BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 201
Page 1
Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Joan Buchanan, Chair
SB 201 (Liu) - As Amended: August 6, 2013
SENATE VOTE : 30-9
SUBJECT : Instructional Materials: English language arts and
English language development
Pupil Assessment: English Language Development
SUMMARY : Permits the adoption of instructional materials in
English language arts (ELA) and English language development
(ELD) and makes changes to the assessment of ELD for pupils who
are English Learners (ELs). Specifically, this bill :
1)Permits the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt
instructional materials aligned to the Common Core State
Standards in ELA/ELD, as specified.
2)Permits the SBE to charge a fee for all publishers wishing to
submit materials for consideration by the SBE, as specified.
3)Identifies the intent of the Legislature to continue
implementation of the Common Core State Standards and ensure
that pupils and teachers have access to instructional
materials that are both aligned to the Common Core State
Standards and meet the needs of ELs.
4)Makes inoperative those sections of law governing the
administration, development, and maintenance of the existing
California English Language Development Test (CELDT) upon the
report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to
the Legislature that both the assessment for the initial
identification of ELs and the summative assessment are ready
for their initial administration.
5)Makes operative new sections of law governing the
administration of the assessment of ELs for the purpose of
SB 201
Page 2
determining the English language proficiency of those pupils
upon the report of the SPI to the Legislature that both the
assessment for the initial identification of ELs and the
summative assessment are ready for their initial
administration.
6)Requires the development of two separate ELD assessments; one
assessment shall be used for the initial identification of
pupils as ELs and a second assessment shall be used for the
annual summative assessment for EL pupils.
7)Requires the assessment of pupils in kindergarten and grade 1
to be assessed in English listening and speaking, and, once an
assessment is developed, in early literacy skills.
8)Identifies the window in which the annual summative assessment
may be administered as a four-month period after January 1 of
each school year, as determined by the SPI.
9)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the SBE, to release a
request for proposals for the development of assessments for
the purposes set forth in this bill, if the SPI determines
that no existing assessments may be used.
10)Requires the SBE to approve assessment blueprints, assessment
performance descriptors, and performance-level cut scores
based on standard settings.
11)Specifies the minimum requirements of an assessment used for
the initial identification of EL pupils.
12)Specifies the purpose of an assessment used for the initial
identification be the identification of pupils who are limited
English proficient.
13)Specifies the minimum requirements of an annual summative
assessment of EL pupils.
SB 201
Page 3
14)Specifies the purposes of a summative assessment are the
identification of the level of English proficiency of pupils
who are limited English proficient and to assess the progress
of limited-English-proficient pupils in acquiring the skills
of listening, reading, speaking, and writing in English.
15)Makes technical and non-substantive changes to these
sections.
EXISTING LAW:
Instructional Materials
1)Requires the SBE, pursuant to its constitutional duty, to
adopt basic instructional materials for use in grades 1
through 8 and to ensure that the instructional materials it
adopts meet specified criteria.
2)Requires the Instructional Quality Commission (IQC) to perform
several duties including studying and evaluating instructional
materials and recommending to the SBE instructional materials
for its adoption.
3)Requires the SBE to adopt instructional materials in all of
the following subjects: language arts, mathematics, science,
social science, and bilingual or bicultural subjects every
eight years and any other subject for which the SBE determines
the adoption of instructional materials to be necessary or
desirable.
4)Provides that upon adopting of basic instructional materials,
the SBE is required to make available to publishers and
manufacturers and all interested schools, a list of those
instructional materials by subject and grade level.
5)Prohibits the SBE from adopting instructional materials and
from following the procedures for the adoption of
SB 201
Page 4
instructional materials until July 1, 2015.
6)Allows a local educational agency (LEA) to use instructional
materials in kindergarten and grades 1 through 8 that have not
been adopted by the SBE if the materials are aligned with the
SBE adopted content standards in that subject area and the LEA
uses a review process as specified.
English Language Development Assessments
1)Requires each school district that has one or more pupils who
are ELs to assess each pupil's ELD, using a test acquired or
developed by the SPI with the approval of the SBE, in order to
determine the level of proficiency upon initial enrollment,
and annually, thereafter, until the pupil is redesignated as
English proficient.
2)Requires the SPI and the SBE to establish procedures for
conducting the ELD assessments, including determining the
period of time within which the annual ELD testing is required
to be conducted.
3)Requires the CDE to develop reclassification procedures that
utilize multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify
a pupil as proficient in English, including, but not be
limited to, the following:
a. Assessment of language proficiency;
b. Teacher evaluation;
c. Parental opinion and consultation; and
d. Comparison of the pupil's performance in basic
skills that demonstrates whether the pupil is
sufficiently proficient in English to participate
effectively in a curriculum designed for native English
speaking pupils of the same age.
4)Requires the CELDT to have sufficient range to assess ELs in
grades 2-12 in English listening, speaking, reading, and
writing skills. Pupils in grades kindergarten and first grade
are required to be assessment on listening and speaking
skills, as specified.
SB 201
Page 5
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee, this measure will have the following fiscal effects:
1)Reviews: Significant state costs, which will be fully
recovered by publishers' fees.
2)Instructional materials: Substantial cost pressure for LEAs to
purchase new instructional materials.
The Senate Appropriations Committee has not heard the provisions
of this bill that address the development and administration of
assessments for English language development. According to the
author, the California Department of Education (CDE) estimates
new ELD assessments could impose a cost of $7.55 million, of
which $4.25 million would be for the cost of the initial
assessment. The exact cost could be lower, depending on the
level of alignment with the existing CELDT.
COMMENTS :
During the 2012-13 school year almost 22% of all pupils in
California's K-12 public schools were ELs. Of these nearly 1.35
million pupils, approximately 85% spoke Spanish as their primary
language. ELs are at a considerable disadvantage relative to
their native English speaking peers, as they enter school with
different levels of English fluency and therefore have different
instructional needs to achieve language and academic
proficiency. In order to provide the necessary instruction,
pupils must first be accurately identified as ELs.
Instructional Materials
Educational standards describe what students should know and be
able to do in each subject in each grade. In California, the SBE
adopts standards that may be used by LEAs for students, from
kindergarten through high school. The CDE helps schools make
sure that all students are meeting the standards. The SBE
adopted the Common Core State Standards for California in
English Language Arts and Mathematics in 2010. In 2012, the SBE
adopted English Language Development Standards that are aligned
to the California Common Core State Standards in English
SB 201
Page 6
Language Arts.
LEAs are currently either using ELA instructional materials that
are not aligned to the Common Core State Standards or have opted
to purchase supplemental materials that are designed to bridge
the gap between instructional materials aligned to the previous
content standards and the Common Core State Standards. This
bill addresses the need for comprehensive instructional
materials in ELA that are aligned to the Common Core State
Standards.
Publishers and manufacturers will submit instructional materials
aligned to the Common Core State Standards in mathematics were
submitted for review in July, 2013 and may be adopted by the SBE
no later than March 30, 2014. This bill mirrors the language
governing the adoption of these mathematics instructional
materials, including the establishment of a fee-based adoption.
In a fee-based adoption, publishers are assessed a fee based on
the number of subjects, number and types of materials, and grade
levels submitted for review. Some publishers of instructional
materials have expressed concern that this process requires a
significant investment of resources to develop the materials and
pay for consideration by the CDE and SBE without any assurance
that school districts will purchase those materials. The
committee may wish to consider whether it is wise to continue to
impose publisher fees. The Association of American Publishers
(AAP) has requested that the CDE submit a report to the
Legislature documenting its expenditure of the publisher fees
collected pursuant to the mathematics instructional materials
adoption authorized in 2012, prior to imposing fees for this
adoption. Further, the AAP has asked that if such fees are
imposed on the publisher, these fees be limited to reflect only
documentable incremental costs.
LEAs will face enormous pressure to adopt new ELA/ELD
instructional materials after the SBE acts in November, 2015.
This comes on the heels of the adoption of mathematics
instructional materials in March, 2014. Such a quick timeline
for adoption of two major subject areas will require a
significant amount of funds, which could be compounded by the
implementation of the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF). The
LCFF replaces revenue limit funding and separate categorical
program funding with a uniform per-pupil rate based on K-3, 4-6,
7-8, and 9-12 grade spans, augmented by supplemental funding
based on additional needs of students, such as ELs or students
SB 201
Page 7
from low income families. LEAs currently receive about $2.5
billion for categorical programs that serve the general pupil
population, instructional materials being an example of such a
program. The LCFF eliminates these programs and their funding
by excluding them from the base grant and using the funding for
the supplemental grant. Districts with relatively few targeted
pupils will lose much of this funding altogether. Districts
with relatively large number of targeted pupils will receive the
funds formerly associated with these programs in their
supplemental grants.
English Language Development Assessments
Current law requires the assessments used to determine the
English language development of ELs, to be aligned to the ELD
standards and Title III of the federal No Child Left Behind Act
of 2001 (NCLB), requires ELD standards to be linked to content
standards and requires the English language proficiency test to
be appropriately aligned to the ELD standards. Districts
administer a home language survey when students first enroll in
the California school system. The survey asks (1) what language
the child first used when learning to speak; (2) what language
the child most frequently uses at home; (3) what language the
parents or guardians use when speaking to the child; and (4)
what language is most frequently spoken by adults in the home.
If the answer to any of the first three questions is a language
other than English, students are required to take an English
language skills assessment. In California, the current
assessment used for this purpose is the California English
Language development Test (CELDT). A student who has previously
been identified as an EL, based on a prior CELDT administration,
must take the CELDT once each year between July 1 and October 31
until he or she is reclassified as fluent English proficient.
This bill would result in a number of changes to the existing an
English language skills assessment.
In March, 2006, the United States Department of Education issued
recommendations to California in response to a compliance
monitoring visit. The United States Department of Education
recommended that California review the use of the CELDT as a
measure for initially identifying K-12 students as ELLs and
consider whether development of a separate screening measure
aligned to the CELDT would be beneficial. These recommendations
also included the need for California to develop a
developmentally appropriate English language proficiency
SB 201
Page 8
assessment of reading and writing skills for ELL students in
kindergarten and grade one.
First, this bill requires the development of two separate
assessments: one for the initial identification of a pupil as an
EL and the second for the annual assessment of an EL until the
pupil has been reclassified as English language proficient.
Currently, the CELDT is used for both purposes. By calling for
the development of two distinct assessments this bill would
allow for a more reliable and valid measurement of students'
language skills. Initial assessments are used to diagnose a
pupil's learning needs and therefore should be administered
prior to providing a pupil EL instruction. A summative
assessment is designed to take place after the pupil has learned
the content area and tells us where pupil is at given points in
time and what has been achieved. It is used mainly to measure
performance rather than support learning.
The committee recommends an amendment that prohibits the SPI
from administering an assessment for initial identification or a
summative assessment pursuant to proposed section 6 of this bill
(Education Code section 60810) until both assessments are
developed and adopted by the SBE. This will ensure that the
assessments work in tandem with each other, are aligned to the
same set of standards, provide comparable data and results, and
meet the federal requirements of Title III. In the absence of
such language, it is foreseeable that a pupil would be provided
an initial assessment and a summative assessment that are linked
to different standards. While there is always a concern that
there will not be adequate funds to timely develop and implement
both tests, there are few alternatives. If the CDE's limited
resources are used only to develop an initial assessment for the
purpose of bring California into compliance with the
requirements of Title III, but the existing CELDT is not revised
to align to the Common Core State Standards, California would
similarly be out of compliance. While it is possible to
implement the initial assessment and then wait for additional
funds to develop a summative assessment that is aligned to the
California Common Core State Standards (CCSS), this will leave
California out of compliance with the federal requirements and
in no way guarantees future funding for this purpose.
SB 201
Page 9
Second, this bill requires the continuation of the Early
Literacy Assessment. This early assessment was first
administered in 2009. Based on the first three years of this
assessment, and the scores from the more than one million
kindergarten and grade one students who took the Early Literacy
Assessment during this period, the CDE produced a report to the
Legislature. In summary, this report made the following
findings: "(1) the assessment is reliable and valid for its
intended purpose; (2) score differences between English-fluent
students and English learners are highly significant, both
statistically and practically; and (3) students retested after a
year of school show great increases in test scores." Based on
these findings, the CDE makes three recommendations:
1)Separate the K-1 tests into distinct grade level
exams (kindergarten, grade one, and grade two).
2)Reevaluate the weighting of reading and writing in
the overall score calculation. When the K-1 CELDT is
separated into kindergarten and grade one
assessments and optimized for use with each
population, it would be appropriate to reconsider
the weights afforded to reading and writing.
3)Incorporate common core standards in the Early
Literacy Assessment. Because California has
developed a new set of ELD aligned to the CCSS for
ELA, it is necessary to reexamine the CELDT
blueprint and the underlying skills currently
measured to ensure that they are aligned to the new
ELD standards. Item development, which is continuous
throughout the life of the test, should be reviewed
to confirm that new items created for the test are
fully aligned to the new ELD standards and,
therefore, to the CCSS for ELA.
These recommendations are reflected in the language of this
bill. In developing the assessment for the initial
identification and the summative assessment, the bill permits
the SBE to adopt assessments that offer distinct grade level
exams as set forth in the first recommendation. This bill also
SB 201
Page 10
directs the SBE to approve assessment blueprints, performance
descriptors, and performance level cut scores which address the
CDE's second and third recommendations. The committee
recommends a technical amendment to correct a drafting error as
it relates to the requirement to administer the Early Literacy
Assessment for a period of four years as specified.
Finally, this bill changes the window during which a school
district may offer the assessment. Senate Bill 753 (Padilla),
Chapter 634, Statutes of 2011, prohibited the administration of
the CELDT during the fall with the intent being to administer an
assessment after a significant portion of English language
instruction had been provided. Since that time, school
districts have struggled to administer numerous tests during the
spring during a narrow window. According to the author, this
language would provide more flexibility to the school districts
but still maintain the prohibition on a fall administration. The
committee may wish to consider whether this specified window is
appropriate to capture a sufficient percentage of a pupil's
instruction within the school year, or whether it would be more
appropriate to establish a testing window that began in February
or March of each school year.
Previous legislation :
Senate Bill 753 (Padilla), Chapter 634, Statutes of 2011,
prohibited the administration of the CELDT during the fall with
the intent being to administer an assessment after a significant
portion of English language instruction had been provided.
SB 521 (Romero) held in the Senate Appropriations Committee in
2009, was substantially similar SB 753.
AB 2077 (Fuentes), held in the Senate Appropriations Committee
in 2008, would have made changes related to the administration
and scoring of the English language development test, including
moving the testing window to a three-month period in the spring.
AB 748 (Escutia), Chapter 936, Statutes of 1997, requires the
development of a statewide test of English language development
for English learners and requires all districts to use it to
assess their English learners.
SB 201
Page 11
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Superintendent of Public Instruction, Tom Torlakson (Sponsor)
Association of American Publishers, Inc. (PRIOR VERSION)
California Federation of Teachers (PRIOR VERSION)
Californians Together
Opposition
None on File
Analysis Prepared by : Jill Rice / ED. / (916) 319-2087