BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2350 Page 1 Date of Hearing: April 6, 2016 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Patrick O'Donnell, Chair AB 2350 (O'Donnell) - As Amended March 28, 2016 SUBJECT: English learners SUMMARY: Prohibits English learners (ELs) in middle and high school from being prevented from enrolling in core curriculum courses and courses required for graduation, requires that courses designed for long term English learners (LTELs) be offered for graduation credit, and requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to create a video-based professional development series on integrated and designated English Language Development (ELD). Specifically, this bill: 1)Makes findings and declarations relative to the achievement gap between English learners and other students. 2)Prohibits, with the exception of articulated newcomer programs, a middle or high school student who is an English learner or who is enrolled in an English language development course from being prevented from either of the following: AB 2350 Page 2 a) enrolling in core curriculum courses in English language arts or any other course required for graduation or to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the University of California (UC) or the California State University (CSU) b) taking a full course load in core subjects required for graduation to meet the a-g subject requirements for admission to the UC or the CSU 3)Requires that, if a local educational agency (LEA) offers a course designed for LTELs, that course confer credits in English language arts necessary to meet graduation requirements. States the intent of the Legislature that LEAs submit those courses to the UC and the CSU for approval to meet a-g subject requirements for admission. 4)States that the English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education (SBE) in 2014 states that English learners at all levels require both integrated and designated ELD, defined as follows: a) designated ELD: instruction designed for ELs according to their level of English proficiency to overcome language barriers in a reasonable amount of time, during a protected time in the regular school day, in which teachers use the ELD standards in ways that build into and from content instruction in order to develop critical language they need AB 2350 Page 3 for content learning in English. b) integrated ELD: instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their classrooms, regardless of course content, use the California ELD standards in tandem with the state content standards 5)Requires the CDE to contract for the development of a series of videos demonstrating best practices for implementing designated and integrated ELD in grades transitional Kindergarten through grade 12, and make the series available on the CDE website. Requires that: a) in developing the series the CDE convene a group of experts and request public comment b) the series be designed to assist LEAs in providing instruction in designated and integrated ELD c) the series be completed and available for use by the 2017-18 academic year d) the CDE compile and include in the series program models that address the structuring of the school day to allow for instruction in the full curriculum and ELD, and means of implementing these models. EXISTING LAW: AB 2350 Page 4 1)Requires the State Board of Education (SBE) to approve standards for English language development for students whose primary language is a language other than English. Requires that these standards be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted standards for English language arts, the standards for mathematics, and the standards for science. 2)Establishes state high school graduation requirements, including three courses in English. Permits local educational agencies to adopt additional requirements for graduation which exceed those of the state. 3)Defines "English learner" or "student of limited English proficiency," and requires each school district to assess the English language development of each of those students within 30 days of initial enrollment and annually thereafter until the students are redesignated as fluent English proficient. 4)Requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to establish procedures for the reclassification of a student from English learner to English proficient. Requires that the reclassification procedures developed by the CDE use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a student, including, but not limited to, all of the following: a) assessment of language proficiency using an objective assessment instrument, including, but not limited to, the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) b) teacher evaluation, including, but not limited to, a review of the student's curriculum mastery AB 2350 Page 5 c) parent opinion and consultation d) comparison of the performance of the student in basic skills with those of his or her peers 5)Defines an LTEL as an English learner who meets all of the following criteria: a) is enrolled in any of grades 6 to 12, inclusive b) has been enrolled in schools in the United States for six years or more c) has remained at the same English language proficiency level for two or more consecutive prior years, or has regressed to a lower English language proficiency level, as determined by the English language development test or a score determined by the Superintendent on any successor test d) for a student in any of grades 6 to 9, has scored far below basic or below basic on the prior year's English language arts test, or a score determined by the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) on any successor test AB 2350 Page 6 6)Requires that the CDE annually ascertain and report the number of students who are, or are at risk of becoming, long-term English learners and to provide this information to school districts and schools. 7)Title VI of the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits recipients of federal financial assistance, including school districts, from discriminating on the basis of race, color, or national origin. Title VI's prohibition on national origin discrimination requires school districts to take "affirmative steps" to address language barriers so that EL students may participate meaningfully in schools' educational programs. FISCAL EFFECT: This bill has been keyed a state-mandated local program by the Office of Legislative Counsel COMMENTS: Need for the bill. The author's office states: "The achievement gap between California's English learners and their peers is a central challenge facing in our public education system. California's English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students, graduate from high school at lower rates, and attend postsecondary institutions at lower rates. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has actually widened over time. Results from the first administration of our Common Core-aligned assessments suggest that the gap may be widening AB 2350 Page 7 further. As our state focuses on ensuring that every student is college or career ready, we must address barriers and support effective practices so that our system is worthy of our students' potential. Recent evidence has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to English learners' success, including secondary English learners' poor access to the core curriculum and insufficient teacher preparation and professional development to address the instructional needs of English learners, particularly in light of the state's new English language development standards. AB 2350 will improve English learners' access to the core curriculum and will support educators in improving English language development instruction. This bill will ensure that English learners are not held back from enrolling in core curriculum courses necessary for graduation. It will ensure that special courses designed for long term English learners these students continue to move students along the path toward graduation. And it will establish a professional development resource for teachers on California's groundbreaking English language development standards. These standards represent provide new and promising opportunities to meet the language and content learning needs of our students." English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4 million English learners in California public schools, representing 22% of the state's enrollment. 2.7 million students speak a language other than English in their homes, representing about 43 percent of the state's public school enrollment. 73% of English learners are enrolled in the elementary grades, and 27% are enrolled in the secondary grades. One in three English learners in the U.S. resides in AB 2350 Page 8 California. California's English learner students score substantially lower on state assessments than non-English learner students. While there has been incremental growth in achievement among students in both the general population and English learners, the rate of growth in the general population has significantly outpaced that of English learners. As a result, the achievement gap has widened over time. On the state's California Standards Tests (CSTs) of English language arts in grades 3, 5, 8, and 10, the gap between English learners and their peers widened between 2003 and 2009. On the 2013 CSTs of English language arts, 23% of English learners scored at the proficient or advanced levels, compared with 63% of English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37%% scored at those levels compared with 55%% of their peers. On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress (CAASPP), 11 percent of English learners in all grades met or exceeded standard in English language arts/literacy and 11 percent in math, compared with 69 percent and 55 percent for those subjects, respectively, for students proficient in English. While it is not possible to draw direct comparisons between the above CAASPP results and those from the CSTs, there is at least a strong suggestion that the achievement gap relative to Common Core standards is even greater. Graduation rates for English learners are also lower AB 2350 Page 9 compared to the general population and other subgroups. According to the CDE, the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was 81%, while the rate for English learners was 65%, the lowest of any subgroup besides students in special education. The dropout rate for English learners, at 21%, was the highest of any subgroup. In 2014, the pass rate of English learners on the California High School Exit Examination language arts test was half the rate of English only peers (17% vs. 34%), and was also lower on the mathematics portion (13% vs. 20%). Data from 2008-09 show that English learners high school graduates attend postsecondary institutions at the rate of 52%, compared with 74% of English-only students. When viewing this data it is important to note that English learners who have achieved proficiency in English and have been reclassified are no longer included in the English learner subgroup. Recent reports highlight key policy issues related to the achievement gap. A number of organizations have recently produced reports and policy briefs on the English learner achievement gap in California. Publications by Californians Together, Policy Analysis for California Education, EdTrust West, and the Civil Rights Project at the University of California, Los Angeles addressed a variety of issues, but generally aligned around the need to: Improve reclassification policy Increase ELs' access to core academic courses Improve data collection and reporting AB 2350 Page 10 Support biliteracy as a viable strategy Improve teacher preparation and professional development to address needs of ELs This bill addresses two of these issues: access to the core curriculum for ELs, and professional development to address the instructional needs of ELs. The issues of data reporting and statewide reclassification policy are not addressed by this bill, but they are addressed by the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), as described later in this analysis. Reclassification is also the subject of a bill this Session (AB 491, Gonzalez) which is pending in the Senate. The issue of biliteracy is addressed by an initiative which will appear before the voters at the November, 2016 election. This measure was placed on the ballot by the Legislature through its approval of SB 1174 (Lara, Chapter 753, Statutes of 2014). If approved by the voters, this measure would amend and repeal various provisions of Proposition 227 of 1998, including repealing the requirement that all children be taught English by being taught in English, and instead would allow LEAs, in consultation with language experts in the field and parents, to determine the best language instruction methods and language AB 2350 Page 11 acquisition programs to implement. Access to the core curriculum for English learners. This bill addresses English learners' access to core curriculum courses in middle and high school by prohibiting ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum courses and courses necessary for graduation. Policy Analysis for California Education's (PACE) 2015 report, "Improving the Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning English," reported findings from research conducted by three school district-university research partnerships focused on examining English learner needs, policies, practices, and outcomes. This research found that ELs are less likely than non-ELs to be enrolled in core academic subject courses and, as a result, earn fewer credits toward graduation than non-EL students. The research further found that limited access to ELA is largely due to 1) ELD courses being used as a substitute, rather than a complement, for ELA courses, and 2) the enrollment of elementary and secondary ELs in intervention classes for language arts and math which were not designed for ELs' language and academic needs. This research found that in one large urban school district, 30% of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35% were not enrolled in a full course load. PACE concluded, "research from the three partnerships suggests that English learners often suffer from restricted educational opportunity compared to that of non-English learners, particularly with regard to their academic learning needs." The report also noted that, while some students were prohibited from taking ELA courses because they were enrolled in ELD courses, the content area preventing ELs from being reclassified was generally ELA itself. This finding suggests that some English learners are stuck in a kind of trap - unable to access ELA courses until they are proficient in ELA. AB 2350 Page 12 Credit-bearing LTEL courses. This bill requires that districts offering courses specially designed for long term English learners be offered as credit-bearing courses. The first data available identifying the number and percentage of LTELs was produced by the CDE in draft form in December, 2014 and provided to school districts and county offices of education. These data reflected the LTEL definition in the law prior to recent changes required by SB 750 (Mendoza, Chapter 660, Statutes of 2015). The 2014 data indicate the following: Of the approximately 471,000 English learners in grades 6-12 (who were not previously reclassified), approximately 339,000 had been in a U.S. school for more than six years. Of the approximately 339,000 English learners who have been in U.S. schools for more than six years, approximately 90,000 are LTELs. This represents 26.5% of the population which could be identified under the law at that time (note that this percentage applies to the group of English learners who were not previously reclassified). Some school districts have begun designing courses for LTELs which are both ELD and ELA courses, and which offer credit toward graduation requirements. This practice addresses both the issue of access to the core curriculum and also the "crowding out" of EL students' schedules, a problem which occurs when the need to take courses in both ELD and ELA prevents students from enrolling in other courses. To assist LEAs in developing and offering credit-bearing courses for English learners which meet these requirements, staff recommends that this be amended to require that the video professional development modules required by this bill include information on developing credit-bearing ELD courses. Districts which have created credit-bearing LTEL courses include AB 2350 Page 13 Los Angeles Unified School District, Anaheim Union High School District, and Ventura Unified School District. Los Angeles Unified School District also sought and obtained "A-G" credit (for CSU and UC admissions) for their LTEL course, an additional step encouraged by this bill (see below for more information on the treatment of ELD courses for UC and CSU admissions credit). "Integrated and designated" English language development and the need for professional development. This bill defines "integrated and designated" ELD, and requires the CDE to provide video-based professional development on how to implement this instructional model. Instruction for English learners has evolved significantly in the last 40 years, from an emphasis solely on English acquisition to a focus on access to content, to the current "integrated and designated" model. Initial "English as a Second Language" (ESL) approaches used from 1900 to the 1970's focused solely on English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980's, providing support for English acquisition through academic content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the 1980's to the present day, have focused on providing English learners access to content through modified (sometimes referred to as "scaffolded") instruction. The English Language Arts/English Language Development Framework adopted by the State Board of Education in 2014 provides a comprehensive strategy for meeting both the content and language learning needs of ELs. This model is known as the "integrated and designated" model of ELD, defined in this bill as follows: Integrated ELD instruction occurs throughout the school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an EL student in the classroom. The CA ELD Standards are used in tandem with the California Common Core State Standards for ELA/Literacy and other content standards to ensure students strengthen their abilities to use academic English as they learn content AB 2350 Page 14 through English. Designated ELD is provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school day. Teachers use the California ELD Standards as the focal standards in ways that build into and from content instruction to develop critical language ELs need for content learning in English. Ideally, students are grouped for designated ELD by English language proficiency levels (Emerging, Expanding, Bridging), although schools need to consider their particular student population (e.g., number of ELs at each proficiency level) and make appropriate decisions about grouping. In 2015 the SBE approved a list of adopted instructional materials aligned to this framework, and LEAs will be piloting and selecting instructional materials in the next few years. There is wide acknowledgement that this shift to designated and integrated instruction represents a major shift in pedagogy, and that teachers will require support in implementing this model. There appears to be a local demand for technical assistance and professional development; CDE reports that they have received requests for guidance in implementing this model. The CDE is also in the process of developing a new assessment for English learners to replace the CELDT. This test, known as the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC), will be administered by 2018, and will be aligned with the 2012 California English Language Development Standards. It will be comprised of two separate ELP assessments: one for the initial identification of students as ELs, and a second for the annual summative assessment to measure a student's progress in learning English and to identify the student's level of English proficiency. ELD courses to fulfill the "A-G" course requirements. This bill encourages school districts offering courses designed for LTELs AB 2350 Page 15 to submit those courses for approval as "A-G" courses for the purpose of UC and CSU admissions. Current CSU and UC policy allows advanced-level English courses for second language learners to be approved to meet the English ("b") subject requirement, provided that they meet specified measures of rigor and are comparable to other mainstream college-preparatory English courses. This policy allows students to use a maximum of one year of ELD coursework to count toward the four-year English requirement. UC does not grant credit for an ELD course taken during the senior year. Sheltered English and SDAIE courses can be approved as meeting "A-G" requirements without approval, but ESL and ELD courses must be submitted separately for approval. ESSA's new requirements regarding English learners. The federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), signed into law in 2015, establishes new requirements relating to the education of English learners. According to the Council of Chief State School Officers, ESSA includes new requirements to: Report on number and percentage of ELs 1) meeting state-determined long-term goals, disaggregated by disability, 2) attaining English proficiency, 3) meeting challenging state academic standards for 4 years after exiting, disaggregated by disability, and 4) who have not attained proficiency within 5 years of classification Include ELs' progress in attaining proficiency in English in state accountability systems (instead of solely within the Title III program) Use standardized statewide entrance and exit procedures for identifying ELs. Align state ELD assessments with state ELA proficiency standards. AB 2350 Page 16 (Permits states to) use scores of reclassified ELs for up to four years after reclassification, in the EL subgroup for purposes of state accountability systems Recommended amendments. Staff recommends the following amendments to meet the author's intent: 1. Re-order one intent section and on page 3 line 30 strike "the" and add "English" 2. On page 4 lines 11-12, amend the reference to newcomer programs to ensure consistency with federal law. 3. On page 4 line 31 replace "in 2014" with a reference to the section authorizing the ELA framework revision 4. On page 5 line 26, change "comment" to "input." 5. On page 5 line 31 change "2017-18" to "2018-19" to change the date by which the video series must be completed. 6. On page 5 line 33, after "agencies" add "and charter schools." 7. Clarify that the requirements in subdivision a) apply to middle schools as applicable. 8. On page 4, line 3, after "require" insert a AB 2350 Page 17 comprehensive program of English Language development that includes" 9. On page 5, line 22, replace "the full curriculum" with "academic content." 10. As noted above, add a requirement that the professional development modules required by this bill include information on developing credit-bearing ELD courses at the secondary level. 11. Add a section amending the current definition of specially designed academic instruction in English to conform to the "designated" and "integrated" ELD model. Related legislation. AB 491 (Gonzales) of this Session requires the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt, best practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July 2022. AB 491 largely extends a requirement in current law SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of 2012, which was never fulfilled. SB 1174 (Lara), Chapter 753, Statutes of 2014, if approved by the voters, would amend and repeal various provisions of Proposition 227 of 1998, including repealing the requirement that all children be taught English by being taught in English, and instead would allow LEAs, in consultation with language experts in the field and parents, to determine the best language instruction methods and language acquisition programs to implement. AB 2350 Page 18 REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION: Support Californians Together (co-sponsor) State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson (co-sponsor) California Association for Bilingual Education Los Angeles Unified School District Opposition None received Analysis Prepared by:Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087 AB 2350 Page 19