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: 8/19/16 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, who scores at any proficiency level on the
assessment of English language development, from being denied
from enrolling in courses required for graduation, or meeting
the minimum course requirements for admission to the University
of California (UC) or California State University (CSU).
Senate Floor Amendments of 8/19/16 narrow the scope of the bill
by deleting sections related to integrated and designated
English language development and specially designed content
instruction in English, and align the bill with federal law by
prohibiting middle and high school English learners from being
denied enrollment in specified courses.
AB 2350
Page 2
ANALYSIS:
Existing law:
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)Prohibits, under the federal Equal Educational Opportunity Act
of 1974, the denial of equal educational opportunity by the
failure of an educational agency to take appropriate action to
overcome language barriers that impede equal participation by
its students in its instructional programs. (20 U.S.C. Sec.
1701 et seq.)
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:
AB 2350
Page 3
1)Defines "standard instructional program" as, at a minimum,
core curriculum courses, as defined by current law, courses
required to meet state and local graduation requirements, and
courses required for middle school grade promotion.
2)Provides that, consistent with federal law, a middle or high
school student classified as an EL and scores at any
proficiency level on the assessment of English language
development be granted access to core curriculum courses.
Specifically, it:
a) Prohibits denying such a student from:
i) Enrolling in courses that are part of the standard
instructional program of the school that the student
attends.
ii) Enrolling in a full course load of courses
that are part of the standard instructional program.
iii) Enrolling in courses that are not part of a
school's standard instructional program that either meet
the subject matter requirements for college admissions or
are advanced courses, such as advanced placement courses,
on the sole basis of a student's classification as an
English learner.
b) Makes these requirements inapplicable to a student
participating in a program designed to meet the academic
and transitional needs of newly arrived immigrants,
provided that the program is designed to remedy any
academic deficits incurred during participation and that
the program's design is reasonably calculated to enable
these students to attain parity of participation in the
standard instructional program within a reasonable length
of time, as specified.
3)Makes a number of technical changes.
4)Makes a number of related declarations and findings.
Comments
AB 2350
Page 4
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
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.
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
AB 2350
Page 5
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
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.
AB 2350
Page 6
This bill, in an effort to respond to these concerns,
prohibits ELs who score at any proficiency level on the
assessment of English language development from being denied
from taking core curriculum courses necessary for graduation,
grade promotion, or meeting a-g requirements for college
admission.
4)Related court case. Existing case law, Castaneda v. Pickard
(1981, 648 F.2d 989), interprets the federal Equal Educational
Opportunities Act of 1974 to require schools to ensure English
learners' participation in the "standard instructional
program" of a school either by providing access to the
standard instructional program along with English language
support, or instead by providing a program for English
learners, "during the early part of their school career, which
has, as its primary objective the development of literacy in
English," provided that the program is designed to help the
student "overcome the academic deficits" incurred during
participation in that program, and that it is "reasonably
calculated to enable students to attain parity of
participation in the standard instructional program within a
reasonable length of time after they enter the school system."
This bill declares that it is the intent of the Legislature to
clarify these requirements for California public schools. In
addition, this bill seeks to align its provisions with the
specified sections in federal law (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1701 et
seq.) that prohibit middle and high school ELs from being
denied enrollment in specified courses.
5)Evolution of ELD instruction. 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.
AB 2350
Page 7
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
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
AB 2350
Page 8
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 8/22/16)
Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Torlakson
OPPOSITION: (Verified8/22/16)
None received
ASSEMBLY FLOOR: 78-0, 6/1/16
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Travis Allen, Arambula, Atkins, Baker,
Bigelow, Bloom, Bonilla, Bonta, Brough, Brown, Burke,
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
8/22/16 22:44:21
AB 2350
Page 9
**** END ****