BILL ANALYSIS
AB 2019
Page A
Date of Hearing: April 7, 2010
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Julia Brownley, Chair
AB 2019 (Torlakson) - As Amended: March 18, 2010
SUBJECT : Education: education technology
SUMMARY : Authorizes the Superintendent of Public Instruction
(SPI) to convene a task force for education technology for
purposes of developing recommendations for a comprehensive
statewide plan to increase and enhance the level of technology
used to deliver instruction in California public schools.
Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires the membership of the task force to consist of no
more than 15 education technology experts, including, but not
limited to, parents, administrators, school board members,
researchers, industry representatives, and a majority of
current credentialed teachers and shall include at least one
representative from a large, a representative from a
medium-sized, and a representative from a small school
district.
2)Requires the task force to submit recommendations to the State
Board of Education (SBE) on or before September 1, 2012 for a
comprehensive statewide technology plan that addresses all of
the following:
a) Professional development based on a study of existing
industry models for professional development in technology
and existing school professional development programs, and
for the improvement of school technology in professional
development;
b) Electronic learning resources and instructional
materials based on a study of trends in long-term
compatibility of resources and hardware and best practices
in the use of electronic resources;
c) Hardware, with an emphasis on long-term compatibility
between hardware and software systems and intersystem
compatibility and address extended life cycle plans to
preclude the premature obsolescence of equipment;
AB 2019
Page B
d) Telecommunications infrastructure based on a study of
industry standards for wireless interoperability and
recommend adoption of a standard for telecommunications
infrastructure for schools; and,
e) Funding based on an assessment of various funding models
and make recommendations on methods of providing reasonable
levels of funding for technology in schools on a continuing
basis.
3)Requires the SBE to adopt a comprehensive statewide plan to
increase and enhance the level of technology used to deliver
instruction in California public schools, pursuant to the
recommendations of the task force, on or before January 1,
2013.
4)Authorizes the California Department of Education (CDE) to
accept private donations to support the expenses incurred in
operating the task force.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the California Technology Assistance Project
(CTAP) to provide coordination and services in education
technology in 11 regions in California.
2)Requires, pursuant to federal law, the No Child Left Behind
Act of 2001 (NCLB), each state to maintain a state technology
plan for the purpose of ensuring that technology use is
consistent with the state's strategies for improving student
academic achievement through the use of technology in
classrooms, including improving the capacity of teachers to
integrate technology into curricula and instruction.
3)Requires the CDE to assist the SBE on education technology
plans, policies, programs, and activities and requires the CDE
to provide statewide coordination and evaluation of technology
programs and resources and to advance the use of technology in
the curriculum and in the administration of elementary and
secondary schools.
4)Requires a school district to have a three- to five-year
education technology plan as a precondition of receiving any
technology grant administered by CDE.
AB 2019
Page C
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS : This bill seeks to create a plan that will include
recommendations for the expansion of the use of technology in
schools.
Existing federal law, the NCLB, requires each state to maintain
a statewide technology plan for the purpose of ensuring that
technology use is consistent with the state's strategies for
improving student academic achievement through the use of
technology in classrooms, including improving the capacity of
teachers to integrate technology into curricula and instruction.
In May 2005, the SBE approved the NCLB State Technology Plan,
which addresses the federal requirements of NCLB. The plan
includes California's strategies for improving student academic
achievement through the use of technology and efforts to
leverage statewide education technology services, regional
services, grant administration, monitoring, and outreach efforts
so that all efforts focus on promoting research-based proven
practices.
Additionally, the Commission on Technology in Learning (CTL) was
established by AB 598 (Soto), Chapter 830, Statutes of 1999, as
an advisory body to the SBE to develop a report that made
recommendations to ensure that technology is systemically
integrated into all levels of education. The CTL developed a
document titled the "Education Technology Master Plan," that
provides a vision for the state on how to effectively use and
support educational technology to improve student achievement,
close the gaps in access to educational technology, and move
California schools to at least parity with or exceed the level
of technology integration in other states. The plan included 25
recommendations that support technology use in three areas: 1)
Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment; 2) Professional
Development; and 3) Infrastructure. On May 7, 2003, the SBE
accepted this report as "Recommendations of the Commission on
Technology in Learning" but not as a technology "master plan"
for the state. The SBE decided that the document "could be used
by CDE and SBE staff as a guide in preparing any technology plan
that may be determined to be needed for federal funding purposes
(with that plan then being considered by the State Board in the
future if necessary)."<1>
Furthermore, as a condition of receiving education technology
---------------------------
<1> State Board of Education Meeting Minutes, May 7, 2003.
AB 2019
Page D
funding, districts are required to develop or update a
technology plan to reflect a district's plan on using technology
to improve student achievement and to improve the capacity of
all teachers in schools served by the district to integrate
technology effectively into curricula and instruction. The
components of the plan include curriculum; professional
development; infrastructure, hardware, technical support and
software; funding and budget; and monitoring and evaluation in
such a way as to keep student achievement emphasized in the
district plan.
An argument could be made that another state technology plan may
be duplicative of plans that are already required both of the
state pursuant to NCLB and of districts in order to receive
technology grants. Additionally, the report and recommendations
developed by the CTL are comprehensive in nature and could be
used for policy making purposes by implementing some of the
recommendations in the document. Alternatively, the report
could be used as guidance in the development of education
technology policies.
This Committee may wish to consider whether another technology
plan is necessary. Prior legislative efforts establishing a
task force to develop a technology plan have been unsuccessful
and vetoed by the Governor, who has argued that such bills are
unnecessary and that the SPI does not need additional authority
to convene such a task force. Should this Committee wish to
pass a bill that establishes a task force to develop a
technology plan, it may be prudent for the task force to build
upon or consider the existing technology plans and reports to
create the statewide technology plan required by this bill.
Particularly since the recommendations that have been previously
developed are consistent with what the bill calls for. For
example, one of the recommendations in the CTL plan suggested
providing incentives to business and industry to develop
rigorous and effective digital content in curriculum,
instruction, and assessment that are aligned to the academic
content standards. A second recommendation suggested providing
incentives to districts and schools to foster and sustain
rigorous and effective systemic professional development that
promotes the integration of technology in education. Staff
recommends the bill be amended to require the task force, in the
development of the recommendations for a statewide technology
plan to consider, as may be appropriate, the existing NCLB
technology plan and the recommendations included in the CTL
AB 2019
Page E
technology plan.
The bill requires the recommendations of the task force to be
submitted to the SBE and requires the SBE to approve a
comprehensive statewide plan to increase and enhance the level
of technology used to deliver instruction in schools. If there
are specific action items for implementation within the
recommendations or the plan, the Legislature may be an
appropriate body to consider some of the recommendations. Staff
recommends the bill be amended to require the recommendations to
also be submitted to the Legislature.
The author states: "While there is widespread consensus on the
benefits of education technology and its important role in
providing students with a high-quality education, California
lags far behind most states in high-tech learning. In many
contexts, California is considered a high-tech state with
low-tech learning environments for its students. Though some
school districts are making an effective use of technology,
California has received a (D) with respect to the use of
education technology."
While there is support for incorporating technology in the
classroom, the challenge for the state has been the fiscal
climate which leaves limited resources for technical equipment,
maintenance, support and training to increase access to
technology in the classroom.
Governor's Information and Communications Technology Digital
Literacy Council : The Governor issued an Executive Order (EO)
establishing the Information and Communications Technology (ICT)
Digital Literacy Council for the purposes of developing a
California Action Plan for ICT Digital Literacy. The EO points
at evidence of the digital divide in California and notes that
less than half of Latinos (48%) have home computers, compared
with about 86% for Whites, 84% for Asians, and 79% for Blacks.
Additionally, only 40% of Latinos have Internet access, and only
34% of Latinos have broadband connections at home, while
majorities of other racial or ethnic groups have both Internet
access and broadband connections. The EO requests that the
Legislature and Superintendent of Public Instruction join the
Leadership Council in issuing a "Call to Action" to schools,
higher education institutions, employers, workforce training
agencies, local governments, community organizations, and civic
leaders to advance California as a global leader in ICT Digital
AB 2019
Page F
Literacy.
Arguments in support : The California Science Teachers
Association writes, "AB 2019 would require an Education
Technology Task Force to develop a plan to increase the level of
technology used in California's classrooms. We believe that such
a task force will be instrumental in providing guidance to our
education policy makers and will assist them in catapulting
California's schools forward to deliver more effective education
through the 21st century technology."
Previous legislation : AB 836 (Torlakson) of 2009 requires the
SPI to establish and convene a task force for education
technology for purposes of making preliminary recommendations on
technology literacy model standards for grades 7-12, inclusive,
and to address specified issues related to technology. AB 836
was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger with the following veto
message:
"Earlier this year, I issued an Executive Order directing the
State's Chief Information Officer (CIO) to establish the
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Digital Literacy
Council for the purposes of developing a California Action Plan
for ICT Digital Literacy. The CIO is charged with working with
stakeholders in both the education and technology fields to
develop a plan to incorporate digital literacy in our schools
and workforce. This bill would require the Superintendent of
Public Instruction (SPI) to establish a task force for education
technology, funded by private donations. The SPI does not need
additional statutory authority to convene an internal task force
for this purpose. Therefore, this bill is unnecessary."
SB 1330 (Torlakson) of 2008 requires the Superintendent of
Public Instruction (SPI) to convene a task force for the purpose
of developing recommendations for a comprehensive statewide plan
to increase and enhance the level of technology used to deliver
instruction in California public schools. SB 1330 was vetoed by
Governor Schwarzenegger with the following veto message:
"This bill is unnecessary since current law does not prohibit
the Superintendent of Public Instruction from convening an
internal advisory committee to update the statewide education
technology plan with approval of the State Board of Education.
Increasing and enhancing technology in our schools is important,
but the provisions in this can be accomplished without
AB 2019
Page G
legislation."
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Association of American Publishers (If amended)
Business for Science, Math and Related Technologies Education
California School Library Association
California Science Teachers Association
California Teachers Association
Children Now
PASCO Scientific
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Marisol Avi?a / ED. / (916) 319-2087