BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2178
Page A
Date of Hearing: May 14, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Mike Gatto, Chair
AB 2178 (Levine) - As Amended: May 7, 2014
Policy Committee: EducationVote:7-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable: No
SUMMARY
This bill establishes, starting in 2015-16, the Blended Learning
Pilot Program, administered by the State Board of Education
(SBE) for the purpose of exploring best practices in blended
learning. Participation in the pilot, among other things, allows
a local education agency (LEA) to seek a waiver of education
statute with the stated goal of achieving certain educational
benefits. Specifically, this bill:
1)Defines "blended learning" as a formal education program in
which a pupil learns at least in part through online delivery
of content and instruction with some element of pupil control
over time, place, and pace, and at least in part at a
supervised location away from home.
2)Authorizes school districts, county offices of education,
charter schools, or charter school management organizations to
apply to the SBE to participate in the pilot program.
3)Requires the SBE to select 20 to 30 schools to participate in
the program.
4)Authorizes the SBE to solicit and receive grants from private
entities for purposes of funding the administration of the
pilot program.
5)Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction to contract
with an educational research organization to study the pilot
program and submit the results of the study to the SBE by
September 28, 2017.
FISCAL EFFECT
AB 2178
Page B
1)General Fund administrative costs to the SBE, likely in the
range of $120,000 to $170,000 to administer the pilot program
and report program outcomes.
2)General Fund costs of approximately $250,000 over three years
for the Superintendent of Public Instruction to contract with
an educational research organization to conduct an interim
study of the pilot program and make recommendations.
COMMENTS :
1)Purpose . Supporters of this bill, including the Students
First, contend while some schools are offering blended
learning innovations in California, these educational models
are not well supported by existing law. Supporters contend
current education policies follow two paths to instruction:
the traditional classroom model and the virtual classroom
model. Blended learning operates in the middle of that
spectrum. This bill is designed to provide a comprehensive
analysis of blended learning on a statewide level with the
intention of influencing possible statutory changes that might
improve the adoption and implementation of blended learning.
2)Background . Blended learning is a method of instruction that
combines on-line or technology learning and more traditional
face-to-face or classroom interactions. Blended learning
programs are being used across the state in various public
school settings. Schools can implement several different
approaches to blended learning, including:
Face-to-Face Driver: The teacher decides when to
implement online learning on a case-by-case basis, to help
supplement the curriculum.
Rotation: In this model, students move on a fixed
schedule between online learning (which is most often
self-paced) and traditional teacher instruction in a
classroom, usually organized by small student groups.
Flex: In this model, the online platform dominates
student instruction. On-site teachers provide support as
AB 2178
Page C
needed through tutoring or small-group sessions.
Online Lab: Courses are taught entirely online. Labs
rely heavily on software modules, but online teachers are
also available.
Self-Blend: Most often seen in high schools across the
country, the self-blend model lets students take online
courses to enhance traditional classroom learning.
Online Driver: This program is designed so that an
online platform delivers the entire curriculum. Check-ins
with a teacher are often optional, though occasionally they
are mandatory.<1>
1)Opposition . Opposition, including the California Teachers
Association (CTA), is concerned with the ability to seek a
waiver of education code without public input from the local
community. Charter schools do not have the same waiver
authority as school districts, in large part because they are
already exempt from most provisions of the Education Code.
This bill grants charter schools participating in the pilot
project the same general waiver authority as school districts.
A school district can only apply for a waiver from the SBE
upon a vote of its governing board after a public hearing.
Charter schools are not governed by publicly elected boards.
CTA is concerned that no parallel process is required for
charter schools to seek public input from the families they
serve prior to requesting a waiver.
Analysis Prepared by : Misty Feusahrens / APPR. / (916)
319-2081
---------------------------
<1> The Rise of K-12 Blended Learning: Profiles of Emerging
Models