BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Gloria Romero, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: AJR 39
AUTHOR: Torlakson
AMENDED: May 10, 2010
FISCAL COMM: No HEARING DATE: June 16, 2010
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Common core standards: history-social science and
science.
KEY POLICY ISSUES
Should the Legislature call upon the National Governors
Association (NGA) and Council of Chief State School Officers
(CCSSO) to develop common core standards in social studies
and science?
Should the Legislature call upon these entities to consider
the development of common core standards in other subject
areas, such as foreign language, the arts, physical education
and career technical education?
Is this resolution necessary when the NGA and CCSSO have
already indicated they plan to develop common core standards
in science and possibly other subject areas?
SUMMARY
This resolution calls upon the National Governors Association
and the Council of Chief State School Officers to replicate
the process used to develop English language arts and
mathematics common core standards to now develop common core
standards for social studies and science.
BACKGROUND
Academic content standards define the knowledge, concepts,
and skills that pupils should acquire at each grade level.
California has adopted content standards as follows:
English language arts - 1997
Mathematics - 1997
AJR 39
Page 2
History-Social Science - 1998
Science - 1998
English Language Development - 1999
Visual and Performing Arts - 2001
Physical Education - 2005
Career Technical Education - 2005
Health - 2008
The development of common core standards in English language
arts and math, i.e., academic standards that are meant to be
used by states (voluntarily) across the nation, has been
undertaken by the National Governors Association's Center for
Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School
Officers, reportedly in consultation with teachers, parents,
content experts and administrators. Forty eight states (all
but Texas and Alaska), the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico
and the Virgin Islands have signed on as participants in the
development of the common core standards. States that
participate in the development of the standards are not
required to adopt the final common core standards.
The final draft of the English language arts and mathematics
common core standards were released on June 2, 2010. These
standards also include standards for literacy in
history-social studies, science and technical subjects
(understand words and phrases, learn to pay attention to
details, and read diagrams and charts). These literacy
standards are meant to cover the academic language used in
those subjects but do not cover the subject matter content of
history-social science or science standards.
These common core standards are not national standards per
se, as they were not developed by the United States
Department of Education nor are states required to adopt
these standards. However, the United States Department of
Education is promoting this initiative through the Race to
the Top grant, for which applicant states can score points
for adopting common core standards.
SB 1 of the Fifth Extraordinary Session (Steinberg, Chapter
2, 2010), which relates to the Race to the Top grant, among
other things, established a 21-member Academic Content
Standards Commission (Commission) for the purpose of
developing academic content standards in English language
arts and mathematics (at least 85% of these standards must be
the common core academic standards). SB x5 1 established the
following deadlines:
AJR 39
Page 3
The Commission must present the standards it develops
to the State Board of Education (SBE) by July 15, 2010.
The SBE must either adopt or reject these standards
by August 2, 2010. (Education Code 60605.8)
The first meeting of the Academic Content Standards
Commission is scheduled for June 17, 2010.
In addition to making statutory changes relative to common
core standards, California has expressed a commitment to
consider adopting common core standards via the state's
applications for Race to the Top grant funding (in
applications for both the first and second rounds).
California's second round application states, "California
became a committed participant in the development of common
core standards in English-Language Arts and mathematics by
submitting a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) on May 28, 2009,
with the National Governors Association and the Council of
Chief State School Officers. The MOA was signed by the
Governor, the California State Board of Education President,
and the State
Superintendent of Public Instruction. The MOA clearly stated
an intention to adopt common core standards as long as they
'meet or exceed our own.' The State intends to submit
evidence of adoption on or before August 2, 2010."
ANALYSIS
This resolution calls upon the National Governors Association
and the Council of Chief State School Officers to replicate
the process used to develop English-language arts and
mathematics common core standards to now develop common core
standards for social studies and science.
This resolution further calls upon the National Governors
Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School
Officers (CCSSO) to also examine the viability of developing
common standards in other subject areas, including but not
limited to foreign language, the arts, physical education,
and career technical education.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Need for the bill : According to the author, the Common
AJR 39
Page 4
Core Standards Initiative does not currently include
efforts to develop standards for other core subject
areas. "Each new generation of students needs to be
equipped with the knowledge of history, geography,
economics and government, skills needed to make informed
decisions about complex public issues, attitudes that
support democratic practices, commitment to engage in
civic life, a strong understanding of the physical
world, including biology, chemistry, geology, astronomy
and physics, and a firm grasp of the scientific method
of discovery."
2) Only English and math ? The Common Core State Standards
Initiative website states, "English-language arts and
math were the first subjects chosen for the common core
state standards because these two subjects are skills,
upon which students build skill sets in other subject
areas. They are also the subjects most frequently
assessed for accountability purposes. Of course, other
subject areas are critical to young people's education
and their success in college and careers. Once the
English-language arts and math standards are developed,
CCSSO and NGA Center, on behalf of the states, plan to
develop a common core of standards in science and
potentially additional subject areas." Considering this
plan to develop common core standards in science and
possibly other subjects, is this resolution necessary?
3) Prior legislation .
AB 97 (Torlakson, 2009) would have required
the Superintendent of Public Instruction to convene
Academic Content and Performance Standards Review
panels for the purpose of reviewing and
recommending changes to the academic content
standards for
English language arts and mathematics. AB 97 is on
the inactive file on the Senate Floor.
SB 1097 (Torlakson, 2008) would have
established a process for review and revision of
the reading/language arts and history/social
science academic content standards. SB 1097 was
vetoed by the Governor, whose veto message read:
The original academic content standards were
AJR 39
Page 5
adopted through a
public and inclusive process involving teachers,
educators and
content experts from around the state. The
authorizing statute
provided that the Governor retain a majority of
appointments to
the Standards Commission, followed by the
Superintendent and
leadership in the legislature and correctly held
the Governor
ultimately accountable to ensure a balance of
expertise and
stakeholders participated in such a critical
endeavor. This bill
proposes to dilute the role of the Governor.
SB 1097 also deletes a provision codified by the
original statute
that explicitly authorized the State Board of
Education (Board) to
modify any proposed content standards prior to
adoption.
Instead, it only allows the Board to accept or
reject proposed
changes. The Board would not have authority to
make even
minor corrections to the panel's recommended
changes.
I see no compelling reason to alter the balance
established by
the original statute in determining the composition
of the
commission that reviewed the academic content, or
the process
that provided for recommendations to the Board for
consideration, modification, and approval.
Furthermore, while I would welcome participation by
teachers,
the measure does not define "recent public
classroom
experience" and thereby raises the possibility of
controversy
regarding whether or not certain members of the
panel are duly
AJR 39
Page 6
authorized to participate.
I cannot support the dilution of the authority of
the Governor or
the State Board of Education. California's content
standards are
too important to allow for unnecessary ambiguity
that could call
into question the very process of a historic review
and possible
modification.
SUPPORT
Association of California School Administrators
California Alliance for Arts Education
California Association for Health, Physical Education,
Recreation and Dance
California Council for the Social Studies
California Language Teachers Association
California Science Teachers Association
California State PTA
OPPOSITION
None received.