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