BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2290
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
2290 (Santiago)
As Amended May 27, 2016
Majority vote
------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes|Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Education |7-0 |O'Donnell, Olsen, | |
| | |Kim, McCarty, | |
| | |Santiago, Thurmond, | |
| | |Weber | |
| | | | |
|----------------+-----+----------------------+--------------------|
|Appropriations |20-0 |Gonzalez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bloom, Bonilla, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Daly, Eggman, | |
| | |Gallagher, Eduardo | |
| | |Garcia, Roger | |
| | |Hernández, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Obernolte, | |
| | |Quirk, Santiago, | |
| | |Wagner, Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
------------------------------------------------------------------
AB 2290
Page 2
SUMMARY: Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(SPI) to recommend to the State Board of Education (SBE)
revisions to the content standards in world languages, and
authorizes the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the revised
standards by January 31, 2019. Specifically, this bill:
1)Authorizes the SPI to recommend to the SBE revisions to the
foreign language academic content standards adopted by the
SBE.
2)Requires the SBE, on or before January 31, 2019, to adopt,
reject, or modify any revisions proposed by the SPI.
3)Requires that if the SBE modifies the foreign language
academic content standards, it explain, in writing, to the
Governor and the Legislature the reasons for modifying the
standards.
4)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the SBE, to select a
group of experts in world languages for purposes of assisting
the SPI in developing recommendations on the revisions.
5)Requires the SPI to hold a minimum of two public hearings in
order for the public to provide input on the revisions, and
requires the SBE to act on those recommendations at a
subsequent public meeting.
6)Requires the public meetings to be held pursuant to the
Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act.
7)Requires that, if the foreign language academic content
AB 2290
Page 3
standards are revised, during the next revision of the foreign
language curriculum framework and evaluation criteria the
Instructional Quality Commission ensure that the revisions are
incorporated into the foreign language curriculum framework
and evaluation criteria for purposes of adopting instructional
materials.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, one-time General Fund administrative costs, in the
range of $150,000 to $250,000, to convene an advisory committee
of world language experts to assist with the development of the
standards. California Department of Education indicates costs
to review and recommend the content standards to the SBE would
be absorbable.
COMMENTS:
Need for the bill. The author's office states: "World language
programs continue to expand in California and the current
language standards do not adequately reflect recent research
developments in learning a second language, especially in the
area of immersion education, which is the fastest growing world
language program in our state.
"The current World Language Content Standards are not aligned
with the Common Core State Standards, the English Language
Development Standards, and the curriculum framework for world
languages. The existing World Language Content Standards do not
place emphasis on literacy development for heritage speakers of
world languages and in supporting learners with low literacy
skills both in English and another language.
"Furthermore, the current standards do not link the study of
world languages with Career and Technical Education (CTE) and
AB 2290
Page 4
workforce opportunities, which may impede students from
developing global competence and engagement in the 21st century
global workforce. In order for language and cultural programs
to be the most effective for K-12 students, World Language
Content Standards must be updated."
The most pressing need: standards-aligned instructional
materials. The state's current foreign language framework was
adopted in 2003, and instructional materials aligned to that
framework were also adopted in 2003 (with a follow-up adoption
in 2005). The current foreign language standards were adopted
in 2009. Because of the suspension of the curriculum framework
revision process in 2009, the state never adopted a world
languages framework aligned to those standards. And because
state-adopted instructional materials are aligned to that
framework, there was no instructional materials adoption aligned
to the standards. As a result, the state-adopted instructional
materials in this content area are viewed as highly out-of-date,
making instruction in world languages challenging for teachers.
Process similar to SB 1200 for revising math and science
standards. The process proposed by this bill for the updating
of world languages standards is very similar to the one required
by SB 1200 (Hancock), Chapter 654, Statutes of 2012, for the
revising of standards in mathematics and science. In both of
those content areas, state standards were updated to align with
national standards (Common Core State Standards in mathematics,
and the Next Generation Science Standards). That bill
authorized the SPI to consult with a group of experts and to
recommend revised standards to the SBE. The SBE was authorized
to adopt, reject, or modify the standards, and was required to
provide a written explanation for any modifications.
Analysis Prepared by:
AB 2290
Page 5
Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 FN:
0003328