BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 288
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
288 (Holden and Olsen)
As Amended April 22, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Higher |12-0 |Medina, Baker, | |
|Education | |Bloom, Harper, | |
| | |Irwin, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Jones-Sawyer, | |
| | |Levine, Linder, | |
| | |Low, Santiago, | |
| | |Weber, Williams | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Education |6-0 |O'Donnell, Chávez, | |
| | |Kim, Santiago, | |
| | |Thurmond, Weber | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
AB 288
Page 2
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Gordon, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
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,
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
AB 288
Page 3
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;
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
AB 288
Page 4
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 CCC Chancellor's Office (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 5
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
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
AB 288
Page 6
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.
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.
AB 288
Page 7
17)Requires the CCAP partnership report to the CCCCO to be
transmitted to the Legislature, Director of Finance, and the
State Superintendent of Public Instruction.
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. 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 (EC) 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;
b) A fee waiver policy shall not make a pupil fee
permissible;
AB 288
Page 8
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 CCCCO 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: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)To the extent CCDs can claim apportionment funding for
AB 288
Page 9
additional concurrently enrolled students, there will be
increased General Fund (Proposition 98 (1988)) costs. The
equivalent of only 33 additional FTES statewide, at the current
funding rate of $4,676 per FTES would exceed $150,000. To the
extent, however, that community colleges as a whole are already
using all state funds apportioned for enrollment, this measure
will result in unknown Prop 98 cost pressures to allocate
additional state funding to the CCC's for enrollment growth.
2)To the extent this measure results in more students accelerating
their postsecondary education-by reducing their need for
post-high school remediation and/or by reducing their time to
degree-the state and students will benefit from these
efficiencies. To the extent more students obtain needed
remediation through community college courses, rather than upon
entering the California State University, the state will realize
savings equal to the difference in state support per student
between the two segments.
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,
AB 288
Page 10
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.
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
AB 288
Page 11
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 Education Commission
of the States (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.
Analysis Prepared by:
Jeanice Warden / HIGHER ED. / (916) 319-3960 FN:
0000753