BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó

                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  1


          1012 (Jones-Sawyer)

          As Amended  June 1, 2015

          Majority vote

          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                |Noes                |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |Education       |7-0   |O'Donnell, Chávez,  |                    |
          |                |      |Kim, McCarty,       |                    |
          |                |      |Santiago, Thurmond, |                    |
          |                |      |Weber               |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |Appropriations  |17-0  |Gomez, Bigelow,     |                    |
          |                |      |Bonta, Calderon,    |                    |
          |                |      |Chang, Daly,        |                    |
          |                |      |Eggman, Gallagher,  |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,     |                    |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,     |                    |
          |                |      |Jones, Quirk,       |                    |
          |                |      |Rendon, Wagner,     |                    |
          |                |      |Weber, Wood         |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |
          |                |      |                    |                    |


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  2

          SUMMARY:  This bill prohibits, starting with the 2016-17 school  
          year, a school district maintaining any of grades seven to 12 from  
          assigning any students to any "course period without educational  
          content" for more than one week in any semester, or to a course  
          that the student has previously completed with a grade sufficient  
          to meet the A-G requirements and graduation requirements, unless  
          specifically authorized per requirements of the bill.   
          Specifically, this bill:

          1)Defines "course period without educational content" as one  
            course period during which any of the following occurs: the  
            pupil is sent home or released from campus before the conclusion  
            of the designated school day; the pupil is assigned to service,  
            instructional work experience, or to a course that has a  
            different name, but involves the pupil providing assistance to a  
            certificated employee in a situation in which the ratio of pupil  
            to employee is greater than one to one; or the pupil is not  
            assigned to any course for the relevant course period.

          2)Sets forth reasons why a pupil may be assigned to a course  
            without educational content and requires the principal or  
            assistant principal to certify and place the rationale in the  
            student's cumulative file.

          3)Clarifies a school district is not prohibited from establishing  
            and offering evening high school classes, independent study,  
            courses of work-based learning or work experience, or distance  
            learning if the program otherwise meets all of the requirements  
            of law governing that program.

          4)Excludes pupils enrolled in an alternative school, a community  
            day school, a continuation high school or an opportunity school  
            from provisions of this bill.


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  3

          5)Makes these requirements subject to the Uniform Complaint  
            Procedures (UCP), requires the California Department of  
            Education (CDE) to respond to appeals within 60 days, and  
            requires that if merit is found in an appeal the local  
            educational agency to provide a remedy to the affected student.

          6)Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to  
            annually prepare an annual report detailing actions taken  
            regarding related complaints, and requires the SPI, by January 1  
            of each fiscal year, to submit the report to the report to the  
            appropriate fiscal and policy committees of the Legislature.   
            Requires the SPI to adopt regulations that set forth the  
            procedures governing complaint procedures.

          EXISTING LAW:  

          1)Specifies requirements for graduation from high school,  
            including:  three courses in English; two courses in  
            mathematics; two courses in science; three courses in social  
            studies; one course in visual or performing arts, foreign  
            language, or career technical education; and two courses in  
            physical education.  Authorizes school districts to adopt  
            additional requirements for graduation.

          2)Establishes course requirements for admission to the University  
            of California and the California State University, known as the  
            A-G requirements.

          3)Requires that only the attendance of students under the  
            immediate supervision and control of a certificated employee is  
            counted toward the computation of average daily attendance.


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  4

          4)Establishes the minimum day in middle school and high school as  
            240 minutes.  

          5)Through regulation, requires local education agencies to adopt  
            uniform complaint procedures through which the public can  
            register complaints regarding educational programs and rights.   
            (California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 4600).  

          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, unknown, likely minor, Proposition 98 (1988) General  
          Fund state mandated costs related to the expansion of the UCP, and  
          unknown administrative costs to the CDE to process UCP appeals,  
          likely not to exceed $300,000. 


          Need for the bill.  The author's office states, "Thousands of high  
          school students across California are tracked into so-called  
          'classes,' where they are given meaningless 'credits' for sitting  
          at home, in the office, or taking a course they've already passed.  

          School districts have given these courses different names ('home,'  
          'service,' 'work-experience,' 'college,' 'adult'), but they all  
          have a common trait:  they rob students of learning time and the  
          opportunity for a real education.  And many of the affected  
          students need real, academic classes to fulfill graduation or  
          college access requirements.

          The schools where this occurs serve almost exclusively low-income  
          students of color.  Although this is not the norm across  
          California, it is all-too common in communities where students can  
          least afford to lose learning time.  It is time to ensure that all  


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  5

          of our schools have the support they need to provide real classes  
          to every student until they graduate." 

          Bill related to lawsuit filed by the sponsor.  This bill is  
          related to Cruz v. State of California, a class action lawsuit  
          filed May 29th, 2014, in Alameda County Superior Court against the  
          state on behalf of students in seven schools.

          The suit names as plaintiffs a class of current or future students  
          attending Castlemont High School in the Oakland Unified School  
          District, John C. Fremont High School in the Los Angeles Unified  
          School District (LAUSD), Nystrom Elementary School in the West  
          Contra Costa Unified School District, Franklin S. Whaley Middle  
          School in the Compton Unified School District, Fremont High School  
          in the Oakland Unified School District, Florence Griffith Joyner  
          Elementary School in the LAUSD, and Compton High School in the  
          Compton Unified School District.  The suit names as defendants the  
          State of California, the State Department of Education, the State  
          Board of Education (SBE), and the Superintendent of Public  
          Instruction Tom Torlakson. 

          The plaintiffs allege that the state has violated the rights of  
          the plaintiffs provided by the Equal Protection clauses of the  
          state constitution "by failing to provide them with basic  
          educational opportunities equal to those that other students  
          elsewhere in the State receive" with regard to meaningful learning  

          They allege that this lack of instructional time is due to several  
          factors, including:

          1)Assignment of students to administrative tasks or free periods  
            instead of assignment to classroom periods of instruction  
            because of insufficient curricular offerings and a lack of  


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  6

            available qualified teachers; 
          2)Violence or security disruptions, which result in cessation of  
            instruction and traumatic after-effects, and insufficient access  
            to mental health professionals to assist students and faculty in  
            coping with these disruptions; 

          3)Late changes to the master course schedule requiring course and  
            teacher changes well into the semester; 

          4)Unstable, transient teaching faculties and administrative teams  
            (including principals, assistant principals, and counselors),  
            resulting from under-resourced and stressful campuses not  
            conducive to professional development and growth; and 

          5)Unaddressed student absenteeism, resulting in whole or part from  
            campus conditions.

          The complaint requests that the court address the state's  
          monitoring system and its intervention to prevent and remedy the  
          causes of lost learning time.

          On February 5th of this year the plaintiffs filed a motion for a  
          preliminary injunction.  Last week (April 24th), Alameda County  
          Superior Court Judge George C. Hernández, Jr. denied this motion,  
          stating that, "If, at this stage, Plaintiffs cannot supply  
          reliable evidence regarding the actual practices of most  
          California high schools with regard to the use of contentless  
          classes and the timely implementation of appropriate master  
          schedules, the court lacks a fair standard against which to  
          measure the performance of Plaintiff's own high schools and cannot  
          determine, even preliminarily, whether Plaintiffs have some  
          possibility of prevailing on their claims."


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  7

          Districts respond to lawsuit by curtailing some practices.   
          According to a reply brief submitted in support of the motion for  
          preliminary injunction, Compton High School has ceased scheduling  
          students in "home" periods and has placed "sharp limitations" on  
          service periods since this suit was filed, and LAUSD has indicated  
          that it will take some measures to limit "home" and "service"  
          periods and produce timely, complete master schedules.

          2014-15 scheduling problems in LAUSD caused by data system  
          failure.  In August, 2014 students at Jefferson High School in the  
          Los Angeles Unified School district (LAUSD) walked out of class  
          during their third week of school in protest over a new scheduling  
          system which failed to assign students to classes and assigned  
          some to classes they'd already taken.  Students reported sitting  
          in auditoriums all day for days while course schedules were worked  
          out, and being assigned to classes they had already completed.   
          Teachers found elementary school students listed on high school  
          attendance sheets.

          The problems which occurred in LAUSD were related to a new data  
          system, called MiSis, which was developed by the district and  
          introduced this year.  School district officials acknowledged  
          significant problems with the system, and reported that nearly all  
          scheduling problems were addressed by the end of 2014.  

          Student declarations point to management problems.  Student and  
          staff declarations provided by counsel for the plaintiffs paint a  
          picture of five high schools in the Oakland, Compton, and Los  
          Angeles school districts with numerous management problems.  These  

          1)Scheduling problems (evidenced by students being placed into  
            courses late, being placed in courses already completed,  
            overcrowding of courses, and cancelled courses). 


                                                                      AB 1012

                                                                      Page  8

          2)Staffing problems, including high teacher and administrator  
            turnover (evidenced by students being instructed by multiple  
            substitute teachers, report of high administrator turnover).

          3)Counseling services problems (evidenced by overwhelmed  
            counselors and poor counseling).

          4)Insufficient course offerings for A-G completion (evidenced by  
            students not able to enroll in A-G courses).

          Some statements also indicated that the limited elective course  
          offerings was associated with a decision on the part of the school  
          districts to focus their resources on remedial instruction, which  
          the plaintiffs acknowledge is necessary for many students in these  
          schools.  They state, "Fremont has invested its limited resources  
          in providing intervention classes, which are necessary for many  
          students to graduate, but this has come at the expense of offering  
          sufficient classes and electives to fill the course schedules of  
          students who are on track to graduate."

          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
          Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087  FN: 0000814