BILL ANALYSIS
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Gloria Romero, Chair
2009-2010 Regular Session
BILL NO: AB 314
AUTHOR: Brownley
AMENDED: June 24, 2009
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: July 8, 2009
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT:Beth Graybill
SUBJECT : Instructional Materials
SUMMARY:
This bill makes various changes to the state instructional
materials adoption process for kindergarten and grades 1
through 8 and requires school districts to provide pupils
with newly adopted materials within three years rather than
the two years currently required.
BACKGROUND
Current law requires the State Board of Education (SBE) to
adopt, pursuant to the recommendations of the Commission for
the Establishment of Academic Content and Performance
Standards, statewide academic content standards in core
curriculum areas (English language arts, mathematics,
history/social science, and science). The content standards
are implemented through curriculum frameworks for each
subject area, and adopted by the SBE.
Current law requires the SBE to adopt basic instructional
materials in the core academic content areas every six years
for use in grades K-8 and authorizes the governing board of
each school district to adopt instructional materials for use
in high schools (grades 9-12) under its control.
Instructional materials must be consistent with the criteria
and standards prescribed in the curriculum frameworks adopted
by the SBE. Current law also provides that:
1) Instructional materials may be submitted for adoption
not less than two times every six years in the following
subjects: English language arts, mathematics, science,
social science, bilingual or bicultural subjects and not
less than two times every eight years in any other
AB 314
Page 2
subjects for which the SBE determines the adoption of
instructional materials to be necessary and desirable.
2) Upon making an adoption of basic instructional
materials, the SBE is required to make available to
listed publishers and manufacturers and all school
interests, a list of those instructional materials by
subject and grade level.
Current law authorizes the State Board of Education to grant
a school district additional time to meet the purchasing
timeline requirement if the school district can demonstrate
the following:
(1) The school district has implemented a well-designed,
standards-aligned basic instructional materials program.
(2) The school district, at the time of its request for
additional time pursuant to this subdivision, has
sufficient textbooks or basic instructional materials
for use by each pupil.
(3) The school has submitted an alternative plan for
compliance with the IMFRP deadlines.
Current law requires each pupil, including English learners,
to have a standards-aligned textbook or instructional
materials, or both, to use in class and to take home. In
addition, pupils must be provided with standards-aligned
textbooks or basic instructional materials by the beginning
of the first school term that commences no later than 24
months after those materials were adopted by the State Board
of Education.
Current law establishes the Instructional Materials Funding
Realignment (IMFR) program administered by the SPI under
which school districts are apportioned funds to ensure that
each pupil is provided a standards-aligned textbook or basic
instructional materials, as adopted by the SBE or the local
governing board.
ANALYSIS
This bill :
1) Requires publishers to provide any equipment or
AB 314
Page 3
technology associated with the use of instructional
materials free of charge to the same extent as they are
provided to other states or districts in the United
States (U.S.).
2) Requires publishers to furnish instructional materials
in an electronic format that contains at least the same
content as the printed version at a price that is less
than the price charged for the printed version and
allows the electronic version to be copy-protected.
Exempts small publishers as defined from this
requirement.
3) Requires the SBE to hold a publicly noticed
informational meeting prior to the meeting at which it
is scheduled to adopt recommended instructional
materials.
4) Extends the instructional materials purchasing
requirement from 24 to 36 months following an adoption.
5) Requires the list of state-approved instructional
materials be made available to school districts and be
posted on the California Department of Education's (CDE)
Internet Web site and requires the list to include
information from the assessments or reports of findings
and recommendations developed by expert reviewers and
evaluators of instructional materials, as specified.
Requires items placed on the list to be available for
procurement until a date established by the SBE or three
years following the next adoption of new IMs, whichever
is later.
6) Allows school districts that receive funds from the
Instructional Materials Funding Realignment (IMFR)
program to submit, as specified, names of individuals,
as specified, to be considered to serve in the review
and evaluation of instructional materials submitted for
adoption for use in kindergarten and grades one to
eight, inclusive (K-8).
7) Specifies that school districts choosing to submit
recommendations of individuals shall ensure that at
least one of the individuals is a credentialed teacher
and that all individuals have experience with and
AB 314
Page 4
expertise in the content area under review.
8) Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI)
to verify that the individuals recommended by school
districts have expertise in the content field under
consideration.
9) Requires the SPI to conduct a random lottery to select
individuals to serve as instructional materials
reviewers and content review experts from the
recommendations made by school districts and requires
the SPI to ensure:
a) The selected reviewers reflect the ethnic
groups, types of school districts and regions in
California;
b) The selected reviewers have experience in
providing instruction to English language learners
and pupils with disabilities; and,
c) A majority of the reviewers are credentialed
classroom instructors.
10) Clarifies that a local governing board may use
instructional materials funds to purchase
technology-based materials it can ensure that each pupil
will be provided with a copy of the instructional
materials to use at school and at home.
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Instructional materials adoption . A May 2007 report
by the Legislative Analyst, "Reforming California's
Instructional Material Adoption Process" analyzed the
cost of instructional materials as well as the state's
process for adopting K-8 instructional materials. The
report highlighted the state's complex adoption process,
noting that the process involves many agencies and
groups, many with duplicate functions, which leads to
inflated
instructional materials costs. This bill implements
some of the recommendations made by the LAO to
streamline and reform the instructional materials
adoption process.
AB 314
Page 5
2) 24-month rule . California's six-year adoption cycle
for seven academic subjects essentially requires
districts to purchase new instructional materials in at
least one subject every year. The rising costs of
instructional materials and budget constraints has made
it difficult for many local education agencies to meet
the deadlines imposed by the 24-month rule, resulting in
an increase in the number of waiver requests submitted
to the SBE. While the Education Trailer Budget (SB3X 4,
2009) eliminated the need for some 24-month rule waivers
through July 1, 2010, the rule is reinstated for
Reading/Language Arts (R/LA) for the 2010-2011 school
term, which could require some districts to purchase two
adoptions simultaneously at a time when they face the
prospect of continued budget constraints. As a result,
the State Board of Education has at received numerous
requests to delay the adoption of materials in
Reading/Language Arts - English Language Development or
Mathematics for an additional 12 months. By extending
the purchase deadline, this bill provides districts with
greater flexibility to plan their instructional
materials purchases relative to local needs.
3) Reports of findings and recommendations . This bill
requires that the report of findings from the content
experts and reviewers involved in the process along with
specified information is made available to districts
through the CDE Website in order to help them with their
own reviews. To prevent any confusion that could arise
if multiple versions of these findings are published,
staff recommends an amendment to require the final
report of findings and recommendations be posted on the
Website.
4) Prior legislation . AB 2315 (Mullin, 2008), would
have made major changes to the process of adopting K-8
instructional materials and contained several provisions
that are similar to this bill. AB 2315 was passed by
this Committee on a 7-1 vote and was subsequently vetoed
by Governor Schwarzenegger, with the following message:
The State Board of Education recently addressed the
issue of greater transparency and clear timelines and
procedures in the instructional materials adoption
AB 314
Page 6
process. Those SBE regulations were intended to set
forth the process by which the SBE adopts curriculum
frameworks, evaluation criteria, and instructional
materials. Moreover, I see no need to change the
process or the people involved in this important work.
The SBE should maintain the authority of selection and
appointment of instructional materials reviewers and
content review experts.
AB 2468 (Brownley, 2008) required the SBE to adopt
procedures governing the adoption and purchase of
instructional materials used in kindergarten through
eighth grade, including preventing the consideration of
costs in the early phases of the adoption process and
requiring the SBE to consider costs when adopting
instructional materials. AB 2468 was passed by this
Committee on a 6-3 vote and was vetoed by Governor
Schwarzenegger with the following veto message:
I have vetoed similar legislation dealing with the cost
of instructional materials in prior years. Current law
already provides safeguards against California paying
higher prices for instructional materials than any other
state or school district in the entire country.
Moreover, I continue to believe that California should
always focus on providing the highest quality of
educational materials for our students.
AB 1148 (Brownley, 2007) would have required the CDE to
annually report publisher price quotations submitted for
instructional materials to be adopted that year,
summarize requirements imposed on publishers, and
estimate the net per-pupil cost of purchasing complete
sets of instructional materials for that year. AB 1148
was vetoed. The veto message read in part,
Requiring the California Department of Education to
provide an estimate of the net cost to purchase a
complete set of instructional materials in each subject
and grade level provides no additional utility, since
current law already provides adequate safeguards to
prevent California from paying higher prices than any
other state or school district in the entire country. I
am concerned that the focus on the procedural elements
contained in this bill may take away from concentrating
on the State's overall duty of ensuring that California
AB 314
Page 7
students have access to the highest quality, standards
aligned instructional materials for their education.
SUPPORT
Riverside County Schools Advocacy Association
Small School Districts' Association
California County Boards of Education
California School Boards Association
Association of California School Administrators
San Diego County Office of Education
Santa Clara County Office of Education
American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees,
AFL-CIO
California Association of Suburban School Districts
OPPOSITION
Association of American Publishers