BILL ANALYSIS Ó
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 2350|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 2350
Author: O'Donnell (D)
Amended: 8/1/16 in Senate
Vote: 21
SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE: 9-0, 6/22/16
AYES: Liu, Block, Hancock, Huff, Leyva, Mendoza, Monning, Pan,
Vidak
SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: 7-0, 8/1/16
AYES: Lara, Bates, Beall, Hill, McGuire, Mendoza, Nielsen
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT: English learners
SOURCE: Author
DIGEST: This bill prohibits a middle or high school English
learner (EL) student from being prevented from enrolling in
courses required for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting the
minimum course requirements for admission to the University of
California (UC) or California State University (CSU).
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
AB 2350
Page 2
1)Requires the State Board of Education to approve standards for
English language development for students whose primary
language is other than English. These standards are required
to be comparable in rigor and specificity to the adopted
standards for English language arts, mathematics, and science.
(EC § 60811)
2)Requires the State Board of Education to adopt revised
curriculum frameworks that are aligned to the common core
standards in English language arts by July 30, 2014. Existing
law also requires State Board policies to ensure that the
English Language Arts (ELA) curriculum frameworks include the
English Language Development (ELD) standards and related
strategies in the core subjects of mathematics, science, and
history-social science. (EC § 60207)
3)Requires that the Commission on Teacher Credentialing (CTC)
issue an authorization for a teacher to provide specified
services to limited-English proficient pupils and defines
various terms for this purpose. (EC § 44253.2 and § 44253.3)
4)Requires the CSU and requests the UC to establish a model
uniform set of academic standards for high school courses that
satisfy university admission requirements. In addition, both
the CSU and the UC were directed to implement a speedy process
whereby schools could obtain approval of their courses for
admission purposes, and require that this process notify
applicant schools whether a submitted course has been approved
or denied by August 1 each school year. (EC § 66205.5)
This bill:
1)Defines "designated English language development" and
"integrated English language development" instruction to align
statute with the newly adopted content standards and English
Language Arts/English Language Development Framework.
Specifically, it:
a) Defines "designated English language development" as
instruction during a protected time in the school day in
which ELD standards are used as focal standards in order to
develop language needed for ELs to access content learning
in English.
AB 2350
Page 3
b) Defines "integrated English language development" as
instruction in which all teachers with ELs in their
classroom use ELD standards in tandem with content
standards regardless of course content.
2)Conforms the definition of "specially designed content
instruction delivered in English" within existing law relative
to CTC authorization to teach ELs with the newly adopted
content standards and English Language Arts/English Language
Development Framework.
3)Provides that a middle or high school student classified as an
EL or enrolled in ELD courses be granted access to core
curriculum courses. Specifically, it:
a) Prohibits preventing such a student from:
i) Enrolling in core curriculum courses required for
graduation, grade promotion or to meet subject matter
requirements for college admission.
ii) Taking a full course load in subjects
required for graduation, grade promotion or to meet
subject matter requirements for college admission.
b) Makes these requirements inapplicable to a student
participating in a program designed to meet the academic
and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants, as
specified.
4)Makes a number of technical changes.
5)Makes a number of related declarations and findings.
Comments
1)Need for the bill. According to the author, recent evidence
has pointed to a number of institutional barriers to ELs'
success. These include poor access to the core curriculum and
insufficient teacher preparation and professional development
to address the instructional needs of ELs, particularly in
light of the state's new ELD standards. This bill will ensure
that ELs are not kept from enrolling in core curriculum
AB 2350
Page 4
courses necessary for graduation.
According to the author, ensuring access to core academic
subjects and prohibiting the substitution of English language
development classes for English language arts courses will
begin to address the sizable gap in academic achievement that
persists for ELs relative to their peers. In addition, the
opportunity to address ELD needs under new standards that call
for "integrated and designated" instruction will require
support and professional development to realize this major
shift in pedagogy.
2)English learner achievement gap. There are approximately 1.4
million ELs in California public schools, representing 22
percent of the state's enrollment. California's EL students
score substantially lower on state assessments than non-EL
students. While there has been incremental growth in
achievement among students in both the general population and
ELs, the rate of growth in the general population has
significantly outpaced that of English learners and the
achievement gap has widened over time.
a) On the 2013 California Standards Tests of English
language arts, 23 percent of ELs scored at the proficient
or advanced levels, compared with 63 percent of
English-only peers, and on the tests of mathematics 37
percent scored at those levels compared with 55 percent of
their peers.
b) On the 2015 administration of the California Assessment
of Student Performance and Progress, 11 percent of ELs 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.
c) According to the California Department of Education
(CDE), the overall 2013-14 four-year cohort graduation was
81 percent, while the rate for ELs was 65 percent, the
lowest of any subgroup besides students in special
education. The dropout rate for ELs, at 21 percent, was
the highest of any subgroup.
d) In 2014, the pass rate of ELs on the California High
AB 2350
Page 5
School Exit Examination language arts test was half the
rate of English only peers (17 percent vs. 34 percent), and
was also lower on the mathematics portion (13 percent vs.
20 percent).
3)Recent related report. In October 2015, the Policy Analysis
for California Education's (PACE) issued, "Improving the
Opportunities and Outcomes of California's Students Learning
English," a report on research examining EL needs, policies,
practices, and outcomes. Among other things, researchers
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 English language arts
(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 percent of ELs were not enrolled in ELA courses, and 35
percent 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 the most common barrier to
reclassification for middle and high school ELs was passage of
the ELA content standards criterion. Given the findings that
enrollment in ELD prohibits some students from taking ELA
courses; it is unclear how students are expected to obtain the
course content necessary to successfully meet criteria for
reclassification.
This bill, in an effort to respond to these concerns,
prohibits ELs from being prevented from taking core curriculum
courses necessary for graduation, grade promotion, or meeting
a-g requirements for college admission.
4)Evolution of ELD instruction. This bill defines ELD
instruction to align statute with the newly adopted English
Language Arts/English Language Development Framework, which
AB 2350
Page 6
offers guidance for providing all California students with
English language arts and literacy in history/social studies,
science, and technical subjects. In addition, it offers
guidance for supporting ELs' progress in English language
development.
Instruction for ELs evolved significantly in the last 40
years. Initial "English as a Second Language" (ESL)
approaches used from 1900 to the 1970s focused solely on
English acquisition. Content-based ESL emerged in the 1980s,
providing support for English acquisition through academic
content. Models known as Specially Designed Academic
Instruction in English and Sheltered English, in use from the
1980s to the present day, have focused on providing ELs 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. Under this
model, "integrated ELD instruction" occurs throughout the
school day in every subject area by every teacher who has an
EL student in the classroom. The California 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 through English. "Designated ELD" is
provided to ELs during a protected time in the regular school
day, during which teachers use the 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.
According to the CDE, curriculum frameworks offer guidance for
implementing content standards and describe the curriculum and
instruction necessary to help students achieve proficiency.
They specify the design of instructional materials and
professional development. In 2015, the State Board of
Education approved a list of adopted instructional materials
aligned to the newly adopted English Language Arts/English
Language Development Framework. Local educational agencies
(LEAs) are expected to select from the adopted instructional
AB 2350
Page 7
materials within the next few years.
Related/Prior Legislation
AB 2785 (O'Donnell) requires the CDE to develop a manual for the
purpose of providing guidance to LEAs on identifying, assessing,
and supporting, ELs who may qualify for special education
services by July 1, 2018.
FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: No Fiscal
Com.:YesLocal: Yes
According to the Senate Appropriations Committee, this bill is
not anticipated to result in significant costs to the state as
the prohibition of preventing ELs from enrolling in courses
required for graduation, grade promotion, or minimum course
requirements for UC and CSU admission, is predicated on federal
law which prohibits a state from denying equal educational
opportunity, as specified. This bill provides greater
specificity on this federal requirement that appears to align
with federal guidance.
SUPPORT: (Verified 8/2/16)
Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson
California Association for Bilingual Education
Californians Together
Santa Clara County Office of Education
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/2/16)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,
Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,
AB 2350
Page 8
Calderon, Campos, Chang, Chau, Chávez, Chiu, Chu, Cooley,
Cooper, Dababneh, Dahle, Daly, Dodd, Eggman, Frazier, Beth
Gaines, Gallagher, Cristina Garcia, Eduardo Garcia, Gatto,
Gipson, Gomez, Gonzalez, Gordon, Gray, Grove, Hadley, Roger
Hernández, Holden, Irwin, Jones, Jones-Sawyer, Kim, Lackey,
Levine, Linder, Lopez, Low, Maienschein, Mathis, Mayes,
McCarty, Medina, Melendez, Mullin, Nazarian, O'Donnell, Olsen,
Patterson, Quirk, Ridley-Thomas, Rodriguez, Salas, Santiago,
Steinorth, Mark Stone, Thurmond, Ting, Wagner, Waldron, Weber,
Wilk, Williams, Wood, Rendon
NO VOTE RECORDED: Harper, Obernolte
Prepared by:Olgalilia Ramirez / ED. / (916) 651-4105
8/3/16 19:00:47
**** END ****