Amended in Assembly April 14, 2015

Amended in Assembly March 26, 2015

California Legislature—2015–16 Regular Session

Assembly Bill No. 491

Introduced by Assembly Member Gonzalez

February 23, 2015

An act to amend begin delete Sections end delete begin insert Section end insert 313.5 begin delete and 52052 end delete of the Education Code, relating to English learners.

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL’S DIGEST

AB 491, as amended, Gonzalez. English learners: begin delete reclassification. end delete begin insert proficiency assessment: reclassification. end insert

begin delete

(1) Existing

end delete

begin insert Existing end insert law required the State Department of Education, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to reclassify English learners and recommend to the Legislature and State Board of Education any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the department determines are necessary to identify when English learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and curricula that require English proficiency. Existing law required the department to issue, by January 1, 2014, a report that includes specified findings, research, analysis, recommendations, and best practices.

This bill would additionally require the department, by July 1, 2016, to recommend, and the state board to adopt, the department’s recommendations and best practices pursuant to the department’s recommendations in the report referenced above.

begin delete

(2) Existing law requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction, with the approval of the state board, to develop an Academic Performance Index, as specified, to measure the performance of schools and school districts. Existing law requires schools and school districts to demonstrate comparable improvement in academic achievement as measured by the Academic Performance Index by all numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school or school district, including ethnic subgroups, socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils, English learners, pupils with disabilities, and foster youth.

end delete begin delete

This bill would add reclassified English learners to the list of numerically significant pupil subgroups designated in this provision. To the extent that this provision would impose new duties on schools and school districts, it would constitute a state-mandated local program.

end delete begin delete

(3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

end delete begin delete

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

end delete

Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program:  begin delete yes end delete begin insert no end insert .

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:

SECTION 1.  

Section 313.5 of the Education Code is amended
to read:

313.5.  

(a) By January 1, 2014, the department shall review
and analyze the criteria, policies, and practices that a sampling of
school districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and
demographic diversity of school districts in the state use to
reclassify English learners, and recommend to the Legislature and
state board any guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the
department determines are necessary to identify when English
learners are prepared for the successful transition to classrooms
and curricula that require English proficiency.

(b) For purposes of completing the review and analysis required
pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall consult with
parents of English learners, experts with demonstrated experience
in developing and administering assessments for English learners,
classroom or resource teachers, or both, school district
administrators with expertise in curriculum, instruction, assessment,
and accountability, and researchers possessing expertise in the
education of English learners.

(c) The group of experts described in subdivision (b) shall
develop a study design that may include a sampling methodology
for purposes of selecting the school districts that will be part of
the review and analysis to identify best practices pursuant to
subdivision (a).

(d) For purposes of completing the review and analysis required
pursuant to subdivision (a), the department shall examine and
report on the following:

(1) The practices and standards used by a sampling of school
districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and
demographic diversity of school districts in the state to meet the
four reclassification criteria specified in subdivision (f) of Section
313.

(2) The extent to which school districts are following the
guidelines established by the state board.

(3) The range of reclassification criteria developed by school
districts.

(e) As part of the examination required pursuant to subdivision
(d), the department shall analyze the following:

(1) English language proficiency and academic performance
data.

(2) The relationship of the reclassification criteria to
reclassification rates.

(3) The academic performance of pupils after reclassification
as English proficient.

(4) The relationship of the reclassification criteria to the
academic performance of pupils after reclassification.

(f) In its report, the department also shall identify any other
pupil outcome measures that indicate an English learner is prepared
to successfully transition to a classroom and curricula that require
English proficiency.

(g) By January 1, 2014, the department shall issue a report that
includes the department’s findings, research, analysis,
recommendations, and best practices pursuant to subdivisions (a),
(d), (e), and (f).

(h) By July 1, 2016, the department shall recommend, and the
state board shall adopt, the department’s recommendations and
best practices pursuant to subdivisions (a), (d), (e), and (f), as
reported pursuant to subdivision (g).

(i) By January 1, 2017, the department shall issue an updated
report that reflects any changes in analysis and recommendations
as a result of the adoption by the state board of the common core
standards pursuant to Section 60605.8 and the English language
development standards adopted pursuant to former Section
60811.3, as that section read on June 30, 2013, or Section 60811.4.

(j) This section shall be implemented only if state or federal
funds are appropriated as necessary to fully fund this purpose or
if private funds are made available as necessary to fully fund this
purpose.

begin delete

SEC. 2.  

Section 52052 of the Education Code is amended to
read:

52052.  

(a) (1) The Superintendent, with the approval of the
state board, shall develop an Academic Performance Index (API),
to measure the performance of schools and school districts,
especially the academic performance of pupils.

(2) A school or school district shall demonstrate comparable
improvement in academic achievement as measured by the API
by all numerically significant pupil subgroups at the school or
school district, including all of the following:

(A) Ethnic subgroups.

(B) Socioeconomically disadvantaged pupils.

(C) English learners.

(D) Pupils with disabilities.

(E) Foster youth.

(F) Reclassified English learners.

(3) (A) For purposes of this section, a numerically significant
pupil subgroup is one that consists of at least 30 pupils, each of
whom has a valid test score.

(B) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), for a subgroup of pupils
who are foster youth, a numerically significant pupil subgroup is
one that consists of at least 15 pupils.

(C) For a school or school district with an API score that is
based on no fewer than 11 and no more than 99 pupils with valid
test scores, numerically significant pupil subgroups shall be defined
by the Superintendent, with the approval of the state board.

(4) (A) The API shall consist of a variety of indicators currently
reported to the department, including, but not limited to, the results
of the achievement test administered pursuant to Section 60640,
attendance rates for pupils in elementary schools, middle schools,
and secondary schools, and the graduation rates for pupils in
secondary schools.

(B) The Superintendent, with the approval of the state board,
may also incorporate into the API the rates at which pupils
successfully promote from one grade to the next in middle school
and high school, and successfully matriculate from middle school
to high school.

(C) Graduation rates for pupils in secondary schools shall be
calculated for the API as follows:

(i) Four-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school
year, which is considered to be three school years after the pupils
entered grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the
total calculated in clause (ii).

(ii) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year three school years before the current school year,
plus the number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating
at the end of the current school year between the school year that
was three school years before the current school year and the date
of graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was three school years before
the current school year and the date of graduation who were
members of the class that is graduating at the end of the current
school year.

(iii) Five-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school
year, which is considered to be four school years after the pupils
entered grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the
total calculated in clause (iv).

(iv) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year four years before the current school year, plus the
number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating at the
end of the current school year between the school year that was
four school years before the current school year and the date of
graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was four years before the
current school year and the date of graduation who were members
of the class that is graduating at the end of the current school year.

(v) Six-year graduation rates shall be calculated by taking the
number of pupils who graduated on time for the current school
year, which is considered to be five school years after the pupils
entered grade 9 for the first time, and dividing that number by the
total calculated in clause (vi).

(vi) The number of pupils entering grade 9 for the first time in
the school year five years before the current school year, plus the
number of pupils who transferred into the class graduating at the
end of the current school year between the school year that was
five school years before the current school year and the date of
graduation, less the number of pupils who transferred out of the
school between the school year that was five years before the
current school year and the date of graduation who were members
of the class that is graduating at the end of the current school year.

(D) The inclusion of five- and six-year graduation rates for
pupils in secondary schools shall meet the following requirements:

(i) Schools and school districts shall be granted one-half the
credit in their API scores for graduating pupils in five years that
they are granted for graduating pupils in four years.

(ii) Schools and school districts shall be granted one-quarter the
credit in their API scores for graduating pupils in six years that
they are granted for graduating pupils in four years.

(iii) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (ii), schools and school
districts shall be granted full credit in their API scores for
graduating in five or six years a pupil with disabilities who
graduates in accordance with his or her individualized education
program.

(E) The pupil data collected for the API that comes from the
achievement test administered pursuant to Section 60640 and the
high school exit examination administered pursuant to Section
60851, when fully implemented, shall be disaggregated by special
education status, English learners, socioeconomic status, gender,
and ethnic group. Only the test scores of pupils who were counted
as part of the enrollment in the annual data collection of the
California Basic Educational Data System for the current fiscal
year and who were continuously enrolled during that year may be
included in the test result reports in the API score of the school.

(F) (i) Commencing with the baseline API calculation in 2016,
and for each year thereafter, results of the achievement test and
other tests specified in subdivision (b) shall constitute no more
than 60 percent of the value of the index for secondary schools.

(ii) In addition to the elements required by this paragraph, the
Superintendent, with the approval of the state board, may
incorporate into the index for secondary schools valid, reliable,
and stable measures of pupil preparedness for postsecondary
education and career.

(G) Results of the achievement test and other tests specified in
subdivision (b) shall constitute at least 60 percent of the value of
the index for primary schools and middle schools.

(H) It is the intent of the Legislature that the state’s system of
public school accountability be more closely aligned with both the
public’s expectations for public education and the workforce needs
of the state’s economy. It is therefore necessary that the
accountability system evolve beyond its narrow focus on pupil test
scores to encompass other valuable information about school
performance, including, but not limited to, pupil preparedness for
college and career, as well as the high school graduation rates
already required by law.

(I) The Superintendent shall annually determine the accuracy
of the graduation rate data. Notwithstanding any other law,
graduation rates for pupils in dropout recovery high schools shall
not be included in the API. For purposes of this subparagraph,
“dropout recovery high school” means a high school in which 50
percent or more of its pupils have been designated as dropouts
pursuant to the exit/withdrawal codes developed by the department
or left a school and were not otherwise enrolled in a school for a
period of at least 180 days.

(J) To complement the API, the Superintendent, with the
approval of the state board, may develop and implement a program
of school quality review that features locally convened panels to
visit schools, observe teachers, interview pupils, and examine pupil
work, if an appropriation for this purpose is made in the annual
Budget Act.

(K) The Superintendent shall annually provide to local
educational agencies and the public a transparent and
understandable explanation of the individual components of the
API and their relative values within the API.

(L) An additional element chosen by the Superintendent and
the state board for inclusion in the API pursuant to this paragraph
shall not be incorporated into the API until at least one full school
year after the state board’s decision to include the element into the
API.

(b) Pupil scores from the following tests, when available and
when found to be valid and reliable for this purpose, shall be
incorporated into the API:

(1) The standards-based achievement tests provided for in
Section 60642.5.

(2) The high school exit examination.

(c) Based on the API, the Superintendent shall develop, and the
state board shall adopt, expected annual percentage growth targets
for all schools based on their API baseline score from the previous
year. Schools are expected to meet these growth targets through
effective allocation of available resources. For schools below the
statewide API performance target adopted by the state board
pursuant to subdivision (d), the minimum annual percentage growth
target shall be 5 percent of the difference between the actual API
score of a school and the statewide API performance target, or one
API point, whichever is greater. Schools at or above the statewide
API performance target shall have, as their growth target,
maintenance of their API score above the statewide API
performance target. However, the state board may set differential
growth targets based on grade level of instruction and may set
higher growth targets for the lowest performing schools because
they have the greatest room for improvement. To meet its growth
target, a school shall demonstrate that the annual growth in its API
is equal to or more than its schoolwide annual percentage growth
target and that all numerically significant pupil subgroups, as
defined in subdivision (a), are making comparable improvement.

(d) Upon adoption of state performance standards by the state
board, the Superintendent shall recommend, and the state board
shall adopt, a statewide API performance target that includes
consideration of performance standards and represents the
proficiency level required to meet the state performance target.

(e) (1) A school or school district with 11 to 99 pupils with
valid test scores shall receive an API score with an asterisk that
indicates less statistical certainty than API scores based on 100 or
more test scores.

(2) A school or school district annually shall receive an API
score, unless the Superintendent determines that an API score
would be an invalid measure of the performance of the school or
school district for one or more of the following reasons:

(A) Irregularities in testing procedures occurred.

(B) The data used to calculate the API score of the school or
school district are not representative of the pupil population at the
school or school district.

(C) Significant demographic changes in the pupil population
render year-to-year comparisons of pupil performance invalid.

(D) The department discovers or receives information indicating
that the integrity of the API score has been compromised.

(E) Insufficient pupil participation in the assessments included
in the API.

(F) A transition to new standards-based assessments
compromises comparability of results across schools or school
districts. The Superintendent may use the authority in this
subparagraph in the 2013-14 and 2014-15 school years only, with
the approval of the state board.

(3) If a school or school district has fewer than 100 pupils with
valid test scores, the calculation of the API or adequate yearly
progress pursuant to the federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001
(20 U.S.C. Sec. 6301 et seq.) and federal regulations may be
calculated over more than one annual administration of the tests
administered pursuant to Section 60640 and the high school exit
examination administered pursuant to Section 60851, consistent
with regulations adopted by the state board.

(4) Any school or school district that does not receive an API
calculated pursuant to subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2) shall not
receive an API growth target pursuant to subdivision (c). Schools
and school districts that do not have an API calculated pursuant
to subparagraph (F) of paragraph (2) shall use one of the following:

(A) The most recent API calculation.

(B) An average of the three most recent annual API calculations.

(C) Alternative measures that show increases in pupil academic
achievement for all groups of pupils schoolwide and among
significant subgroups.

(f) Only schools with 100 or more test scores contributing to
the API may be included in the API rankings.

(g) The Superintendent, with the approval of the state board,
shall develop an alternative accountability system for schools under
the jurisdiction of a county board of education or a county
superintendent of schools, community day schools, nonpublic,
nonsectarian schools pursuant to Section 56366, and alternative
schools serving high-risk pupils, including continuation high
schools and opportunity schools. Schools in the alternative
accountability system may receive an API score, but shall not be
included in the API rankings.

(h) For purposes of this section, county offices of education
shall be considered school districts.

SEC. 3.  

If the Commission on State Mandates determines that
this act contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement to
local agencies and school districts for those costs shall be made
pursuant to Part 7 (commencing with Section 17500) of Division
4 of Title 2 of the Government Code.

end delete