BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  April 22, 2015


                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION


                              Patrick O'Donnell, Chair


          AB 1369  
          (Frazier) - As Amended April 14, 2015


          SUBJECT:  Special education:  dyslexia


          SUMMARY:  Requires schools to annually screen all students in  
          Kindergarten and grades 1 through 3 for dyslexia, identify  
          students with dyslexia with a specified screening instrument,  
          and instruct students with dyslexia with a specified  
          instructional approach.  Requires the Superintendent of Public  
          Instruction (SPI) to adopt program guidelines, a screening  
          instrument, and an instructional approach for this purpose.   
          Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, commencing  
            with the 2016-17 academic year, to require institutions of  
            higher education that provide teacher training programs to  
            include instruction in the recognition of, and appropriate  
            evidence-based teaching methodologies for, dyslexia, or other  
            reading and writing dysfunctions, including dyscalculia,  
            dysgraphia, auditory and visual processing disabilities, and  
            related disorders.



          2)Defines "dyslexia" to mean a specific learning disability that  
            is neurological in origin and characterized by difficulties  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  2





            with accurate or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling  
            and decoding abilities. Further defines dyslexia:



             a)   states that these difficulties typically result from a  
               deficit in the phonological component of language that is  
               often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities  
               and the provision of effective classroom instruction



             b)   states that secondary consequences may include problems  
               in reading comprehension and reduced reading experience  
               that can impede the growth of vocabulary and background  
               knowledge



             c)   states that other characteristics include, but are not  
               limited to, difficulty in acquiring language skills;  
               inability to comprehend oral or written language;  
               difficulty in rhyming words; difficulty in naming letters,  
               recognizing letters, matching letters to sounds, and  
               blending sounds when speaking and reading words; difficulty  
               recognizing and remembering sight words; consistent  
               transposition of number sequences, and letter reversals,  
               inversions, and substitutions; and difficulty in  
               replication of content



          1)Defines "specific learning disability" to include dyslexia,  
            dyscalculia, dysgraphia, auditory and visual processing  
            disabilities, and related disorders.



          2)Requires that, on or before January 1, 2017, the SPI to  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  3





            develop program guidelines for dyslexia or other reading and  
            writing dysfunctions to be used to assist regular education  
            teachers, special education teachers, and parents to identify,  
            assess, plan, provide, evaluate, and improve educational  
            services to pupils.



          3)Requires the program guidelines include characteristics  
            typical of pupils with dyslexia or other reading and writing  
            dysfunctions, and evidence-based strategies for their  
            remediation.



          4)Requires the SPI to consult with teachers, administrators,  
            school psychologists, and other educational professionals  
            involved in the identification and treatment of dyslexia or  
            other reading and writing dysfunctions.



          5)Requires the SPI to disseminate the program guidelines and  
            provide technical assistance regarding their use and  
            implementation to parents, teachers, administrators, other  
            education professionals, and faculty members in teacher  
            training programs of institutions of higher education.



          6)Requires local in-service training programs for school  
            psychologists, regular education teachers, and special  
            education teachers in local educational agencies (LEAs) to  
            include a component on the recognition of, and appropriate  
            evidence-based teaching methodologies for, dyslexia, or other  
            reading and writing dysfunctions, including dyscalculia,  
            dysgraphia, auditory and visual processing disabilities, and  
            related disorders.









                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  4







          7)Requires, on or before January 1, 2017, the SPI to adopt both  
            the following:
             a)   an evidence-based screening instrument to identify  
               pupils who have dyslexia or other reading and writing  
               dysfunctions.
             b)   an evidence-based, multisensory, direct, explicit,  
               structured, and sequential approach to instructing pupils  
               who have dyslexia or other reading and writing  
               dysfunctions.





          1)Requires that, commencing with the 2017-18 academic year, LEAs  
            use the screening instrument to identify students who have  
            dyslexia or other reading and writing dysfunctions.



          2)Requires that, commending with the 2017-18 academic year, LEAs  
            use the evidence-based multisensory approach.  



          3)Requires LEAS to ensure that teachers receive appropriate  
            training on the screening instrument and the instructional  
            approach.



          4)Requires that LEAs screen all students enrolled in  
            kindergarten and grades 1 to 3, at least once per year, to  
            identify dyslexia.  If the screening identifies dyslexia or  
            other reading and writing dysfunctions in a pupil, the LEA  
            would be required to notify the student's parent or legal  
            guardian in writing within 30 calendar days.








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  5








          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Encourages institutions of higher education to provide, in  
            teacher training programs, increased emphasis on the  
            recognition of, and teaching strategies for, specific learning  
            disabilities, including dyslexia and related disorders. 


          2)Encourages the inclusion, in local in-service training  
            programs for regular education teachers and special education  
            teachers in local educational agencies, of a component on the  
            recognition of, and teaching strategies for, specific learning  
            disabilities, including dyslexia and related disorders.


          3)Defines a specific learning disability, as defined in Section  
            1401(30) of Title 20 of the United States Code, as "a disorder  
            in one or more of the basic psychological processes involved  
            in understanding or in using language, spoken or written,  
            which may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen,  
            think, speak, read, write, spell, or perform mathematical  
            calculations. The term "specific learning disability" includes  
            conditions such as perceptual disabilities, brain injury,  
            minimal brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental  
            aphasia. That term does not include a learning problem that is  
            primarily the result of visual, hearing, or motor  
            disabilities, of intellectual disabilities, of emotional  
            disturbance, or of environmental, cultural, or economic  
            disadvantage."



          4)Requires that a student who is assessed as being dyslexic and  
            meets eligibility criteria for the category of specific  
            learning disabilities is entitled to special education and  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  6





            related services.


          5)Requires that if a student who exhibits the characteristics of  
            dyslexia or another related reading dysfunction is not found  
            to be eligible for special education and related services, the  
            pupil's instructional program shall be provided in the regular  
            education program.


          6)States the intent of the Legislature that the program  
            guidelines for specific learning disabilities, including  
            dyslexia and other related disorders, be available for use by  
            teachers and parents in order for them to have knowledge of  
            the strategies that can be utilized with pupils for the  
            remediation of the various types of specific learning  
            disabilities.


          7)Requires, in an uncodified section, the SPI to develop program  
            guidelines for specific learning disabilities, including  
            dyslexia and other related disorders, for use by regular and  
            special educators and parents to assist them in identifying  
            assessing planning, providing, evaluating, and improving  
            education services to pupils.  




          FISCAL EFFECT:  This bill has been keyed as a state-mandated  
          local program by the Office of Legislative Counsel.


          COMMENTS:  


          Definition of specific learning disabilities, including  
          dyslexia.  Federal law establishes 13 disability categories  
          which states use to determine if students qualify for services.  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  7





          The category of Specific Learning Disability is defined in  
          federal law as follows [emphasis added]:  "Specific learning  
          disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic  
          psychological processes involved in understanding or in using  
          language, spoken or written, that may manifest itself in the  
          imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read, write, spell,  
          or to do mathematical calculations, including conditions such as  
          perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal brain  
          dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia."  California  
          law mirrors the federal definition in Education Code Section  
          56377.


          


          According to the author, the definition of dyslexia in this bill  
          reflects the definition used by the International Dyslexia  
          Association and the National Institute of Child Health and Human  
          Development (National Institutes of Health).  The bill also  
          seeks to broaden the number of conditions defined as specific  
          learning disabilities beyond what is included in federal and  
          state law.





          Number of students with specific learning disabilities.   
          According to the CDE, over 700,000 California students received  
          Special Education services in the 2013-14 academic year, and of  
          these, the largest group (over 280,000 students) were provided  
          services for a Specific Learning Disability.  The subset of  
          those who are diagnosed with dyslexia is not reported, but is it  
          believed to be a significant portion of the total.  The next  
          largest category of disability is Speech or Language Impairment,  
          with over 160,000 students served.










                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  8








          How do schools determine if a student has a specific learning  
          disability, such as dyslexia? Federal law requires several steps  
          to be taken to determine if a student has a specific learning  
          disability or another disability.  





          When a student is identified as struggling, the school must  
          first try to meet a student's needs through the general  
          education program.  Schools generally use Student Study Teams  
          (SSTs) or an approach called Response to Intervention (RtI).    
          RtI is an instructional approach designed to identify struggling  
          students and provide interventions explicitly targeted to meet  
          their needs.  If the school finds that these actions do not meet  
          a student's needs, they refer the student (with parental  
          consent) for a professional evaluation.  The evaluator assesses  
          the student to determine if the student has a disability and  
          whether that disability interferes with the student's education.  
           If the student meets both criteria federal law requires that  
          services be provided, and a team of stakeholders come together  
          to prepare an individualized education plan (IEP), which  
          determines the services which must be provided for that student.  
           





          Federal law and state regulations require that no single score  
          or product of scores be used as the sole criterion for the  
          decision regarding a child's eligibility for special education.











                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  9







          What precedent does this bill set?  Staff is unaware of any  
          precedent in California law for a number of requirements in this  
          bill, including:





                 defining a disability in state law in a manner that is  
               different than federal law 
                 expanding the definition of a federal disability  
               category


                 universal screening for a disability


                 requiring the identification of a single screening tool  
               for determining eligibility for services


                 requiring the identification of a single instructional  
               approach for the education of students with a disability


                 mandating the use of a single screening tool 


                 mandating the use of an instructional approach


                 establishing a process for determining eligibility for  
               services which is separate from the process in federal law












                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  10






          In reviewing this legislation, the Committee may wish to  
          consider whether the problems identified by the proponents merit  
          such a significant departure from current policy (with  
          associated mandated costs), and what precedent it might set for  
          other disability categories. 





          What is at the root of the problem the proponents wish to fix?   
          This bill is motivated by concerns among parents that many  
          students who are dyslexic are not being identified as such, and  
          as a result are being deprived of needed educational services.   
          Proponents also argue that current instructional methods for  
          students identified as dyslexic are deficient.  





          The first concern of the proponents has to do with what they  
          view as the under-identification of students with dyslexia.  As  
          described above, federal definitions of disabilities are used by  
          California in identifying students with special needs.  Dyslexia  
          is one condition listed in the federal (and state) definition of  
          a specific learning disability.  Federal law states that a  
          specific learning is disability a disorder in a psychological  
          process.  





          State regulations (5 CCR § 3030) specify these psychological  
          processes:










                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  11








            The basic psychological processes include attention, visual  
            processing, auditory processing, sensory-motor skills,  
            cognitive abilities including association, conceptualization  
            and expression. 





          Not included in that list of processes is a phonological  
          processing deficit, which proponents of this bill say is a  
          hallmark of dyslexia.  They state that when school districts  
          review assessment data for a given student, school personnel  
          look for visual and auditory processing deficits - but often  
          ignore evidence of phonological deficits - because visual and  
          auditory deficits are specified in the above definition.  They  
          note that dyslexia is not a visual or auditory deficit and that  
          not all individuals with dyslexia have processing deficits.   
          Staff notes that these regulations are written in a manner which  
          allows school districts to identify more processes than are  
          delineated in this regulation, so there is nothing preventing  
          school districts from using evidence of phonological deficits in  
          their determinations.





          The Committee may wish to consider that, if this definition is  
          at the root of the problem, the solution, rather than the  
          numerous mandates in this bill, may be to instead amend statute  
          so that the list of psychological processes identified in state  
          regulations (5 CCR § 3030) includes - or may include -  
          phonological processing.










                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  12








          The second concern expressed by the proponents is that that  
          current instruction for dyslexic students who do qualify as  
          having a specific learning disability is often not appropriate  
          for students' needs.  They argue that an effective approach is  
          one which is "evidence-based, multisensory, direct, explicit,  
          structured, and sequential."  This bill requires the  
          identification and use of such an approach.  If this approach is  
          indeed effective, the state may have an interest in providing  
          information on it to school districts and institutions of higher  
          education so that they may more effectively meet the needs of  
          dyslexic students and train new teachers, respectively.





          There is precedent for this, and it is very similar to several  
          provisions of this bill.  Staff notes that current law AB 3040  
          (Speier), Chapter 1501, Statutes of 1990, enacted 25 years ago  
          as an uncodified section, actually requires the CDE to develop  
          program guidelines which would do the above.  Specifically,  
          existing law is as follows.  





            The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall develop program  
            guidelines for specific learning disabilities, including  
            dyslexia and other related disorders, for use by regular and  
            special educators and parents to assist them in identifying  
            assessing planning, providing, evaluating, and improving  
            education services to pupils.  The program guidelines shall  
            include characteristics typical of pupils with dyslexia and  
            related disorders and include strategies for their  
            remediation. The superintendent shall consult with teachers,  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  13





            administrators, other education professionals, medical  
            professionals, parents, and professionals involved in the  
            identification and treatment of specific learning  
            disabilities, including dyslexia and other related disorders.

            The program guidelines shall be completed in time for use no  
            later than the beginning of the 1992-93 academic year. Once  
            the program guidelines are completed the superintendent shall  
            disseminate them, and provide technical assistance regarding  
            their use and implementation, to parents, teachers,  
            administrators, and faculty members and teacher training  
            programs of institutions of higher education.  (Also states  
            that the CDE is to use available discretionary federal funds  
            for this purpose.)
            


          The Committee may wish to consider if the above sections,  
          updated for current conditions and limited to dyslexia, could  
          address the second problem raised by the proponents.  Should the  
          Committee wish to require such a project again, staff would  
          recommend that 1) the to meet the requirement of dissemination  
          of the guidelines the CDE be required to post them on its  
          website, 2) the guidelines also identify which symptoms, such as  
          letter reversals, are a normal part of growth and development,  
          and 3) require that the guidance regarding instruction focus on  
          an instructional approach which is "evidence-based,  
          multisensory, direct, explicit, structured, and sequential," 4)  
          limit the scope to dyslexia (not other specific learning  
          disabilities or "related disorders"), and 5) require the  
          completion of the guidelines by [a specified date to be  
          determined in consultation with the CDE].





          Arguments in support. The Southern California Tri-Counties  
          Branch of the International Dyslexia Association writes:  "Our  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  14





          dyslexic students struggle to gain essential literacy skills  
          because of their specific learning disability.  Dyslexia is the  
          most common learning disability, affecting over 1 million  
          students in California public schools.  Although dyslexia has  
          been in our California Education Code since 1990, it is still  
          not recognized by most public schools.  Teachers and  
          psychologists are not trained to either recognize when a student  
          is dyslexic nor provide evidence-based interventions, and  
          students do not receive early screening to identify their  
          learning disability.  AB 1369, by requiring early screening,  
          improving teacher training, and setting high standards for  
          evidence-based interventions, will benefit hundreds of thousands  
          of California students and their families by providing those  
          students the opportunity to achieve proficient literacy skills."





          The sponsor of this bill, Decoding Dyslexia California writes:   
          "[There is] a tremendous amount of evidence about how dyslexia  
          manifests in the brain, how it manifests in the classroom, the  
          genetic component of dyslexia, but more importantly, we know  
          what type of instruction works for students with dyslexia.





          This intervention is a multisensory, explicit, systematic  
          investigation of the structure of the English language which is  
          implemented by someone trained in not only the strategies of  
          this type of intervention but who also understands why a student  
          with dyslexia needs this type of intervention. This intervention  
          is not disguised as Balanced Literacy, but is the deep  
          instruction into how words are built based on language patterns.  
          Despite this mountain of research, parents and advocates attend  
          IEP and school meetings on a regular basis where the IEP team  
          repeatedly tells these parents and advocates that dyslexia does  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  15





          not exist, that it is a broad term (which it is not, it is SLD  
          that is the broad term), that public schools do not work with  
          dyslexia - the list of unfounded comments goes on and on. Our  
          concern is that these bright children are marginalized despite  
          the vast amount of research. They are held back and asked to  
          change, when the instruction is what needs to change. They are  
          denied their potential due to schools continued lack of  
          education in the area of dyslexia."  





          The author states, "Current law does not provide for appropriate  
          screening for dyslexia.  Currently, assessment/screenings focus  
                                                          on visual, auditory or processing deficits. Dyslexia is not a  
          visual or auditory deficit and not all individuals with dyslexia  
          will have a processing deficit. This bill would establish  
          appropriate screening requirements that would include  
          identification of a phonological processing deficit in the areas  
          of reading and writing."





          Arguments in opposition.  The California Teachers Association  
          writes, "CTA believes testing of students should not detract  
          from time allocated for the delivery of required curriculum or  
          cause negative impact on students' academic performance.  Mass  
          testing of all students in early grades will result in  
          over-identifying dyslexia, other specific learning disabilities,  
          or other related disorders.  Many young children display  
          behaviors that can be misidentified as learning issues, when  
          those behaviors are developmentally appropriate and will not be  
          manifested as lifelong learning disabilities.  New mandated  
          screening/testing of all students in grades K-3 lessens the  
          instructional time available for learning required curriculum;  
          and adversely affects students' ability to learn the curriculum  








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  16





          in a timely manner to master grade level skills and academic  
          state standards.  Local educational agencies have adequate  
          systems in place for identifying students who may need special  
          education services."





          The SELPA Administrators of California write, "While we  
          appreciate the author's intent with this proposal, our concerns  
          are as follows.  First and foremost, reversals in numbers,  
          letters or words are a part of normal growth and development up  
          through second grade.  Therefore, screening for reversals prior  
          to this time is inappropriate because most children simply  
          outgrow them.  In fact, dyslexia has been dropped from the fifth  
          edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental  
          Disorders (DSM-V), released in May 2013 by the American  
          Psychological Association.





          Second, screening for dyslexia as proposed by this bill would  
          create an unfunded mandate that would not result in any benefit  
          for students in terms of early intervention.  We do not believe  
          this mandate is necessary because the federal Individuals with  
          Disabilities Act (IDEA) does in fact provide for identification  
          of children with specific learning disabilities, including  
          visual and motor impairments, after normal growth and  
          development has been ruled out.  This includes vision and  
          hearing screenings early on but not for reversals for the  
          reasons noted above."













                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  17





          The California School Boards Association writes, "CSBA is  
          supportive of including components on recognizing and addressing  
          dyslexia and other reading and writing dysfunctions in teacher  
          preparation programs, along with providing in-service training  
          to currently credentialed school personnel.  As more children  
          with special needs are being mainstreamed in general education  
          classrooms, teachers need to be better prepared to address their  
          issues.  However, we must strongly oppose the provisions of your  
          legislation that would have every student in Kindergarten and  
          grades 1 through 3 screened for dyslexia each year."





          Special Education Task Force report.  Earlier this year the  
          Special Education Task Force, convened by the CDE, the State  
          Board of Education, and the Commission on Teacher Credentialing  
          issued a report entitled "One System: Reforming Education to  
          Serve ALL Students."  The report contains a broad set of  
          recommendations for the reform of Special Education programs.   
          It does not contain recommendations specific to dyslexia  
          screening or instruction.





          Prior legislation.  AB 1938 (Speier) of the 1999-2000 Session,  
          as heard in the Assembly, would have re-enacted the Miller-Unruh  
          Basic Reading Act of 1965 and required school districts to  
          provide in-service training that included a learning disability  
          component. That bill was held in the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee.













                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  18





          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:




          Support


          Decoding Dyslexia California (sponsor)


          International Dyslexia Association, Southern California  
          Tri-Counties Branch


          Learning Ally


          Literate Nation California Coalition


          Congresswoman Julia Brownley


          5,500 letters from individuals




          Opposition


          California School Boards Association


          California Teachers Association


          SELPA Administrators of California








                                                                    AB 1369


                                                                    Page  19









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