BILL ANALYSIS �
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Alan Lowenthal, Chair
2011-2012 Regular Session
BILL NO: SB 300
AUTHOR: Hancock
INTRODUCED: February 14, 2011
FISCAL COMM: Yes HEARING DATE: May 4, 2011
URGENCY: No CONSULTANT: Lynn Lorber
SUBJECT : Academic Content Standards: Science and History-Social
Science.
SUMMARY
This bill establishes a commission to develop academic content
standards in science and history-social science by January 1, 2013,
and requires the State Board of Education to either adopt or reject
the new standards by June 30, 2013.
BACKGROUND
Current law required the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt
statewide academically rigorous content standards in reading,
writing and mathematics by January 1, 1998, and standards in
history-social science and science by November 1, 1998. The SBE was
specifically authorized to modify any proposed standards prior to
adoption.
(Education Code � 60605)
Current law does not require the standards to be reviewed or
revised.
SB 1 (Steinberg, Ch. 2, 2009-10 Fifth Extraordinary Session), among
other things, established a 21-member Academic Content Standards
Commission for the purpose of developing academic content standards
in language arts and mathematics that are at least 85% the same as
the common core standards being developed by the Common Core State
Standards Initiative. As required by SB 1, the Commission reported
its recommendations to the SBE by July 15, 2010, and the SBE adopted
the standards on August 2, 2010. (EC � 60605.8)
ANALYSIS
SB 300
Page 2
This bill establishes a commission to develop academic content
standards in science and history-social science by January 1, 2013,
and requires the State Board of Education to either adopt or reject
the new standards by June 30, 2013. Specifically, this bill
1) Establishes a 21-member Academic Content Standards Commission
for Science and History-Social Science (Commission), as
follows:
a) Eleven members appointed by the Governor.
b) Five members appointed by the Senate Rules Committee.
c) Five members appointed by the Speaker of the
Assembly.
At least of the members appointed by each authority must be
current public elementary or secondary classroom teachers of
science or history-social science.
2) Requires the Commission to develop standards in science and
history-social science that are internationally benchmarked and
build toward college and career readiness by the time of high
school graduation.
3) Requires the Commission to present the standards to the State
Board of Education (SBE) by January 1, 2013, and requires the
SBE to either adopt or reject the standards by June 30, 2013.
If the SBE rejects the standards it must provide to the
Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), Governor and
Legislature a written explanation of the reasons the standards
were rejected.
4) Requires the SBE and SPI to present to the Governor and
education and appropriations committees a schedule and
implementation plan for integrating the academic content
standards into the state educational system.
5) Requires all Commission meetings to meet Bagley-Keene open
meeting requirements, and provides that members serve at the
pleasure of the appointing authority.
SB 300
Page 3
STAFF COMMENTS
1) Purpose of the bill . According to the author, "The current
academic content standards for science and history-social
science were developed in 1998, fully 13 years ago. The
state's current science standards do not include any mention of
biotechnologies or nanotechnologies, or a requirement that
students learn about environmental issues, or even that Pluto
is no longer considered a planet. California students will
continue to lose ground in science and history-social science
unless required through legislation, we provide them with the
most current, updated standards which form the foundation of
their education in core subject."
2) Common core . It is possible that common core standards in
science and history-social science will be developed and
available for adoption by states. It appears that California
has not been deeply involved in any discussions or actual
development of these standards. It may not be reasonable to
wait for the development of common core standards in science
and history-social science because there is no clear timeline
of when these standards may be developed, and California's
standards include issues that may not be addressed in the
common core (such as the role of racism in history).
3) Role of the State Board of Education . This bill establishes a
process for the development and adoption of standards that
mirrors the process used for the development and adoption of
California's common core standards. The veto messages for
prior legislation relative to the revision of standards
indicate concern over the diminished role of the State Board of
Education (SBE) to modify proposed standards. While current
law relative to the initial adoption of standards specifically
authorized the SBE to modify standards prior to their adoption,
Legislative Counsel opined in 2005 that the SBE does not have
the authority to revise or amend the content standards after
their adoption and argued that the Legislature reserved for
itself the power to decide if, when, and the process by which
the content standards should be revised or amended.
4) Frameworks and instructional materials . The development and
SB 300
Page 4
adoption of California's standards was followed by the
development and adoption of the frameworks, which serve as the
blueprint for how to implement the standards. The frameworks
in turn provide guidance for the development of instructional
materials. The process for reviewing frameworks and adopting
instructional materials has been suspended since July 2009, and
is not scheduled to resume until the 2015-16 school year.
(Education Code � 60200.7) One may question the value in
developing standards while the state has no process in place to
develop the framework or adopt instructional materials based on
new standards. Staff notes that California adopted common core
standards in English language arts and math in 2010 despite the
lack of a process to revise the frameworks and adopt
instructional materials.
The Curriculum Commission approved the draft update of this
framework for field review on July 17, 2009. However,
suspension of the framework and instructional material
processes was implemented beginning July 28, 2009, meaning that
no actual field review or online survey will occur for this
framework.
5) Fiscal impact . According to the Senate Appropriations
Committee's analysis of prior legislation, this bill would
impose $360,000 in costs for the development of standards in
science and history-social science. Staff notes that this
estimate could vary depending on the size and scope of the
Commission.
6) Related legislation . AB 1033 (Feuer), as passed by the
Assembly Education Committee on April 27, 2011, provides for
the establishment of a standards review commission if the
Superintendent of Public Instruction to recommend to the State
Board of Education jointly determine that there is a need to
revise or modify existing standards. AB 1033 is pending in the
Assembly Appropriations Committee.
7) Prior legislation . AB 97 (Torlakson, 2010) was nearly
identical to this bill. AB 97 was vetoed by the Governor,
whose veto message read:
SB 300
Page 5
Given California's participation in the Common Core
initiative and the anticipated reauthorization of the
federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act, this bill
is premature. This bill could create an unnecessary,
duplicative process in the development of content
standards and in the integration of those standards into
the state's assessment system.
There have been several unsuccessful attempts to authorize or
establish a process to review and revise academic content
standards. Veto messages for SB 1097 (Torlakson, 2008), AB
2744 (Goldberg, 2004), AB 642 (Mullin, 2003) and SB 1367
(Karnette, 2002) cite the Governor's concern over a diminished
role for the SBE in modifying any revised standards. Other
prior attempts include:
AB 1454 (Richardson, 2007) failed passage in this Committee.
AB 1100 (Mullin, 2005) was held on the Assembly Appropriations
Committee's suspense file.
SUPPORT
Business for Science, Math and Related Technologies Education
California Science Teachers Association
OPPOSITION
None on file.