BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 288
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 29, 2015
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Patrick O'Donnell, Chair
AB 288
(Holden) - As Amended April 22, 2015
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. Specifically, this bill:
1)Makes findings and declarations regarding the value and
benefits of dual enrollment, the need for California to
rethink its policies regarding dual enrollment, and the need
for the state to remove fiscal and policy barriers that
discourage dual enrollment opportunities.
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,
AB 288
Page 2
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 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)Requires 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;
AB 288
Page 3
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
and federal reporting requirements regarding the
qualifications of the faculty member or teacher teaching a
CCAP partnership course offered for high school credit;
e) Which participating district will be the employer of
record for purposes of assignment monitoring and reporting
to the county office of education and which participating
district will assume reporting responsibilities pursuant to
applicable federal teacher quality mandates; and
f) 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
AB 288
Page 4
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.
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)Provides 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
AB 288
Page 5
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)Provides 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
requirements, as specified.
14)Provides 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)Provides 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.
AB 288
Page 6
16)Provides 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;
d) Total number of FTES generated by CCAP partnership CCD
participants; and
e) An evaluation of the CCAP partnerships and, based upon
the date collected, recommendations for program
improvement, including, but not necessarily limited to, the
need for additional student assistance or academic
resources to ensure the overall success of the CCAP
partnerships.
17)Requires the CCAP partnership report to the CCCCO to be
transmitted to the Legislature, Director of Finance (DOF), and
the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI).
AB 288
Page 7
18)Provides that a community college district that violates this
article, including, but limited to, any restriction imposed by
the board of governors pursuant to this article, shall be
subject to restrictions on interdistrict transfer.
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.
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;
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
AB 288
Page 8
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
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
AB 288
Page 9
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.
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
AB 288
Page 10
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
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
Highly qualified teachers. Federal law requires all states to
take the following actions with regard to "highly qualified
teachers:"
AB 288
Page 11
Measure the extent to which all students have highly
qualified teachers, particularly minority and disadvantaged
students;
Adopt goals and plans to ensure all teachers are highly
qualified; and
Publicly report plans and progress in meeting teacher
quality goals.
In order to be designated as highly qualified, a teacher must be
certificated. However, the highly qualified teacher requirement
does not apply to community college faculty. This bill avoids
the federal requirement by allowing the community college
district to be designated as the employer of record.
Students who are concurrently enrolled under existing law can
earn high school credit as well as college credit for courses
taken. Under existing law, however, those courses are taught at
a college campus and the number of students who may be
concurrently enrolled is limited. This bill allows courses to
be taken for dual credit at a high school and does not impose a
limit on the number of students who can be concurrently
enrolled. Under the partnership, courses for high school credit
can be taught by a community college instructor who is not
credentialed, which moves us in the opposition direction of
federal requirement. Certification means a teacher has not only
the subject matter knowledge, but also the pedagogical training
and experience needed to effectively teach high school-aged
students. While concurrent enrollment offers many advantages,
the committee may wish to consider how far California should go
in relaxing the requirement that courses for high school credit
be taught by certificated teachers.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
AB 288
Page 12
Support
Academic Senate for the California Community Colleges
California Catholic Conference, Inc.
California Chamber of Commerce
California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office
California Edge Coalition
California School Boards Association
Chaffey College
Children Now
College of the Siskiyous
Community College League of California
Compton Unified School District
AB 288
Page 13
Design Science Early College High School Boosters Club
EdVoice
Freemont Union High School District
Gentrain Society
Irvine Valley College
Kern Community College District
Los Angeles Community College District
Los Angeles Unified School District
Los Rios Community College District
Napa Valley Community College District
North Orange County Community College District
Monterey Peninsula Community College District
Orange County Business Council
AB 288
Page 14
Pasadena Community College District
Peralta Community College District
Rural County Representatives of California
San Bernardino Community College District
San Diego Community College District
San Diego Unified School District
San Francisco Community College District
Santa Rosa Junior College
Saddleback College
South Orange County Community College District
West Kern Community College District
Yuba Community College District
AB 288
Page 15
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by:Rick Pratt / ED. / (916) 319-2087