BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          491 (Gonzalez)


          As Amended  April 30, 2015


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                  |Noes                |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |----------------+------+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Education       |7-0   |O'Donnell, Chávez,    |                    |
          |                |      |Kim, McCarty,         |                    |
          |                |      |Santiago, Thurmond,   |                    |
          |                |      |Weber                 |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |----------------+------+----------------------+--------------------|
          |Appropriations  |17-0  |Gomez, Bigelow,       |                    |
          |                |      |Bonta, Calderon,      |                    |
          |                |      |Chang, Daly, Eggman,  |                    |
          |                |      |Gallagher,            |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,       |                    |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,       |                    |
          |                |      |Jones, Quirk, Rendon, |                    |
          |                |      |Wagner, Weber, Wood   |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
          |                |      |                      |                    |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 










                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  2





          SUMMARY:  Requires the California Department of Education (CDE) to  
          recommend, and the State Board of Education (SBE) to adopt, best  
          practices for the reclassification of English learners, by July  
          2022.  Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2019, to issue a report that  
            includes the department's findings, research, analysis,  
            recommendations, and best practices with regard to the  
            reclassification of English learners.  


          2)Requires, by July 1, 2022, the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to  
            adopt, the CDE's recommendations and best practices with regard  
            to the reclassification of English learners.  


          3)Repeals a requirement for a report required to be completed by  
            January 1, 2017, to address any changes in analysis and  
            recommendations on reclassification resulting from the adoption  
            of the Common Core standards in mathematics and the Next  
            Generation Science Standards.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to review and analyze the  
            criteria, policies, and practices used by a sampling of school  
            districts that represent the geographic, socioeconomic, and  
            demographic diversity of the state to reclassify English  
            learners, and recommend to the Legislature and SBE any  
            guideline, regulatory, or statutory changes that the CDE  
            determines are necessary to identify when English learners are  
            prepared for the successful transition to classrooms and  
            curricula that require English proficiency.


          2)Requires, for purposes of completing that review, the CDE to  








                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  3





            consult with various parties, and examine: practices of a  
            sampling of school districts, the extent to which current  
            requirements are being followed, and the range of  
            reclassification criteria developed by school districts.  


          3)Requires the CDE, by January 1, 2014, to issue a report that  
            includes the CDE's findings, research, analysis,  
            recommendations, and identified best practices.


          4)Requires, by January 1, 2017, the CDE to issue an updated report  
            that reflects any changes in analysis and recommendations as a  
            result of the adoption by the SBE of the Common Core standards  
            in English language arts and the English Language Development  
            standards.


          5)Requires the CDE, with the approval of the SBE, to establish  
            procedures for the reclassification of a student from English  
            learner to English proficient, and requires that the  
            reclassification procedures use multiple criteria in determining  
            whether to reclassify a student.


          6)Establishes the California English Language Development Test  
            (CELDT) to identify students who are limited English proficient,  
            to determine the level of English proficiency of students, and  
            to assess the progress of English learners in acquiring the  
            skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing in English.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee, one-time General Fund contract costs to the CDE in the  
          range of $450,000 to $670,000 to complete reporting requirements,  
          likely through a contract.  CDE states data from an initial report  
          can be used as a foundation for the report required by this bill.  
          Additionally, recent amendments remove a second reporting  
          requirement. These factors suggest costs will likely to be at the  








                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  4





          lower end of the estimated range. 


          COMMENTS:  


          Concerns about the current reclassification system.  In setting  
          policy regarding the reclassification of English learners, both  
          the state and school districts must strike a delicate balance in  
          order to avoid reclassifying students too early or too late.  If  
          students are prematurely reclassified they may lose needed  
          instructional support and may be unprepared to succeed  
          academically.  And if reclassification occurs too late, students'  
          academic options may be limited, depriving them of important  
          educational opportunities.


          The reclassification system for English learners is set out in  
          statute and conducted under guidelines issued by the SBE which  
          specify four criteria for reclassification.  There is considerable  
          flexibility under statute and these guidelines. Districts may  
          adopt different thresholds on CELDT and basic skills assessments,  
          and may also adopt additional measures.  Two of these measures,  
          while important, are also open-ended in nature.  As a result the  
          reclassification process varies by district.  


          SB 1108 history.  SB 1108 (Padilla), Chapter 434, Statutes of  
          2012, required the CDE to undertake a review of the  
          reclassification system, contingent on funding being provided for  
          that purpose.  No state funding was provided, and CDE could not  
          use federal funds for this purpose.  The CDE entered into a  
          memorandum of understanding with the Public Policy Institute of  
          California (PPIC) which allowed the CDE to share data from the  
          California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System for the  
          purpose of the required analysis.  The CDE intended that the  
          report would assist in meeting the requirements of SB 1108.  The  
          PPIC issued that report in January, 2014, but the CDE believes  
          that it was not sufficient to meet the requirements of SB 1108 or  








                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  5





          to form the basis for recommendations to the SBE regarding  
          reclassification.  In 2014 the author of SB 1108 introduced a new  
          bill, also numbered SB 1108 (of the 2014 Regular Session), which  
          would have required the CDE to recommend, and the SBE to adopt,  
          best practices regarding reclassification. That bill died in the  
          Senate Appropriations Committee. 


          PPIC report on reclassification.  In January 2014, the PPIC issued  
          the report described above, Reclassification of English Learners  
          in California Schools.  The report provided the first longitudinal  
          analysis of reclassification practices of California schools,  
          using data from 2007-08 through 2012-13 (excluding charter  
          schools), and found that:


          1)Reclassified English learners not only outperform English  
            learners, but also often do as well as native English speakers  
            on measures of academic outcomes.


          2)More than 90% of districts in the analysis use more demanding  
            criteria than are suggested by the SBE reclassification  
            guidelines. 


          3)Districts using more stringent reclassification criteria have  
            lower reclassification rates.  


          4)The use of stricter criteria was associated with better outcomes  
            for reclassified fluent-English-proficient students on  
            standardized tests in sixth grade and 8th grade, more on-time  
            progression in 8th grade, but for students reclassified in 9th  
            grade a reduced likelihood of graduating from high school.  


          The report also noted that two major changes in education pose new  
          questions for the reclassification of English learners:  the  








                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  6





          Common Core State Standards and the Local Control Funding Formula.  
           The first will require reclassification criteria to be reset with  
          reference to the new Common Core aligned assessment.  The Local  
          Control Funding Formula "may reduce districts' incentives to  
          reclassify students," as it does not provide a funding adjustment  
          for reclassified students (though the report noted that many  
          reclassified students are also from low income families and so  
          would continue to generate an adjustment).  The report recommended  
          the adoption of one statewide standard for reclassifying students  
          based on the assessments and levels recommended in the guidelines  
          provided by the SBE.  It noted that in most cases this would mean  
          a lowering of the standards which districts are currently using.  


          Reclassification criteria in flux as districts transition to new  
          test data.  Changes to the state's assessment system are resulting  
          in changes to two of the criteria required to be used in  
          reclassification.  The state has not produced statewide assessment  
          data for two years while the transition to Common Core aligned  
          assessments is taking place.  This set of data represents the  
          fourth criteria required to be used in reclassification.  The CDE  
          has advised districts that current law allows the use of "locally  
          available assessment results," and has provided examples of  
          acceptable assessment data districts could use in the  
          reclassification process. In addition, the first criterion for  
          reclassification is also undergoing transition.  Starting in  
          2017-18, the state will begin using a new Common Core aligned  
          measure of English proficiency to replace the CELDT - the English  
          Language Proficiency Assessments for California (ELPAC).


          State still needs data for policy decisions around  
          reclassification.  There are important policy questions to be  
          answered by the analysis required by SB 1108, with implications  
          for the educational success of many students.  The assessments set  
          to be implemented this year and in 2017-18 will have a significant  
          impact on reclassification criteria, so it would appear that the  
          time is right to plan for a new analysis of the system.  Both the  
          author and the CDE agree that the PPIC report's findings are an  








                                                                       AB 491


                                                                      Page  7





          insufficient basis for recommendations to the SBE on changes to  
          the reclassification system, as proposed by this bill.  The author  
          intends that the CDE conduct the analysis required by SB 1108  
          before making such recommendations.  




          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
                          Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087  FN:  
          0000714