BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  April 7, 2015


                       ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HIGHER EDUCATION


                                 Jose Medina, Chair


          AB 288  
          (Holden) - As Amended March 23, 2015


          [Note: This bill is doubled referred to the Assembly Education  
          Committee and will be heard as it relates to issues under its  
          jurisdiction.]
          


          SUBJECT:  Public schools:  College and Career Access Pathways  
          partnerships


          SUMMARY:  Authorizes the governing board of a community college  
          district (CCD) to enter into a College and Career Access  
          Pathways (CCAP) partnership with the governing board of a school  
          district with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high  
          school to  California Community Colleges (CCC) for career  
          technical education (CTE) or preparation for transfer, improving  
          high school graduation rates, or helping high school pupils  
          achieve college and career readiness; requires the CCAP  
          partnership agreement to outline the terms of the partnership,  
          as specified; and requires each participating CCD and school  
          district to provide an annual report to the to the CCC  
          Chancellor's Office (CCCCO).  Specifically, this bill:  

          1)Declares the following findings of the Legislature:

             a)   Research has shown that dual enrollment can be an  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  2





               effective means of improving the educational outcomes for a  
               broad range of students;

             b)   Dual enrollment has historically targeted high-achieving  
               students; however, increasingly, educators and policymakers  
               are looking toward dual enrollment as a strategy to help  
               students who struggle academically or who are at risk of  
               dropping out;



             c)   Allowing a greater and more varied segment of high  
               school pupils to take community college courses could  
               provide numerous benefits to both the pupils and the state,  
               such as reducing the number of high school dropouts,  
               increasing the number of community college students who  
               transfer and complete a degree, shortening the time to  
               completion of educational goals, and improving the level of  
               preparation of students to successfully complete  
               for-credit, college-level, courses;



             d)   California should rethink its policies governing dual  
               enrollment, and establish a policy framework under which  
               CCDs and school districts could create dual enrollment  
               partnerships as one strategy to provide critical support  
               for underachieving students, those from groups  
               underrepresented in postsecondary education, those who are  
               seeking advanced studies while in high school, and those  
               seeking a CTE credential or certificate;



             e)   Through dual enrollment partnerships, CCDs and school  
               districts could create clear pathways of aligned, sequenced  
               coursework that would allow students to more easily and  
               successfully transition to for-credit, college-level  
               coursework leading to an associate degree, transfer to the  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  3





               University of California or the California State  
               University, or to a program leading to a CTE credential or  
               certificate; and,



             f)   To facilitate the establishment of dual enrollment  
               partnerships, the state should remove fiscal penalties and  
               policy barriers that discourage dual enrollment  
               opportunities; reducing some of these restrictions, will  
               lead to the expansion of dual enrollment opportunities,  
               thereby saving both students and the state valuable time,  
               money, and scarce educational resources. 



          2)Authorizes a CCD governing board to enter into a CCAP  
            partnership with a school district governing board for the  
            purpose of offering or expanding dual enrollment opportunities  
            with the goal of developing seamless pathways from high school  
            to community college for CTE or preparation for transfer,  
            improving high school graduation rates, or helping high school  
            pupils achieve college and career readiness.

          3)Stipulates that as a condition of, and before adopting, a CCAP  
            partnership agreement, the governing board of each district,  
            at an open public meeting of that board, must present the dual  
            enrollment partnership agreement as an informational item;  
            and, at a subsequent open public meeting of that board, must  
            take comments from the public and approve or disapprove the  
            proposed agreement.



          4)Specifies that the CCAP partnership agreement must:



             a)   Outline the terms of the CCAP partnership and shall  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  4





               include, but not necessarily be limited to, the scope,  
               nature, time, location, and listing of the ability of  
               pupils to benefit from those courses; 

             b)   Establish protocols for information sharing, joint  
               facilities use, and parental consent for high school pupils  
               to enroll in community college courses; and,



             c)   Identify a point of contact for the participating CCD  
               and school district partner.

          5)Stipulates that the CCAP partnership agreement shall certify  
            all of the following:

             a)   Any community college instructor teaching a course on a  
               high school campus has not been convicted of any sex  
               offense, as defined, or any controlled substance, as  
               defined;

             b)   Any community college instructor teaching a course at  
               the partnering high school campus has not displaced or  
               resulted in the termination of an existing high school  
               teacher teaching the same course on that high school  
               campus;



             c)   A qualified high school teacher teaching a course  
               offered for college credit at a high school campus has not  
               displaced or resulted in the termination of an existing  
               community college faculty member teaching the same course  
               at the partnering community college campus;



             d)   Both the CCD and the school district partners comply  
               with local collective bargaining agreements and all state  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  5





               and federal reporting requirements regarding the  
               qualifications of the faculty member or teacher teaching a  
               CCAP partnership course offered for high school credit;  
               and,



             e)   Remedial courses taught by community college faculty at  
               a partnering high school campus shall be offered only to  
               high school students who test as non-proficient in  
               mathematics, English or both on a formative assessment in  
               grade 10 or 11, as determined by the partnering school  
               district.

          6)Specifies that a copy of the CCAP partnership agreement must  
            be filed with the CCCCO and the California Department of  
            Education before the start of the CCAP partnership.

          7)Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership shall  
            not provide physical education course opportunities to high  
            school pupils, as specified.



          8)Specifies that a high school pupil enrolled in a course  
            offered through the CCAP partnership cannot be charged any fee  
            that is prohibited, as specified.



          9)Specifies that a CCD participating in a CCAP partnership may  
            assign priority for enrollment and course registration to a  
            pupil seeking to enroll in a community college course that is  
            required for the pupil's CCAP partnership program that is  
            equivalent to the priority assigned to a pupil attending a  
            middle college high school, as specified.











                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  6





          10)Specifies that a CCD may limit enrollment in a community  
            college course solely to eligible high school students if the  
            course is offered at a high school campus during the regular  
            school day and the community college course is offered  
            pursuant to a CCAP agreement.



          11)Specifies that a CCD conducting a closed course on a high  
            school campus, as specified, shall be credited with those  
            units of full-time equivalent students (FTES) attributable to  
            the attendance of eligible high school pupils.



          12)Specifies that a CCD may allow a special part-time student  
            participating in a CCAP partnership agreement to enroll in up  
            to a maximum of 15 units per term if all of the following  
            circumstances are satisfied:



             a)   The units constitute no more than four community college  
               courses per term;

             b)   The units are part of an academic program that is part  
               of a CCAP; and,



             c)   The units are part of an academic program that is  
               designed to award students both a high school diploma and  
               an associate's degree.



          13)Stipulates that the governing board of a CCD participating in  
            a CCAP partnership agreement may, in whole or part, exempt  
            special part-time students, as specified, from fee  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  7





            requirements, as specified.

          14)Stipulates that a district shall not receive a state  
            allowance or apportionment for an instructional activity for  
            which the partnering district has been, or shall be, paid an  
            allowance or apportionment.



          15)Stipulates that attendance of a high school pupil at a  
            community college as a special part-time or full-time student,  
            as specified, is authorized attendance for which the community  
            college shall be credited or reimbursed, provided that no  
            school district has received reimbursement for the same  
            instructional activity.



          16)Stipulates that for each CCAP partnership agreement entered  
            into, the affected CCD and the school district shall annually  
            report to the CCCCO all of the following information:



             a)   Total number of high school pupils by school site  
               enrolled in each CCAP partnership;

             b)   Total number of community college courses by course  
               category and type and by school site enrolled in  by CCAP  
               partnership participants; 



             c)   Total number and percentage of successful course  
               completions, by course category and type and by school  
               site, of CCAP partnership participants; and,











                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  8





             d)   Total number of FTES generated by CCAP partnership CCD  
               participants.



          17)Requires the CCAP partnership report to the CCCCO shall also  
            be transmitted to the Legislature, Director of Finance (DOF),  
            and the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI).
          


          EXISTING LAW:  



          1)Authorizes the governing board of a school district, upon  
            recommendation of the principal of a student's school of  
            attendance, and with parental consent, to authorize a student  
            who would benefit from advanced scholastic or vocational work  
            to attend a community college as a special part-time or  
            full-time student.  Additionally, current law prohibited a  
            principal from recommending, for community college summer  
            session attendance, more than 5% of the total number of  
            students in the same grade level and exempted from the 5% cap  
            a student recommended by his or her principal for enrollment  
            in a college-level summer session course if the course in  
            which the pupil was enrolled met specified criteria. These  
            exemptions were repealed on January 1, 2014 (Education Code  
            Section 48800, et seq.). 

          2)Prohibits a pupil enrolled in a public school from being  
            required to pay a pupil fee for participation in an  
            educational activity; and, specifies that all of the following  
            requirements apply to the prohibition:  

             a)   All supplies, materials, and equipment needed to  
               participate in educational activities shall be provided to  
               pupils free of charge; 









                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  9





             b)   A fee waiver policy shall not make a pupil fee  
               permissible; 

             c)   School districts and schools shall not establish a  
               two-tier educational system by requiring a minimal  
               educational standard and also offering a second, higher  
               educational standard that pupils may only obtain via  
               payment of a fee or purchase of additional supplies that  
               the school district does not provide; and, 

             d)   A school district or school shall not offer course  
               credit or privileges related to educational activities in  
               exchange for money or donations of goods or services from a  
               pupil or a pupil's parents or guardians, and a school  
               district or school shall not remove course credit or  
               privileges related to educational activities, or otherwise  
               discriminate against a pupil, because the pupil or the  
               pupil's parents or guardians did not or will not provide  
               money or donations of goods or services to the school  
               district or school (EC Section 49011). 

          3)Requires the CCC Chancellor's Office to report to the  
            Department of Finance and Legislature annually on the amount  
            of FTES claimed by each CCC district for high school pupils  
            enrolled in non-credit, non-degree applicable, and degree  
            applicable courses; and provides that, for purposes of  
            receiving state apportionments, CCC districts may only include  
            high school students within the CCC district's report on FTES  
            if the students are enrolled in courses that are open to the  
            general public, as specified.  Additionally, current law  
            requires the governing board of a CCC district to assign a low  
            enrollment priority to special part-time or full-time students  
            in order to ensure that these students do not displace  
            regularly admitted community college students (EC Sections  
            76001 and 76002). 



          FISCAL EFFECT:  Unknown








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  10







          COMMENTS:  Concurrent and dual enrollment background.  According  
          to New Directions for Community Colleges, no. 169, Spring 2015,  
          the practice for offering college courses to high school  
          students stems from local practice in many states and was  
          initiated between CCDs and local school districts, but the  
          practice proceeded without clear state policy guidelines,  
          regulations, or direction; resulting in variation in local  
          practice.  Some states, such as Minnesota, as far back as the  
          1980s, were early adopters of state dual credit policies,  
          whereby their state policies provided a framework for offering  
          college courses to high school students and the students  
          receiving both college and high school credit for some of their  
          courses. 


          Concurrent enrollment provides pupils the opportunity to enroll  
          in college courses and earn college credit while still enrolled  
          in high school.  Currently, a pupil is allowed to concurrently  
          enroll in a CCC as a "special admit" while still attending high  
          school, if the pupil's school district determines that the pupil  
          would benefit from "advanced scholastic or vocational work."   
          Special-admit students have typically been advanced pupils  
          wanting to take more challenging coursework or pupils who come  
          from high schools where Advanced Placement or honors courses are  
          not widely available.  Additionally, programs such as middle  
          college high schools and early college high schools use  
          concurrent enrollment to offer instructional programs for  
          at-risk pupils that focus on college preparatory curricula.   
          These programs are developed through partnerships between a  
          school district and a CCC.  During summer session at a CCC,  
          principals are limited to recommending no more than 5% of their  
          pupils in each grade level to enroll at a CCC during a summer  
          session.  Existing law provides certain exemptions to this  
          process (as aforementioned in current law above).  These  
          exemptions expired on January 1, 2014.  










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  11





          According to a February 2014 report by Education Commission of  
          the States (ECS), the number of U. S. public high schools  
          offering concurrent enrollment programs is growing, with 82%  
          providing such opportunities in 2011-12.  Academic research and  
          state experience highlight the benefits of concurrent enrollment  
          programs for improving college rates, particularly for minority  
          and/or low-income students.  Additionally, ECS finds that with  
          the possible exception of the state of Massachusetts, minority  
          and/or low-income students tend to be underrepresented in  
          statewide concurrent enrollment programs.


          Purpose of this bill.  The author states, "Gradually more  
          students are entering community colleges and some CSUs  
          [California State University] assessing below college-level.   
          Consequently, more courses are being offered on their respective  
          campuses to prepare students for college level coursework."  The  
          author contends that, "This measure will increase the  
          accessibility of concurrent enrollment programs in order to  
          continue to achieve the goal of helping low achieving students  
          integrate into a college environment, increase the likelihood a  
          degree program will be completed, decrease the length of time to  
          complete a degree program, and stimulate interest in higher  
          education among high school students." 

          How many?  According to the CCCCO's statutorily required report  
          on special admit enrollments:  26,604 (the most recent data  
          available to date) special admit students were claimed  
          systemwide, in summer 2013, with 22,432 of the students  
          successfully completing and passing their courses.  The summer  
          2013 numbers have slightly increased when compared to the  
          previous last couple of years; however, the 2013 numbers remain  
          significantly lower when compared to summer 2007, when of the  
          68,708 special admit students claimed systemwide, 53,387  
          successfully completed and passed their courses.

          Double-dipping?  There is a common perception that concurrent  
          enrollment courses require a state to "pay twice" for a student  
          to take a single course.  However, according to ECS, "If the  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  12





          dual enrollment opportunity is strong, rather than paying twice,  
          states are paying earlier."  ECS concludes that the state is  
          consolidating two payments into one if the community college  
          course that the high school pupil takes is transferable to the  
          postsecondary institution where he or she later enrolls.

          To address this issue, this measure specifies that a district  
          shall not receive a state allowance or apportionment for an  
          instructional activity for which the partnering district has  
          been, or shall be, paid an allowance or apportionment.  
           
           Committee considerations.  This measure creates an unprecedented  
          policy shift; allowing high school pupils whose grade 10 or 11  
          formative assessment show that they are not college proficient,  
          to take remediation courses while in high school, as taught by  
          community college faculty on a high school campus, and receive  
          credit.  

          While the measure calls for data around the CCAP partnership  
          participants to be gathered and reported to the CCCO,  
          Legislature, DOF, and the SPI, there is no present requirement  
          to assess the success of the remediation courses taught on the  
          high school campuses.  The author and Committee may wish to  
          consider adding an accountability framework and evaluation  
          mechanism to the measure in order to determine the success of  
          the remediation courses taught by community college faculty to  
          high school pupils on a high school campus.

          Additionally, the author and Committee may wish to address who  
          is responsible for additional support to pupils, faculty,  
          teachers, and staff if the CCAP partnership does not aid in  
          ensuring high school pupils are fully prepared for college level  
          courses upon graduation.

          Lastly, there is an inconsistency with the spelling of the word  
          "school site" throughout the language of the measure; the author  
          may wish to work with Legislative Counsel in order to be  
          consistent throughout the entire measure with the spelling.
          








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  13





          Conflicting legislation.  AB 542 (Wilk) and AB 889 (Chang),  
          which will both be heard today by this Committee, seek to amend  
          and address some of the same code sections as this measure,  
          addressing special part-time or full-time students and early and  
          middle college high school students.

          Staff recommends, should all the measures pass out of this  
          Committee, that they eventually be amended to address potential  
          chaptering out issues.

          Related Legislation.  There have been many bills introduced in  
          the last several years that attempt to address concurrent  
          enrollment and the 5% cap, including, but not limited to the  
          following bills:  AB 1451 (Holden), of 2014, which was held on  
          the Senate Appropriations Committee Suspense file, was similar  
          in nature to this measure.  AB 1540 (Hagman), of 2014, which was  
          held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee Suspense file,  
          would, among other things, specify that the governing board of a  
          school district may authorize a pupil, at the recommendation of  
          a community college dean of a computer science department or  
          another appropriate community college computer science  
          administrator, and with parental consent, to attend a community  
          college during any session or term as a special part-time or  
          full-time student and to undertake one or more computer science  
          courses offered at the community college.  AB 2352 (Chesbro), of  
          2014, which was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee  
          Suspense file would, among other things, remove early and middle  
                                                                     college high school students concurrently enrolled at a CCC from  
          receiving low priority admission status.  AB 160 (Portantino),  
          of  2011, which was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee  
          Suspense file, removed certain restrictions on concurrent  
          enrollment and authorized school districts to enter into  
          partnerships with CCC districts to provide high school pupils  
          opportunities for advanced scholastic work, career technical or  
          other coursework at CCC campuses.  AB 230 (Carter), Chapter 50,  
          Statutes of 2011, exempted a pupil attending a middle college  
          high school from the requirement that CCC governing boards  
          assign a low enrollment priority to concurrent enrollment  
          students if that pupil is seeking to enroll in a CCC course that  








                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  14





          is required for the pupil's middle college high school program.   
          SB 1437 (Padilla), Chapter 718, Statutes of 2008, extended the  
          sunset date from January 1, 2009 until January 1, 2014 for which  
          this bill seeks to further extend the sunset.  SB 1303 (Runner),  
          Chapter 648, Statutes of 2006, exempted from the specified 5%  
          cap on CCC summer session enrollment, a pupil recommended by his  
          or her principal if the pupil met specified criteria.  



          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:




          Support


          Alameda Science and Technology Institute


          Alameda Unified School District


          American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees


          Banning High School


          California Catholic Conference, Inc.


          California Community Colleges (Sponsor)


          Castro Valley Unified School District










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  15





          Cerritos Community College District


          Chaffey Joint Union High School District


          Coast Community College District


          College of the Sequoias


          College of the Siskiyous


          City of Temecula


          Community College League of California 


          Compton Unified School District


          Design Science Early College High School Boosters Club


          Ed Voice


          Feather River Community College District


          Fremont Union High School District


          Foothill De Anza Community College District










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  16





          Gateway to College at Laney College


          Gentrain Society of Monterey Peninsula College


          Grossmont Union High School District


          Hemet High School


          Hemet Unified School District


          Irvine Valley College


          Kern Community College District


          Kings Canyon Unified


          Long Beach Community College District


          Los Angeles College Faculty Guild


          Los Angeles Community College District


          Los Rios Community College District 


          Moreno Valley Unified School District










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  17





          Mountain View Los Altos High School District


          Mt. San Jacinto Community College District


          Murrieta Valley Unified School District


          North Orange County Community College District


          North Valley Military Institute College Preparatory Academy


          Oakland Unified School District


          Paloma Valley High School


          Pasadena Community College District


          Peralta Community College District


          Porterville College


          Porterville Unified School District


          Riverside Community College District


          Sacramento City College, Davis Center










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  18





          Saddleback College


          San Bernardino Community College District 


          San Diego Community College District


          San Diego Metropolitan Regional Career & Technical High School 


          San Diego Unified School District


          San Francisco Community College District


          San Jacinto Valley Academy


          Santa Monica College


          Santa Rosa Academy


          Santa Rosa Junior College


          Shasta-Tehama-Trinity Joint Community College District


          South Orange County Community College District 


          Tri-Valley Regional Occupational Program










                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  19





          Valley Regional Occupational Program


          West Kern Community College District


          William S. Hart Union High School District


          Yuba Community College District


           


          Opposition





          None on file.








          Analysis Prepared by:Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916)  
          319-3960















                                                                     AB 288


                                                                    Page  20