 
            deletion is necessary to reconcile this current requirement 
            with the proposal in the bill that requires graduation rates 
            to be included in the API commencing with the 2012-13 fiscal 
            year.


          3)Clarify that the high school exit examination referred to is 
            the examination developed pursuant to Section 60850 of the 
            Education Code.

          4)Reconcile a conflict in and clarify the implementation dates 
            proposed in this bill.

          5)Charge the existing advisory committee, established to advise 
            the SPI and the SBE on all appropriate matters relative to the 
            creation of the API, rather than a new advisory committee, 
            with developing recommendations for the inclusion of multiple 
            measures in the API of middle and Junior high schools as 
            proposed in this bill.

           Previous legislation:   AB 400, vetoed in 2007, was substantially 
          similar to this bill.  AB 519 (Mendoza), held in the Senate 
          Appropriations Committee in 2007 but later amended to a 
          different subject, would have required the incorporation into 
          the API of data regarding the availability in high schools of a 
          course of study that fulfills University of California and 
          California State University admission requirements, and the 
          submission of a plan for incorporating dropout data into the 
          API.  AB 2167 (Arambula), Chapter 743, Statutes of 2006, 
          establishes a specific methodology for including graduation 
          rates, as previously required, in the API; also requires the SPI 
          to report annually to the Legislature on graduation and dropout 








                                                                  AB 224
                                                                  Page  6

          rates in the state.  SB 1284 (Scott), held in the Assembly 
          Appropriations Committee in 2006, would have updated and made 
          technical amendments to statutes that establish the API.  SB 257 
          (Alpert), Chapter 782, Statutes of 2003, requires the advisory 
          committee established to advise the SPI on the API to make 
          recommendations to the SPI on a methodology for generating a 
          "gain" score measurement to provide more accurate measure of a 
          school's growth over time.  AB 1295 (Thomson), Chapter 887, 
          Statutes of 2001, makes changes to the API to allow small school 
          districts to receive an API score, receive growth targets, and 
          performance awards.  SB 1 X1 (Alpert), Chapter 3, Statutes of 
          1999-2000 First Extraordinary Session, known as the Public 
          Schools Accountability Act (PSAA), authorizes the state's 
          current accountability program, including establishment of the  
          PSAA Advisory Committee and development of the API.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :   

           Support 
           
          California Agricultural Teachers' Association
          California Association of Leaders for Career Preparation
          California Business Education Association
          California Manufacturers and Technology Association

           Opposition 
           
          School for Integrated Academics and Technologies (SIATech) 
          (Unless amended)
           
          Analysis Prepared by  :    Gerald Shelton / ED. / (916) 319-2087