BILL ANALYSIS �
SB 547
Page 1
SENATE THIRD READING
SB 547 (Steinberg)
As Amended August 26, 2011
Majority vote
SENATE VOTE :25-14
EDUCATION 7-3 APPROPRIATIONS 12-5
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Brownley, Ammiano, |Ayes:|Fuentes, Blumenfield, |
| |Buchanan, Butler, Carter, | |Bradford, Charles |
| |Eng, Williams | |Calderon, Campos, Davis, |
| | | |Gatto, Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| | | |Mitchell, Solorio |
| | | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
|Nays:|Norby, Beth Gaines, |Nays:|Harkey, Donnelly, |
| |Wagner | |Nielsen, Norby, Wagner |
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Replaces the state's current measure of school and
school district academic performance, the Academic Performance
Index (API), with the Education Quality Index (EQI), an index of
school and school district quality that is comprised of multiple
indices, each reflecting a different dimension of school or
district performance. Specifically, this bill :
1)Makes findings and declarations as to the challenges faced by
and the needs of California's pupils, and regarding the
state's current accountability system and the opportunity
presented to transition to a new approach; also, states
Legislative intent that the API evolve to encompass other
valuable metrics in addition to test scores, graduation rates
and dropout rates, and that a more comprehensive set of
expectations and aspirations for California's public schools
be reflected in the state's school accountability system.
2)Makes current law implementing the API inoperative on July 1,
2014, and repealed as of January 1, 2015.
3)Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI), in
consultation with the Public School Accountability Act (PSAA)
advisory committee, to develop the EQI system for schools and
SB 547
Page 2
school districts, and requires the State Board of Education
(SBE) to adopt the EQI no later than August 1, 2014, after
providing for public input; also, requires, commencing with
the 2014-15 school year, all schools and school districts to
be evaluated using the EQI.
4)Requires the PSAA advisory committee to:
a) Seek input on its work on the EQI through subcommittees
or other methods from persons with expertise in various
specified educational issues and programs; and,
b) Hold public meetings subject to the Bagley-Keene Open
Meeting Act at least once per quarter from January 1, 2012,
through July 1, 2016.
5)States legislative intent that the EQI provide a comprehensive
and transparent measurement of pupil performance and school
quality to better inform parents, pupils, teachers, school
administrators, policymakers, and the public about public
school performance using multiple indicators of pupil, school,
and school district quality and performance.
6)Requires the EQI to be to be developed for each school type
and school district, and to include, but not be limited to,
the following:
a) For schools and districts maintaining any of grades 9
through 12, the State Assessment Index (SAI), Graduation
Rate Index (GRI), College Preparedness Index (CPI), and
Career Readiness Index (CRI);
b) For schools and districts maintaining grade 8, the SAI
and GRI, and a valid and reliable measure or measures of
pupil access to and performance in college and career
preparatory and exploratory experiences is to be
considered, if maintained in that school; and,
c) For schools and districts maintaining kindergarten or
grades 1 to 7, inclusive, the SAI.
7)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the PSAA advisory
committee, to develop and recommend to the SBE for adoption:
SB 547
Page 3
a) The component indices listed in 6) a) above for school
districts and for each school type, including alternative
schools, as specified;
b) An alternative accountability system;
c) The relative weights of the component indices, and a
total value for the EQI, consistent with the following
requirements:
i) For schools and school districts maintaining
kindergarten and any of grades 1 through 8, the SAI is
required to comprise no less than 40% of the value of the
EQI.
ii) For schools and school districts maintaining any of
grades 9 through 12, the SAI is required to comprise no
more than 40% of the value of the EQI.
iii) Within the EQI, the weights assigned to the CPI and
CRI are required to be equal.
d) No less than one additional component index for schools
maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 through 7;
e) An annual school and district score or other evaluation
system for the EQI;
f) An annual growth target for the SAI and the GRI,
including targets for numerically significant pupil
subgroups, as defined;
g) A method for measuring English learner progress;
h) Whether a growth target or an annual measurement of the
narrowing of the achievement gap should be established for
each additional component index, including targets for
numerically significant pupil subgroups;
i) The relevant indices and indicators necessary to meet
and comply with federal law; and,
j) Any additional data elements, and connections between
existing data systems, that are identified as needed, after
consulting with the state's three higher education
SB 547
Page 4
segments, the Employment Development Department, and other
appropriate entities.
8)Requires the SPI to annually release results and supporting
information on the EQI and its component indices, and
authorizes the SPI to develop and recommend to the SBE for
adoption, any regulations necessary to implement these
provisions.
9)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the PSAA advisory
committee and when additional valid and reliable data become
available, to develop and recommend to the SBE additional
indices, as specified, and to take into account the
appropriateness of particular indices and indicators to grade
spans and school types; also, prohibits any additional
component index from being included in the EQI until one full
school year after its adoption by the SBE.
10)Requires the SPI, commencing no later than July 1, 2013, to
annually report to the Governor and the Legislature on the
development, implementation and impacts of the EQI and its
component indices; also, requires the SPI, in consultation
with the PSAA advisory committee and subject to an
appropriation for this purpose, to contract for an independent
evaluation of the EQI, and to submit the evaluation and any
recommendations no later than July 1, 2018, to the Governor
and the Legislature.
11)Specifies that the SPI not be limited in the development of
the EQI by the scope of the California Longitudinal Pupil
Achievement Data System (CALPADS) or any other relevant data
system; also, requires the SPI to report to the Governor and
Legislature by July 1, 2013, on any additional data required
to be reported by local educational agencies for purposes of
the EQI.
12)Requires the SAI to be comprised of pupil scores from the
state's current standards-based achievement tests or any valid
and reliable successor assessments adopted by the SBE, and the
high school exit examination; also, specifies inclusion and
exclusion rules, disaggregation requirements, and reporting
requirements and authorities.
13)Requires the GRI to be comprised, as appropriate to the grade
SB 547
Page 5
configuration of the school or school district, of:
a) Four-year, five-year, and six-year graduation rates,
that are appropriate to school types and where schools and
districts are required to be granted full value for
graduating, in five or more years, pupils with
disabilities; and,
b) Appropriate rates at which pupils successfully promote
from one grade to the next.
14)Requires the CPI to:
a) Be comprised of multiple valid, reliable, and stable
measures of pupil preparedness for postsecondary education
that may include, but is not limited to district, school
and subgroup rates reflecting completion of local and state
assessments, course enrollment and completion, academic and
extracurricular programs, and advanced or additional
learning opportunities, for pupils in any of grades 9 to
12; and,
b) Include an adopted method for providing additional
weight in the index for schools and school districts that
demonstrate that pupil subgroups, including economically
disadvantaged pupils, pupils with disabilities, and English
learners, are proportionately represented among pupils who
are prepared and eligible for enrollment in four-year
colleges and universities.
15)Requires the CRI to be comprised of multiple valid, reliable,
and stable measures of pupil readiness for career, including,
but not limited to course enrollment and completion of career
pathway and standards-aligned career technical education
programs, industry-validated courses and certifications,
intersegmental articulation with institutions of higher
education, and local and state assessments, and portfolio
assessments for pupils in any of grades 9 to 12.
EXISTING LAW requires:
1)The SPI to develop the API to measure the performance of
schools, and to include a variety of indicators in that
measure, including, but not limited to, achievement test
SB 547
Page 6
results, attendance rates, and graduation rates.
2)School districts to offer to all otherwise qualified pupils in
7th through 12th grades a course of study fulfilling the
requirements and prerequisites for admission to California's
public institutions of postsecondary education, and that
provides an opportunity to attain entry-level employment
skills in business or industry upon graduation from high
school.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee, annual General Fund (GF) administrative costs to the
California Department of Education (CDE) of at least $470,000 to
implement the requirements of this bill. These costs are
associated with staff for the development and implementation of
the EQI. A portion of this funding, approximately $250,000 GF,
will likely only be required for a limited time period because
much of the work is associated with the development of the
indices. Also GF/Proposition 98 (98) costs, likely between
$750,000 and $1 million, to CDE to hire an independent
contractor to complete the reporting requirements of this bill.
The evaluation is contingent upon an appropriation for this
purpose. In addition, potential GF/98 cost pressure, in the low
millions, to school districts to collect data required for the
EQI. The bill requires the SPI, to report to the Legislature
any additional data elements added to the EQI.
COMMENTS : The SPI established, pursuant to SB 1 X1 (Alpert),
Chapter 3, Statutes of 1999-2000 First Extraordinary Session,
the PSAA advisory committee to advise the SPI and the SBE on all
appropriate matters relative to the creation of the API. SB 1
X1 also requires the SPI, with the approval of the SBE, to
develop the API to measure the performance of schools for
reporting and accountability purposes, and to include a variety
of indicators in that measure, including, but not limited to,
achievement test results, attendance rates, and graduation
rates. Currently only achievement test results are incorporated
into the API, and the API is configured to produce scores
measuring a school's static performance at each grade level, in
each content area, in each year, at one point in time.
Currently, California's public school accountability system has
no mechanism for measuring success in terms of outcomes or
opportunities beyond performance on core academic assessments,
SB 547
Page 7
including civic and community responsibility, career or college
readiness and acquisition of life skills; the current
accountability system also has no way of identifying or
rewarding those schools that educate the whole pupil in any way
other than is measured by testing skills and knowledge in
mathematics, language arts, history and science. The indices
proposed in this bill are intended to replace and augment the
information composited in the current API, thus including
information on student opportunities and student success so as
to provide broader and more comprehensive information on school
performance than is available from the API focus on achievement
test scores alone. The proposed EQI would aggregate information
from at least four sub-indices, related to different dimensions
of student performance and opportunity, including academic
performance, advancement and graduation rates, preparation for
career or post-secondary education, and enhanced student
learning opportunities.
This comprehensive expansion of the accountability measures that
are used to provide public information on and make state-level
accountability judgments about the state's K-12 public schools,
provides the clear benefit of basing that information and
judgments about schools on a broader base of multiple measures
of the characteristics that define school success or failure.
However, this proposal is not without its problems, including
lack of data, technical issues with the creation and
interpretation of multi-dimensional indices, lack of
comparability and continuity from the API to the EQI,
uncertainty concerning the design of the indices, and the
extensive code clean-up that would necessarily follow.
Analysis Prepared by : Gerald Shelton / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0002277