BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  1





          ASSEMBLY THIRD READING


          AB  
          740 (Weber)


          As Amended  April 20, 2015


          Majority vote


           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Committee       |Votes |Ayes                 |Noes                 |
          |                |      |                     |                     |
          |                |      |                     |                     |
          |----------------+------+---------------------+---------------------|
          |Education       |7-0   |O'Donnell, Chávez,   |                     |
          |                |      |Kim, McCarty,        |                     |
          |                |      |Santiago, Thurmond,  |                     |
          |                |      |Weber                |                     |
          |                |      |                     |                     |
          |----------------+------+---------------------+---------------------|
          |Appropriations  |13-4  |Gomez, Bonta,        |Bigelow, Gallagher,  |
          |                |      |Calderon, Chang,     |Jones, Wagner        |
          |                |      |Daly, Eggman,        |                     |
          |                |      |Eduardo Garcia,      |                     |
          |                |      |Gordon, Holden,      |                     |
          |                |      |Quirk, Rendon,       |                     |
          |                |      |Weber, Wood          |                     |
          |                |      |                     |                     |
          |                |      |                     |                     |
           ------------------------------------------------------------------- 


          SUMMARY:  Requires the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI),  
          by January 1, 2017, to recommend to the State Board of Education  
          (SBE) a schedule for the regular update of academic content  








                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  2





          standards.  This bill authorizes the SBE to convene academic  
          content standards advisory committees to update the standards, and  
          requires that the SBE adopt or reject the updated standards.   
          Specifically, this bill:  


          1)Requires that by January 1, 2017, the SPI recommend to the SBE a  
            schedule for the regular update of academic content standards in  
            all subjects for which standards have been adopted. States the  
            intent of the Legislature that content standards are updated  
            before the revising of curriculum frameworks, and that  
            curriculum framework revisions occur before the adoption of  
            instructional materials.


          2)Requires that the schedule be aligned to the current eight-year  
            cycle of curriculum framework updates and instructional  
            materials adoptions. 


          3)Requires that, when the academic content standards in a given  
            subject area come up for review according to this schedule, the  
            SBE make a determination as to whether those standards require  
            an update.  Requires that determination to be based upon:


             a)   The amount of time since the standards were adopted or  
               last updated


             b)   Whether additional research conducted since the standards  
               were adopted or last updated justifies updates to the  
               standards


             c)   The potential impact on existing curriculum, instructional  
               materials, and assessment systems based upon the standards










                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  3





          1)States that nothing in the section governing the determination  
            shall be construed to prohibit the consideration of national  
            standards adopted by other states in making this determination.


          2)Requires that if the SBE determines that an update to the  
            academic content standards in a given subject is warranted, it  
            convene an academic content standards advisory committee to  
            recommend updates to the content standards in that subject. 


          3)Requires such a  committee to consist of 21 members who serve at  
            the pleasure of the appointing authority, appointed as follows:


             a)   Ten members appointed by the Governor


             b)   Four members appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules


             c)   Four members appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly


             d)   Three members appointed by the SPI


          1)Requires that not less than one-half of the members appointed by  
            each of the appointing authorities be current public school  
            elementary or secondary classroom teachers who have a credential  
            under state law, and meet the definition of "highly qualified"  
            under federal law.


          2)States the intent of the Legislature that the advisory  
            committees include representation from teachers of different  
            grade level spans, that members possess a thorough knowledge of  
            the academic content standards in the content area and grade  
            level span in which they are appointed, and that the committee  








                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  4





            membership reflect the diversity of the various ethnic groups,  
            types of school districts, and regions in California.


          3)Requires each academic content standards advisory committee to  
            review the content standards in its subject matter and prepare  
            updates to the standards as the committee deems necessary.


          4)Requires that, when making its recommendation, an academic  
            content standards advisory committee consider the extent to  
            which its proposed updates reflect current and confirmed  
            research in the subject area under consideration, and the impact  
            that the proposed updates will have upon school districts and  
            existing curricula and assessments.


          5)Requires that an academic content standards advisory committee  
            conduct at least two, and no more than six, in-person meetings  
            that are open to the public and include opportunities for public  
            input. Requires that, upon completing this review, the terms of  
            the members cease.


          6)Requires that, upon updating the standards, an academic content  
            standards advisory committee forward them to the SBE, which must  
            do either of the following within 120 days of the receipt:


             a)   Adopt the proposed updates, or


             b)   Reject the proposed updates, in which case the SBE must  
               provide a specific written explanation to the SPI, the  
               Governor, and the Legislature of the reasons why the proposed  
               standards were rejected


          1)Requires that, prior to final action, the California Department  








                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  5





            of Education (CDE) post on its Web site the proposed updates for  
            a minimum of 60 days.  The CDE must include a link by which  
            members of the public may submit comments on the proposed  
            updates.


          2)Requires that members of an academic content standards advisory  
            committee serve without compensation, except for actual and  
            necessary travel expenses and substitute costs.


          3)Requires the SPI to develop, and the SBE to adopt, guidelines to  
            implement this section.


          4)States that the convening of an academic content standards  
            advisory committee is contingent upon the Legislature  
            appropriating funds for that purpose in the annual Budget Act.


          EXISTING LAW:  


          1)Requires the SBE to adopt or reject content standards in  
            language arts and mathematics and requires that at least 85% of  
            those standards to be those developed by the Common Core State  
            Standards Initiative consortium.


          2)Requires SPI to convene a group of science experts to recommend  
            science content standards for adoption to the state board,  
            utilizing the Next Generation Science Standards as the basis for  
            their deliberations and recommendations to the state board.   
            Requires the SBE to adopt, reject, or modify the standards.   
            This section is now repealed.


          3)Requires the SPI, in consultation with the SBE, to update,  
            revise, and align the English Language Development (ELD)  








                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  6





            standards to the Common Core State Standards, and requires the  
            SBE to adopt or reject those revised standards.


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee:


          1)Ongoing General Fund administrative costs of approximately  
            $800,000 to develop a new Content Standards Unit within the CDE.  
             This bill directs the standards to be tied to the eight-year  
            cycle for frameworks and adoptions.  It is likely staff would be  
            need to work on more than one project each year, on an ongoing  
            basis. 


          2)One-time costs of approximately $100,000 (General Fund  
            (GF)/non-98) to convene each Academic Content Standards Advisory  
            Committee. There are currently ten subjects that could be  
            updated. 


          3)The adoption of new content standards has a multiplier effect  
            that leads to additional costs.  Once new curriculum standards  
            are adopted, frameworks aligned to those standards must be  
            adopted (approximately $1.2 million GF/non-98 per framework).   
            An instructional materials adoption follows each framework  
            revision (approximately $1.3 million GF/non-98 per subject).   
            These estimates do not include additional Proposition 98 costs,  
            likely in the millions, for districts to purchase instructional  
            materials and provide professional development. 


          COMMENTS:  


          Need for this bill.  The author's office states, 










                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  7





            Though academic content standards are an essential part of the  
            California achievement and accountability systems, there is no  
            process currently in place for the regular review and update  
            of the standards. Some of California's current standards, such  
            as the history-social science standards, date back to 1998. As  
            a result, each time standards need to be updated, even if the  
            updates are only minor, new legislation must be enacted. 


            Except for legislation, there is currently no process in place  
            for the regular updating of academic content standards despite  
            the fact that it is often necessary to make modifications to  
            content standards given that there are regular changes in  
            disciplinary knowledge and academic research. The updating of  
            content standards does not constitute a complete revision, but  
            an update where necessary to reflect new knowledge. Creating a  
            rational and predictable process would help school districts  
            plan for changes in curriculum.


          Current schedule for framework adoption.  Curriculum frameworks  
          are revised and adopted on an eight-year cycle, and instructional  
          materials adoptions take place after new frameworks are adopted.   
          Standards adoptions generally precede the development of the  
          frameworks.  The next frameworks set for revision are as follows:


               2016:  History-Social Science (last revised 1998), Science  
               (last revised 2013)


               2018:  Health (last revised 2008)


               2019:  World Languages (last revised 2009)


               2020:  Math (last revised 2010), Visual and Performing Arts  
               (last revised 2001)








                                                                       AB 740


                                                                      Page  8







               2021:  Physical Education (last revised 2005)


               2022:  English Language Arts/English Language Development  
               (last revised 2010/2012)




          Analysis Prepared by:                                               
          Tanya Lieberman / ED. / (916) 319-2087  FN: 0000715