001Thank you. We're waiting for the screen to come up here. Uh, and so, [laughter] okay. Uh, I'm going to give it a minute because I need to acknowledge our remote member as soon as the screen is available. I can't see it. It's It's in a place that I can't. If I stand up, I can. Okay, there we go. [laughter] Um, I see that 10 of our 11 members are present in person here today and I understand Vice President Glover Woods is participating in the meeting from a remote location. Uh, consistent with recent changes in the laws governing our meetings. I must ask, Vice President Glover Woods, would you confirm that you are present? >> Yes, I am present. >> I see you. And can you confirm that there's no other adults in the room from
002where you are participating remotely? >> There is no one in the room, adult or otherwise. >> All right, great to see you. Uh, seeing that all of our board members are now present, I hereby call the November 2025 meeting of the state board of education to order uh at 8:36 a.m. Uh, and let me ask if uh we are going to uh have trouble with the big screen if somebody could move that smaller screen back a little bit so that it will be visible and I can be sure to call on the um members who need to be called on. Great. Thank you. Uh and I'd like to commence by saluting the flag. Member Rodriguez, will you please lead us in the pledge of allegiance? To the flag of the United States of America and
003to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all. >> Okay. Uh we are going to get rolling uh with our um prelude to the meeting. Uh on the consent calendar, the proposed waiver consent items are W1 through 14. The proposed regular consent items are items 7 through 14. There are two public hearings on the agenda. One uh item 17 is the 2025 mathematics adoption of K8 instructional materials and it will be the instructional quality commission recommendations. Item 20 is the proposed formation of a new Greenfield United School District from Greenfield Union Elementary School District and the corresponding portion of South Monterey County Joint Union High School District. We will uh reopen item one SBE priorities later in the morning to take up the SBE president's report and the superintendent's
004report. We will reopen item one twice tomorrow to take up the state board of education screening committee recommendations and again towards the end of the meeting tomorrow to take action on the preliminary report of actions, the draft September 2025 meeting minutes and to report on our liaison assignments. Item 15, guidance to support the 2026 English language arts English language development instructional materials follow-up adoption has been moved to Thursday, November 6th. It will be taken up after item 17, the 2025 mathematics adoption of K8 instructional materials and there will be no closed session today. With respect to public comment, public comment will be accepted either in person or by phone. Members of the public wishing to call in for public comment should view the live stream of the meeting to know at what time public comment
005will occur for each item. Public comment may be provided by dialing the phone number, entering a participant access code, and then following each of the operators prompts. Upon dialing in, callers will be added to a caller queue. The operator will notify callers when it is their turn to provide public comment. We will also ask callers to please turn down the speaker volume of their computers if they're following the live feed. To avoid an echoing effect, members of the public wishing to provide public comment in person should sign in using the binder at the table just outside the room. The binder uh on the has had separate pages for each item number and this ensures that the staff are able to track the in-person speakers for each particular item. Public comment will be limited to one
006minute for each speaker. Uh Spanish speakers will have two minutes to accommodate interpretation. Uh item 21 is the general public comment item during which members of the public may provide comment on matters that are not specifically listed on the board's agenda. We'll now take up item one and I'll turn it over to state superintendent uh for his report. Nice to see you. Thank you, Madam President, members of the board. Good morning. Good morning to everyone here and those following online. Uh we want to start with some good news and uh to acknowledge that we have announced several uh uh recipients of the 2026 teacher of the year program and we're excited to celebrate them. It was an honor uh to call them and tell them. They always thought that I was someone calling to sell
007them something. Um and they were very excited to share um their ideas. And I've asked each of the teachers of the year as they join the teacher of the of the year family to become adviserss to us in the work that we do and to help um share what they've uh done to have success with their students. Um how do we replicate that and find ways to help other students to have that same success? I'm pleased to share with you that in in each of these counties we have um selected teachers of the year. Um, in Kern County, April Runinen. Um, in Los Angeles County, Renee Romero. Uh, in Santa Clara County, uh, Christina Krisha. And also in Los Angeles County, Heather Panel. And in San Diego County, Karina Martinez. And so, congratulations to all
008of those teachers of the year. They will be welcomed into a family of teachers. I also want to acknowledge those who were the runner-ups um and thank them for their hard work. [snorts] Also in Los Angeles County, Monica Heidi Duket. Um we have in Imperial County, Diana Gomez. In San Diego County, we have Gregory Hinchiff and Maddie Hutchinson of Los Angeles County. Uh let's give those extraordinary educators a round of applause. And congratulations to uh our teachers of the year who you'll have a chance to meet soon. Uh as you know uh we also recently uh the state recently announced and released uh CAPS test scores. Um I'm pleased to tell you that in every category California students have shown some progress and are are moving forward. Uh in some places um the progress was
009modest. Um in other places um larger uh but the good news is is that in every category students are showing uh performance um in ELA an increase by 1.8 percentage points. um uh and uh also 1.8 percentage points in math, two percentage points in science. This year, as we released those uh results, we decided to also visit school districts that um in many ways um exceeded um even statewide averages. We wanted to have a chance to highlight the bright spots of many of the districts and it was an honor to visit with Los Angeles Unified School District and San Diego Unified School District and Pittsburgh Unified School District. In the case of Los Angeles Unified, um they have made uh gains in every single category and every grade uh two years running and um we
010were excited to spend time with them and to talk about what they felt made a difference for them. And they talked about um fully enrolled TK programs. They talked about the reading coaches and specialist grants that uh have been provided. They talked about community schools. And so we're grateful um to see uh the progress at at LA Unified School District. Uh San Diego Unified School District has made national uh gains and is recognized um nationally uh for uh the achievement of students in fourth grade and eighth grade. Um and uh similarly um the superintendent and her team talked about the importance of cultural competence of the stu of their educators. um having educators who reflect the diversity of their students, their heavy emphasis on dual language immersion programs and bilingual education. Um and it was
011exciting to spend time with them in Pittsburgh Unified. Um, Madame President, you'll be pleased to know that um, there are many teachers who have participated in the residency programs that we've helped to increase the stipen for. And they talked about how that has provided a direct benefit and they have said, "Thank you for the community schools program in particular um, that they believe has helped them to see the progress that they're seeing and they said, "Thank you for the community schools grants and please send more." Um so uh again, you know, we know that there's a lot of work that we need to do as we address issues like increasing our state's graduation rate and reducing chronic absenteeism. Um but we think it's very important to acknowledge the hard work of educators of every stripe
012all across the state um of families and of students to help our students to achieve um and California students will continue to thrive and grow. um in let's give them a big round of applause and all the educators, thank you for your work. Um this state has done more than any other state to help students bounce back from the pandemic. $6 billion to have broadband uh billions for the learning recovery block grant, expanded learning opportunities, coupling that with community schools. Uh this state has a blueprint for how to help our students uh achieve. And you will hear us in the in the weeks and months to come talking about the importance of reading by third grade and a plan that we intend to unveil to help California achieve reading competency and proficiency for our students
013by third grade. building off of TK, uh, building off of community schools, um, making sure building off of the assessment programs and the the reading coaches, all of the things that California has put in place in how we will strive to work together as a state, helping the state reach this important benchmark for students all across our state. Uh, so you'll hear more about that. I want to give you just an update on some legislation that we had shared with you some weeks ago um that was um designed to protect our immigrant students and families. We mentioned to you the bill AB49 that says ICE has no place in our school campuses and that data about students cannot be shared. The governor has signed uh AB49 into law. Uh we thank Assembly Members Mirsuchi um
014and uh for his authorship and Senator Lena Gonzalez uh for her authorship of that bill as well as SB98 uh a bill that focuses on uh education in both the prek through 12 space and higher education and uh calls for institutions to provide notice to families when ICE is in the vicinity so that families can be safe and can make uh arrangements. And so we're very pleased that both of these laws have been signed uh into law and [snorts] that we can provide additional uh benefits for uh California students. want to mention a little bit about the SNAP program, the supplemental meals program that has um been in question and until recently has been in question and the courts have ruled that the federal government must provide some um contingency funding um to help uh
015families who are supported u by SNAP. Um there are two there are 5.5 million Californians um who utilize SNAP benefits. Two million of them are children. And while the courts have ruled that uh SNAP benefits must be provided in [snorts] the month of November, those benefits will only be half of the amounts that families typically would receive. Our schools once again are continuing to help fill the gaps and to support uh many families. Many of our districts are having extra breakfast programs, providing graband-go meals. They're providing additional dinner uh time programs and snack programs. and the the districts that have um nonprofit partners like an ed fund are raising dollars to help families directly with additional uh donations and support. Um our office has put out some guidance to school districts to uh help them
016uh have examples of ways to blend programs to offset the impacts of the reduction in funding for SNAP um at the moment and uh we'll be putting out additional guidance uh as uh the situation uh continues to unfold. In the meantime, we encourage any family, any family to use 211 as a way of finding resources in your community uh where you might utilize uh resources from the food bank or from other programs in our state as this situation uh continues to take place. Finally, Madame President and board members, I wanted to acknowledge u that we have uh announced the uh California uh blue ribbon schools. Uh this is a program that was a national blue ribbon schools program that was cut by the federal administration. Uh we've made the decision that we're going to continue
017to honor and recognize uh those schools. Bless you. Um that reached the distinction of being a national blue ribbon school. These are schools that have uh both public and private that have demonstrated incredible work to close achievement and opportunity gaps and where students demonstrate especially high levels of academic success. We have put out a press release acknowledging the 31 schools in California and we will be forwarding the uh uh the uh uh blue ribbon schools program into our annual distinguished schools award celebration so that there will be a formal celebration for all of our awardees. And so that's it for my report, Madame President. Um I'm happy to submit to any questions from you or members of the board. >> Thank you so very much. We appreciate it. Um and uh we have a as
018you know a very full two-day meeting uh of the board. So we're going to uh try to be expeditious in our um next couple of days. I I want to join uh Superintendent Thurman in congratulating the 2026 California Teachers of the Year uh who represent the most important people in our state, the profession on which all other professions depend. uh and uh just to note that they represent a wide swath of uh grade levels and you know areas in the state. April Ragwendon who's a first grade teacher in Bakersfield City School District. Uh Renee Romero is an 11th and 12th grade international balorate language and literature teacher in Coina Valley Unified School District. Uh Chrisia Del Rosa is a ninth grade math teacher in the East Side Union High School District. Uh Heather Povvenelli, a
019second grade teacher in the Monrovia Unified School District. And then Karina Martinez, a kindergarten teacher uh in the Escandido Union School District. You know what they say, everything I ever needed to know I learned in kindergarten. Uh and that is often the case. So we appreciate and escape [laughter] all of these educators and we appreciate all of the educators whom they represent. uh and we're so grateful to them for their hard work and their dedication. Indeed, November is National Gratitude Month. Uh we have a lot to be grateful for uh even since yesterday uh in in terms of what's going on in our state and in our country. Um and it is a great opportunity to remember to take time to reflect on all we have to be grateful for. I'm grateful to be, you
020know, surrounded by so many wonderful state board members and determined educators and families and policy makers in the doing this important state in the great state of California. I know we've had many opportunities to be grateful for being Californians. Uh and we have more of those right now. Uh also grateful to see the results of some of our um collective efforts. Uh some of which have just been recently announced as Superintendent Thurman noted. We do have uh assessment results that were recently announced uh which do show real progress. Our our schools do appear to be turning the corner with the gains in English language arts, math and science for every grade level and for every major student group in the state. Uh and this has happened even as the proportion of students in California who
021are socioeconomically disadvantaged has been increasing from about 58% to about 65% just over the last few years. And um the number of students who are experiencing homelessness who are uh students with disabilities has been increasing and nonetheless we see uh strong progress. Um the percentage of students meeting or exceeding the proficiency standard which is the three on our fourpoint scale which represents a thorough or in the case of advanced a uh sophisticated level of mastery of the grade level standards increased by about two percentage points. Um the gains were about four times as large as last year's gains in ELA and science and about twice as large as last year's gains in mathematics. So it feels like there's a sense of momentum. We have a long way to go. There's much work to do, but
022uh we are experiencing I think some um momentum in in that in that process. And these results are even more promising when you realize that proficiency on California's Smarter Balanced Assessments is a high bar. Both because of where the standards are set at a high level, but because our tests are more rigorous than the tests in most other states. The Smarter Balance tests in ELA measure more higher order thinking and critical thinking skills. Most states just have a reading test, mostly multiple choice questions. We measure reading, writing, research, and listening. Even at third grade, our little students are doing research uh essays as part of their um assessment with open-ended essays and tasks. And similarly, in math, California assessments are more sophisticated than those in most other states. They measure math concepts and procedures plus
023data analysis, problem solving, how well students communicate their reasoning through additional performance tasks in which they have to solve a complex real world problem and communicate their reasoning directly. Um so uh the theory of action behind these assessments which uh 10 states participate in and in and several territories is that when you give that kind of rigorous work to students all along the way uh they will be gaining more skills uh and and uh demonstrating those you know being college and career ready and uh a recent study in Washington state uh really reaffirmed that that uh students at level three or four in high school 70 85% go on to college successfully even at a level two. Most students go to college without remediation successfully and graduate even at a level one. A third of
024students go to college without remediation and are able to be successful. So the skill set that students are acquiring in schools uh is a robust skill set. Um while our standards have not changed in any way uh for uh reporting or for accountability, we are now reporting more transparently the the proportion of students scoring at each level at the one, the two, the three, and the four. So that we're paying attention to all students, not just the bubble kids who are close to getting over the line for, you know, uh proficiency. uh and ensuring that we're focusing on all the students and on our progress in reducing the numbers of students scoring at level one who are not consistently meeting grade level standards as we did each uh in each subject area this year. So,
025we want to be paying attention to all of our students and then making progress across that entire continuum. Uh, as Superintendent Thurman said, we have gains in districts um which serve some of the state's most vulnerable students which were even larger than the statewide gains. Uh, and encouragingly across the state, some of the strongest improvements were seen for black students and Latinx students. Uh, so we are beginning to uh close achievement gaps, although there is still a very long way to go. Uh those gains are um due in part to the investments uh and efforts to target uh inequities in life circumstances and educational opportunities made by this administration. Of course, as you know, we've got now transitional kindergarten fully online this year, expanded learning programs, literacy coaches and reading specialists uh that work in
026the highest need schools, the equity multiplier, which is targeted to high poverty schools as well as community schools in more than 2500 schools or just about 2500 schools. And we'll hear more about that today. But with what is happening on the federal front and I appreciated um superintendent's uh recognition of the challenges with SNAP and all the other programs um with threatened withholding of nutrition supports and healthc care supports the work of community schools is becoming even more important uh because they are providing that safety net and we have evidence that it's paying off. We had a recent study that showed that our first cohort of community schools uh experienced significantly larger improvements in chronic absenteeism, suspension rates, math and English language arts achievement than comparable schools that had not yet received the community school
027funding. And on the very same day that the assessment data were released, the governor also signed AB1454, which is a very important uh literacy bill that will help ensure educators and um uh students have access to the tools and training and resources needed to help students become stronger readers. Uh we will be discussing the criteria for that set of professional development opportunities later today and the guidance for new materials adoptions tomorrow. building on the most current knowledge from the science of literacy. And to augment these data, next week the state will release data from the 2025 school dashboard, which includes the latest data on graduation rates, suspension rates, test scores, English learner progress, college and career indicator, chronic absenteeism, and local indicators. Uh we expect we'll have more good news to share. We'll also be
028looking carefully at the college and career indicator this year. uh there's been a lot of proposals for ways to make that indicator of whether kids are ready for their futures even more robust and well-rounded than it is now. So that's going to be an important area for us because at the end of the day that is the point of all of this. Um so before I close I want to also celebrate the fact that November is Native American his heritage month. uh and it is a time for us to celebrate the diverse and rich culture and history and traditions uh of the first Californians. And the observance is also of course a time to educate uh everyone to raise awareness about the struggles native people experienced in the past as well as in the present.
029Uh and I hope we can find a lot of meaningful activities this uh opportunities this month to engage and learn about the trailblazers in in our uh state across California. We have good news to share close to home with new members of the state board team. Uh Audrey Buchvever, um I don't know if she's here. There she is. She's waving to us, was recently appointed by Governor Nuomo to serve as a senior policy director. She will be filling Sarah Prosky's former position. She'll be working on accountability. She brings a wide range of experience and research expertise to the team. She's been a lead of workforce development and career pathways at first in family since 2023 and a researcher at the California Education Lab at the University of California Davis prior to that. So, welcome to
030Audrey. Uh, and Lindsay Valley, is she here? There we go. Uh, was recently hired to fill Rick Reyes former education administrator position. She's been a valued colleague in the school fiscal services division in CDE and a leader in launching and implementing new programs and providing policy and an analysis in areas such as charter schools and school district reorganizations. So, we're happy to welcome Audrey and Lindsay and uh to jump into our agenda as I know we're all looking forward to hearing reports from our student advisory board members. So with that we will transition to our first item. Item two. Item two is uh the recommendation of three finalists for submission to uh the governor for consideration and appointment. Uh and the state board of education screening committee recommends that we approve the three finalists for
031the position of 2026 27 SBE student member. uh and it will be presented by the screening committee chair, Vice President Glover Woods. Please begin. >> Thank you. Good morning, President Darlingham and good morning board members. So good to see all of you. I am excited to present this item to you. As you know, the selection of our student uh state board of education member is always a highlight of the work that we do and we had an amazing group of applicants this year. I have to tell you, we had a record number of applications that were submitted, 93 applications that represented um our students from all different backgrounds, areas of our state, and a truly representative group of applicants that represent uh all of the 6 million plus students we serve. Just a little bit
032of information about the process that we utilized. First and foremost, the applications were were paper screened by our screening committee and those 93 applicants were narrowed down to 12 semi- finalists and that was done on Thursday, October 9th. Those 12 semi-finalists attended the student advisory board on education conference and they made presentations to the student delegates at that conference. Those student delegates uh selected six from that group of 12 that would come forward for interview with the screening committee and those interviews took place yesterday evening. I was excited to participate in those interviews with members Escodo, Lewis, McQuillin, and Enikke. And I have to tell you, as I probably say every year, we were beyond impressed. And it was such a difficult task to narrow down those applicants to the three that we will be
033re recommending to you shortly. Do note that uh once if our recommendations are approved by you, the names of those three finalists will be submitted to the governor's office for consideration. And then the final selection of one student will be made at that level and that will be the student who serves the 2026 27 student member of the state board of education. So, I would like to acknowledge um the 12 that were brought forward from our group of applicants. And first, I'm going to acknowledge the six students who were selected by the screening committee as semi- finalists. Students, as your name is called, please come and receive your certificate at the podium from board member McQuillin. So these students are first I'd like to bring forward Diego Harris. Diego is from High-Tech High in Chula
034Vista in the San in the San Diego County Office of Education in San Diego County. Congratulations, Diego. Next, I'd like to bring forward Astress Ling. She comes from Carl Mont High School in the Sequoia Union High School District which is in San Mateo County. And I'm sorry, he comes forward. My apologies. Next, I'd like to bring forward Ryan Park. Ryan comes from the Science Academy STEM Magnet in Los Angeles Unified School District, which is located in Los Angeles County. Congratulations, Ryan. Now, we'd like to recognize Sophia Rodriguez. Sophia comes from San Marino High School in the San Marino Unified School District, which is in Los Angeles County. Our next semi-finalist that we'd like to recognize is Arandi Tessus from Piedmont High School in the Piedmont Unified School District in Alama County. And I do apologize
035if I mispronounced your name. And uh students, please accept my apology ahead of time if I did. And if I do mispronounce your name, I do give you my greatest apologies for that. Our last semi- finalist we will recognize is Avery Epdike. Avery comes from Cerritos High School in the ABC Unified School District which is located in Los Angeles County. So congratulations to those six semi- finalists. Outstanding job. Now I would like to acknowledge the uh three candidates who were um identified as candidates that we interviewed. So I would acknowledge Anali Bor Bhorquez my apologies apologies Anali Yuri Kim and Juliana Garcia. All three of them were identified as candidates for the 202627 student board member position. And um I'm going to ask them I think I saw one that already came up. Analy um
036if you would introduce yourself at the podium and tell us where you attended school and the name of your school district. So first we'll uh go forward with um Anali. Thank you. Yes, I'm from. >> Um, hello. I'm Analy Borquez. I'm from Long Beach Polytechnic High School in Long Beach, California. Congratulations to you. Now, I'd like to bring forward Yuri Kim. [applause] Yuri, would you please tell us where you attended school and the name of your school district? Of >> course. Good morning. My name is Yuri Kim and I attend Arnold Obeckman High School in Tustin Unified School District. >> Congratulations to you. And now I would like to bring forward Juliana Garcia. And Juliana, again, please tell your the name of your school and the name of your school district. >> Oh, is it
037this one? Good morning. My name is Juliana Garcia. I go to Grace M. Davis High School, which is in Modesto City Schools. Thank you. >> Thank you. Congratulations. Congratulations to the three of you. Again, outstanding job. Lastly, it is my pleasure to announce the three finalists. They are Elizabeth Flores, Aon Hanife, and Justin Petty. Again, these names, if they are approved by the state board of education, these three applicants will be recommended to the governor's office for consideration and the final selection of the one student who will serve as the 2026 student member of the SBE. So, at this time, I'd like to ask our three recommended finalists, Elizabeth, Aon, and Justin, to introduce themselves at the podium, tell us where they attended school, name of their school district, and uh any other brief remarks
038they would like to give. So, let's start first with Elizabeth. Elizabeth, would you please come forward? [applause] >> Hello everyone. Good morning. Uh, my name is Elizabeth Flores. I currently serve as the student board member for the Sweetwater Union High School District in San Diego County. Um, I am truly honored to be here today to be able to extend my passion for advocacy and I hope to continue to do so in the future. Thank you. >> Thank you, Elizabeth. Congratulations. Um, now I would like to bring forward AON. Aon, please come forward. [applause] Good morning everybody. My name is Aon Anife. I attend Monavista High School in the contra in the sorry in the Sermon Mode Valley Unified School District. I work very closely with my local government as well as with state legislators to
039represent students all over. I also just wanted to really quickly say thank you to the entirety of the state board as well as CAS for setting up this really great process. Thank you. >> Thank you. And our our final finalist that we would like to bring forward um for recommendation is Justin Penny. Justin, come forward, please. [applause] Uh good morning everybody. I feel so honored and grateful to be here. I go to Del Oro High School in the Plaster Union High School District. I'm currently serving as our student board member and I again want to thank you not only for this process but just for having this role. Um no matter who gets elected, I think it is so valuable for our state and education policies and I truly thank you all. Thank you for
040your consideration. [applause] >> Thank you. And thank you again to all of the applicants that um had an interest in this position. And President Darling Hammond, I will turn it back over to you. >> Thank you so much. It's just wonderful to meet all of these students from across the state. I know you guys have had a very difficult job trying to sort out a uh a way to uh move us forward on our student board member uh given all the talent that we have. Uh we're going to open the phone line for public comment. Uh those who want to provide comment on this item can do so by calling the telephone number and using the participant access code shown on this slide. Uh while we're waiting for members of the public to call in,
041I want to ask other screening committee members, members Lewis and Escobedo and McQuillin as well as student member Aj if they have any initial comments. >> Thank you. Uh, I would just like to add to comments that have already been made about how wonderful this process is and how exciting it was to read through all of the 93 applications that were submitted by the students. And thank you to all of you for doing that. And as already been stated, it's a very difficult process because we have some outstanding young people in our schools. And it is so gratifying and uh pleasing to know that one day they are going to be the future leaders in education and in other occupations that are going to take care of us and take care of this country. So
042thank you to all of you and good luck to the three finalists. [laughter] >> It it truly is um heartwarming to know the civic engagement 93 applications. I think it's a record number of students throughout California willing to serve in this position. And for me, reading through the applications, hearing their thoughts and the accomplishments, you know, the those GPA, wow. And and and and just what they've done already in their local communities is is transformational. And it it's this year has been amazing. uh and uh it just continues to get better and thank you um my colleagues for making this an amazing experience. What definitely one of my highlights as a as a board member. >> Yes, I would like to agree with the the board members here. It was a fantastic process. I think
043all of the students should be very proud of themselves and their preparation, hard work, and representing representing us here in California so well and and your fellow students. Uh it's been an honor to read your applications and be a part of the screening. One of the highlights of being on the board is to interact with the students here. So, thank you very much. Yes, it was such an honor to observe all the SPM candidates and learn more about them throughout the conference every day, whether it was through their speeches or when they were answering questions from the delegates. I was just so astounded at the work that they were doing to better the lives of others in their communities. And it really made me reflect on the work that I'm currently doing as the board
044member. Um, how I want to serve my community and how I want to serve the constituents, which are the students. And so I just wanted to really thank all the SPM candidates for inspiring me and re-energizing me. And I know that they're going to continue to do amazing things in the future and I can't wait to support them throughout their journey. So thank you for the opportunity. >> Terrific. Uh do we have any uh comments either in the room or on the phone? >> We do not have any comment in the room. >> There is one caller in the queue. Um, caller with the phone number ending in 1014, please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. >> I'm I'm sorry. I'm not I'm I'm not
045There's no comment for this this uh tab. >> Okay. Thank you. That concludes public comment. >> All right. So, we have an opportunity for board discussion and member Rosco Gonzalez, you want to kick us off? Good morning. Just I'm so excited about just the pool of applicants that we had. As a classroom teacher and former ASB advisor, I've seen how important it is to keep students engaged after they take this first step. So, when my students ran for office, we always looked for ways to keep them to keep their leader uh leadership energy going. So, I'd love to see something similar here, maybe going through um student advisory networks connected to LEA boards and county offices of education. Um I would like to see their leadership invested and harnessed. >> Any other comments or a
046motion? Yeah, member Rodriguez, >> I just want to tell all of the students how proud I am of you and just how much I loved walking into the building this morning because I miss the energy of my high school students and you recharged me and I'm very proud of all of the work that you're doing and all of the example that you're setting for other students to get involved. Thank you. >> Do we have a motion? >> Okay. love to motion to approve the finalist that will be forwarded to the governor for his consideration and appointment as the 26 27 um state board student member. >> Great. Second from member Rodriguez. Okay. Um Brooks, can you please call the role? >> Member Yoshari. >> Absolutely. Yes. >> Member Rodriguez. >> Yes. >> Member Patillo Brownson.
047>> Yes. Member Rosco Gonzalez. >> Yes. >> Member Olen. >> Yes. >> Member McQuillin. >> Hi. >> Member Lewis. >> Yes. >> Vice President Glover Woods. >> Yes. >> Member Escoto. >> Yes. >> President Darlingham. >> Yes. >> Member GK. >> Yes. >> Motion carries unanimously. >> All right. [applause] I want to thank uh Vice President Glover Woods and the screening committee members, all of you uh to and to all the students who took time to apply and participate in this process. Uh and we're going to take up item three, the 2025 student advisory board on education conference. So we are blessed with lots of opportunities to see our students from across the state. Uh today this item will be presented by the student representatives who participated in the 2025 student advisory board on education.
048Uh and uh then in their annual conference the item has an addendum which is the 2025 SABE conference report. Uh first I'd like to ask board member McQuillin and then student board member Ajik as this year's liaison if they have any comments to share. >> Yes. Um I I had the pleasure of giving feedback to some of the delegates regarding the proposals and so I'm super excited and enthralled to see them in their final form and that concludes my report. >> Yes, I think we're in for a real treat hearing the presentations from the students. I agree with what was shared earlier uh by member Gonzalez that we we really should harness that energy and the input of the students more. The student uh reading through the applications, the students have fantastic input on all
049of the current issues from cell phones to the achievement gap to all of the issues are students are facing in California. So I I appreciate that and um and finding ways to harness that input is important. So thank you. >> Terrific. Uh we do have various presenters for this item who will introduce themselves. We will have a brief introduction by Thea Nicoles who is the education policy director of the California Association of Student Councils. Fia, do you want to join us at the podium? Here we go. Please begin. >> My name is Fia Nicolasu and I'm currently a senior at Bella Vista High School in the San Juan Unified School District here in Sacramento. I'm also serving as your 2025 Student Advisory Board on Education Conference Director. On behalf of our delegation, we'd like to
050really thank you for taking the time to not just listen to, but really consider student voices when it comes to the issues that really shape the education system we live and grow in every day. For more than 70 years, our organization, the California Association of Student Councils, has been a nonprofit dedicated to uplifting student voices and empowering the next generation of ethical leaders. Now, 75 members of the delegation have spent the last three days coming up with solutions and speeches on the seven issues they've deemed to be most prevalent in the education system. And they'd like to present them to you today. Without further ado, I'd like to present our first speaker, Eva Messerve Stone, delivering a proposal on budget transparency. The District of Santa Rosa City Schools is currently in a $20 million deficit.
051By April, their district is in danger of a state takeover, meaning schools within their district could be consolidated or completely shut down altogether to save the money, which is already happening with the recent merges of the middle school and high school campuses in the Santa Rosie City Schools. This shows the impact of lack of transparency of the LCAPS because they are undigestible for students and parents due their due to their complex structure. Emphasizing on the fact that the knowledge gap is far too wide between the district and its people. The lack of knowledge in our community reflects how students and families are unable to advocate for funding changes and have a say in the issues as they do not have the proper resources to understand these documents which contributes to the continuation of financial issues
052as the general public cannot step in. Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. My name is Ava Meruri Stone. I'm from Tory Pines High School in San Diego and I'm here to represent our solution on behalf of the transparency and budgeting delegation. It is an honor to be standing here before you today. The root problem surrounding California's budget transparency is the density and information and its complex format in the LCAP which makes comprehending these documents difficult. Because of this, there is a lack of coherent awareness about the money distribution among the community. The public has the right to easily understand where their money is going and how their students are affected by this education. LCAP reports are often hundred of pages long filled with jargon and detailed
053data tables that are difficult for most people to comprehend, including myself. Furthermore, the length and unclear format of documents lack consistency across districts, placing a huge administration burden on the school districts. Students and parents remain in the dark on how their money from the LCFF is allocated and utilized in the LCAP. They are unaware of how their money is actually being spent towards a student's education and whether it's being responsibly distributed. As students, we see that understanding what areas of school are financially struggling can help us and the community advocate for changes. To address this issue, we need to look at the eight pre-existing state priorities of the LCFF as those priority standards set the standard for the LCAP and other plans to follow. We propose to add a sub point to the third priority
054which is parental involvement because it's relevant to bridging the community gap between communities and the district thus granting the general public to understand the LCAPS and giving them the resources they need to engage. The subpoint will be called comprehensible fiscal information and awareness that will aim to ensure that LCAP documents can be understood by all parents and students. the ability to adjust as priority gives gives a unique accommodation towards the district's specific community guidelines and capabilities. Furthermore, adjusting within the pre-existing LCFF principles allows the effects of the new standard transparency to trickle down to the schools and the districts through the compliance under these rules. It is ensured that all transparency will be reflected in all districts because the LCAPS must reflect all eight LCFF priorities. The adjusted priority is flexible so schools can adapt
055and respond to the priority to the capac to the capacity each indivividual schools can achieve. Two successful examples of districts which have worked to increase transparency funding is the Placer Union High School District which has its board of trustees to recently approve an exemplmentary in initiative to help their community understand the salaries made by employees, teachers and administrators through the district. And the Los Angeles Unified School District, the biggest district in our state, is another example of the California district that has noticed of the importance of transparency in the LCAP funds, managing $18.8 billion in the 2025 to 2026 school year. They implemented an executive summary with big charts and graphics to make it easier for students and parents to understand. Due to the transparency that the executive summary has provided, the district was able
056to receive 18,000 comments of feedback by students, parents, and the community partners. This feedback has made the district accountable, making provisions the better match for the schools and making cuts where necessary based on the circumstances of their school, showing how it can be addressed through transparency to meet the third priority. President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board, we urge you to educate the to edit the LCFF priority 3 to add the subpoint comprehensible fiscal information awareness to promote transparency on understanding the documentation of the LCAP. This proposal aligns exactly with the intent of the LCFF to foster equity and community engagement, flexibility, and promote stable funding. Thank you. [applause] >> Right. Um we uh really appreciate that. We're always looking for ways to get good advice about the LCAP
057[laughter] and uh we we appreciate this. Um Vice President Glover Woods, did you want to uh uh lead off with questions? >> I sure can. President Darlingham and thank you very much and thank you uh for that very um well thoughtout proposal to increase transparency. Um my question is in relation to the student engagement. How could you see this additional transparency aspect increasing the student engagement in the LCAP development process? What might that look like? >> Thank you for your comment. So we addressed that as students we feel like we have a lack of understanding of how our money is being spent. So we can't actually create effective change because we we lack the understanding to do any change that we see fit. Therefore, we think that adding transparency, which everyone can understand, will motivate
058students to promote their voices because I know especially at my school, a lot of um money is being spent in different areas, but that can leave for a lot of imbalances. And as a student who wants to get the most out of our education, we hope to create change as we see fit to benefit our education and hope that engagement will go up as students are more aware of how their voice matters and how they can create action. Thanks so much. >> So I'll I'll ask another question. It's it's ironic the LCAP um has become longer and longer as people have sought more and more transparency about more and more details in the ways in which districts operate. Uh, and so, uh, I'm curious about how you might think about balancing the the desire for
059detail with the simplicity that makes something understandable um, that is likely to accompany uh, any recommendation, you know, that we make for greater transparency. We did acknowledge this and we did find that it would have to be depending on the school because obviously we acknowledge that all school districts are different and so in making it more comprehensible for everyone there are different ways that we recommend to meet these priorities. However, it's up to the schools to implement in their own because we do acknowledge every school district is different. So, we would recommend that as seen through the Placa Union High School District, they implemented theirs to have two pages, which is pretty sufficient in the fact that I can read that, but I'm not going to read 70 pages of an LCAP. So, we seen
060through there that was efficient, but we acknowledged that not all schools have the same resources. So, therefore, it have to be specifically on like some different recommendations or how other schools wish to address this. >> All right. Well, thank you so much. We really appreciate it. As I say, this is a popular topic and we appreciate recommendations on this uh important issue that we uh struggle with every year. Thank you. >> Thank you so much everyone. >> Next up we have opportunities and awareness in special education presented by Gianna Kim. [applause] Hi. So, so Hi, my name is Brooke Miles and I attend Vista High School in Richmond, California, an alternative education school which is categorized under the special education department. I've had an IEP 504 plan for dyslexia, discoia, ADHD, and OCD since I
061was 9 years old. I've dealt with the firsthand experience of being underserved in the special education community. During this time, I have seen I have personally seen and felt what it's like to be treated negatively in comparison to my peers. This initiative is important to me because I have seen the change from going to a public school system that hasn't fulfilled the needs of special education students to now a school that fulfills the needs of special education students involved. I truly feel that this initiative from this proposal will serve my community in ways that the system has failed to do in the past. But I often struggle with public speaking. For this reason, I'll now hand over the floor to my co-speaker, Giana Kim. >> Thank you, Brooke. Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President
062Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. My name is Giana Kim, and I'm a junior at University High School in Irvine, California. For the purpose of the speech, the term neurode divergent is used to include students who have 504s, IEPs, and are part of the special education program. Approximately 13% of California's public schools students have disabilities. While the individuals with disabilities education act states that students with disabilities should be educated with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate, many districts still struggle to provide fully inclusive classrooms, often placing neurode divergent students in separate settings instead. Students educated in inclusive settings show better academic outcomes, higher graduation rates, and stronger social development. Furthermore, they foster empathy and collaboration among all students which are critical to healthy school culture. Our proposal provides guidelines for the
063following five topics: arts and humanities, science and mathematics, athletics, world cultures, and school spirit. We suggest that the California SBE create a comprehensive guide book for student leadership to follow with the help of adult adult adviserss. Our main goal with these guidelines is to establish programs at school that help integrate and foster bonds between neurode divergent and neurotypical students. These initiatives will help break stigma and the decrease bullying and harassment of special education students. These guidelines are not mandatory, but rather a list of best practices for schools to follow. It'll provide each California school district with a set framework to use as a strong foundation to better serve the neurode divergent students attending schools in the state. We highly encourage and expect schools to adapt activities, rules, and expectations to best fit the needs of
064all participants. We urge these initiatives to be studentled to foster a deeper connection and incentive for student leadership and by proxy the general student population to participate in said initiatives to stop reinforcing barriers. In Kaho Valley Unified School District, similar initiatives have proven to show results in improved attendance, test scores, and participation in campus life and surrounding community. Additionally, the implementation of these initiatives should be relatively cost-f free as the materials required are already available in most schools for the general student population. While we're not requesting to pass this proposal as a as a legislation, nor are we mandating for anything to be implemented, it's imperative that this proposal is considered to better the educational experience for all neurode divergent students in the public education system. Our vision is to create a school environment where
065students truly understand and value inclusivity for peers in special education. By teaching the student body neurodeiversity and fostering genuine awareness, we can build a culture of empathy and acceptance that extends beyond the classroom. Special education students should have the same opportunities to learn, participate, and connect. Whether through integrated classes, adaptive sports, or extracurricular programs that strengthen social and life skills, we aim for every Californian student to leave school not only academically prepared, but also compassionate and ready to support an inclusive community. We implore that the California SBE endorses integrative initiatives for neurode divergent students following the provided structures as best practice recommendations for California schools and readily provides access to the framework to California school through the California SBA website. Thank you. [applause] Have comments? Yes. member to Yoshimoto Tari. >> Thank you. Good morning,
066Brooke and Gianna. Thank you for your presentation today. And uh Brooke, I just wanted to share the first time I had to speak publicly when I was a teacher. I cried the night before. It was very scary for me. So uh opportunities for public speaking are just great opportunities to develop courage and to to uh practice and it goes on for a lifetime. So congratulations to you both. Um I did want to say for um ask a question about the guidebook a little if you could elaborate a little bit more on the guide book and how if it were to be created uh how you would see that being implemented uh in with school sites and districts. >> Yes. So our proposal um proposes that we provide guidelines for five topics mentioned in the speech
067which are arts and humanities uh science and mathematics, athletics, world cultures and school spirit. And what we would do is we would set guidelines for student bodies and student leadership to follow in order to implement these and adapt certain activities to best fit their student population in their given school because student bodies are generally the people who know their school and community the best. >> Thank you >> others. Yes, member Lewis. >> First of all, thank you Brooke for sharing your personal story. Thank you so much for that and you did a great job by the way and thank you Gianna for your presentation as well. So with regards to um the inclusive inclusive opportunities that will be available for the students, how would you how would you recommend that a district or a school
068measure the effectiveness that these initiatives are implemented? How would you suggest they measure whether or not they're doing what they're supposed to do? So studies have shown that integrative measures have uh better academic outcomes and uh higher attendance rates. So measuring those can definitely see the effectiveness of this proposal as well as this is essentially what our proposal is asking for schools to implement for integrative measures for special education students to uh regularly interact with general student populations as well. So we can measure the academic outcomes and the um attendance rates as well. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. Really a very important topic. We appreciate it. >> Thank you so much. >> We're going to uh Great to see you. We're going to take a small break so that students
069who need to come in for the next batch can come in and those who have been here in the first part of the meeting can exit. >> No break. >> Yes. All right. So, we're going to continue with our student presentations. Uh, and via Theo, would you like to introduce the next one? >> Yes. Next up, we have AI in Education presented by Serena Kangura. [applause] Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. We are living in the future. In the blink of an eye, we can get answers to anything that we desire due to tools like Chat GBT, Claude, Gemini, and more. This tool offers immense possibilities whether it is used for studying or as the key to a breakthrough in medicine. Yet with the uneducated use
070of it, we are damaging the effectiveness of our education system. Honestly, it's scary how fast AI has integrated into our lives. But rest assured, this speech is 100% humanmade. Hi, my name is Serena Kangura. I'm a freshman attending Royal High School in Semi Valley, California. And I am the speaker representing AI artificial intelligence education group from the student advisory board on education. Work that once took hours can now be produced with a single click. Because of this overwhelming convenience without proper regulations, many students fall into a consistent habit of academic dishonesty and a misunderstanding of how these tools actually work. Without proper guidance, AI creates entire generations of future leaders who can take the technology but cannot retain the intended subject. On behalf of the AI literacy group, we recommend that the state board on
071education incorporate artificial intelligence literacy content into the ELA and EL curriculum from grades four to eight when the framework is next revised. We would do so by building on top of the existing AI literacy content introduced in California Assembly Bill 2876. The bill which was passed in September 2024 incorporates AI literacy content into mathematics, science, and history social science curriculum frameworks but not ELA and EL curriculum. To students like us, this seems surprising as some of the most prevalent misuse of AI occurs in English classes where the most creative and original thinking is required. This misuse makes it clear that AI literacy should be included in the curriculum within ELA and EL classes. Our approach follows the same structure used in Assembly Bill 2876 for incorporating AI literacy content into the framework upon its next
072revision. We are not creating a new system from scratch. Instead, we suggest applying the same treatment to ELA and EL that mathematics, science, and history are already receiving, adding AI literacy content generated by the IQC to each framework during its next scheduled revision. Since this model has already been legislative legislatively reviewed and approved across multiple subjects, adapting it for ELA and EL ensures that the expansion is realistic, consistent, and feasible. As time goes on, AI grows increasingly prevalent. It is essential that as students learn how to use it to our advantage, but to establish a fine line so that it's not something to depend on. The introduction of AI literacy content into grades four to eight ELA and EL curriculum can significantly increase students academic performance. Fourth to 8th grade is a valuable time to
073start as these are the most crucial years for cognitive development and knowledge retention. Establishing a foundation of how to navigate the usage of AI in formative years creating a skill students can retain for the rapidly growing technology. Our proposal requires minimal fiscal cost due to the fact that our only true expense will be on the development of the AI literacy curriculum within ELA and EL into the existing framework. But the impact that this small amount of funding will bring is tremendous. This solution addresses the root cause of misuse before it becomes a larger issue by teaching students how to use AI responsibly rather than restricting or banning it. AI is now an integral part of our society. Rather than pushing it aside, we must adapt to it and use it to maximize our capabilities of
074learning within the education system, just as we have with all the other innovative technologies that have enhanced our classrooms. Most importantly, integrating AI helps reshape the narrative around this technology, transforming it from something feared and misunderstood into a tool that students can use responsibly by educating rather than eliminating. This proposal ensures that California students are prepared not only to live in a world shaped by AI, but to lead it with knowledge, creativity, and integrity. Thank you. [applause] >> Thank you. Uh what a timely and important topic. Um who would like to ask questions? Member Ola. >> Thank you. Thank you, Serena. That was incredible. Um and you said you're in ninth grade. >> Yes, I am. Wow. Um, so I really appreciate your um your group's approach to um thinking about a AI literacy and
075incorporating it into existing areas. Um, and I wrote down a few key phrases, educating rather than eliminating um, and knowledge, creativity, and integrity. Those are really, I think, hitting at the heart of um, where the opportunity is. Um, so I just want to thank you for that. >> Yeah. >> And my my question is about um I really appreciate the idea of focusing on AI literacy. Um, and based on what you've already shared. Um, my sense is that students perhaps are ma more AR AI literate than their teachers are. Um, and so I'm wondering um if how you what how you think you might we might address the AI literacy gap between students and um instructors. >> Yes, we definitely acknowledge this within our brainstorming topic. Um as we saw we've seen that teachers have
076had um staff development days where they have learned how to integrate AI into their classrooms. So um within these uh presentations and the literacy content that their students will learn, it will also help teach these students how to navigate through this as some teachers have different types of curriculum that they would agree with with AI. Um some of them approve of it, some of them would not like to use it whatsoever. So by integrating this into um the AI literacy content within ELA, we can teach students more about how to use it properly. >> Thanks. That makes a lot of sense. Thank you. >> And member Orosco Gonzalez, >> Serena and member Oakland, you asked pretty much my question. And when I was listening to you, Serena, I had written down ideas about your perspective
077of how schools help teachers and students learn to use AI as an advantage, but of course responsibly and while encouraging still that creativity. But then you said something interesting right now that kind of shifted my question around PD. I wonder as I'm always um a champion for teacherled uh professional learning and I'm thinking of AI. I wonder how we can incorporate students in that professional learning. um maybe students giving helping teachers learn as I think when I was first entering college um the internet was new and I've always felt the students who are in my classroom are native to technology as I am native to a second language and now this is I feel even an additional language for students that you are so proficient in this topic more so than any teacher or outside
078consultant And I would wonder how you can partner with schools um eleas and or to encourage students to become part of that model of part part of teachers and students leading professional development. What do you think about that? >> Yes, I definitely agree with that. I think that as students become more literate with AI um it's similar to similar to other technology that we have um experienced. I know that I have definitely helped like some teachers with um technology within classrooms. So I definitely think that that could be something considered within this. Um as students like learn this through their classrooms, I believe that they will become more literate with AI and that will allow them to teach more with students and so that or with teachers as well. So we could kind of go
079hand inand with that. But thank you for sharing. [laughter] >> Very good. Yeah, we look forward to uh this actually happening in real life. [laughter] Thank you. [applause] >> Next up, we have Civic Education and Engagement presented by Arlene Ramos. [applause] Good morning. My name is Arlene Ramos, a senior from Golden Valley High School in Bakersfield, California. The push to incorporate civic engagement through student advocacy in California schools has been existent for many decades. And luckily, our state is consistently working on mechanisms to integrate student voice into our educational system. For example, the CDE task force on K12 civic learning establishes the standard for civic education curriculum in K12 public schools. However, despite the remarkable success that California has made, there is still no student representation in the K12 civic learning task force. and therefore
080there is little to no input from student voices to influence decisions that affect their daily lives. To combat this, the SBE would provide a recommendation to the CDE to include representative students to the task force by adding three students on the civic engagement task force. one student from rural, urban, and suburban areas to maximize diversity and fulfill all student needs in the state. The group would gain a firsthand experience on from youth. As for the election process, students would fill out an application that includes written responses and there will be a space to describe their qualifications and motivations. Further finalists will go through an interview to ensure authenticity. Because we want to make the student leader positions inclusive to students, the criteria for this position consists of these points. The student must be a high
081schooler, grades 9 through 12 with a minimum 2.0 GPA. Information regarding the position would be distributed through the CDE website with resources provided to eleas via email counselors and teachers. These voices speak for all students in California and will serve a one-year term. It is a great advantage that this position requires little funding and can be directly implemented on a panel that already exists without the need for excess change to the ways of the task force. Therefore, the student advisory board on education delegation has identified that while there are many civic education and advocacy opportunities available to students across California, there is a significant lack of awareness and promotion of these programs in schools. This disconnect prevents students from engaging with valuable resources that will strengthen their understanding of government, law, and civic responsibility. As
082a result, many students remain unaware of how to participate in advocacy with local and state initiatives, leading to an underrepresentation of youth voices in civic spaces and missed opportunities when resources were provided. To ta to challenge this, the three student positions on the CDE task force would bring new perspectives, issues, ideas, and energy to make real student experiences become voices of action. Thank you. >> Terrific. Thank you very much board members. >> McQuillin, >> thank you for your presentation. Very important topic. [clears throat] Do you have any other recommendations on the selection process for uh the three students or maybe if the students would be staggered in any way for their terms that kind of >> Yeah. And so what my group was discussing was that so we would have um possibly like one student
083from north, one from southern California, central California where um all these areas have different um subgroups like urban, suburban and rural to get like a different perspective on how civic education curriculum is actually being implemented in their schools. >> Thank you. >> Member GK. >> Hi Arlene. First of all, I just wanted to say phenomenal presentation. You have a very powerful voice. I really felt the energy. >> I was my question was pretty similar to board member McQuillin, but I was wondering just out of curiosity just in your opinion like what qualitative responsibilities or pre-existing qualifications you think the representatives on the task force should have um outside of the like the GPA and stuff. >> Yeah. Um, we want a student who's very outspoken. And, um, the reason why we did have the GPA
084set low was so that the different students from not just the same students with this perfect 4.0 GPA, like the same type of student is getting involved consistently, but we want to hear more voices. Maybe that 2.0 GPA isn't receiving enough um, support at home, and we want to hear how we can support them through civic education in the schools. >> Terrific. Thank you so very much. We really appreciate it. >> Thank you. Have a great one. >> And at this point, I think we're going to take another small break so that the uh folks who are here can go out and the folks who are going to present next can come in. All right, I think we are reassembled and we're ready to continue with the next student presentation. Next up, we have closing
085the opportunity and achievement gap presented by Keegan Beecher. [applause] Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Clover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. My name is Keegan Beecher. I'm from Walnut High School in the Walnut Unified Valley School District. Samarine Sandeu, a fellow delegate of mine in my small group, was sorted into classes with native English speakers when she first entered the California school system. Only she could not speak English. Her mother, not understanding the gravity of a simple form sent home in the homes language survey, checked a box saying that Samarine spoke English. A checked box turned into three years of misplacement and public school systems. English learners make up one of our public school population. The achievement gap between English learners and native speakers is an issue that the state has invested
086significant resources in addressing. In fact, the ELPAC is a standardized screening that assesses student progress in English language development with the end goal of moving students into regular classes. Ultimately, however, the classification of English learners is first decided by the home language survey. The root of the disparity lies in our mclassification of English learners through said survey. My save group focused on making a targeted change to the way English learners enter our schools. For more than 60 years, title six of the 1964 Civil Rights Act has dictated the way that children are sorted into EL programs. The Home Language Survey has parents self-report their child's proficiency in English. A single checked box is a differencemaker in a child's academic future. A single check checked box cannot measure fluency. It cannot measure understanding. A single checked
087box is what sorted Samine into the wrong class, leading to years of inefficient learning. It is easy to imagine a newly immigrated parent from abroad misreporting their child's English proficiency on the home language survey. A study conducted on all 50 states by the University of Virginia on the validity of the home language survey determined that the survey consistently misreports the accuracy of children's learning ability. The inclusion of of a of an objective screening would reduce the margin of error present in an ultimately subjective survey. SAB proposes a fairway, a comprehensive, developmentally appropriate proficiency assessment diagnostic taken in kindergarten so that placement reflects ability. We believed in a diagnostic assessment designed to identify children who require participation in EL programs in conjunction of course with the home language survey. Every child deserves placement into programs that
088determine their education based on a clearly defined set of rules. Including an unbiased diagnostic and parentled conversations through the home language survey provides a factual basis of the sorting of young learners. It is imperative for the SBE to ensure the proper placement of children in classes to close the gap for young Americans who need ELD help. If a fifth of our students are English learners, a fifth of our students depend on getting this issue right. Making sure that EL programs are sorted correctly at the onset of students education allows for students to find themselves in classrooms that genuinely cater to the needs of the student. We want to build off of the existing tools through the present present in the screening for risk of reading to provide screening assessments as a additional safety net for
089English learners. We seek to support the platform provided in the 2017 English learner roadmap to more accurately utilize the resources rolled out by the program for the children it's designed to serve. Further, our proposal differentiates itself from the ELPAC by creating assessment which regardless of the home language survey commits to an earnest reporting on English language capabilities. I can no more call myself an American or a Californian for the fact that I speak English and that young Chinese boy in my third grade class did not. The same is true for that young Mexican girl in my kindergarten class on the brink of finding her words. The group that encapsulates any society, the spirit of any society is its children. And the child that encapsulates the spirit of our society is that young girl learning what
090it means to be a human while learning the language written on the document which guarantees her freedom. Thank you. >> Thank you uh board members. >> Yes, member Escobedo. Thank you for the presentation and and really appreciate the amount of research you've conducted and the validity of of home language survey. So I'm I'm curious to understand further. So you're you're articulating that we should combine an assessment similar to the L E L E L E L E L E L E L E L E L E L E Lac or revising the ELPAC along with the home language survey. >> Uh correct. Yeah, thank you for your question. Um, currently the ELPAC serves students who are already identified as English learners. Um, so we want to work in conjunction with the home language survey to
091include parents in those conversations of course when we have them fill out that survey, but also give them a fair and a factsbased assessment diagnostic taken uh when they enter school system. So the ELPAC currently has an initial uh English proficiency test which is only administered to uh kids who have been already identified as English learners. So if we could use that uh platform already rolled out by that program and and kind of expand it to all students um I think that is what we're looking for. >> I see. So you're looking at at combining these two instruments to really have a clearer picture of the ability and the assets that the student already has. >> Yeah. Because of course we don't want to take the parents out of the conversation when it comes to
092you know how they feel about their child's proficiency. >> Thank you. Thank you. others. Member Yoshimoto Tari, >> thank you very much for your presentation. Um, you mentioned uh the home language survey and the ELPAC results. Um, in my experience, the the the family and the parent voice is very important in that. And so I wondered if you could elaborate a little bit more on how you how we should you or school site leaders should support um parents and families of being informed of the the process and also the results. >> Um, yeah. So, thank you for your question. Um, really the end goal is to kind of alleviate maybe the pressure that's put on parents to um and and provide a safety net, right, for kids that, you know, um might might be misidentified
093as English learners or might fall through the cracks of the system, right, and are uh spend years in the system without being in the classes they need to be. Um, and we of course we don't want to remove the parents voice from the uh that conversation, but uh we want to include a more objective facts-based approach to how we identify English learners in the first place. So like to work in conjunction uh with the systems already in place. >> Thank you. >> Great. Thank you so very much. We really appreciate it. >> Thank you. Next up, we have Mental Health Awareness presented by Addison Luon. Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. I wish my parents knew that I had no one to talk to. I wish
094my teachers knew that how much I was juggling outside of school work. And I wish my family knew that their mental health experiences don't reflect mine. These are just a few of the heartbreaking truths we hear resonating with students throughout our communities. I've seen everything ranging from lack of understanding of their everyday stresses to even suicidal ideiation expressed. As a whole, students wishes reveal the great opportunity that California has to prevent student voices from slipping into mental health policies they can't identify with. My name is Addy Lu Wong. I'm a senior at Vista Deago High School and a student board member for the Fulsome Cordova Unified School District. Today, my mental health council group and I bring before bring before you a call for progress, a step toward a future of student representation and mental
095health policy. According to the CDE, nearly one in five you youth experiences a diagnosible mental health disorder. Additionally, a recent study conducted by UCLA found that 45% of Californian adolesccents between the ages 12 and 17 struggled with mental health issues. Increased behavioral incidents, absenteeism, and academic decline can all be attributed to the silent struggle of unadressed mental health issues. Despite this data illustrating the detriment of students lived experiences, mental health policies are created, approved, and adopted by adults merely attempting to aid youth struggles. Without a true understanding on how relevant the policies are, how helpful can they truly be? being directly affected by policy changes, youth voice is vital at the forefront of mental health policy. This is why a mental health youth advisory council under the state board of education should be created. Members
096of the council will be chosen via a lottery system that draws from a pool of optedin student board members interested in addressing mental health disparities in their communities. Students terms will be one year long and meet virtually by annian annually. Each council member will present in the beginning of the meetings sharing mental health issues they deem prominent. Feedback on existing policies and demonstrate a need for new ones will advise the board on how mental health policies can best alleviate and support struggles of students. With successive cohorts, the Mental Health Youth Advisory Council will continuously shape mental health policy for generations of California students. SBE will be forming a coalition distinctive from former Youth Advisory Councils such as the California Youth Empowerment Commission and Tony Thurman's Youth Advisory Council, which have shown the effectiveness of youth
097voices at the forefront of impactful change. Both councils have successfully pioneered studentled initiatives and have prospects of continually shaping the California public education system. However, the SBE's mental health youth advisory council would specifically focus on how SBE's academic standards, curriculum frameworks, regulations, and assessments directly affect student mental health. Unlike the other councils that focus on a more broad spectrum of student issues, with power to create policy, not just adopt it, we can incorporate student voice at the top of the policymaking chain, shaping an education system for students by students. The people in this room are proof that California's education system has the power to produce impactful change makers. But these very change makers l currently lack the platform for having productive conversations with policy makers that influence their everyday lives. Should the state board of
098education intend to continue producing relevant and engaging mental health policy, we believe it's imperative they tap into this previously untapped resource of student voice to continue shaping this policy. With students working in collaboration with the state board of education, we can turn students wishes into reality. Thank you. >> Thank you so much board members. Member Patilla Branson, >> thank you for the presentation. That was really powerful and incredibly well delivered as well. Um I I wanted to um ask a question about how you see it interacting um this advisory body interacting with the work of the state board of ed. Um I think you named curricular frameworks um and then there's obviously accountability systems which were part of the um the LCAP presentation earlier. Are there any particular examples that you might want to lift
099up as to where you feel like student voice would most squarely intersect with the purview of of the state board? >> I don't think I have like any like particular policies in mind that they could like interact with, but I know that um previous like councils such as like Tony Thurman's youth advisory council like they have subcommittees that like work on like AI and stuff like that. And I think that um these youth voices could be like um I think yeah I think like any honestly any policy that is like brought up I feel like students from like throughout these school districts have valuable perspectives that would be unique to um their school district that they can incorporate and give input on like oh maybe like students would think that like that particular um policy
100in regards to like grading or whatever would actually um be more detrimental to students than it would be beneficial and just like things like that for them to consider I think would just be very valuable for them to yeah think about. >> Terrific. Member Rodriguez. >> Thank you. Um you sort of answered the question that I had as well. Um, and I also want to comment on how wonderful your presentation and the insightful and poignant remark about how different our adults, right, um, our mental health issues are than the ones that our young people are facing today. Um, how do you see uh, this committee interacting with uh, the youth empowerment commission? >> Um, well, the youth empowerment commission is like uh, works with the governor. So I think that um we actually envision this
101council to be more unique because it works directly with the state board of education that has the power to create policy. I think having student voice at the very top of the policym process before it even goes down to the um down to CDE to be like adapt adopted. um it'll be very powerful for students to actually be able to like tell um board members that like this is what we think about these things that you're working on currently. Um whereas like I think the youth empowerment commission is specific to like the governor's policies and they um it's like it's the same similar group of like 13 students I believe that um yeah that will work with the governor and they um bring like more uh minority voices into like the into the conversation. Um,
102so I think they serve a different purpose than this one will. And I think this one will be unique because it also specifically focuses on mental health issues. >> Thank you so much. What an important topic. Thank you. >> Thank you. Think we have one more presentation. Okay. Oh, we're we're doing another break. Thank you. We're ready for our next presentation. >> Last but not least, we have postsecary preparedness presented by Jacob Garcia. Good morning, Board President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and esteemed members of the board. My name is Jacob Garcia, a student at West Valley Early College High School of the Anderson Union High School District, just south of Reading, California. It is an honor to stand before you today. I am speaking on behalf of my amazing delegate group focusing on
103postsecary preparedness. I have had the privilege of experiencing firsthand what strong, supportive, and unbiased counseling can do for a student. My own counselor once encouraged me to apply for the position of student board member for my county's board of education, an opportunity that completely changed the course of my journey. Through that experience, I discovered and deepened my passion for education. And thanks to my board support in sending me to SABE, I now have the honor of speaking before you today. But I also recognize unfortunately that this story does not hold true for all students across California. Many students do not have access to a counselor who truly believes in their potential or takes time to help them explore the possibilities beyond high school. Counselors are the groundwork of student success and are expected to assist
104in class scheduling, provide mental health support, and encourage success after high school. But high case loads can limit counselors ability to find ways to individualize and unbias their amazing support. Which is proven true by the college career indicator within the 2024 California school dashboard that finds that only 45.3% of 2024 high school graduates were prepared for college and careers. Now to be clear, many counselors make the best effort to care and support for their students. However, there is a lack of prioritization to to carry out effective, essential, and ethical school counseling across all California school districts, which is where exactly us students need your help. As the California State Board of Education, we encourage you to add a new reflective prompt to the local control and accountability plan template. The adoption of a new prompt
105to the LCAP template would hold school districts accountable for post-secary counseling as a part of a movement for a more equitable student opportunities within California. With these requirements, school districts are required to transparently reflect their actions regarding their prioritization of equitable post-secary counseling in order to uphold this new LCAP prompt. The prompt would include descriptions of how schools are equally promoting all secondary opportunities to students such as military scholarships, vocational training, trade school, or direct employment. And although many professional organizations offer standards and outlines for ethical practices that school counselors should abide by, counselors aren't necessarily mandated to follow these practices. So essentially, our proposal holds districts accountable to prioritize e equitable post-secary counseling within their schools by requiring them to reflect on a new LCAP prompt. And to clarify, this is not a mandate
106to follow existing guidelines from external agencies. This proposal specifically focuses on adding to the LCAP prompt to further incentivize counselors using fair practices. Therefore, save delegates gathered one vision that we hope districts implement into their counseling. The vision that all California school counselors prepare every student for post-secary success, beginning early and continuing throughout high school. Counselors should provide equal access to information about all pathways, whether that be college, trade school, military, or the workforce. in order for students to be informed and confident about their future and success after graduation. And above all, this proposal is one that does not require much funding or new infrastructure. It is simply about clarity and the encouragement for statewide prioritization of equitable post-secary counseling within all our school districts. The cost is minimal, but I can assure you the
107impact this new LCAP addition can have on students is profound. And with that, our our delegate group is dedicated to transferring transforming my experience with an exceptional counselor into a norm for all students across California, where the LCAP prompts districts to reflect on equitable and inclusive practices. That is why this proposal matters because we believe every California student deserves the opportunity to imagine their future, to dream big, and to rise above every challenge. By integrating a new reflection prompt within the LCAP, districts will be held accountable to promote counseling that empowers students to graduate high school with not just a diploma, but an understanding of the world and the opportunities within it. students will have a belief in their success because someone a counselor believed in them. Thank you. [applause] >> Thank you so much.
108Uh board members, member McQuillin, >> thank you Jacob for sharing and sharing your experience with a great counselor to guide you and I appreciated uh all that you've uh put into this. Um, a question I have is, >> [snorts] >> uh, if the standards were adopted, uh, what does the the LEAs and districts and state need to do to make sure counselors, uh, meet the standards? >> Are you are you asking what guidelines that we can have in place? >> So, just guidelines. >> Yes. Um when we were researching our topic, our delegation group found under the ASCA, the Association of uh school counselors, they have already a framework in place for counseling practices and they also have a division within California, but the California Association doesn't specify those that framework specifically. And what us
109students are trying to bring is for us to hopefully incentivize districts to provide their way of promoting equitable counseling for students. So by adding that prompt, I think that it would be beneficial for districts and the counselors to the students. >> Member Esco, >> thank you so much. is such a critical topic, you know, as we're looking at redesigning high schools, you know, having that critical adult is is is so so important. I'm really crit I'm really interesting interested to know is what do you see the which of the standards that you propose seem to be the most critical knowing full well that we're in a world of significant change? You know, you heard about AI and how that's changing the landscape. How how are these standards flexible enough to to meet those changes and
110which one do you think are is the most critical one? >> The most critical that I believe within the standards that the the students that the vision that they have um I believe that the standard is the equitable advertisement that there are other post-secondary opportunities other than college like the military, trade school and workforce. as a state, sending our students to every single opportunity is crucial to having a beneficial state and having a successful state. So, I think that if we emphasize counselors to counsel in a way that emphasizes every single opportunity, I think that's the most important. >> Thank you. >> Well, we thank you so much for uh sharing about this additional important topic. What an amazing paniply of uh issues you guys have tackled. We really really appreciate it. Thank you. And
111we do want to allow the public to comment. So we're going to post the public comment slide. Thank you. If you want to call in for public comment, you can use the phone number and the access code shown on this slide. Uh, are there any um public comments in person? For starters, >> there's no public comment in the room. >> All right. And uh, we'll give it a minute to see if there's any public comment on the phone. >> There are no callers in the queue. >> All right. Uh well, we uh I all want to I think appreciate all the work and thinking and negotiating and debating and weighing and balancing all the evidence and uh arguments that went into these presentations. We really appreciate the uh engagement around them and the uh ability
112of folks to sort of respond to the questions and to really take it to a deeper level. So, thank you. you you are such great exemplars of uh education in this state and of the commitment of our students to our um civic uh betterment uh in the education arena. Thank you so very much for all of this [applause] and this concludes this information item. Uh we are going to take an actual break at this point for 15 minutes uh and we'll reconvene by uh quarter to Seven. Thank you. Uh we are all assembled. We're going to continue with item four, which is the California Assessment of Student Performance and Progress and English Language Proficiency Assessments for California. We're going to get an update on the program activities. Uh this is an information item only and
113it will be presented by Mal Vang and Dr. Kelly Botcher of the CDE and Tony Alpert of Sparter Balanced. Mal, there we are. Please begin. Good to see you. Roberson, President Darlin Hammond, uh, Vice President Glover Woods, and our esteemed board members. Uh, I'm Ma Vang, director of the assessment development and administration division at the California Department of Education. And to assist me with this item, we have Dr. Dr. Kelly Bocker, our research uh our education research and evaluation administrator of our um psychometrics uh uh evaluation and data office in the assessment development administration division. We also have Tony Alpert who is the executive director from Smarter Balanced here and the item before you as mentioned is an information only item. Uh today's presentation will cover uh the 2024 25 test results public release uh
114summary and the federal peer review update and as well as uh we have a treat of um bringing the mathematics performance task micro pilot to you. And now I will turn it over to Dr. Kelly Bcker to present the item on the results of our student performance on our statewide assessments. Kelly, I'm gonna turn it over. >> Oh, >> good morning, Dr. Kelly Bocker of the assessment division here at CDE. And I have the privilege, thank you, Ma, for giving me the privilege of sharing very happy news with you today to announce uh the release of our 2425 assessment results that just occurred about a month ago. Uh and to share with you some of the highlights of our results data. So in um on October 9th of 2025, the CDE publicly released our 2425
115CASP and ELPAC assessment results. And so in the next few slides, we will walk through the statewide results, highlight some of the key trends that we noted in the data, and discuss how California schools and districts are making progress for students. So let's begin with the big picture. California students made meaningful gains in English language arts, mathematics, and science statewide. We saw a 1.8 percentage point increase in students who achieved the proficient or advanced level on the English language arts assessment. Uh that may be known to some as level three and four on the test. Uh we also saw a 1.8 percentage point increase in mathematics at those same levels and a two percentage point increase in science. So increases across the board in students achieving a level three or a level four. Also compared
116to last year, we saw an increase in the average scale score for ELA, math, and science across all grades. And in these post-pandemic years, we have been seeing [snorts] student scores trend upward. And that was particularly true in our results this last year, seeing the most uh the greatest improvement we've seen thus far. So we feel these results reflect a continued progress in academic achievement and the impact of our collective efforts across the state. And then we look at specific student groups. It's good news again. So nearly all student groups showed improvement across all three subjects. This includes groups defined by race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, English language fluency, and other key demographics. underscoring California's commitment to opportunity for every learner. And of note, male students, black or African-American students, and Hispanic Latino students had
117larger than state average improvements for most grades in both ELA and mathematics. I'm very happy to see that. So these figures here show um the percentage of students scoring at each achievement level over the last few years. So we have been seeing steady progress in student achievement across ELA math and science. And when we look at the percentage of students who have scored at level two, three and four, those upper three green, we've seen those percentages gradually increase from year to year. And the percentage of students scoring at the minimum or level one level has progressively gone down. So that is indeed a happy trend to see. We feel that this trend underscores the impact of California's long-term investments in rigorous instruction, educator support, and student centered learning strategies. And as I mentioned at the
118intro, we saw ELA increase to 48.8% in 24, excuse me, in 2425. Mathematics increased to 37.3%. These are students at level three and four. And science also increased to 32.7% in 2425 of students scoring at proficient or advanced. And also with science specifically and very encouragingly I think uh the science results have now surpassed preandemic levels by about three percentage points. And when we look again at gains by student group, the story is even more encouraging. So student groups of black and African-American students, Hispanic, Latino, socioeconomically disadvantaged, foster youth, and children of armed forces service members all showed year-over-year gains in the percentage of students reaching proficient or advanced. And again, this is in ELA, math, and science. These [clears throat] improvements reflect our ongoing commitment to closing opportunity gaps and ensuring every student has
119the chance to succeed. And when we look at these groups in particular, we're encouraged to see this momentum building, which are the trends we hope to see in achieving uh closing those gaps ultimately. Uh if we look particularly at the blue bars on our graph here, these are our black or African-American students and the green are our Hispanic or Latino students. the increase in the proportion of students scoring at level three or four outpaced the increase of students scoring at level three or four for all other students. So again, this rate of increase is exactly what we'd hope to see for to close achievement gaps. And other student groups, including our yellow bars here, which are our socioeconomically disadvantaged students. Um, also not noted here, but our foster youth and English learner student groups also
120made improvements compared to last year. These are the results for our summitive English language proficiency assessments for California or our summitive ELPAC. This is our assessment that's given annually to English learners. And we can see here that the performance levels and the uh percentage of students in each is is fairly consistent across the last few years uh and and tends to be fairly stable from what we're seeing. Um it is important to note that interpreting the summit of ELPAC slides here is a bit different than the academic achievement slides I showed just a few minutes ago uh in that the p the um composition of the EEL student group is changing every year by nature of uh reclassification as students exit. It's not the same group of students taking this assessment every year. So just
121a important caveat in interpreting this and by seeing it consistent is is no reflection of student growth or a lack of growth for that matter. So for anyone who would like more details on our results um who would like to slice and dice the data perhaps by school district or student group uh we encourage you to visit our test results for California assessments websites at the URLs noted here. Um, and I will note that uh all of our 2425 assessment results are there with the exception of the California Spanish assessment, which we expect to be added uh into these sites in December. So, just about a month from now. Uh, and this is just a one-year uh one-time delay because of the expansion that we did to the California Spanish assessment. Required a little bit
122more time to get those posted uh but just for this one year. Okay, I'm going to do a quick pivot here uh to give you an update on something called the federal peer review process. Um, so federal peer review is an evidence-based process where each state is expected to submit to the US Department of Education evidence to demonstrate that its assessment system meets a set of established criteria. And in particular, our every state's assessment, including California's, should demonstrate evidence of validity, reliability, and fairness as established by the Every Student Succeeds Act or ESSA. So as new assessments become operational, states are expected to provide additional evidence for peer review covering each summit of assessment that is required under ESSA. And this is often an iterative process where states are submitting additional evidence to meet the
123requirements as it becomes available. So for the past few years, our our team back in the assessment division has been submitting documents to the US Department of Education for our summitive assessments under ESSA. So these are our English language arts assessments, mathematics, science and English language proficiency. There are four possible results for peer review when we get graded if you will. Uh these are meets requirements at the top, substantially meets requirements, partially meet and does not meet. And those top two categories meets and substantially meets are considered passing results for peer review. So just this summer in August, California received uh results from the Department of Ed that we are very happy about uh confirming that the following four summit of assessments meet all requirements according to um ESSA and their review. So that's our
124smarter balanced ELA and math assessments. Uh in particular, the adjusted blueprints that we have been using for a few years now did indeed get approved. the California science test, the summit of ELPAC, and the summit of alternate ELPAC. Uh California's other two assessments or other three assessments rather, which are alternate assessments for ELA, math, and science. They are requesting a little bit of additional evidence um which will be submitted in the next uh this summer and in summer of 2027 uh to fulfill those last remaining requirements. But again, these are already very positive results. So in closing, the purpose of federal peer review is to help states develop comprehensive assessment systems that provide accurate and valid information for holding districts and schools accountable for student achievement against our state standards. And achieving these positive results
125is very much a collaborative effort between educators, schools, and LEA staff that made it possible for us to meet this passing result for peer review. So, as always, a big shout out and a thank you to the amazing educators, schools, and districts that we have in California uh that helped us achieve these very positive results. So, I will now turn it over to Tony Albert from Smarter Balance to present the next section of our item. Thank you. >> Hello. And uh for the record, my name is Anthony Albert, executive director for Smarter Balance. Uh really pleased to be here. uh and following uh presentation with such great news as well. So congratulations to uh the state board and California for your success this year. That's really fantastic. Uh so as uh members of the board
126may recall, Smarter Balanced engaged in a collaborative study of the relationship between the Smarterbalance Assessments and the uh California mathematics frameworks. And uh as an outgrowth of that investigation, although we found that the relationship was very robust, there were some areas of improvement that we wanted to attend to. One of those was in grade four. But in general, augmenting our approach to mathematics with a greater emphasis on uh data reasoning, uh data visualizations, and uh increasing the quality of a task using student feedback. Um and uh the way we've described this is consistent with uh what is otherwise being called data sciences. So our approach to this uh new aspect of the mathematical practices or at least new for us uh was to engage in uh a pretty uh focused study that included uh short
127paper and pencil assessments uh that was designed to understand how students perceived this new emphasis of the mathematical practices. And um as I mentioned although they did align with our mathematics claims of communicating reasoning, data analysis and problem solving and modeling uh but they they were focused more on the data sciences approach which tends to be inclusive of asking what are the right tools the reasoning behind using a particular tool or approach. uh not just the or whereas on our standard PTS it's asking students to engage in the problem without that metaccognition about necessarily the the types of tools or their approach uh that they're taking using data to solve the problem. So uh these items were all machine scored and contain constructed contain both machine scored and constructed response. The tasks were designed to
128uh test those uh mathematical practices um including multiple different types of stimuli. So different types of v visualizations and data tables um and typically in our current PTS performance tasks we have a single uh stimuli tends to be the more common approach. Uh and then what was really unique for us was the incorporation of student surveys as part of our commitment and our strategic plan to uh receive input from students about how the uh assessment functions and how we can make it function better. Um we wanted to find out what their thoughts were about these new uh performance tasks. So we administered these micro pilots in grades four, six and 11. Uh and as well as the uh student feedback survey. Um the findings are going to be used then to guide our future development
129of our specifications which are the blueprints that we use to design tasks and items. the guidelines that we give to item writers, the trainer training that we might provide directly to item writers or vendors as the case may be depending on who's uh uh owning a partic particular aspect of the development process and um thinking about how we integrate as a larger framework these data sciences approaches into our full suite of mathematics assessments. Uh we anticipate that finally after all of these revisions will take place that we'll be doing a field test that will incorporate these concepts in spring of 2027 and then depending on the quality of data that we receive back uh students would begin to see those in operational use in spring of 2029. So uh the results were that generally students
130found these tasks to be quite challenging and um while we uh and we're not quite sure exactly what the nature of the issue was uh we believe that undoubtedly it was some aspect of the performance test itself and we have got some pretty clear plans about how we're going to revise it. uh we an error that we made which we're going to address in the future is we didn't ask teachers about their instruction though. So uh we don't know to what extent is the instructional experience for students different or was there some barriers or uh that we included in the performance test itself that made those tasks more difficult than we might otherwise hope. So, uh, we'll rethink our survey approach where we'll include some information from try to include some information from teachers, maybe
131using some of their lessons plans, uh, as as, uh, guides about how they approached their math instruction. Uh, and then potentially ask students as well about their experience of their instruction and how similar were the tasks uh, to the activities that their teacher provided them um, or supported them through their math instruction. This is were at grade level. Uh also having the operational skill at grade level makes it difficult to determine where is the student succeeding and where's the student uh needs additional support. So reusing that approach will be likely helpful in the future. uh we need to iterate on the context the setup of these questions to make sure they're as simple as possible and uh similarly reduce the language load again which are lessons that we continue to learn uh and we keep
132on trying to improve that as we're approaching these new types of tests with these new aspects though we're incorporating new language and so we have to revisit uh the language we use so that it's accessible to students uh all students So, uh, we look forward on continuing to provide progress updates and really appreciate the board's, uh, encouragement for us to innovate, uh, and really sponsor this investigation into new performance tasks. Thank you, Tony and uh Kelly. Um we'll be available to see if there's any clarifying questions or discussion. Just to check you have you reached the end of the item for now? >> Okay. [laughter] information. >> I think what we'll do is we'll go ahead uh and put the public comment slide up. >> Uh and then we'll see if we have if anyone
133wants to call in for public comment, they can use the phone number and the participant access code shown here. Uh and while we're waiting, I'll ask our liaison member Rosco Gonzalez for any comments before me and then we'll see if there are any other clarifying questions. Thank you. Thank you, Ma, and for your presentation. Your department did an excellent job. I just want to recognize the what a milestone the peer review represents for California. It doesn't always get much attention, but having every major assessment meet federal requirements says a lot about the strength and stability of our system. That kind of validation just builds trust and shows that the data we use to understand student growth is solid. The results also show encouraging momentum. We're seeing steady gains in ELA, math, and science, and students
134are uh reconnecting with grade level learning, and the supports in place are starting to show impact. Um it's especially meaningful to see progress amongst our underserved students, which reflects the targeted work is happening in classrooms. The interventions and the early support and literacy is key to this. Um the results also show this momentum. Sorry. Uh we are also continuing to look progress over time having access to clear information I think would also about um about how English learners would move forward towards um reclassification. So again, having access to clear information about how English learners move towards reclassification helps educators and families understand the full picture of student growth. Um, lastly, I'm glad to see data science integrated in math is exactly where we want students headed and continued investment in assessment literacy for teachers would
135make this data even more useful for improving instruction and student growth. Thank you. >> All right. And I'll just add my congratulations on the um federal approvals of our systems uh and um uh suggest that we find a time in the future to talk more about the performance tasks and how those are unfolding. It is a new area for us to figure out how to uh engage students around data, what kind of tasks uh really do connect to their experience um and you know how to um analyze those. So, it's exciting that we're launching on it and I think we'd love to learn more about that as as we um progress. Are there any other clarifying questions from folks before we go to public comment? All right. Uh is there any public comment in the
136room? >> There are four people signed up for inperson public comment. Please remember to state your name and affiliation for the record when it's your time to speak. Will the following people please line up at the microphone in the back of the room? Regina Chagoya, Manuel Benstro, Raquel Morales, and Edgar Lampin. President Darling Heman and members of the state board of education. I am Regina Chagoya from Berkeley Federation of Teachers and Berkeley School District and speaking on behalf of California Federation of Teachers, which is a union of educators and classified professionals. Regarding agenda item number four, CTF views instruction of English learners as one of our critical important areas of service. Um that being said, it's difficult to know the full scope of our efforts without re reinstituting the reclassifying data reporting in the past
137time to resume reporting of reclassification data of our English learners. And thank you for listening. Good morning members of the board. My name is Manuel Bonrostro with Californians together. Uh we want to first acknowledge and appreciate the ongoing review of reclassification criteria. Uh this information is fundamentally important when accurately measuring the progress for for English learners in all districts and across uh schools across the state. Uh we have a specific request regarding data reporting uh up until the 202021 school year. uh the California Department of Education publicly provided reclassification data disegregated by county, district, and school. We under we understand that this data reporting was challenging during the heights of the pandemic. Uh but now we requestedly request the board um and department of education uh to resume reporting reclassification data for districts, schools, and
138counties starting uh with the 202526 school year. uh our partners frequently request this information to ensure local accountability and advocacy for English learner progress across the state. Thank you. >> Good morning. Good morning members of the board. Raquel Morales with at Trust West. Um I would like to plus one my colleague that just um gave public comment and would like to align our comments with the equity coalition. This year's CAPS results show proficiency rates that are finally beginning to return to pre-COVID levels, but still leave glaring unacceptable equity gaps between Native American, black, and Latino students compared to their white and Asian peers. Schools supported only 33% of black students to meet or exceed grade level standards in ELA, and only 20% of black students were at or above grade level in math. For Native
139American students, only a third were at or above grade level in ELA and just over 23% were at or above grade level in math. Additionally, only 39% of Latino students were supported to meet or exceed standards in ELA and 26% in math. We remain deeply concerned about achievement gaps that linger despite overall progress. We urge the board to pair public reporting of aggregate improvements with clear strategies to address persistent inequities, including targeted supports for districts demonstrating limited progress under the systems of support. Thank you. >> We will now move to public comment on the phone line. >> Caller with the last four digits 7517. Uh please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. >> Thank you, Leilani Agaldo. On behalf of the Association of California School
140Administrators, AXA commends the continued statewide progress reflected in the 2425 CASP and ELPAC results. The improvement in ELPAC performance following the removal of the TK students from the testing population via legislation underscores the importance of developmentally appropriate assessments. The data showing uh changes in level three and level one for the ELPAC results as an example ensures that resources are provided more appropriately to students who genuinely need the supports. Thank you. Thank you. Next caller with the last four digits 4369. Please state your name and affiliation for the record. Your time starts now. >> Good morning. I'm Sally Fox calling from San Diego on behalf of the California Association for Bilingual Education, Cababe. Cabab is proud of its 50 plus years promoting bilingual education for California's students. Starting way back when Pichone and George Muscone collaborated
141on legislation to declare bilingual education a right for English language learners. Then the state board was required to adopt regulations setting forth standards for language reclassification criteria to be adopted by school districts using multiple measures. Before I retired in 2018 as a bilingual coordinator at the San Diego County Office of Education, I frequently accessed RFP data through the CDE website in my work. But RFP data have not been published through dataquest since 2021 because of difficulties related to the CO 19 pandemic. So I agree with the other advocates who urge the board to resume their publication. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8256. Please start your public comment. You have one minute. >> Hi, this is Robert Manwin from Children Now. With the release of this year's assessments results, we see marginal
142overall improvement, but still performance being below prepandemic levels, suggesting we still have work to do. In our letter, we wanted to draw the board's attention to the large and growing academic achievement gaps. For example, gaps grew for low-income students and English learners and were flat and large for foster youth. California has some of the largest achievement gaps in the country. For example, we ranked tied for worst in eighth grade math on the last NA test uh when we disagregate by income. When we look at the LCAPS across the state, we see ELEAs focusing on district-wide action despite LCAP instructions improvements that have suggested that they have to focus on closing achievement gaps. We rarely see LEA setting differential improvement goals. So, it shouldn't be surprising that we see gaps not closing. As the board approaches
143its work on differentiated assistance criteria and future LCAP template work, we encourage the board to signal to ELEAS the need to laser focus on closing achievement gaps. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 1505, please start your public comment. You have one minute. >> Good morning. Uh, dear President Darling Hammond and members of the board, my name is Mariano Losano. I'm a high school teacher from San Diego and I'm calling today on behalf of Californians together to kindly request that the board resumes reporting e recclassification data on data quest. Having worked as an LCAP coordinator, I understand that reclassification data not only helps the schools and districts to evaluate the effectiveness of their programs, actions, and services, but also informs decision- making and resource allocation during LCAP planning. While the dashboard currently reports
144the ELPI, the ALPAC score is only one of several criteria used for reclassification purposes, which also include content mastery and overall academic achievement to ensure an accountability system that effectively monitors EEL progress. It is critical to have pre-classification data available. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Next caller, ending in 8674, please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. Good morning, President Darling Hammond and members of the state board. This is Rachel Murphy, senior legislative council of public advocates and member of the LTF equity coalition. We would like to align our comments with our equity partners at Trust West, Californians Together, Children Now and Cave around the widening and persistent achievement gaps for marginalized student groups. As stated in our coalition letter and by my
145colleagues, we urged the board to pair public reporting of aggregate improvements with clear strategies for addressing persistent inequities, including targeted supports for districts demonstrating limited progress under the system of support. Thank you. >> Thank you. This concludes public comment for item number four. >> All right. Thank you very much. Um, we're now open for board discussion. Uh, and I do have a question to to start off with. Mau if you can uh help us understand the um sort of status of the reporting of reclassification data and whether there's a plan to get that restarted or where it stands. Yes, that's a report that our accountability office used to provide and um I will take the request back and now that our state our data is a little bit more stable we could uh look at
146continuing that um and I'll work uh and we'll share that data that information with uh Cindy Kazanas our um uh analysis measurement and reporting division and we'll get that going. >> All right. Thank you. >> It's a really a report that we all like to have, but it's not required. So, we are working on some of the more required uh reports, but we would love to restart that as soon as the um we can. >> Thank you. >> Other Yes, member Escobedo. >> It may not be required, but it might be important to really focus on strategy. So, I think it's really I I I would love to see the relationship between the ELPAC data and redesignation rates and how it it affects one another because there there are definite interconnection between both of those
147datas and it may help districts strategize, right? Um how how to best focus their instruction on which students and what's working, what's not. I think the more we triangulate data, it it it definitely will will help districts and teachers um kind of think what what's being effective uh or not. So, appreciate it. Thank you. >> Just to note, there's also a conversation going on about reclassification and what that, you know, whether there's a more standardized way to approach it. And so it's a really important time for us to get um sort of aware of and on top of the conversations around >> especially since we invested so much time with the optel instrument. >> Yeah. >> Shared I think >> uh we're we're in a I think in a in a more clearer place and
148how to redesinate students utilizing you know some specific uh factors with our teachers and parents. There's also a a study coming out on that um from the getting down to facts you know group of studies that are going on across the state that'll be available early in the year. So it may be a topic that we want to sort of understand and take up generally. Um yes member Yoshimoto Tari >> very short just want to express my um appreciation for the request of that information. >> Terrific. Um, other questions, comments, discussion? Member McQuillin? >> Yes, thank you for the report. I've been looking at the American Indian Alaskan scores that continue to uh be troublesome, although there's less who are not meeting the standard, but uh there's anything we could do to strategize. There's a
149few LEAs around the state that have a high percent and if there's a district that's having any success to be able to share that out with others and zero in on what's going on with our American Indian students. >> Thank you. >> Chief Deputy Robersonson, you have a comment? Yeah, I just wanted to share that we're as the California Department of Education very committed to this data for uh redd designation reclassification. So while it's not mandated and from an awareness of work scope, but definitely we are committed to getting that data out and those reports out to the field. >> That's great. >> Thank you. Other um comments, questions? All right, this is an information item. So, um, thank you so much, Mal, for not only the report, but all the work that went into
150getting us a, uh, very smooth assessment season in this last year. Uh, thank you. >> Before we leave this item, though, I know I have the next one, too. So, I just want to say that um, you know, the fear the peer review um, submission success is really due to your leadership, too. I mean having a board of this caliber to be able to understand all the complexities and be able to support all the development along the way. I mean that's so key. No one can do that work alone, right? It takes all of us to lift our huge state to be able to get those kinds of results. And so it should be something that you know you all are to be commended for that and for your leadership as well especially our our
151leader uh President Darlingham and I mean we are so lucky to have you in terms of assessments overall. I mean I I think every state when you have that kind of leadership uh should get these kinds of results. >> It's all of us. um take no credit for it, but I will say it takes a village to create an assessment system. So, [laughter] and now you've been leading the charge, so we appreciate you. And since you have the next item, why don't we go ahead and take up item five? >> I'm going to depend on Alex to find the right >> Let me switch it. >> Okay, this is the topics related to California's assessments. Uh this is again going to be another information uh item uh without um any action needed but uh we
152will be educated by it. Uh and so um Mal when you're ready take it away. >> And u Mal Vang director of the assessment development and administration division. Again this item uh is and for information only. Um I will be covering some uh the following topics are uh there were questions about the California assessment contract process and then more uh addressing questions about the adjusted form blueprints for smarter balance uh English language arts uh literacy or ELA and mathematics and the there were questions about the the translation tools and some issues outside of my area of expertise uh assessment system and the contracting procurement process but uh we will cover it and I will try to bring as much information as possible so this board could have um more information to address the cons uh
153the the requesters or com public comment that came about. So, um the this is the um little overview about the California assessment contract process. Uh the state board of education members, some may have expressed a desire to ensure that the California Department of Education uh is including a way for prospective uh vendors to be able to respond to our request for submission process for the next uh California assessment system contract. to highlight the expertise in various areas uh of the contract so that the SBE can be sure that the best support and options are um available for those areas. So the request for submissions or our procurement process will allow vendors to collaborate as well as um respond to um that procurement and we encourage them to build teams to respond um with one prime
154contractor for a reason, right? that prime contractor allow uh vendors to again let me just back um go back a little bit when we're encouraging them to u collaborate to build off each other's strengths to create a stronger proposal when they collaborate beyond just one and while that designation of that prime contractor is important because it gives us that point of accountability that point of um communications and responsibilities It really takes a lot more than one contractor to fill our to fulfill our assessment needs. And that process um again um encourages those vendors out there who identify to kind of identify their strengths and weaknesses ahead of time where they can best fit and to reach out and communicate with each other and partner with each other so that we uh the CDE and the
155SBE uh will receive proposals that are responsive and to the requirements that we need for our system to work and to include innovative approach approaches um and various aspects of the assessment system to meet our needs. So in the current contract, I just want to share that uh ETSs is the prime contractor and and we uh share that quite a bit but however there are several uh subcontractors to ETSs and this slide highlights some of those. We have Cambium Assessment Inc. they are the they host and support the test delivery system. Um the measurement incorporated the um subcontract to do uh constructive response scoring of the smarter balanced uh summitive assessments English language arts and math west ed uh subcontracts to do trainings focused on materials for the interim assessments how to score and also
156um data leadership um we have metametrics in the last uh around um they are they provide the Lexile framework framework for reading and the quantile framework for mathematics. And then we have the Sacramento County Office of Education or Skoey that uh provide educator recruitment, outreach, uh meeting logistics and trainings among other tasks. Okay. So that's uh in a nutshell about the uh contracting and encouragement of contractors to support uh in that procurement process. And then there were questions about um from the last board meeting there was some public comment um was shared regarding the reduced number of questions and the impact on the subc scores uh for individual students and the potential impact on the score pre precision for smaller group sizes from our smarter balanced uh adjusted blueprints. So, um, I just want to
157kind of take us down a little memory lane that, um, in November of 2020, the our state board approved the adjusted blueprints, right? We were in the middle of a pandemic. And then in, uh, September of 2022, uh, the state board approved the continue use of the adjusted form blueprints for that particular year, 2022 and 2023, and subsequent administrations. And that decision was really moved forward with the uh adjusted form blueprints. It was informed by feedback from many right from our local educational agency staff and and and administrators, our various interest holders and families and they expressed support as a result of the additional benefits that accompanied that decrease in testing time. When we reduced the blueprint, it also decreased the testing time. And those other benefits were that there would be increased instructional time
158available. There would be increased flexibility and scheduling and adequate monitoring of administrations be decreased risk of connectivity as well as uh u network issues. Right? So um again reduction in the potential exposure of items uh from the item bank as a result of the reduction of the number of items that need to be out there. So the adjusted form blueprints maintain this uh comparable allocation of content across the claims as well as the same proportion of depth of knowledge across all items. So um on the test results for uh California's assessments that's the public website that we provide all these we still have subcores they're still available at the composite claim that is when we combine two claims for reading and listening and writing and research for stu all student groups and then at the
159individual claim like reading writing listening research or inquiry for the stu student groups of 30 or more. Uh and then on the student score reports subc scores are available at the composite claim for um all students. Uh and we did that in this last year and continuing. So although the precision for the total score of the test will be a little bit less than the full form um by the nature of that reduction in length overall scale scores and achievement levels are comparable to those of prior years and they're still within industry standards. And as noted when Dr. Kelly Bcker was talking about the peer review update. The adjusted form blueprints receive federal peer review approval as being comparable to the full form and represent assessments that are valid and reliable and of high technical
160quality. We would not pass without that and consistent with the nationally recognized and professional technical standards. So just wanted to address uh that particular concern as well. I'm kind of like zipping through many topics so bear with me but we'll get there. Um there was uh also uh questions about uh translation tools. These are translation uh translation resources for both the smarter balance assessment um for mathematics as well as the California science test. And um it's to include translation glosseries. We also have translation glosseries in 14 languages and um accessibility resources such as read aloud, text to speech and speech to text are also available in Spanish. So um the Smarter Balance uh summitive assessment for math and the California science test. Uh students who are English learners can use um can also read spa
161who can also read Spanish can receive a full translation of each test item each question in Spanish as well as on-screen directions in Spanish including menus and buttons and using feature uh a feature called dual language stack translations and in addition for the grade eight or high school California science test uh a Spanish version of the periodic table and Other science charts are also available. So at the September 2025 uh state board meeting uh there was there were public there was a public comment requesting an update to the California Science Test dual language stack translation resource to allow easier use for students. Um, I wanted to say that prior to receiving that feedback, uh, CDE staff, we've been working with the contractor to re revise the functionality to match the one that is used for
162the mathematics. So that that Spanish stack dual language accessibility resource for the California science test now will use a toggle mode, right? That means like where a student can toggle between English and Spanish. And this reduces the amount of text on the screen and it allows for more streamline translation between English and Spanish and and easier on the eyes for the student as well. Just want to clarify that uh topic there. um other issues uh that are outside of the assessment system and the contracting procurement process. Uh I will cover them here and hopefully provide some additional information to address the questions and concerns. Um there were again at the uh September 25 uh 2025 meeting uh they raised qu there were questions raised about some members as well as the public did raise topics
163um regarding this and while um we partner with our um accountability office AMAR quite a bit um and the multilingual division uh they did help write our uh responses and draft this item. Um um they are the AMR team is working hard and trying to get our dashboard out and so they're not available here in the room with us but um I I'm not sure if Alicia is here. >> Yeah, but Alicia uh is here from the multilingual support division. So I will cover some of these questions and the responses and if there are additional questions I can't address, I will I will phone a friend. Um there was a question as to whether we could accelerate the release of assessment results to align the reporting of student growth data with the release of the
164California school dashboard or dashboard. Uh this is again outside of the role of the assessment contract and it would be the sole responsibility of the CDE accountability and data collection teams to evaluate and implement. So uh upon the close close of our um California and longitudinal pupil achievement data systems or cowpads end of year collection the CDE uses the demographic information to determine the accountability demographic information at the school district and state levels as well as information that determines which school is continuously enrolled. Right? That's a timing. And then for a state nearly what 6 million 5.8 6 million students, 10,000 schools and 2,000 local educational agencies. Uh the city requires several weeks to ensure the information is accurate, right? Uh to do the calculations. So um upon the completion of all elements of the
165academic indicators for the dashboard, the CDE provides the current assessment contractor with the student level data file. complete the demographic information, attributed school and district codes appropriately and the inclusion determinations and then the current assessment contractor calculates the growth data. they help us with that. It returns the statewide data file by late November to us and then given the size of our state um and the complexity of the growth model uh the fact that the calculations happened over a matter of weeks uh once uh we we data is quite remarkable um in terms of understanding the process. So I want to share why it has to happen a little bit later. Uh with that we also had um again this uh is outside the assessment contract but is a suggestion that there was a suggestion
166that the future assessment contractor implement certain policies related to students attending Dashful alternative school status DAS schools. It's a mouthful. Um, the commenter requested that the SBE change this policy to also review and calculate the incorporation of students who may have recently transferred to a DAS school in their original school assessment results. Well, this level of student information is not readily available in Calpads, right, or visible um and um or to share with the assessment contractor. So the CDE would have to first consult with internal and ex external data collection and reporting subject matter experts uh to determine whether the Kalpad's uh enrollment data could be used reliably for this purpose and then uh a few more slides about uh there another public comment uh provided uh outside of the assessment contract but was requested
167for standardization of the reclassification policies for English learners and California's reclassification criteria uh are outlined in statute as part of the of a standardized exit procedures required by federal law and state law also requires that eleas adopt local policies to reclassify students aligned with that criteria. So lo uh local educational agencies have that flexibility to determine their measures which are approved by local policies. So in California the reclassification crit is reclassification is based on these four criteria um that was mentioned earlier as well. uh one the assessment of English of language proficiency using the state test of English language proficiency which is the California assessment California English language proficiency assessments for California or the alpac and the summitive alternate alpac that's for criteria one teacher evaluation including a review of the students curriculum mastery uh
168parent opinion and consultation and comparison of student performance in basic skills against an empirically established range of performance in basic skills based on the performance of English proficient students of the same age. So uh our education code sections 3 point 313 and 6080 require the summitive alpac and summitive alternate alpac as our state approved I mentioned um assessment for reclassification decision making under criteria one for statewide threshold scores set as overall performance level four on the summitive alpac and overall performance level three on the summitive alternate alpac. However, the processes for criteria 2, three, and four remain locally determined. And in response to the public comment, I will be addressing criterion four, which is the comparison of student performance in basic skills. So, um to be clear, local educational agencies are not required to use
169the Smarter Balance English language arts results for criterion 4. Um, LEAs may use different assessments for each grade level based on their local assessment policy, a local um locally uh local reclassification policy, excuse me. So, um, LEAs may choose to use any objective assessment of basic skills in English and locally determine the threshold um score that English learner students must achieve to meet that requirement, the requirements of criterion 4. So this selected assessment must be one that is locally administered to all students in that grade level and not solely just for English learner students. So there is variability in how local educational agencies reclassification processes um are handled but they're but not in the statewide exit criteria. Okay. So whichever assessment is used for criterion four for reclassification purposes, local educational agencies really locally determine
170the performance threshold required on those English language arts assessments based on the average performance of all students within their district. So just want to clarify that piece and with that um try to address uh some of the questions and concerns that were coming up and that uh I will pause now for any clarifying questions. That's kind of the end of my uh slides. >> Thank you. That was like a smorgus board of assessment items. [laughter] Um, let's put up the public comment slide and uh any members of the public wanting to call in can use the number and access code turn on this slide. And while we're waiting, I'll ask our leazison member Rosco Gonzalez if she has any initial comments before me. Thank you, Mao, for all these items that just tied into other
171meetings that we had in guidance. Um, from just a classroom point of view, the shorter test forms have made a real difference. um they still give us solid data but take less time away from instruction and that matters to teachers and students. Also, what I thought was really interesting and just so impactful will be the new Spanish translation toggles and the translation glosseries in 14 different languages are another strong improvement. These tools uh make testing more accessible and less overwhelming for students who are navigating two languages. And I just really appreciate the clear uh explanation of how reclassification continues to rely on multiple measures from el alpac results to teacher input which is key and parent consultation. It helps to see the whole picture of a student progress. So thank you again for your presentation.
172>> Thanks. Uh I want to just uh add my um congratulations on those accessibility um advances that we have. uh and I will have some questions about that. Uh I will ask one clarifying question now uh which is whether the accessibility uh elements as well as the translation elements are readily available to all test takers or whether they have to be pre-desated to get access to the accessibility um elements >> um if if they are designated supports. I mean >> I'm asking is it available to everyone without it being pre-desated >> uh to the student? >> It's not a universal tool. So they to access the translations you must be an English learner who would be able to read in that other language to be able to use the tool. So in a way it
173is accessible to everybody but yes uh an adult has to go in there assign it to the students for them to use it on the test. >> And that's the same thing with speech to text and text to speech. Yeah. >> So, I just think that, you know, one of the things we should be thinking about as we move towards universal designs for learning is universal designs for um assessment also. And I think that's a conversation we may want to put on the table at some point. Because we're we're still, you know, using those in modest ways for some students. >> Yeah. We would like to hope that a lot of the accessibility resources kind of mirror what students have access to in their instructional programs that they should be able to use those on
174the assessment as well. So, yes, I'm right there with you that if we >> it's a good time given what's happening in UDL and what's happening in technology um capacities for us to be thinking about that. Um, but I'm getting into the discussion, which is not what we're supposed to be doing now. So, I'm going to try to follow my own rules [laughter] and um see if there are any other clarifying questions before we go to public comment. All right, let's get to uh see if there's any public comment in the room. There are three people signed up for inerson public comment. Please remember to state your name and affiliation for the record when it's your turn to speak. Will the following people please line up at the microphone in the back of the room?
175Steve McDougall, Lindseay Tornado, and Lorraine Richards. President Darling Hammond, members of the state board of education, I am Steve McDougall from the Selenus Valley Federation of Teachers speaking on behalf of CTF, a union of educators and classified professionals. Regarding agenda item number five, instructional time is is finite as we only have 180 days with our students and that's assuming they show up for all 180 days. Given this reality, CTF believes that using the Smarter Balance Summitive Assessments short forms for both ELA and mathematics, thus reducing lost instructional time for the sake of more testing. What we currently use in addition to other systemic components is plenty in order to obtain the necessary data for understanding our work when improving instruction. Thank you for listening. >> Good morning, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, members
176of the board, Lindseay Tornator, on behalf of the California County Superintendent. We appreciate the thoughtfulness of this item and the depth of analysis it provides. We'd like to comment on a few of the elements. The adjusted form blueprints. We support the continued use of the adjusted blueprints. We feel they retain performance tasks while reducing testing time, giving schools more instructional time, scheduling flexibility, and fewer connectivity challenges. Reclassification. We appreciate the California system uses multiple carefully approved criteria such as the ELPAC, teacher input, parent feedback, and peer comparisons. Um, we also feel that tools like the ELPAC and Optel provide guidance while allowing local flexibility tied to state standards. Regarding the timing of growth data release, the perspective of county offices, this does not create a challenge for us. We are continuously engaged in datadriven discussions
177with our eleas and our own programs. The lag in growth data release does not present a challenge as we are and we are continuing to learn how to best use this data to drive student outcomes. No recommendations at this time. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Lorraine Richards and I am a classroom teacher representing California Teachers Association. Thank you to the state board of education and California Department of Education staff for including the historical context of the adjust adjusted format blueprints for smarter balance English language arts literacy and mathematics in this item. CTA fully supports the continued use of the adjusted shorter test form. Students need adequate instruction time and testing should not take away from instructional time. Since the approval of the adjusted form blueprints, educators and students have been able to be
178more focused on learning and less time focused on assessments. Thank you. >> We will now move to public comment on the phone line. >> Thank you. Uh caller ending in 8256, please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. >> Hi, this is Robert Menry from Children Now. I want to thank Mel and her team and board staff for this item and considering the smorgish board of assessment questions that Children Now raised at the September board meeting as the board considers its next 5-year assessment contract. Today, I'll focus on two of them. First, we have concerns with the accurate accuracy of the CASS assessment for individual students. These test results are used for high stakes decisions for individual students like EL reclassification, special education and course placement.
179And when we cut the number of multiple choice questions in half, uh the it reduced the accuracy of those individual test scores even while maintaining accurate data for group accountability. Second, we believe that a student growth indicator should be a cornerstone of any accountability system. We provide three ideas on how the state could address the timing issues that are currently keeping the growth indicator off of the accountability systems uh for differentiated assistance. One idea would be to align the demographic definitions of the calf and the dashboard demographic definitions so that the calf demographics available in the spring could be used for the growth calculation. >> Thank you. Your time is up. Next caller ending in 8674. Please start your public comment. >> Good morning. Rachel Murphy with Public Advocates and the LCFF Equity Coalition. [snorts]
180We'd like to elevate two points from our coalition letter. First, we continue to urge the board and department to prioritize the acceleration of the student growth timeline so that growth can be included in the annual release of the California school dashboard each fall. Growth scores are the gold standard for determining which districts are or are not continuously improving. Closing achievement gaps and timing issues should not hinder improvement. As such, we recommended exploring options that would allow growth data to be released alongside differentiated assistance eligibility or be produced and validated earlier. Second, we thank the board for clarifying the current reclassification framework for English learners, but recommend that the board take action to improve transparency and consistency in the implementation of reclassification policies. across districts. Doing so will help us understand whether reclassification policies are advancing
181equitable outcomes and supporting English learners full participation in schools. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8945. Please start your public comment. >> Hi, this is Suzanne Kuy from the Charter Schools Development Center. [snorts] We appreciate the discussion about precision of scores given reduced accuracy of short form CAST assessments. Many states post confidence intervals and California used to. Posting confidence intervals for individual group and school scores supports robust data use and promotes assessment literacy. It's especially important for ELA and math growth scores because these scores are based on two short form assessments, pre and post, and sometimes even a third pre-EST score from two years before. In 2024, the dashboard tile for ELA and math growth showed possible range for all students. When the state board approved the new items for the 2025
182dashboard tile, it wasn't clear that confidence intervals would be lost. It's important to provide the student group confidence intervals for ELA and math growth tiles on the upcoming 2025 dashboard for ELA and math growth. Thanks so much. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 1385. Please state your name and affiliation for the record. Your time starts now. >> Hello, this is Sarah Lilis, executive director of Teach Plus California. Again, we want to thank Mel and the staff for being so responsive and covering so much in this item. We did want to associate our con our comments with the LCFF equity coalition and reinforce the need to not quite give up on on getting the growth model uh incorporated into our accountability system. Understanding there are limitations with the data exchange between the contractor and the
183CDE and ELEAS, we're hopeful that the effort to elevate growth in our support and account accountability system does not stop here. One option to consider is using the demographic data from the assessment data system once it is aligned with our accountability system and dashboard instead of waiting for Calpad's data to develop the grow growth measures. Alternatively, alternatively, if we cannot speed up the release of the growth measure, we should wait to determine the list of differentiated assistants until growth data is available. That way, eleas and communities would still be able to see all the available data at the earlier October deadline, but the identification of those eleas who need the targeted support of differentiated assistance could still use growth as an indicator. Thank you. >> Thank you. This concludes public comment for item five. >>
184Right. Thank you. So, we now have time for board discussion, comments, questions on the variety of issues that Mau um presented. Is there any questions? Any comments? Seeing none, going. [laughter] All right. I think we want to thank you, Ma, for for that presentation. and we appreciate it. [laughter] >> Um, we're now going to break for lunch. Uh, and so yeah, uh, we we've been very efficient, so we'll, uh, stop now and come back at 12:30. Get an extra five minutes. [laughter] Thank you. Welcome [clears throat] back from lunch. Uh we are now going to take up a very special item, item six, which is a study session on a differentiated assistance. Um I'm going to just sort of frame us up a little bit about what the study session is about. Uh you'll recall
185that the 202526 budget charged the state board with updating the criteria for identifying uh local education agencies for differentiated assistance uh by July 15, 2026. Uh the goal is to take into account the recommendations from the 2022 Weststead evaluation which emphasized focusing resources and support on eleas with the greatest needs. Uh as we all know over the past several years the number of eleas identified for differentiated assistance has grown significantly and at one point it had doubled from pre preandemic years in part due to the broadening eligibility criteria. uh we've been adding indicators and then we've been adding subgroups to uh to the indicators and then the lingering effects of the pandemic as well as the number of identified eleas has increased at one point it was over 60% of our LEAs in the state
186the systems capacity to provide deep and sustained and meaningful support has been stretched uh and it underscored the need to revisit how we target and deliver assistance The state board has continued to strengthen the information offered by California's accountability system through ongoing updates to the dashboard as I said by um including new indicators and new student subgroups. Uh and so this study session is an opportunity to take a holistic look at our accountability system. How are we identifying eleas for support? What kind of support do they get? uh and to ensure that the system is effectively serving those with the greatest needs and that differentiated assistance is truly differentiated. So we're beginning the conversation today. This is not the moment to come up with solutions. It is the moment to understand the nature of the
187problem. Uh and I encourage us to think broadly about what the system could and should look like and not be constrained by the current structure. We are going to hear from folks who are part of the system in California, but also about what some other states are doing as well for supporting um schools and districts. I'm going to turn it over to Vice President Glover Woods to walk us through the agenda for the study session. Take it away. Thank you, President Darling Hammond. And um as I get ready to introduce uh the speakers that will be sharing with us this afternoon, I just want to underscore President Darling Hammond's comment about not jumping to solutionitis, if you will, during this study session. Um what we really want to be able to do is to spend
188some time learning and listening to what is working well because there are some aspects, I'm sure, that are working well and also what is not working as intended. Um, also board I just would like to lift up that it's the intent to have additional study sessions beyond today on this particular topic before we get to the point of decision making in at our July 2026 board meeting. So um I'm quite excited about today's conversation. Um, we're going to have multiple opportunities, I'm sure, to hear more about the system, to be able to hear and receive feedback from our multiple educational partners throughout the state. their voice is so critical to this particular conversation as well and ultimately get us to that goal of establishing updated criteria for differentiated assistance that uh can better support those
189eleas that are of the greatest need most definitely and also those um who may not be in greatest need but also looking at how that support might look for those who might be in need at some point but are not quite at that level just yet. So we will have more conversation about that. So let me introduce to you who will be sharing with us this afternoon. We're first going to hear from Dr. Erica Torres from uh the California Department of Education and from Matt Navo from the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence. What they will do is provide an overview of our statewide system of support for eleas in need of targeted support including what's working well and also lifting up some of the challenges in the system at this current point. After they speak,
190we will hear from Dr. Kelsey Carlson from Weststead on the key findings and recommendation from their statewide evaluation of differentiated assistance including strategies for targeting resources where they can make the most difference. After she speaks, we're going to hear from Dr. Ed Manala from the El Dorado County Superintendent of Schools who will provide a local perspective of how differentiated assistance is working. um at the local level. And lastly, we will hear from uh Dr. Kirsten Carlson Leaf from American Institutes for Research on how other states are structuring their systems of support, including examples of successful models that may be helpful as we consider California's approach. A short summary of the models was included in attachment to to this item. So, as we jump into this conversation, I will turn it back over to President Darling
191Hammond. And again, quite excited. Wish I was there in person to engage in this discussion with you, but I'm definitely looking forward to all of the thoughts and ideas that come from our study session. President Darling Hammond, I'll turn it back over to you. >> And I'm gonna turn it over to Erica Torres. [laughter] So, >> thank you. >> Afternoon, President Dr. Dr. Darling Hammond, Vice President Dr. Glover Woods, members of the State Board of Education, Chief Deputy Superintendent Dr. Roberson. So honored to be with all of you today. My name is Erica Torres, and I have the honor of serving as deputy superintendent of public instruction for the student success and career readiness branch. So, it's really a privilege to join all of you uh for this study session where we're going to take
192a closer look at the differentiated assistant system and how it's designed to support the continuous improvement in districts, schools, and charter schools across the state of California. And so during the first part of our presentation today, I'm going to provide an overview of the background and context of California's differentiated assistance system or DA system. the key provisions under AB121 and its mandate to update the performance criteria by July 2026, the criterion supports that are tied to DA eligibility, the levels of support that are built into the statewide system, and then we're going to transition to Matt Navo, the executive director of the CCE, who will lead us through the trends, learnings, and opportunities. days ahead. And so, just as a reminder, differentiated assistance is part of California's statewide system of support, which is designed to
193ensure that every local educational agency, including districts, county offices of education, and charter schools have access to the supports that they need in order to increase student outcomes. And so the DA system is triggered by data uh but driven by collaboration um which is centered on the idea that every student group matters and that improvement should be rooted in local context capacity building and shared accountability. And today's session really offers all of us an opportunity to reflect on how DA is serving both as an accountability tool and a continuous improvement lever. And so just as a reminder, under Assembly Bill 121, the state board is required to update the DA performance criteria no later than July 15, 2026 in alignment with the findings from the state funded evaluation of the DA system and the need
194to appropriately focus resources where the demonstrated needs are the greatest. And so this language was added based on concerns um that the number of eleas eligible for DA support has been consistently high and so CCE will be able to share some of um that data in up upcoming slides during our presentation. So over the years the criteria for DA has evolved and grown um with the addition of new indicators and new student subgroups and there are questions as to whether DA in general um puts a strain on the system uh to adequately address the varying needs of all of our alas throughout the state of California and also at does it target the resources where there is a greatest So we were asked to be with all of you today um in this study session
195to just provide you with a general background of a DA and the system of support and then my colleagues with CCE will provide an overview of the challenges within the system when it comes to differentiated assistance. And so currently a district or county office of education is eligible for differentiated assistance when student group performance falls below the standards in two or more LCFF priority areas, local indicators, or a combination of both. And so once identified, the county superintendent or CDE works in partnership with the LEA to provide targeted technical assistance for at least two years um which is really focused on developing capacity, addressing root causes and improving student outcomes. And so I do want to share that charter schools follow the same criteria except identification must occur across two or more years in order
196to qualify. In all cases, DA is meant to support improvement to add to built systems that are responsive that are data driven and focused on long-term success for every student group. And so it's also important to note that the board's work on updating the DA criteria will definitely impact the third level of support in our system which is the direct technical assistance or DTA. Um, as shown in this slide, the criteria for DTA is linked to DA or differentiated assistance as districts and county offices of education are eligible for DTA if they have three or more student groups that meet the DA criteria in three out of four consecutive years. for eleas with less than three student groups. All of their student groups meet the criteria for three out of four consecutive years. And so
197charter schools are eligible for DTA from the CCE via four distinct pathways that are laid out in education code. However, of those four pathways, three pathways depend on the charter school meeting DA eligibility criteria. In this way, DTA for all LEAs regardless of type is closely connected to DA. And so, of course, my colleague from CCE will delve into this in the coming slides. And so, we know that we have different levels of support within our system of support. And so, level one, as we know, is universal support. And so this is support that is available statewide to all ELEAs and it includes tools and resources and professional learning. Level two is differentiated assistance which as I mentioned earlier is triggered by data and led by the county superintendent or CDE in partnership with the
198district. Level three is intensive support and it's really reserved for persistent multi-year challenges that really require deeper collaboration and expertise across agencies. And this tiered structure is designed to ensure that the level of support matches the level of need and that we build stronger systems through sustained relationships, ongoing learning, and shared responsibility across state and local partners. And so with that, I will now turn it over to my colleague, Mr. Dr. Matt Navo, executive director of the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence, um, to walk us through the trends, the opportunities, and what we're learning from the field as we prepare for the 2026 update. Welcome, Mr. Navo. >> Thank you, Erica. Good afternoon, and thank you, Madam President, Madame Vice Chair, members of the board for this opportunity to share. Um, it's a pleasure being
199here and for those of you that I haven't had the pleasure of meeting, as mentioned before, Matt Navo, executive director of the CCE. By way of a quick diversion, big shout out to my partner Kim Partio Bronson, who we both came on the board at the same time. So, I have been in that chair. Uh, but it's been some time ago and it's a pleasure to present from this from this position. Also, big thank you to the CD partners and state board partners, uh, particularly Katie, Michelle for helping get ready for this item. This is a meaty topic of my colleague uh Deputy Superintendent Eric Torres did a wonderful job of of laying the groundwork for me to share with you. I want to honor the fact that this is a very complicated and very
200uh there's very uh there's many moving parts with regards to this topic. So, I'll do my best to be as clear as possible around what's happening, some of the uh challenges, impacts, and most notably the opportunities. Uh this slide that you have in front of you, I'm assuming Erica, you have the slides moving. Okay. Uh this slide recognizes a couple of things and there's two points that I think are very clear here. One, the trends of eligibility for LEAs in differentiated assistance have decreased. I want to honor the open forum comments about there is room for growth and I think you as a board heard that. But I also think that it's very important to honor the hard work of our local practitioners, our county offices, our state agencies. Post pandemic, the impacts on students
201were tremendous. And the hard work and coordination and articulation that it has taken to decrease the numbers of LEAs in need of differential assistance has been a monumental lift. I want to recognize that. I think you deserve as a board an opportunity to celebrate even the small wins that are happening in the state around these issues. As noted in the opening comments, our Mad President noted, this is a very very uh complex assessment, much more complex than most states have. And I think it's notable to just recognize that and uh recognize the achievements. So differentiated assistance has dropped into 20 2022 of over 600 LEAs to now 2024 um just over 400 LEAs. I think another point of particular notice here is you'll see the green line. Those are long-term English learners that have now
202surpassed um the identification of LEAs. They have surpassed students with disabilities. Uh, of note, uh, Deputy Superintendent Eric Erica Torres mentioned charters. Charters need two years of data, uh, to be collected before they are eligible. So, they were eligible first in uh, 2023. They will be eligible this fall for differentiated assistance in one of those four pathways uh, previously mentioned. So, you will see uh, some changes to this. Uh, the trend may uh, go up, the trend may continue to fall. All of that to be said, I think it's important to celebrate the efforts here. The trends are moving in the right directions and the adjustments are being made. However, there are challenges associated with what you see here and I'll go into that. Uh the next slide talks a little bit about direct technical
203assistance uh specific to CCE and there's a story behind this that I think is uh tells a much broader story of what's happening across the state but I'll flag a a couple of key components for you. You'll notice that there are 54 districts in what the system of support calls tier three. So the system of support is divided into universal, targeted, and intensive. It has been on a three-year phase journey of coordination uh collaboration and integration and CCE sits in uh the most intensive part of that three- tiered support with state agencies and local practitioners and county offices. In 2021, seven [snorts] districts were identified for direct technical assistance and today you have uh 54. Of those 54, 23 24, 15 LEAs moved out of eligibility for direct technical assistance and 15 new districts came
204in. So you'll notice there that 39 districts uh stayed in the services of direct technical assistance. Within direct technical assistance, these 54 leas have 54 different stories and 54 different unique needs. of which county offices there are 26 as you see on the map represented uh in this collaborative structure. The note here is that they are also tiered into a level of support of collaborative planning, collaborative facilitation and embedded partnership. Embedded partnership being the most intensive support that uh uh agencies can provide of those DTA student groups. You'll see below that the largest student groups triggering direct technical assistance for this uh 2425 students with disabilities, homeless, foster, and African-American students. I think of note here uh something to point out is that current ED code requires a deep collaboration and consultation amongst agencies that
205are serving the the eleas eligible for the most intensive tiered of support. What that means is it is uh constrained by time. It is also constrained by simply leas who do not qualify to be identified for differentiated assistance or direct technical assistance uh but who may need support and I'm going to talk about that in the subsequent slides. I think something that is connected to this consultation is that in our current time frame, you identify leas who are eligible for direct technical assistance in the fall. the coordination of agencies to determine what what what the current u plan of support has been to ascertain if there's a deeper level of support that is needed occurs then after November between December and March because of the volume of uh districts in direct technical assistance and in
206differentiated assistance it is taking the counties 58 counties and ccede and other partners within the statewide system of support that are needed huge amounts of time to coordinate collaborate and determine the level of support by the time you turn determine the level of support you're in March you are now heading into state testing for the new year that gives you then then summer and fall to implement of which some of those districts will come immediately out of direct technical assistance and new ones will come in. So you can see the dilemma in time frame. We have too many LEAs in need of technical assistance and as a result of that I would use the analogy you have too many in the emergency room from a heart condition to a broken arm and the system is
207being stretched a mile wide and an inch deep on its ability to uh counter some of the deeprooted issues in the districts that are in need of differentiated assistance and technical assistance. So, that being said, I'll go to the challenges. I'm not going to go through every bullet here. I know you can read these, but I'm going to highlight just a couple of bullets for the sake of time. Uh, Madam Chair, I want to honor the opportunity for you to be in dialogue. On the challenges, I'll honor the two uh first two bullets. The current driver of criteria for DA has identified approximately threequarters of all school districts. That being said, LEAs um are are being triggered into the on an annual dashboard which be creates a level of unpredictability. Noted I I identified that
208in the DTA 15 in and 15 out of which they are required uh technical assistance providers to provide some level of support to them and as I noted in the previous slide the time span is short. So what we need to think about here is some way to mitigate the number of districts that actually require the intensive support or at least allow the system to be be able to identify those districts and to target the issues around improving teaching and learning in within the short amount of time that they have or I would argue within a longer time of support that is needed. Uh even though we have stretched the county office ability to support for two years, those of you that know the the the intensive detail it requires to dive into teaching and
209learning to support math or language arts. It requires a much more intensive amount of time and support to prioritize resources and personnel in that. Uh second, lack of recip reciprocal accountability across LEAs NTA TA uh providers, county offices and GEO leads. There's a lack of time for LEAs to address the deeprooted areas that that are required and because of that it mitigates the opportunity to create an reciprocal accountability that has uh the ability to address the deeprooted issues. And I'm not referring to accountability that has a connotation around just standardized test scores. There are issues with our partners, our local partners that require the system to address uh leadership dysfunction, governance structures, fiscal structures, community issues. Those issues that impact the ability to um improve teaching and learning prevent the system from developing the time,
210the trust, and the vulnerability that is dependent on reciprocal accountability. Meaning that when I show up into this space to support you as an LEA, I share that responsibility as much as you do. And given the constraints uh that I just outlined in the previous slides around some of these uh con the meetings and coordination that is required it it sometimes delays and prevents that clarity and coherence from being achieved around a shared vision of improving teaching and learning. Um the next slide I'll go to I'll talk a little bit about as a result of that you have some impacts on the system and of these four bullets I'm going to hit the first bullet and the second and the third bullet eleas as you as a board have discussed are overloaded by numerous priorities
211and plans and initiatives. this uh this a as a result of this it fragments the mindsets around a compliance driven uh get out of support uh mindset the the vision of the board and I have happened to have been on the board when we developed some of the structures so this is not a referendum on state leadership I was part of the opportunity to do that but I think that this opportunity presents us with a with what the board had envisioned which was a continuous improvement methodology around getting better at getting better. And so this gives us an opportunity to take stock of what has happened as a result of the impacts uh the decisions we made and what those impacts are. But in this particular uh with this particular impact on the system because
212of the numerous initiatives, priorities and plans that eleas are focused to write particularly I will call out small county offices that need to support leas geographic spread or small leas who are dependent on one or two personnel to address all of these. the mindset can't can't they can't get to a mindset around contingent improvement because they're driven by a mindset to get out of compliance so they can begin to address the issues that are uh so important to them. LEAs then become a mile wide and an inch deep on school improvement and technical assistance providers are trying to be uh sensitive to that issue and they also are a mile wide and an inch deep. So the system needs more time here and that's what that bullet uh identifies. The third bullet, a lack of
213authority and mechanisms. This is a this is a particularly challenging issue for the system of support. Districts with the greatest needs are not always identified. That the LEAs with small end sizes run into current situations where they may require uh deep assistance yet are not identified in our current structure as in need. Uh this also creates a uh a situation where when you're using CAS performance as a proxy for academic performance, it seems to present a level of inconsistency for differentiated assistance and identification. In one example here in the central valley, you have a an LEA who quite frankly their special education population is outperforming the general education population with with a sister LEA in the same county and that district outperforms the state average on state on ELA and math and that district is
214identified for differentiated assistance Yet the district whose special education or general education population is not achieving as high as the special education population in another district is not identified. And what that does is it doesn't mean that county offices aren't aware of it. But the current structure forces the county offices and the technical assistance providers to collaborate around a district who's outperforming the state average to determine a level of support for a district who's outperforming the state average in ELA and math. And yet there are no resources to be able to provide the flexibility or the uh the need around the district who may need it more. And so that is a that is an issue that the that the uh system is challenged with. And there's no better example of this and Deputy SE
215Superintendent Erica Torres can speak to this than Englewood. Englewood is a district that has ha has every major um technical assistance provider within it. ThickMap, CDE, county office, CCE and others. They have been in that level of support for over a decade and the the the dilemma to coordinate resources to determine uh the types of need that Englewood needs. Uh they need a coordinated support effort. Uh yet there are other districts in the county who may be performing lower and resources are are are there in Englewood. And it's not that they shouldn't. It's just an identification that um they are the technical assistants are required to be there and in some cases there are leas who are in need of greater support in those communities. So lastly, the opportunities. I think there's great opportunity and
216what I'll say here is in bullet one and two. Uh the opportunities these are being moved within the system of support through the uh energy of the technical assistance providers, county offices, geographic leads. They are already working to address these opportunities and to improve the um outcomes for students. But I'll just hit these briefly. The first bullet is establish a more a more precise criteria. We need to think about at least how do we identify the districts with the greatest need for level uh for targeted and intensive so that county offices and uh CCE and CDE can focus on those who need it most. In the example I provided of two districts, the district who is outperforming the state average in ELA and math yet finds itself in differentiated assistance is probably not the best
217use of resources. So how do we figure out how to identify a structure that pinpoints to the district that really needs it? A clear decision-making authority. This is something that's happening within the ELEAS already. But when you think about roles and responsibilities, you have a convergence of resources and we should celebrate that as a state. But you have a convergence of resources on an LEA and Inglewood is a good example. CCE, CDE, thick map, county offices and geographic leads. And there could be some flexibility within ED code that allows those systems to determine how best to collaborate and coordinate because currently each of them has an education code defined objective certain responsibilities and outcomes and currently what's happening is they're trying to align those uh responsibilities together uh to make sense for the LEA. But
218if you think of it from the LEA's perspective, there are many many support partners in districts and particularly for small and rural that becomes um incredibly overwhelming. So the system is working right now to try to align and streamline that um those compliance obligations so that leas are are set up better for success. And last but not least, uh strengthen high quality technical assistance. This is our current structure. We have a DA funding model that currently is funding a weight to fail. So, county offices are funded by the number of LEAs that qualify for differentiated assistance. We need to provide stability and flexibility in how we fund county offices so that they can focus on the early intervention and prevention needs and enhance the universal supports for all LEAs in their county as opposed to
219being funded to say you must you are funded to serve these LEAs who are in greatest need. And they feel uh that their obligation to meet state expectations is very important. And so in doing so, uh, we're missing some of those ELEAs who are most in need. So, Madame Chair, I will pause. Welcome to questions. I know this is a a very complex uh issue. I want to be sensitive to answering any clarifying questions or wonderings, but also don't want to slow you all down from what you need to uh attend to. >> Very very helpful. Um, we do have a lot of presentations. Um but this was a very meaty one. So I do want to take time for clarifying questions if there are any maybe about five minutes or so before we move
220on to the next um presentation. So are there I've got like a page of notes which we'll come back to, but are there clarifying questions for Matt before he leaves us? >> Yes. Yes. Member Olen, >> thank you. Um this is super helpful. Thank you both so much for um laying out so clearly um what exists and what the challenges and opportunities are. Um so I have two um probably silly questions. Um but the first one >> is a silly question. >> I didn't call it a dumb question. So there [laughter] so um the first one was um in one of the slides which now I've moved past you talked about um an LEA being dual eligible both for um differentiated assistance and direct technical support DT yeah >> and DTA um how does I'm
221not sure based on what I read I understand how that's possible >> is that for Matt or for Erica >> whoever can answer. [laughter] >> Erica, did you did you want to take it? >> Yeah. So, thank you so much for the question. I'm gonna invite my colleague Anaisa Sonnenberg who is our manager of our system of support office. So, one of the slides referred to LEAs that could be eligible both for differentiated assistance and um direct technical. Yep. Um and I wasn't sure how you would be eligible for both at the same time. >> The reason why is because the criteria for the direct technical assistant is relying upon the criteria of the um actual differentiated assistance. So in typical cases, it is an LEA that has been eligible or met that criteria for
222eligibility for three out of four consecutive years. So when we do um what's called the LCF assistance file that shows the type of assistance that an LEA is eligible for, which could be general assistance or uh differentiated assistance. That's done first. Um and then um our AMAR division then looks at those LEAs that have met that criteria for the DTA and so they become eligible for both. >> So are all ELEAs who are eligible for DTA therefore eligible for both? >> Uh correct. Unless oh there may be a case in which the out of the four years and the fourth year um they were not eligible but out of the three the uh previous three years they were they would meet that eligibility for DTA. So you may say something like uh year two for
223direct technical assistance they didn't meet the the DA for that year but they still meet the criteria for direct technical assistance. >> Great. Thank you. Okay. So that was my first clarifying question. I don't know if you should go away yet. [laughter] >> This one's I think this one's different. Um my second one was related to the comment about funding for county offices of education related to the number of eleas who are in DA. Um I guess my question is is that one of many funding streams? >> Thank you. It's part of the principal aortionment. So there is a formula that is is calculated. So first um all uh 58 county offices of education receive a $300,000 uh base uh funding as part of their principal portionment so that they can um in effect participate
224in any differentiated assistance activities in their county or even providing it to maybe another LEA outside their county. Um and then based on the eligibility list for differentiated assistance, uh county offices receive additional funding as part of that formula. So for each um small district, which is one to 2,999 students, they've receive an additional $100,000. Uh for a midsize district, which goes up to uh 9,999 students is $200,000 um for each of those. And then for every large district 10,000 students or more, they receive an additional $300,000. So I believe in the um the last um principal a portionment um it was about $115 million that was going out to county offices of education for differentiated assistance. >> Gotcha. And can I ask one followup to my follow-up? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Then I'm
225done. I promise. Um so those funding streams related to DA those um are for two years because no it's for each year they meet the CR uh the eligibility. So, um if a if a district is in what we call year two, meaning they didn't meet the criteria for DA again, but they rem they remain um eligible for the support because the support cycle is two years. Um it doesn't trigger additional money. However, they still have that base funding that is there to help keep the county office engaged with some type of funding to help support that funding. Also, I probably should add charter schools. The um county offices also receive $100,000 per charter school eligible for DA. >> Thank you. >> Um I think Vice President Glover Woods, did you have your hand up
226for uh >> Yes, I did. I I I had my virtual hand up. >> Yes, >> I shall lower my virtual hand. Thank you. Uh just a clarifying question. And I I recall in reading the item that we have eleas that have been eligible more than once, if you will. So my uh clarifying question is do in those instances where LEA has been eligible for differentiated assistance more than once, are they eligible for the same priority areas and or student groups or does that vary as well? >> That varies with the dashboard every year, right? You could go into DA with two student groups one year and a different student groups another year. It might be in math. It might be in science a different year. It doesn't it's not stable. >> That was my
227that was my guest. Thank you for giving voice to it. President Darling Hammond and u I am done but reserve the right to raise my virtual hand later on. And I do want to move us along because there's a lot in this study session but I don't want to you know cut off important information that you need. So if there are other quick clarifying questions at this juncture we can there anybody I mean because this is a complicated system you know what how it gets triggered and and all of that and you'll you can begin to see and you'll see more throughout the session why we're taking a look at it. Uh, any other quick clarifying questions at this point? All right. Oh, yes. I'm sorry. Uh, member Patello Branson. Um, on the opportunity slide,
228the first bullet I think combines two uh categories that I think of as somewhat different. One is around criteria for identification um, which is obviously a very wide net at this point. Um and then the other is around identifying sort of who gets resources. Part of what I'm wondering is if it's possible to disagregate those two because there seems to be a function of identification which is about communication and sort of data as flashlight to put people and eleas on alert as to there is something that needs to be addressed right as distinct from a sorting and prioritization exercise which says even among a cohort of of eleas who have needs to address this is what rises to the top and is most urgent. So maybe the first question is does it seem plausible for
229you all to disagregate those two and then secondly among eleas who aren't getting a lot of resources are you seeing that data as flashlight early warning alert system being a an effective means of prompting action introspection and change within So, thank you so much for the thank you for the question. So, we're if it's okay, we'll get back to you. We do have to connect with our colleagues who support with uh providing the data that we that's used for differentiated assistance um and respond uh once we're able to consult. Thank you. I think we can thank you very much for this part of the presentation and move on to our next presenter at this point. Thank you so much. Um who uh our next person is Dr. Kelsey Crossen from Westad, one of the authors
230of the report that we have referenced that uh flags some of the considerations for u the differentiated assistance program. So Kelsey, please begin. Thank you, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and to the board um for inviting me to speak today about Westad's 2022 evaluation of differentiated assistance. So, just really quickly, I'm going to talk a little bit about the purpose of the evaluation, our research approach, key findings, recommendations, and then a little bit of time for questions. Okay. Okay. Um I think as was mentioned earlier the u evaluation was funded through the 2021 budget bill. It was we were coming up on five years since implementation of the system of support and coming out of the pandemic. So really an important time to be looking at the state's infrastructure for supporting improvement in
231the state. And the budget bill outlined five areas of focus for the evaluation. And I'm going to give you sort of an abbreviated version of our findings and recommendations across these five elements. Um, importantly, the evaluation was of just DA, not the system of support as a whole. Um, it was also a statewide evaluation. We didn't evaluate individual counties or districts um as part of the evaluation. and the evaluation called for really broad input from interest holders who are involved in the work of of the system of support and DA um specifically. So um that really helped uh create the foundation for our research approach and data collection efforts. Um our team took an assetsbased approach to the evaluation. So we really wanted to identify not just you know what wasn't working in the system
232where there was areas for improvement but also really what was working in DA at the time. So uh we took a mixed methods approach to the research. We conducted an impact analysis to understand whether or not um identification or eligibility for DA was making an impact on student outcomes. We did some descriptive analyses, document review, survey, focus groups. You can see some of the groups that were involved there. We interviewed about 80 um participants through focus groups and interviews and we administered three surveys and with the help of some of our um state membership organizations were able to get a you know a really robust response and representative response to the three surveys that we administered. Okay, the findings. So, first I'm going to focus on um impact and delivery of support. Although the results
233weren't consistent um from year to year, the impact analysis did find that DA had a positive impact on student outcomes and the likelihood of eligibility for DA in subsequent years. Um there were limitations to those data. We were just coming out of the pandemic. Um we only had two years of data. Um but nonetheless showed some impact there. We also learned um from our interviews and surveys that counties and districts uh generally had a really positive uh view of DA. Um but there was also uh variation in the quality of DA including a gap between county offices of ed perceptions of the quality of DA and districts perceptions of the quality of DA. And we found um that one in 10 districts reported either low or very low quality of support. Um so an important
234element of any accountability and support system is making sure that we are identifying those schools serving students with the greatest need and then um targeting resources. This is a repeating theme to those schools um to support students. And so additionally that means that we have to limit the number of leas that are identified because by nature our our DA providers are also limited. Um and so we need to so one of the things that we heard from districts um as we were approaching release of the 2022 dashboard um was concern about the number of districts that would be identified after the pandemic with really spiking rates of chronic absenteeism and other factors. um that there would be this large spike in the number of districts identified and that it would overwhelm the system and that
235there was a need to really think about um the sustainability of the accountability system under the current um identification criteria and I'm going to go into a couple of diff additional areas in which the identification criteria came up in our interviews and through our research um related to uh the application in alternative schools and and county run schools and districts serving um groups of students with the small end sizes which I know has come up um already. Um so we heard um uh from many of our um countyrun school leaders um as well as some we've um heard from other alternative schools that in some context um the data on the dashboard just shows very little change from year to year and may not actually be appropriate for measuring student performance. And in some cases,
236even when students were making um large gains, that that still wouldn't the the LEA would still remain eligible for differentiated assistance. And in some cases, in some of these schools, um students may attend the school for just part of the year, a few weeks, a few months. And so it's it's challenging for the county off office of education um or the school leaders to really have a meaningful impact on those student outcomes. And so leaders voiced concerns um that their LEAs may be eligible for DA in perpetuity. Um, as Matt uh mentioned also um student the size of a student group size um in an LEA is um important for uh whether or not they um there's a possibility of eligibility for for DA student group um performance only generates a dashboard color if it's
237more than 30 u with the exception of foster youth, homeless and els. Um and we did a just descriptive analysis looking at um student group LEAs with smaller student groups. And um what we found is across across California, the vast majority of students do attend LEAs um where their student group does um generate a dashboard color. Um and there are um a number of student groups um students uh uh more dispersed populations based on enrollment size or just this dispersion um of a particular student group across the state where they're less likely um to generate a dashboard color and then less likely um to become um eligible for DA and therefore access the the um set of services that are attached and supports that are attached to DA. So here this is example around um
238only 30 to 40% of districts receive a dashboard color for African-American students performance. Um the third alignment uh the third element in the study we looked at the alignment between DA and the dashboard and the LCAP. Um I won't spend a lot of time on this. Um the dashboard is the foundation for DA eligibility. Um there was uh we heard from our system leaders that generally there was a lot of alignment here. Um and all I think uh this is just important to know this is this was an area of focus uh for the state back in 2122 and an important thing to attend to you know in adjusting any elements of the system that that alignment continues. We also looked at alignment between the state and federal accountability systems. Um and what we found
239is that there was a high degree of duplication um in in um eligibility. So uh 81% of districts that were eligible for DA were also eligible for uh school level assistant assistance under ESSA. and those um and system leaders shared with us that those each came with their own separate reporting requirements, processes, improvement um uh processes as well. Um notably also 40% of districts with at least one school that was eligible through the fellow federal accountability system were not eligible for DA. Um so that's some indication that there are schools within districts that are demonstrating um substantial need that are not um getting offered the supports through through TA. Okay. The last element was around challenges challenges and opportunities. Um we heard uh from system leaders just the the incredible limits on staff time um
240concerns about inconsistent staffing when There's lots of turnover at the district level when districts were identified for multiple years for DA and the counties one year were working with one set of leaders, the next year a different set of leaders and some of the challenges that came with that. Um, and even though this was not a question that we asked about, it came up over and over with our leaders, just the overwhelming and increasing administrative burden um and a desire to repurpose that time to focus on improvement work and more strategic efforts. And then finally, um just uh we we heard that some DA eligible county offices and districts were unwilling or reluctant to engage in DA. Um and some still viewed it as a as punitive. Okay. So all of the recommendations come directly
241out of those findings. Um we did recommend revising elig eligibility criteria with context with a focus um on those alternative schools and eleas with um student groups that are the end sizes are too small to be eligible. We also recommended um studying the implications of migrating to a single method of identifying leas for support um to uh to address that lack of alignment between federal and state accountability systems. Reducing administr administrative burden um evaluating local capacity to provide DA given the variability in support. Um here uh incorporating opportun for peer learning. That was something we heard from many districts, a desire that DA uh would involve opportunities to learn from other districts and an opportunity for eleas to access uh the DA provider that best meets their needs and um helping support CD's capacity to
242provide DA. And then the last slide here has the set of recommendations that have either been enacted or already in progress. So, um, it's very satisfying as a research to see your work actually be put into action. >> Uh, while we're asking questions here, maybe we could go ahead and reboot the Zoom for Cynthia, right? We have to uh for a moment take it offline. Um, so that um Oh, I see Cynthia moving. Oh, okay. We need to reboot the Zoom so that everything is working properly technologically. So, we'll take a couple minutes for that. Can we continue with clarification questions while we're doing that? >> Okay, we're going to take a two-minute break. [laughter] Talk amongst yourselves, >> but not about board business. [laughter] Thank you for your attention. Here we go. >> I
243think the Zoom should be working. I don't see um Cynthia or Matt on it. Do we need to wait for them to pop up here? >> There's Cynthia. Okay. >> All right. We're we're good. Okay. So, um are there any clarifying questions for Kelsey is the is where we are. That was a very clear presentation. We appreciated it. It was good to revisit the report. Remember Yoshimoto Tarry? >> A quick clarifying question. And on one of your slides, it talked about who you surveyed or who you spoke to in your mixed method survey, and it said district leaders and charter school um leaders. Can you clarify like what types of positions of folks did you speak to in districts and charter schools? >> He spoke to superintendent and school leaders. uh for the most part
244in the case of um the CO we we also spoke to for eligible county offices of education we spoke to those who are involved in DA as a recipient for the county run schools. So that was the exception and we just spoke to a limited number of charter schools because they weren't actually um receiving DA at the time of the study. >> All right, any other clarifying questions? Yes, member Escobedo. >> I was just curious in your I'm not understanding your uh findings where you said that the results were not statistically significant yet there was a positive impact just sounds like it's a contradiction. So >> I think it was statistically significant for one of the years under that were studied. So, and I can look back this I focused on the qualitative component of
245the study, but it was statistically significant for for one year to the next. So, >> okay, >> that was misleading. >> Thank you. >> And that was back when there were about 300 districts rather than the 600 we had after the pandemic. Yeah. Uh, yes. Member Patillo Bronson. >> Um, for the recommendations slide 16, um, the the eligibility criteria bullet around um basically lifting out eleas with too small of end sizes makes sort of a lot of sense on its face. I'm wondering how that would or if at all interact with the other finding on slide 11 around um African-American student performance already being underrepresented by dashboard colors. Would that exacerbate that? Would that how do you see those two interacting? an attempt to address that issue so that um that students in uh districts
246that don't have enough students of a single student group to be eligible um there would be a pathway to eligibility or support. So, for example, you could reduce the end size would be like a I I think all of this is work that you know would need to be modeled into the system. But, um so if the end size was reduced, students who are now in a district serving 15 African-American students may then um it it would be possible for them to be eligible for support. So you would see the eligibility criteria bullet as expanding not reducing eligibility. >> Uh so I think um there's the recommendation isn't around expanding or or um reducing the number of eleas but more around ensuring that um schools and districts serving students with the greatest needs are getting
247access to the supports available through DA. All right, thank you very much. Um, with that, I'd love to move us along um, if we can to the next uh, speaker. We have a local perspective from Dr. Ed Manisala, who is our Elorado County Superintendent of Schools. Ed, there he is. Thank you for being here. And do we have his slides queued up? I guess they're coming. All right. >> Good afternoon. >> Hey, good to see you. >> Good to see you, President Dr. Darling Hammond, and of course, Vice President Cynthia Glover Woods and members of the State Board of Education. It's a privilege to be with you, to partner with you, and of course, CDE, CC, and all of the other um important partners of that make up the statewide system of support. It's a
248um privilege to be able to articulate this body of work from policy to practice and specifically focusing um on our county, Elorado County. So, as um already has been noted, the statewide system of support was a significant shift for county offices of education and I would say the field as a whole. Uh this is my 10th year as the county superintendent in Elorado County and I entered the county office in 2013 at the time of the inception of LCFF. So uh this idea of focusing on continuous improvement, capacity building and coherence and system alignment was a shift in mindset in practice and approach not only for the county office but even our partnering districts. So one example would be anytime a district is eligible for differentiated assistance, I am making a personal call to each
249of those superintendents and sharing them again what the approach is because you as you can imagine receiving a call that you're eligible. This is a a shift in practice and approach especially when we're looking at it from a partnership um vantage point. Just want to highlight the the reminder the statutory requirements and then our approach as a county office looking at systems um and in particular looking at the tier one supports and differentiated assistance. I know the there's been a lot of explanation of what that is but just acknowledging our statutory role. So, let's dive into our journey. Um, really looking at how differentiated assistance unfolded for our county, um, specifically since 2017 to present. But I want to give you a sense of who we are. So, if you have not been to South
250Lake Tahoe before, if you have, if you're just traveling east on Highway 50, you leave Sacramento County, you enter uh the west side of Elorado County, and if you drive all the way to the Southshore, you've cut across our entire county. We're made up of 15 school districts, 67 schools, 25 plus thousand students. But I want to acknowledge that um there's a high level of trust and collaboration amongst the superintendent in our county. And we do um really honor the autonomy and uh of each local school district, but we also recognize we are interdependent. And what do I mean by that? There are 12 TK districts that feed into one high school district and two unified districts in Elorado County. So this is when we're thinking of systems either from a classroom to a school
251to a district, we're also looking at it from a countywide perspective. In 2016 2017, um we as leaders, superintendents, and some of our superintendents are superintendent principles. Um we meet monthly. We retreat one day in the fall, actually tomorrow, and we retreat two days in the spring. And in 2017 in the unfolding of the statewide system of support in the context of LCFF, we committed to focus on instruction and learning. We will have a laser focus on that still appreciating and not minimizing all of the indicators of the dashboard. But again, I want to want you to um anchor in that idea with us as I share the story. Just to give you a sense of the um rotating number of districts in DA in our county starting from 2017 to 2024, you see the
252um increase of districts uh being eligible for DA. And in 2022 when we had 400 plus districts in DA, you see that spike even in Elorado County primarily because of chronic absenteeism. What were the areas of focus? Um, again just acknowledging while there are 14 student groups and the multiple priorities, here are three themes that continue to emerge. Chronic absenteeism, suspension rates, and academic performance. Even looking at um students with disabilities in particular in respect to ELA and math are just examples to again demystify of what what it looks like in one county. Let me give you a sense of our DA journey. Um in 2017 18 we were really focusing on our continuous improvement methodology. It was just a real deep dive. But what we began to recognize as has already been stated districts
253coming in for one year and fortunately now we're providing a level of support for two years. There's just this rotating um identification. We are just acknowledging that change takes time. An actual practice with limited time frames create challenges. And while root cause analysis identifies the why, we needed time to look at the entire system. For example, in December, this in our early implement implementation, we would receive the dash results, dashboard results. We'd be meeting with our districts in January, March um through May. There would be short time frames with limited opportunity to engage our districts and again made it difficult to really approach um changes within the system and our district leaders were held accountable for in indicators that were shifting annually. And of course we wanted to really push evidence-based strategies and improvement but
254in that context it was difficult. So there were challenges on our journey and it again it was just the the rotating indicators but we wanted to keep our eye on instruction and learning. Um, as a gentle reminder, while we were focusing on the implementation, um, and what we would describe as moving targets year-to-year, there were other compounding challenges. Just giving you a sense of what was occurring at the local level. We were dealing with public health issues with COVID, equity issues, even in the context of COVID, access to technology, um, housing issues, and even just access to basic needs, climate changes. In 2022, we in Elorado County dealt with a 220,000 acre fire, closed six districts and 20 schools, all in the context of differentiated assistance. Um, of course, we are constantly dealing with school
255safety and belonging issues. Um, even today, as we know, we're dealing with advanced technology like AI and addressing that. And of course, teacher and staffing shortages. Again, just creating an appreciation of what's occurring in the local level that I know you're you're already aware of. On our DA journey, we started to recognize a need to focus on foundational strengths and gaps and really look at a systems level approach focusing more on tier one um supports. And we wanted to be proactive and not reactive. The system currently is designed to be a reactive um approach. We go into the districts when indicators arise. So, our shift began, let me go back, I'm sorry. Um, our shift began with recognizing that true change requires systems level thinking and not isolated interventions. We moved from reacting to problems
256towards building proactive sustainable structures of support. We focused, as I was sharing, on strengthening tier one, the universal level of support that s that reaches all schools and students. We emphasize collaboration across departments within our county as well as working with our districts to promote coherence and shared learning. And this approach position EDCO as a proactive partner in district improvement. Let me give you a sense of our theory of action that we are identifying in our experiences with DA. We provide strong coherent tier one system level supports if we do and districts scale high leverage strategies in identified areas of focus that could be be mathematics or ELA. Then we embed coaching for teachers and leaders. This will build sustainable district capacity for improved outcomes and as a result outcomes for students will improve. So
257this theory connects every strand of our work from coaching and data to leadership development. It emphasizes alignment between strategy, implementation and evaluation. This clarity helps maintain focus ensuring that our actions consistently reinforce our core purpose improving teaching and learning. It reflects a mindset shift from isolated activities to sustained capacity building work. So let me give you an example of what tier one system level of supports look like for us. Again, this is not an exhaustive list, but some examples. We anchor our work in four interconnected pillars. Instructional practices, coaching, leadership, and data. High lever instructional practices ensure classroom consistency and quality instruction across schools. coaching for implementation supports educators in transfer transferring professional learning into daily practice with fidelity to some extent the we are in early implementation um and yet again just trying to
258be explicitly clear in terms of what we're focusing on building leadership capacity ensures sustainability empowers site and district leaders to create change and build upon their systems and data and progress monitoring keep our focus on continuous improvement and accountability at every level. I want to acknowledge um just a body of work we've been partnering with California ed partners um in this area of systems work and focusing on mathematics across our county. As a county office, we want to build capacity to provide supports to our districts and yet at the same time honor partners who have been doing good work in this space and adding value to our LEAs. So again, um you'll see us engage in partnerships with other entities while we're providing direct support. So in uh on this slide, um you see tier
259one supports establish clear expectations and align effective practice across districts. We prioritize ongoing professional learning and coaching to build teacher and administrator capacity. It's not about come to our county office and we are going to you to provide one day of professional development. It is not that. We're actually looking at building the system over time. Progress is monitored through data analysis and shared accountability structures. And this work promotes consistency in instructional quality. Learning to or leading to stronger outcomes countywide. And our ultimate goal is coherence from system to classroom, ensuring every student benefits from a unified approach. Let's bring it down to a very local level and highlight Sierra House Elementary in Lake Tahoe Unified. At Sierra House Elementary in Lake Tahoe Unified, we're looking at this body of work within system level work that's
260translating directly to student success. Teachers engage in continuous professional learning for math instruction and implementation high leverage practices over multiple years. A PACE study found these students improved faster than their district peers overall and we're seeing achievement even gain even throughout our county. This example demonstrates how adult learning and system coherence accelerate student growth. It reinforces the central idea improving systems leads to better teaching which leads to better learning. I think in particular too um one area that we're seeing in working with Sierra House is the need to provide consistent support and leadership capacity around the principal and the teacher leaders. It's just an emerging and consistent need. So closing thoughts, teaching and learning are at the heart of DA in our county and I would say across our our colleagues across the state. Our
261focus remains squarely on instructional improvement and as a county office of education, we're uniquely positioned to lead capacity building. We're situated close um to our districts for the long term. Um and we recognize that while there are highlights and challenges, just giving you a glimpse of our body of work. Um the DA process is about cultivating sustainable systemic growth and EDCO's journey exemplifies how collaboration and coherence can drive continuous improvement. Tomorrow we're going to meet with our county superintendents for a one-day retreat. We're going to open up. We're going to be focusing in the context of the systems that I just articulated to just emerging needs not only that are identified in the DA process, but we're seeing just different challenging behaviors at varying levels of the system and we're looking at how do we
262provide those comprehensive supports. We'll pivot in the afternoon just to look at being um anticipative a learner centered um system and anticipating all of the the challenges. That's why we're looking at just a profile of a graduate as the state board has been speaking to bringing individuals who've been really leaning into that space statewide, nationally, even globally and just again looking at um who we are as a system. Again, we are one county of 58. I would almost describe it as a ven diagram. I think that there are many components of DEA that would harmonize and um be fully aligned with what we're experiencing. And then there will be other unique stories in other counties and how they're approaching DA. But that is the intent of LCFF to honor and develop our systems in a
263responsive way um at the local level. Thank you. won't go away yet. Thank you. [laughter] Um, very helpful. Are there any clarifying questions for Ed? I think it paints a good picture of where one might want to be heading. Thank you so much. We appreciate it. >> You're a good teacher. Everybody [laughter] understood everything you had to say. Um, all right. So, uh, our last presentation is from Kristen Carlson Laflotch, who is from the AIR, American Institutes of Research. Um, and she's going to talk to us about what is happening in some other states that have successful models. >> Good afternoon. Anyone hear me? Well, >> yes, that's good. Thank you. >> How do you pronounce your last name? >> Lock. Thank you. >> Oh, at any rate, uh, yes, I'm Kirsten Laflak. with the
264American Institutes for Research and I'd like to extend my thanks to the board president and vice president and the esteemed members of the board to have an opportunity to talk to you in the context of this really interesting study session about differentiated accountability in California. I'm going to be talking about not California but two different states um Massachusetts and Michigan both of which also focus on districts as the unit of change and the driver of um the improvement process. So very quickly I'm going to talk about a few features of statewide systems of support getting sort of the the national view almost and highlighting some challenges uh for statewide systems of support and then I'm going to showcase these two states Massachusetts and Michigan. So first I want to situate this conversation in a broader
265theory of action of accountability. So accountability certainly has multiple steps from the performance uh measuring performance identifying uh schools and districts based on that performance all the way down to ultimately we hope changing behavior at the local level and improving student outcomes. We've heard a little bit in some of the other presentations about um measurement and identification of districts and I'm going to be focusing in on this part in green which is really about the provision of supports and resources to the districts most in need. So, I'm going to drill down a little bit more um and taking a look at statewide systems of support, which states have had in place for for several decades now, sometimes with uh mixed results. These are generally anchored by a state's own theory of action of change, which
266it is in turn informed by the state context, including the state history, resources, local policies. Federal policies often influence this as well. But the provision of support um often has three key components looking across multiple states. First among these is the human capital component. Individuals or teams who provide direct support to districts and schools in need. States may engage members of their own state education agency, intermediate agencies such as the county offices of education here in California. um states may have a vendor list where there are approved contractors that districts can then contract with to provide the support. Quite often these individuals um when they are under contract with the SCA or with a district are um retired teachers, retired administrators. So that imposes some constraints on the pool of people who actually engage in
267this type of work. In complement to that human capital component, there are systems, tools, processes that the states establish to anchor and guide the improvement process at the local level. And finally, there are fiscal resources. Generally, there are funds, grants that are intended to support the the change process. Across the board, the intent is that these resources will drive an a continuous improvement process. and states actually vary quite little in how they frame that continuous improvement process. And these collectively should be driving, we hope, improved student outcomes. Now, I'd like to point to one challenge that some states grapple with, which is what to how to interact with the persistently very lowest performing districts in their states. And sometimes states feel that they need to enact more directive interventions in these very lowest performing districts.
268And I'll be talking about that a little bit in the context of Massachusetts. But there are some other challenges that states face and I've heard these alluded to in the conversations that preceded my presentation. These could be challenges related to quality, especially in the context where there is a large number of districts that are identified or schools. In some cases, resources are spread too thin. That can compromise the intensity of the support, the span of support over time, um the fit or the between the expertise of the support providers and the school needs and the development of trust. And I think one of the previous presenters said developing that trusting relationship and allowing the districts to be vulnerable um is an important part a important facet of the quality of support that's provided. All right,
269let me turn to Massachusetts. So, since 2009, Massachusetts has really put the the district at the center of the change process to stimulate continuous improvement. At present, Massachusetts identifies both districts and schools for support. Two broad categories, one of which is schools and districts uh not requiring assistance or intervention and those requiring assistance and intervention. In the case of districts, right now in Massachusetts, there are 27 districts that are identified for focused and targeted support and two districts identified for broad and comprehensive support. Um, and they are classified as such um based on the discretion of the board. And districts are classified in Massachusetts by aggregating all of the results within the district. is not just looking individual schools but um across all of the the district data to provide a little context for the
270number of districts that you see on the slide here. There are about about 500 districts in Massachusetts. So they are really identifying a fairly small percentage for support. All right, I want to talk a little bit about some principles underlying the Massachusetts approach. The first is that of an instructional priority. So one of the first tasks of these districts that are um targeted for support is to identify one or two discrete instructional priorities on which they will focus and will anchor their andru and structure the support that they receive. Coaching for equity is another important feature of the Massachusetts approach. The intent is to center equity in every conversation and to encourage what they call brave conversations at the local level. Now, Massachusetts is divided into two regions for the purpose of support and these
271two regional support teams provide support anchored around the instructional priority and coaching for equity. A third component is progress monitoring and Massachusetts really leans into the monitoring piece. Um, each year there are external monitors who track the progress of the districts that receive support um to ensure that they are on track with their action steps. However, I would be remiss if I didn't also mention the district reviews, quality reviews in Massachusetts. And this is actually part of state statute that each year a subset of the districts have a deep dive by an external organization that shares formative feedback about the processes ongoing in the district um based on statewide district standards. And the purpose is not only to provide this formative feedback, but to accumulate longitudinal data on local practices in Massachusetts. So I wanted
272to mention that because because this monitoring component is um an important part of Massachusetts approach. All right. So I'm not going to dwell on this slide but it's again to underscore that the Massachusetts approach is grounded in the instructional priority and there's a sequential process that's mapped out in terms of prioritizing planning implementing with a partnership between the district um leadership team and uh external supports. So I had mentioned that states may grapple with how what should they do with a very persistently underperforming districts. This was the case in Massachusetts um particularly Lawrence public schools um which was placed into state receiverhip in 2012. It's been a subject of a great deal of research on balance. Uh the scorecard is that there have been some gains in Lawrence but certainly with numerous challenges as well.
273Um however, Massachusetts tried to replicate the Lawrence approach in two other districts, Holio and Southbridge with um less success than they saw in Lawrence and tried a slightly different approach in Springfield through an empowerment zone and that has um seen some initial um gains in academic growth and student achievement. All right, let me move to Michigan, which has what they call a partnership district model. Now in Michigan uh partnership districts are identified based on the presence of CSI schools. So the schools identified for comprehensive support and improvement. So first Michigan Department of Education identifies CSI schools. They adjust the count. Not every CSI school counts for the purposes of partnership districts and then they issue partnership agreements with the districts. Sort of a a documented agreement between the various partners who support the districts. at
274present. Oh, actually sorry. In fall of 2022, there were 51 districts um that were involved in the partnership model. I think the number is now 45 districts. Again, close to 500 districts in Michigan. So, not a huge percentage of schools that are ident or districts that are identified. There are a number of partners who support uh the partnership model. The first among them being the Michigan Department of Education, which acts as a liaison but also a grant-making entity. Michigan has uh independent school districts somewhat analogous to the county offices of education. They provide more of the hands-on support, professional development, coaching, training, but the community is also considered to be a partner in the change process and partnership districts. This is not only to provide um expertise in kind supports but actually financial resources in
275some cases as well. So collectively these entities work together to drive the change process um with district really being at the center of this um identifying their goals, turnaround strategies and partners. the uh the EPIC group at Michigan State University has been conducting an evaluation of the partnership model in Michigan since its inception. Um they have identified some gains um particularly in math in some of the earlier years. They've also seen some improved attendance um and resulting lower chronic absenteeism rates. There are still some statewide challenges. Um student outcomes are not where one would hope they would be. um serious human capital issues with regard to recruitment and retention of teachers in Michigan as well. Um and so those are some persistent challenges which have not been remediated by the partnership approach. All right. So
276in closing, I wanted to share a few common themes across Massachusetts and Michigan. In both the district is really at the center of the change process. Um, I could argue that Massachusetts has a bit more of a structure around their processes and including the improvement plan. They have um a statewide framework of district indicators. There's a little bit more autonomy in Michigan with regard to the district's um decision-making authority in this process. I think neither state would say both states would say that they do have a structure for guiding the process and they do extend local autonomy. So, it's a question of nuance in this. However, the human capital piece is more central to the change process in Michigan because that is such a persistent challenge for their state. It's less prominent in the Massachusetts
277approach. However, Massachusetts, as I said, does really lean into the monitoring, external monitoring of both districts and schools. There's also a monitoring piece in Michigan, but it's a little bit um more collaborative, less structure, and not that external lens. And in Massachusetts, they've kept this option of state receiverhip on the table for the very lowest performing districts. They're backing away from it a little bit, but it is still a policy lever available to them, whereas Michigan does not do so. Uh, at one point they had experimented with an alternate government governance approach in um Detroit, but they since they abandoned that quite a long time ago and have not really revisited that since. One more common theme in closing is that both both states have chosen to focus on a relatively small percentage of districts.
278And for example, in the case of Michigan with the teams that provide support, it's on balance a case load of seven districts for each team to which they need to provide support throughout the year. So seven districts per team seems like a manageable number, I think, to really understand the local context. And with that, I will open it up to any questions. Are there any clarifying questions for Kristen? Yes. >> Back on I think it was the Massachusetts model. I think you described that part of the improvement plans was driving towards a more manageable set of goals. >> Yes. >> Instructional priorities. >> Have that as a parallel as well? >> They do, but I think there are fewer guard rails around that process. So the the districts in Michigan that have been successful in
279this have been pretty focused like um Sagenov school district for example focused really closely on math and they've seen some improvement in that. Um however there's I think less of a drive to have a focused coherent process. Massachusetts also has something they call their coherence guide book. Um and so they they said I guess just a little bit more structure around the process and they and they explicitly say one or two instructional priorities. There are districts in ma in Michigan that focus on far more and I think it's not a surprise to know that lack of coherence in an in a change process is a challenge that we've it's well documented in research as well. >> And I have one other question between the Massachusetts and Michigan models. Do you see one versus the other
280having larger impacts on student outcomes? Obviously there's a lot in that uh second to last slide around the different processes and the how the the what of impact is sort of the extra box that I was >> yeah I know that's that's a tricky that's an empirical question which is really tricky to answer and the researcher in me doesn't want to just say anything off the cuff um because the studies that have been conducted are not necessarily directly comparable however if we look at the big picture Massachusetts is consistently among the various high performing in in the country. Um, and I think one could potentially attribute that to the fact that they have a very systematic approach in many of the things that they do. We see a lot more variation in Michigan. Um, so
281I think maybe the Michigan system has a little bit more to overcome in terms of the supports that they're providing to districts. Um, something else I should point out about the Michigan context is that they do allow um, families to transfer their students to almost any other school district in the state as long as they can provide transportation to their children. Um, which is sort of interesting context. So there that's a really different dynamic than you have in Massachusetts. So it does in some ways create an uphill climb for some of the districts of Michigan. >> Thank you and super helpful presentation. Uh, one more uh, clarifying question for me and then I'll go to member Olen. Was there anybody else who wanted to So, you mentioned that the empowerment zone was uh, looking like
282it was producing some good outcomes and I wondered if you knew anything about what they were doing in the empowerment zone. >> Yes. So, I wish I could tell you with a lot more detail than I can. However, um, the I know that they Lawrence is still undergoing some form of district receiverhip. Holio and Southbridge didn't see the same level of success. Um, in part it was uh they had less local autonomy in Holio and Southbridge. There was also less buyin and a little bit more state control. So I think in Springfield they tried to find some of the equilibrium that they previously did in in um in Lawrence extending more autonomy to the school level and it's also a smaller set of schools within Springfield that were participating. Um it wasn't the entire school
283district, it was this this empowerment zone and it was a specific collaboration between Springfield Public Schools, the Springfield teachers union um and the support providers. >> Yeah. And I've seen some of the data from Springfield around that which was uh promising. >> Yes. >> Um member Olen um in you you didn't talk a lot about the um how schools were or how districts were um identified for these for these assistance which is fine. Um but I'm curious how long um eleas or how long districts would receive this type of support or they would be part of the program. >> Sure. So in Michigan uh it's they're identified on three-year cycles in conjunction with the identification of CSI's goals. Um in Massachusetts they are identified annually um with the exception of the dis well with like
284an asterisk for the districts that receive the most comprehensive support which is at the board discretion and for example Lawrence has been receiving support since 2012. >> Uh and Vice President Glover Woods I think has a question. >> Yes, thank you very much. Um, one of my questions had to do with the empowerment zone and that has been responded to. Um, one other question related to uh the Massachusetts model actually two questions. Uh, the first is as far as the instructional priority that's identified by the district. Was are the instructional priorities solely academic in nature meaning language arts, mathematics or another academic uh subject or uh other aspects that relate to uh the education of students such as absenteeism or suspension. So that's my first question. Um I can hold for that answer and then
285I have one other. >> Okay, sure. I can answer that quickly. They um are potentially they're often academic in nature um early literacy uh focusing on long-term English learners for example but they could also be related to attendance or other more uh or suspension rates student discipline. They're not constrained in that regard. Thank you. And my other question is in relation also for Massachusetts in relation to the progress monitoring aspect. Could you provide a little bit more detail on what that progress monitoring looks like as well as the district review aspect? I know you touched on it uh briefly, but could you provide a little bit more detail on what that looks like? >> Sure. Uh so the progress monitoring is associated with the districts that have been identified for support and it's explicitly to
286determine the extent to which that they are um following through on their action steps. The quality reviews are a deeper dive um into more a more intense look at the different processes within the the districts and the quality reviews is not linked to the accountability system or uh the provision of supports. It is something that is mandated um that a subset of Massachusetts each year will undergo this deep dive. Um in both cases, it's an external organization that will go in and actually collect on-site data conducting classroom observations, conversations, teacher surveys in addition to looking at extant data on student outcomes. And there's a resulting report from each of these. >> It's kind of like a school quality review that they >> Excuse me. It's like a school quality review that they >> and they
287also do school re school monitoring in Massachusetts as well, but I'm just focusing on districts right now. >> Thank you. Um, okay. I think that we have exhausted our clarifying questions for the moment. We're going to have board discussion. Thank you so much for the presentation. Um, we're going to put up the public comment slide. Uh and uh those who want to call in with public comments can uh use the phone number and the public access co code that will be soon visible on our monitor. There it is. And then before that um uh Vice President Glover Woods and I as liaons will offer a few comments um to queue us up. Uh Vice President Glover Woods, do you want to go first? I I can follow you, President Darlingham, and thank you. >> Um,
288so, you know, we've we've got this this all began um because uh there was an instinct in California uh as the federal system was changing uh to be sure that we were keeping districts in the loop. Uh but originally you know the federal government requires that 5% of schools be identified you know for comprehensive school improvement on a regular basis and the idea was that you know somehow this we would bring a district perspective to that and in fact this the the first criterion in the statute for differentiated assistance was to be the um two any two subgroups that would you know uh perform in the red so to speak. But the second one is any schools uh any districts that have schools in CSI for four or more years. So we're actually coming up
289on that. So that will be yet another piece of this. But the idea was to have a goal to really support sort of root cause analysis and district engagement and a strong improvement process. Um and we have ended up with a system that right now does not really allow us to achieve that goal. um uh it doesn't allow us necessarily to identify and serve the districts in greatest need well and so we're trying to that is kind of the unpacking as I took notes throughout the presentations um you know there's several challenges that we have to face one is how districts become eligible there's the idea that it's you know two two subgroups in the red uh it doesn't uh end up identifying districts with small uh subgroups small end sizes, but it may identify
290other districts for the wrong reasons. And I'll come back around to that. And it isn't tied to areas of work like math achievement or science achievement or English language arts or so on. So we saw in Ed's slide the little whack-a-mole that you know every year you could be popping up or districts for different reasons. So it's it lacks that coherence that we were hearing about. Um there's also the fact that um we know that for example the um English learner subcategory and the uh long-term English learner sub category can produce uh dysfunctional incentives. If you want to get out of the red, you just stop reclassifying students so that your highest performing students are still in the data. Right? So, we have like, you know, pieces like that that are not what we're trying
291actually to accomplish. Um, and uh if you uh you might be putting districts in the red for the wrong reasons and letting districts out for the wrong reasons, etc. It's it's not uh as coherent as we would want it to be. We also saw that when we had the chronic absenteeism spike [clears throat] during the pandemic that some of that chronic absenteeism was because kids were out for COVID and RSV and other things and you wouldn't necessarily want to incentivize districts to have sick kids at school. They were in the red for reasons that didn't have to do with their behavior but with the environment. We're also seeing that now with uh climate events as we saw in Los Angeles with the fires and so on where you know they may have chronic absenteeism but
292it's not something that's amendable to differentiated assistance. It's amendable to the you know to the weather that we're experiencing in the ways in which we handle that. So we have you know some challenges with our indicators. uh we've heard that there are you know so many too many districts in and out of differentiated assistance to keep keep track of them and to do good work with and for them. Um and then there's the uh point that the uh there's churn the annual identification from the dashboard um on you know sometimes grounds that are uh important grounds and sometimes grounds that are are not the right ones. Uh, and then you have the churn. And I was really struck by the point that Matt made that, you know, you have, uh, the identification happens around November
293and then you have sort of until March to even catch up with all the districts and find out what's going on and, you know, try to figure out how to support them and then you're in testing season. So, there's really not much time. uh and is unpredictable in this very short time frame and this kind of churn of districts in and out for reasons that are a little bit mysterious um each year. Uh the other piece that we heard was that you know it can be very bureaucratic. We have a lot of paperwork uh you know for that has to be conducted for this a lot of reporting uh numerous programs and plans. It's a broader problem that we have right now. We have sort of a geological dig of legislation and policies that require
294all kinds of reports and so on from our districts and we've heard a lot about that lately. This is another set of those whether it's LCAP, DA, DTA, CSI, uh you know, you could go on and on. Every program has an acronym and every acronym has paper paperwork associated with it. Um, so that's another piece of it that for some districts this just ends up being part of the, you know, paperwork burden, the the bureaucratic burden because it's not tied to a serious process that that would let them get better. Um, our systems are not coordinated or coherent between and across those things. We heard about that. Uh and then the funding is both unpredictable uh and you know a little problematic because there's um more money if you get more districts in differentiated assistance
295but hardly any time to do something serious with any single district. Um so lots of churn um but not much leverage. Um so those are just the issues that came to me as we were listening to all the presentations. We also heard about some other strategies which uh we appreciate I appreciated hearing from um Dr. Benala and from um Kristen Laflak that there are uh approaches that one could consider that are more investment in a continuous tier one approach that builds the time, the trust, the capacity uh and the interventions that might be tied to um specific priorities that you could pursue over time. And we heard something about that from u Massachusetts and and Michigan. So there are, you know, other ways to do this. We are not at a point of identifying exactly
296what's the right way for for California, but I think we have a sense now of what the challenges are and then, you know, how we might begin to think about um what will work for our original goals. And with that, I'm going to turn it to um Vice President Glover Woods to add other thoughts. >> Thank you, President Darling Hammond. And um I won't be repetitive but I I will share with the board um differentiated assistance as you all know is extremely complicated and having served on the side of providing support to districts that uh were eligible for differentiated assistance and speaking with many as most of you have. Um it's just a very difficult system to understand. However, it it's what we've done I think is is very positive, which is we are looking
297at multiple ways to determine how the instructional program is. Um, as we think about the the 10 state priorities, eight for districts, tens for county offices. And we're also really doubling down on every student succeeding as we think about our 14 student groups. But in that has created a level of complexity and I won't again rehash everything that do uh President Darling Hammond said but um there's definitely a need to look at how the system can better serve ultimately the students of our state through the support of the LEAs. So as I'm thinking about our conversation today and the presentations we've had, I'm almost putting them in buckets to the degree that I can. Uh one being looking at the identification really looking at how do we ensure that we are identifying those eleas with
298the greatest need and utilizing uh the priority areas and the indicators within those priority areas to do so. The second really centers around the support for those districts that are eligible, but also as we've heard in our presentations, get not doing the wait to fail model, but looking at how we can provide support and resources that are more proactive than reactive and along that lens of prevention and intervention. And then the third bucket, if you will, is once that support is in place, how do we uh what type of things need to be in place as it relates to plans and reporting that are streamlined but are still accurate and transparent to uh the communities that the district serves as well as others. So, um again, a very complicated conversation. Um I'm very confident we'll
299be able to get where we need to in July, but um I just encourage us as we can to try to think about it in those three areas as we move forward. And again, I echo everything that President Darling Hammond said about the challenges. And as I said, I was not going to be repetitive and repeat the same things, but I'll just say ditto, ditto, ditto. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, you know, one of the other things that occurs to me as we get get ready to uh get into public comment and discussion is that we do have some success stories here in California, not necessarily always tied to the DA process, but I think about the fact that, for example, Compton for the last several years, used to be in state receiverhip years
300ago, and has been is now uh scoring at or above, you know, the state averages, is back to prepandemic levels of performance, and has done a number of things. Englewood has been making steady progress. Uh we saw fast um improvements for a few years in a row in Oakland that have been, you know, so we we don't know nothing in California about how to do this. We know some things and we may want to really take some time in a future session to reflect on what has happened in districts that have had substantial improvements and how to learn from and benefit from uh what we have experienced here as well. You want to add something to that? Yes. That was interesting. That was kind of my thought process. One of the challenges that was mentioned
301was the variances in quality of technical assistance. how it differs widely depending on county and leading to inequitable experiences. And I'm thinking what you similarly said about tracking outcomes by um technical assistance um centers that have had positive with coaching, data analysis, family engagement to learn which strategies are the most impactful and by tracking that data um how we can utilize that and replicate it. So what you mentioned about Compton Unified and seeing what works when we had that study session in the past, it actually sparked a lot of interest in strategies that they were doing to get their students to achieve at a higher level and raising that graduation rate. And when I was thinking of that, it kind of tied into to what you just said. >> Yeah. So we're probably edging into
302discussion, but it's a great point. And um we do want to get some public comment on the table. So I think to your point too, that's the question of how long do you give people to engage in these kinds of processes, right? It's what and how and all of those things. So going to public comment, do we have any public comment in the room? There are 10 people signed up for inerson public comment. Please remember to state your name and affiliation for the record before you speak. Will the following people please line up at the microphone in the back of the room? Regina Shakoya, Lucy Salceto Carter, Raquel Morales, Edgar Lampin, and Lindseay Tornator. Good afternoon, members of the state board of education. I'm Regina Chagoya with um California Federation of Teachers. Regarding item number
303six, CFT would like to express that differentiated assistance while often package as well as intended continuous cycles of improvement for our schools should be well should not be regulated to as what has occurred in some past instances uh as in successful bodies of research belonging to PhD candidates or those belonging to recent defendant dissertations. Please, when Sacramento recommends differentiated assistance, authorize local stakeholder support bodies of research for our schools. Thank you for listening. Good afternoon. Lucy Salceto Carter with the Alama County Office of Education. We provide differentiated assistance to 12 of our 18 districts and several charters. We're grateful to President Darling Hammond and the board for your focus on this topic. We appreciate that DA's emphasis on outcomes for vulnerable student groups is equitydriven. That vision aligns with our mission to serve our most
304vulnerable students. Greater clarity is needed on how the system of support will operate to serve all school districts and charters. This understanding is essential to determine if proposed funding models are sufficient. In addition, we want to validate the need for multi-year support to have time to address system barriers. On the recipient side, we believe anyone providing DA to COES must have an ex must be an expert in highquality court and community schools. We welcome the opportunity to provide whatever information will be helpful to your deliberations. Thank you. >> Good afternoon. Relises with Ed Trust West. We would like to align our comments with the equity coalition letter on this agenda item. We appreciate the board engaging in this study session to surface the opportunities to improve the system of support support holistically and the role
305of DA identification criteria and improving the system more broadly. We urge the board to consider the following guidance principles as you redefine the DA identification criteria for and the system of support. One, as you consider the eligibility for tier 2 support, we urge you to determine changes necessary to the full SOS that drive improvement in all LEAs, not just those in tier 2 or tier three. Um, number two, the SOS should maintain and deepen the focus on closing in equitable inequitable gaps and student outcomes that negatively impact students of color and multilingual learners. Um, number three, to deepen the impact of SOS on improving student outcomes, there should be a stronger incorporation of parents, students, and communities in the district's improvement process. DA identification criteria should should weigh academic outcomes more heavily, incorporate the growth
306measure while maintaining multiple measures. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, members of the board. My name is Natalie Shin with Californians together. We are highly encouraged by the board's focus on evaluating and improving the DA system. We share the hope that this will result in a stronger, more targeted system of support that truly meets the needs of our state's highest need students, especially English learners. As you deliberate, we urge you to keep two core principles in mind. First, the improved EA system must sharpen its focus on closing achievement gaps. We believe DA can be significantly strengthened to better identify and support LEAs that are struggling to accelerate progress for English learners and other historically undeserved student groups. Second, the mechanism for identifying eleas for assistance is this California school dashboard. We hope that the desire to
307improve DA does not result in lowering the criteria for performance levels on the dashboard itself. Maintaining high, rigorous standards is essential for driving equity and ensuring that true areas of need are not masked. Thank you for your leadership on this critical issue. >> Hello, I am Dr. Dr. Edgar Lamin, CEO of CAB, the California Association for Bilingual Education, former school superintendent, uh director of English learner services at the county level, curriculum and instruction um director, uh pupil services director at the district level, school principal and bilingual teacher. I would like to speak to the issue of lowering the dashboard criteria in item six. Uh we have heard that for this last year it was the first time that many districts provided intentional support for their long-term English learners and this was one of the subgroups
308triggering differentiated assistance. With that in mind like to urge you not to lower the dashboard criteria in the process for amending differentiated assistance as a method for identifying leas for differentiated assistance. We hope that this does not result in lowering the criteria for performance levels in the dashboard. There are other ways to be able to address that. >> Speaking up. >> Good afternoon, Lindseay Tornator. On behalf of the California County Superintendent, as stated in our coalition letter with management and equity, we appreciate today's study session as a first step and commend the board's commitment to a transparent public process. County offices of education bring a unique perspective as both providers and recipients of DA. We thank Superintendent Manala for sharing the Elorado story, an example of policy to practice whose lessons resonate across all 58
309counties. From our experience, the system works best when it's proactive. At its core, DA is about teaching and learning, and county offices are positioned to support and build their LEA's instructional capacity. The systems evolution shaped by the hard work and thoughtful design of those who built it. And the journey the board is about to embark on today reflects continuous improvement in action, bringing us to a pivotal moment to reflect, learn, and strengthen our shared commitment to improving outcomes for all California students. Thank you. >> Will the following people please line up at the microphone? Lorraine Richards, Leilani Agaldo, and Karen Sheay. >> Good afternoon. My name is Lorraine Richards and I am a classroom teacher representing California Teachers Association. When discussing differentiated instruction and the statewide system of support, it is important to remember who
310it is we are trying to support. How much of the funds are actually seen at the schools? Lastly, how much direct support are schools, educators, and students receiving as a result of differentiated assistance? CTA urges the state board of education to re-evaluate our differentiated assistant system to better support the schools in need. Thank you. Hello, Leilani Agonaldaldo on behalf of the Association of California School Administrators. Access supports efforts to evaluate and strengthen DA criteria. We believe this is an opportune time to ensure that the DA system effectively identifies and supports the ELEA's most in need while maintaining its intended focus on assistance rather than discipline. AXA also appreciates the comprehensive review of DA eligibility, especially the consideration of variables such as the student growth model and science assessments. We hope this a holistic approach avoids
311peacemeal adjustments in the future as fragmented changes can disrupt local planning and undermine loterm improvement efforts. Finally, access strongly believes that any significant updates to our accountability system should align with the established three-year LCAP cycle. Districts rely on the LCAP as a gu guiding framework to plan, implement, and measure long-term strategies for student success. And major changes made outside of this cycle disrupt that process. AXA intends to share additional insights from our educational leaders in the coming months. Thank you. >> Good afternoon. Thank you for the opportunity to speak and also uh grateful for the state of California special focus on special education and education. Um my name is Karen Sheay. I'm with FASD. Now, um we think there's a priority needed for proper assessments and proper interventions for people with FASD because frequently they
312have learning challenges. They have uh challenges to remember things. They are perceived of having behavioral um issues. Just dovetailing with um other speakers here, the f the CDC reports 2 to 5% of the general population has an FASD. This is higher than um autism. I'll say it again. It's higher than autism. the prevalence. Um um a few years ago the FASD now folks were able to work with Portantino, Senator Portantino to get on an IEP FASD as a named condition. >> Thank you, speaker. Your time is up. We would really like to talk um meet with the uh official um here at this department or or have an agenda item because we have a strong coalition of like juvie judge professionals etc. >> Thank you. We'll now move to public comment on the phone line.
313>> Thank you. Uh caller with the last four digits 4155, please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and members of the board. This is Dena Wilson, director of accountability, support, and monitoring at the Los Angeles County Office of Education. I'm calling on be today on behalf of the California County Superintendent Curricular and Improvement Support Committee CISK, a partner in the statewide system of support as differentiated assistance providers and partners in the California's accountability and improvement system, county offices of education, work closely with districts and charter schools to build local capacity, improve student outcomes. In Los Angeles County, we have seen gains across our county and are proud that with our support, student outcomes have improved, including
314achievement rates in ELA and math, which have not only recovered, but in many areas exceeded prepandemic levels across our ELEAs. We acknowledge that such meaningful change takes time. However, the current eligibility criteria and length of support cycles are not quite aligned to this reality, nor are they aligned amongst types of eleas. This lack of aligned eligibility criteria and length of support cycles has often caused confusion and less coordinated support. >> Thank you. >> Aligned policies which recognize the limitation. Thank you very much for your time to speak today. We look forward to future engagement on this topic. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 4369. Please start your public comment. >> Good afternoon. Sally Fox here calling on behalf of Cababe. I was sometimes asked to support leadership teams providing DA when I worked at
315SDCOE as a bilingual coordinator because my focus included ELD as a certified trainer for project GLAD. Cabab agrees with other advocacy organizations that a focus on gap closure would result in improved outcomes for all the various highnee students. In addition, we recommend professional learning opportunities for county office staff to be most effective in supporting their local districts. Also, please consider how the universal support tier for districts that are not identified for DA could be clarified and specified for COE staff. KAB is greatly appreciative of the important work the state board of education has accomplished historically and continues to accomplish on behalf of our students in California. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8937, please start your public comment. >> Good afternoon. This is Christina Salasar with the Riverside County Superintendent of Schools.
316Thank you for the opportunity to provide input today. In Riverside County, we've taken a proactive approach by conducting two self-study reports to inform and strengthen our DA efforts. These studies have helped identify bright spots including that advant uh the advantages of fraud departmental communication which were highlighted in the 2024 West promising practice report. At the same time, we identified challenges both of which have been part of today's conversation such as a burden of compliance study reporting and another is the use of single dashboard year for commit uh for determining DA eligibility. Uh for example, based on current estimates, 21 out of 22 districts currently or previously eligible for DA will be shifting eligibility status, creating a constantly moving target. We recognize this session is the beginning of an important convers conversation and we're committed to
317being thoughtful partners. Thank you and we look forward to working with you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 2277. Please start your public comment. >> Good afternoon, President Darling Heman and members of the board. This is Dr. Stephan Bean, County Superintendent of Schools. And I want to thank you for your important work you are doing here today in Orange County. I'm proud to be carrying forward the work of my predecessor, Dr. Mahares who helped shape California's MTSF framework and modeled how a coherent preventionoriented system can transform opportunities for all students including being a critical component for a strong VA structure. My colleague Mary Sukuma at Bu County Superintendent Schools and I submitted a letter to the board to share information and re reinforce our commitment as the state leads for California MTSS. As an
318immigrant and a person with a disability, I've personally experienced how UDL with a strong MTSSF framework can dramatically change the trajectory for a child. These are not just strategies, but rather the structure that makes access and achievement possible for students like me. In your consideration of how to strengthen DA and the system of support, I urge you to ground it in the same framework. When MTSS guides DA, supports are proactive rather than reactive. resources are used efficiently and every initiative with within an LEA works in coherence rather than isolation. A strong VA system is how we ensure California's system. Thank you for your leadership. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 62000, you may begin your public comment. >> Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, and members of the board. My name
319is Karen Lewis and I'm representing the curricular improvement and support committee as the current chair for CISK. We would like to express our appreciation to the board for taking the time to better understand some of the strengths and challenges within the current system and for engaging in thoughtful consideration around the potential for refinement. As mentioned in earlier comments, over the years, county offices of education have begun to strategically shift toward an integrated approach of level one and level two supports. This type of a proactive approach through a multi-tered system of supports has the potential to strengthen continuous improvement processes and allow local teams to align customized support options. We welcome the opportunity to share valuable lessons learned and to continue providing input as the state works toward greater equity and coherence from policy to practice.
320Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8674, you may begin your public comment. Good afternoon, Rachel Murphy with Public Advocates and the LCFS Equity Coalition. We appreciate the board of staff's focus on improving the overall system of support as you consider changes to differentiated assistance identification criteria. We would like to highlight a few of the guiding principles we referenced in our letter, including one to foster a broad culture of continuous improvement among the districts who are not eligible for DA under the revised rules, but still remain in need of significant improvement. We urge the board and the state to take this opportunity to require greater levels of transparency, self-reflection, and community conversation around needed local actions. Two, for districts in DA, we urge improvements be made to increase student, family, and community engagement
321in the differentiated assistance process. And three, we urge the continued use of multiple measures and inclusion of a growth measure to better identify which districts are in most need of DA support. We look forward to this ongoing discussion and the opportunity opportunity to ensure differentiated assistance leads to measurable improvement in student outcomes. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in204. Please say your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. >> Good afternoon. I'm Jennifer Cono calling from Los Angeles speaking on behalf of the Alliance for a Better Community Act, a co-chair of the Consortium for Multilingual Learner Success, a regional collective committed to advancing the full implementation of the California English Learner Roadmap. ABC and the consortium would like to express its appreciation for the state board's
322deliberation deliberation and how to improve California's differentiated assistance system. Your conclusions will have a ripple effect in LA County which serves nearly uh 210,000 English learners including 35,662 long-term English learners uh according to 202425 data quest information. Given that AL pel are now a subgroup triggering critical DA for more districts, we hope that any BA system improvement effort does not result in lowering the criteria for performance levels in the dashboard for this important focus. Thank you for your leadership on this important amendment. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8256, you may begin your public comment. Hi, this is Robert Manwar from Children Now. Uh, Children Now in partnership with the California County Superintendent has convened a working group of school equity and management groups to study the DH criteria, our accountability system, and the
323system of support. Recognizing all the complexities that today's presentations have shown, this group stands ready to partner with the board as this process moves forward. In our letter, children now raises some initial thoughts. One, focus on closing achievement gaps. We need a sense of urgency for change. We are over a decade into LCFF and still haven't seen the transformational change that will close achievement gaps. Two, align the level of support to the level of need. We should be triaging districts using multiple measures to focus the most intensive supports for eleas with the greatest needs. Differentiated assistance should truly be differentiated across districts. Three, value student growth in the DA criteria. And four, uh don't lower performance standards on the dashboard indicators because they are already too low for many dashboard indicators like the LP. Thank
324you for your work today in this study session. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 8945, please begin your public comment. Oh, looks like they dropped. That concludes public comment for item number six. Right, lots to think about. [laughter] I want to open up the floor for discussion. Um, I would love for us to be reflecting on what we think our goals and uh, principles for differentiated assistance might be. like what are the things that seem most important for us to be um leaning in on as we think about any changes to the system? Uh and then uh are there any uh things that we've heard today that give us some directionality that we think we ought to be exploring further uh as potential solutions or strategies without feeling a need to jump to anything
325specific at this point. Who would like to kick us off? Remember Lewis, you look like you're [laughter] >> Yeah. What are what are the things what are the principles and and goals that we really ought to set for ourselves? >> Some of the letters we receive and the public comment that we have. I think one of the uh some of the issues that are brought up is the frequency of identification and not enough time to uh adequately provide support. um to the districts in need. Um and also with the identification process, I love the comment about triage the districts to really highlight the the districts that need the greatest support. Um I've got a long list here. I'm just trying to point out the most don't lower the dashboard standards. That was something that was
326brought out. And I think u just multi-year support is needed. I'm gonna stop with my list. So, >> that's great. Thank you. That's that's very helpful. Member Escoto, you were about to lean in also. >> Yeah. I I I was uh I gravitated with some of the Massachusetts um thoughts about looking at one or two areas, but going in very deep. I think that's really critical. That guacamole picture that I saw there really captivated [laughter] me. You know, I mean, I I love that we have multiple ways of looking at schools, but are there one or two facets that we really need to focus on? The others can be can attribute to that one or two, but just just curious about going into great depth, right? the whole district review aspect. Um would like to
327know a little bit more about that because I I I wonder if they look at for example board cohesiveness governance which I think I mean we know a lot about uh school reformation but district cohesion is critical and there's many facets of it as well. So I I would love to know a little bit more about either desk are there review or is there you know I I know the Wallace Foundation is doing a lot of study on uh district leadership and how to move from a compliance to a real supportive role in and and how do they support how does the district support our teachers in the classroom. I think that that shift is so so important. So that those are a couple of thoughts. >> Okay, I'll get to member Olen and then
328I know member Glover Woods and then I saw member Yoshimoto Tari and I think I saw okay member Batillo Bronson and member Rosco Gonzalez and if I missed you, you know, just keep waving at me. Member, we'll go along the line. Go ahead. >> Um so I I really appreciate um what we've already heard. Um, I just want to one and all that we've heard. Um, and a few words that keep coming to mind for me are um proactive, cohesive, and sustained. Um, those are three words that if you know, you sort of got to what you asked the question, what are some goals? >> Um, and those three words came up in lots of different ways for me. Um, and I could go into all the description, but I I think it's a good
329start for now. >> Perfect. Thank you. Uh, Vice President Glover Woods, >> thank you. Um, along that line of goals and priorities, um, I think one of the key areas that we need to really hone in on and come to decision on is how we define LEA of the greatest need. Uh that phrase has been used multiple times in during our study session and we need to be very clear on what defines that when we say an LEA of the greatest need. What does that how is that defined? Um we know that we have student groups. We know we have priority areas and I'm just going to bounce out questions as far as looking at the priority areas. Do all priority areas serve as um a trigger, if you will, for differentiated assistance eligibility? I
330I wouldn't advocate that all student groups would not because I think we do need to look at all student groups. But again, just kind of looking but being really spending some time to identify eleas of the greatest need and then after we can get clear on eligibility criteria, start to talk about the support that's needed for those that are eligible. Um, I I really think as a goal and priority that we it would be helpful for us to separate the two conversations in order to really be very clear. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, member Yoshiman Otari, I think you're next. >> Thank you. I just wanted to uplift um, there were three words that came out of the evaluation that was shared earlier. They were trust, fit, and expertise. And I think um we
331you know you could there could be several districts that present with the same need or the same indicators that resulted in DA or the need for DA but the root cause analysis of why they're in DA could be 10 different reasons or 20 different reasons. So I think the so the the support needed therefore would be different as well. And so I think whether it's the Ellie as a county office or a district, I think really focusing on what is the right fit, what is the actual need um to close the opportunity, their achievement gap in particular and so and some of that is providing making sure that there's coherence. Um I think coming from the local level, it's easy. There are actually a number of ways districts tried to also provide their own technical
332assistance in addition to the official differentiated assistance. And sometimes that can result in um the need to really focus on how do we build coherence and not just more and more and more different kinds of solutions and trying to find them, but how do we streamline? >> Um member Rosco Gonzalez and then member Pillo Branson and then is there anybody else down there? Member McQuillin, anybody else who wants to go, we'll just go down this line. >> I was just thinking of the lack of reciprocal accountability between LEAs and technical assistant providers. That was one of the challenges that was mentioned. The problem currently is that current relationships can feel one directional. Counties and GL leads provide support, but there's little mechanisms to evaluate the quality or impact of that support. So include teacher voice
333in evaluating whether assistance actually changes classroom practice perhaps through district level teacher advisory teams. From a classroom perspective, I think the conversation matters most when we ask whether the support that is designed to reach our most struggling schools and student groups is actually reaching the students and teachers who need it most. So, I think that sometimes um we overlook the the necessity to capacity build with our teachers and to have our teachers lead and and give voice to what really is needed in their classrooms because the practitioner in the classroom really truly doesn't know if that strategy or that support is being effective. Um, so I'll name that I I think the strategy of narrowing who gets the most intensive supports by al at the same time sort of offering the broad-based universal supports but
334that are not as time intensive or expensive um is something that resonates. I think the the prioritizing and sequencing of what to address first um also seem to be a consistent I very much resonate to the idea of pick your top two um to concentrate on rather than having a district or school try and do and launch 10 simultaneous initiatives of improvement at the same time. Um the caveat that occurred to me as we were looking at the data from um Massachusetts and Michigan is a little bit of scale. Um, so Massachusetts is 7 million people, Michigan is 10, that's about the size of LA County, and LA, California is 40 million, right? Um, so some of it I think we just need to make sure that we're we we can uh sort of narrow
335the funnel and even a California narrowed funnel will still be pretty big just to set expectations. Um, the other piece that I I just want to make sure that we don't lose, even if if we're not offering the most intensive supports to LEAs um that meet this definition um of highest needs. I do still think there is a role of communicating when someone flashes as red based on data and there's there's some definitely some tweaking and uh work to do to make sure we're not over identifying who's uh an LEA of highest need and I think however we can prompt self-reflection um because there are a lot of in district um or in county office of ed supports that are also available on a complimentary basis. Um, the other thing I just wanted to connect
336us back to from our presentations this morning is to think about uh how to incorporate student voice in this process. Um, I I am I've had some conversations with uh students who have school districts that are facing receiverhip and that does have a toll. um and thinking about what uncertainty and instability um that broadcasts to students. Um some of which is about fiscal health and just needs to have a track to proceed and student voice in that process I think is is actually warranted. Um the last thing um I'll name is the multi-year support. I think uh the timeline that Matt named is so very aggressive and short um and I have to imagine really frustrating for people who want to accomplish good things and have plans to get there. Um I I think the
337likelihood that anyone solves an intractable problem in a November to March swing is is a pretty tough um thing to imagine. Member Rodriguez, did you want to add anything at this point? No. Yes. >> All the comments have been said. Thank you. >> Member GK, do you want to add anything at this point? Okay. Member McQueen, >> I just heard a lot a lot ditto on there. Um and something that stood out for me in the presentation from the other states is that scale also comparison of scale that seemed like a small percent of the LEAs in in those other states >> 10% in each of those states >> we're getting the DA uh assistance compared to what we're trying to do much larger a larger percent so that needs to be looked at so
338anyway a lot of good comments thank you >> so maybe just to sum up a little bit so that we can kind of focus on our, you know, Oh, would you like to add anything, Chief Deputy Robersonson? >> Appreciate that. Um, I think this is a really important conversation and as someone who was a teacher in San Francisco Unified and Oakland Unified, I remember a time under No Child Left Behind where we only focused on English language arts and math and it got really reductive and it got really punitive and we were reconstituting schools based on those two items. So I really commend us in California for having a much more holistic approach for looking at the whole child. We've spent a lot on community schools that really brings in the student voice, the community
339voice, and right now that is incredibly important as we really need to have a sense of safety and belonging for all of our students at this time. We're really seeing it, hearing about it. Um so I just think that's something we want to keep in mind. Like we've been in a place before where we've gotten really narrow. So I would really caution us in that. Um and also in this process definitely wanting to hear from providers. I was someone who did DA while I was at Alama County Office of Ed as well as DTA while I was at CCE. But really we need to be listening to our schools and our districts and most importantly to our students and our teachers in this process. So just making sure we're really bringing in that voice and
340centering those voices. >> Thank you. So um here's I've been taking notes. So here's what I have heard. Um much consensus around more time, sufficient time and duration to actually do the work. Um depth and focus uh and coherence in that work. um the idea of being proactive um providing adequate tier one supports so that you know in fact you are using time and coherence and focus in that way while also uh triaging or identifying the LEAs with the greatest need that we need to figure out um how to do um and then the the notion of from getting from compliance to productive support and the ideas that have been surfaced again around co coherent and sustained support um with trust and expertise. The right kind of expertise brought to the table, the right fit,
341the trust, teacher voice, student voice, school voice, district voice. In other words, the clients um actually being in the mix, not just the vendors and the providers is I think another important piece of getting to coherence over time. Um so, uh those are uh important pieces there. was I heard I can't remember who said this now but the notion that we want to be sure maybe it was member Padilla Branson self-reflection being sure that there are ways that the district continue to self-reflect based on dashboard indicators we do want the indicators to be cautioning you know causing that we have a lot of requirements for that in the LCAP uh and so we al also to be thinking we heard about um more ideas for improving the LCAP this morning um which is now hundreds
342of pages and very difficult for people to manage and use and get value out of. Um, but we have layered a lot on there about what people are expected to do with all the indicators and the state priorities and so on. But ultimately these things ought to be fitting together in some way. Our ways of helping people reflect and then getting supports uh and building a system. And they came about independently at different moments in time with different pieces of legislation and you know different add-ons and some of it has also grown with um you know uh various lawsuits that have led to you know more provisions and and actions and so on. So I don't want to make this job undoable or too big. Uh but we should be keeping a view of the
343whole system because it has grown like topsy. We're putting a lot of money and effort into it. Districts are, schools are, county offices are. Uh and uh it's overwhelming um in the way it is now uh landing on on schools and we need to figure out a way to make it coherent and sustainable and productive and supportive. So, um, with that even more ambitious goal, uh, I think we're going to close out this session. We're going to continue to, uh, study this. I think we're hearing some consensus about some directions and some goals. I heard you, member Escobedo, to say it would be interesting to learn more about whole district review as a part of this, which is one of the ways you get a strategic direction and a plan that's sustainable and coherent. So,
344um, and I think we've acknowledged that we have some places in California that have substantially improved and understanding those places and their strategies might help us figure out what will work elsewhere as well. So, I uh commend all of you uh and all of our speakers for leading us through this very intense and and um thought-provoking study session. You've been very attentive. So, I think we deserve a break and we will come back in 15 minutes and take up the rest of our agenda. Thank you. All right. Thank you all for that very um thoughtful study session. Uh we are now going to go to our consent agenda. Uh we need the public comment slide. Uh, and we're going to take up regular consent items 7 through 14. Member Escobedo is recusing himself. And we
345will now open the phone line for the queue for public comment on consent items 7 through 14. Members of the public wishing to call in to provide comment can do so by using the phone number and the participant access code shown on this slide. Um, are there any speakers signed up to provide public comment in person? There are no people signed up for in-person public comment. >> All right, we'll give it a few minute seconds at least of wait time to see if there's anybody on the phone. Do we have any callers on the phone? >> There are no callers in the queue. >> Oh, sorry. Someone just popped up. >> They want to talk about those >> just in time. Uh caller ending in 5018, please state your name and affiliation for the record.
346Your time starts now. >> Good afternoon. My name is Lee Rosenberg from the law office of Young Minion Corps. I'm council for Napa Foundation, lead petitioner for my economist Charter Middle School. I'd like to underscore my written comments to the state board on item number 14 that while we appreciate that compliance with the court's order uh requires the state board to vacate its 2022 decision, that's not the end of the process. By vacating the 2022 action, it remains that the state board's next step is to rehear Napa Foundation's appeal, taking into account the court's rulings. That's the standard sequence of events in writ litigation. The court did not decide that there were no facts under which the state board could approve the charter petition on appeal after hearing again, but instead the court held that
347the findings that the state board made on the spot in 2022 were insufficient to support the state board's action. We believe the state board can cure this and issue more comprehensive findings that would address the court's issues. We ask that the state board ensure that a hearing is scheduled for January so the state board may consider the appeal again at that time and provide NAPA foundation with the procedural rights it is due under the education code. Thank you very much. Thank you. >> Thank you. This concludes public comment for consent items 7 through 14. >> All right. Hearing no more comment. Do I have a motion to adopt the CDE recommendations on items 7 through 14? Member Rodriguez. and a second from member Rosco Gonzalez. Perks, can you please call the role? >> Will. So,
348this is on the motion to adopt city recommendation on items 7 through 14. Member GK, >> yes. >> President Darling Hammond, >> yes. >> Member Escoedo is saying, Vice President Glover Woods, >> yes. >> Member Lewis, >> yes. Member McQuillin, >> yes. >> Member Olen, >> yes. >> Member Rosco Gonzalez, >> yes. >> Member Patilo Brownson, >> yes. >> Member Rodriguez, >> yes. >> Member Yoshima Modari, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay, we're going to take up item 16, which is the proposed criteria and guidance for the selection or development of literacy professional development programs. And the California Department of Education re recommends that we approve the proposed criteria and guidance. Um, and this item will be presented by Deputy Superintendent Will McGee, uh, Dr. Bonnie Garcia, Monnique McWain, and Eve Fabashi of the
349CDE. Will, good to see you. Please begin. >> Thank you. Thank you. And it's good to be on this side of the podium this afternoon. So, good afternoon everyone. President Dr. Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, board members, Chief Deputy Superintendent Robersonson, and community. My name is William McGee and I am the deputy superintendent of the building educational together branch here at the department of education. Today we have our great team who will be presenting on the criteria and guidance for selection of the development of literacy professional development programs for your approval. We're happy to be here today and we're happy to engage in the presentation. Our recommendation today is the state board of education approve the pro proposed criteria and guidance for the selection or development of literacy professional development programs. I'll now hand
350it over to Dr. Barney Garcia, our statewide literacy co-director, who will take us through the presentation. >> Thank you, Will. Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, Chief Deputy Superintendent Robersonson, and members of the board. I am Dr. Bonnie Garcia, statewide literacy co-director with the California Department of Education. I would like to begin by acknowledging members of the state board of education, including Alen Allison Zaria and Riel Msaro for their collaboration on this effort. Assembly Bill Education 121, Education Code 33319.6. And say that five times really fast. It's really fun. Um, [laughter] it directs the state board to approve the CD to approve and for the CDE to post criteria and guidance for the selection and development of inservice professional development programs for effective means of teaching literacy in TK through grade 5
351with list with a list of inservice programs that have been deemed to meet that criteria by September 30th of 2026. The legislation also provides 200 million for local education agencies, LEAs to provide this training focusing on educators who have not been prepared to assess against uh who have not been prepared or assessed against the new teaching performance expectation standards in literacy. LEAs may expend these funds between 26 and 27 uh through 2930. So, beginning next year, the CDE will make these funds available to LEAs so they can begin providing professional development to their staff that aligns to the approved uh criteria and guidance. These funds will be aortioned to districts in equal amounts for full-time equivalent certificated staff who teach students TK through grade 5 using the October 2025 CalPADS data submitted. Approval of this
352criteria and guidance now prior to the statutory deadline of September 30th, 2026 will really allow districts to plan for the 2627 school year using the criteria and guidance to either refine or develop internal PD or to select a program during this year so they can begin implementation next year. the it will also allow for PD providers that are intending to submit their programs to begin to prepare their materials in accordance to the criteria and guidance that are prepared. The program uh the criteria and the guidance that is approved now will also allow the program review committee that will be established to conduct a calibrated review process before going on to recommend programs to the state board for approval September 2026. And we will be bringing a recommended list to the board in September uh for
353approval. And here's a highlevel literacy PD guidance as well as program approval timeline beginning with the PD program submission period that we anticipate going from November 2025 all the way to February 2026. There will be a technical assistance webinar that will take place as soon as the invitation to submit is released. We will then have a review committee application period between December 2025 to January 2026. There will be a technical assistance webinar in January for districts who are planning to use a criteria and guidance to support uh during the 2526 year to support either the refinement, development or selection of professional development programs that they will implement in the 2627 school year. The application deadline will be seep uh sorry February 13 of 2026. Thereafter we will have the committee review the uh submissions and
354also hold deliberations between March through May of 2026. The program recommendations will be posted to our website in June and uh public comment will be collected through July of 2026. Following that, the CD will uh provide the final recommended list for approval of the PD programs at the September board meeting. The CDE will then post per statute the final approved list on September 30 by September 30th, 2026. There will be another technical assistance webinar that will be held for districts soon after the rel the final list is posted to our website. You can refer to the California Department of Eds literacy PD program web page for the full updated timeline. Last month, the CDE collected interest holder input. The CDE posted the draft criteria and the guidance and received feedback from 64 respondents that represented
35552 entities. And you can refer to the attachment two that has a summary of the trends that we saw from the comments as well as the counts of the respondents and the affiliations for which they came from. We'd like to take a moment to thank the members from the public who provided their input and who engaged with us in this process. Their input was really valuable and we appreciated the information that they provided. We'd like to note that the respondents indicated appreciation that the document aligned with our ELAL framework, our California dyslexia guidelines, the quality um professional learning standards as well as the statute. They also noted that the document was concise, clearly written, and had logical sequencing and defined sections. Lastly, they noted that the questions that were in that were included for consideration
356were helpful and clarified the guidance. I am now going to hand it over to E. Fabashi, education programs consultant in the professional learning support division, who will provide an overview of the document, including the revisions that were made according to public input. Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, Chief Deputy Robersonson, and members of the board. My name is Eve Fabia. I'm an education programs consultant in the professional learning support division at CDE. So, to go over the areas of the criteria, the criteria section is organized into three parts and here is a brief overview of each. Area one, professional development model and delivery. Inservice PD follows the precepts of effective evidence-based PD aligned to the SPE approved quality professional learning standards or the QPLS. Area two, effective means of teaching literacy. Inservice
357PD is aligned to evidence-based practices in state adopted documents and standards for universal comprehensive literacy instruction in TK to 5 including the English language arts English language development or ELA EL framework and the California dyslexia guidelines. Area three optional criterion PD has evidence of a positive impact on student and/or educator outcomes. Areas one and two each include a description followed by a bulleted list of spec specific criteria which derive directly from the statute. And we'd like to note that the optional criterion refers to providers demonstrating evidence of previous impact of their programs based on interest holder input. The guidance was enhanced to also include measuring impact at the LEA level. We would like to note that respondents indicated appreciation that the criteria demonstrate a solid understanding of what constitutes effective PD include interactive collaborative professional
358learning. Include adequate time and structures for reflection, coaching, and periodic checks. Include foundational skills as well as oral language development, vocabulary, background knowledge, comprehension, and writing. support early intervention and support the needs of English learner students and English language development. Based on the trends identified in public comments, the CDE made targeted revisions to the criteria, which are represented in bold italics in attachment one. Revisions to the criteria based on public input include adding language to the introduction to clarify the intention of tier one universal support and that the term professional development also encompasses professional learning and in area one adding evidence-based to professional development and to models of effective instructional practices. While requests to include the specific term science of reading is beyond the scope of EC 33319.6 Six, references to evidence-based practices and explicit
359and systematic instruction are included to ensure that instructional practices are in alignment with the research. And in area two, adding universal to comprehensive literacy instruct to comprehensive literacy instruction, explicit and systematic instruction per EC44259 and comprehensive and designated and integrated to English language development or EL. requests to include specific strategies for EL are subsumed by the requirement for alignment to the ELA ELD framework in conjunction with this change and uh also expanding the heading from optional criterion to optional criterion for the selection of professional development programs to indicate that the criterion is specific to the selection rather than the development of PD programs. The guidance is intended to support eleas as they develop or select an inservice literacy PD program. Eleas are encouraged to consider local context including student backgrounds and needs ensuring assets based
360and culturally sustaining instructional practices per English learner roadmap principle one. Educator, school district and state level needs as well as local initiatives and program type. For example, English medium programs and multilingual programs should also be considered. The guidance covers the following topics including statutory requirements and questions for LEA consideration. One, which staff will participate in literacy PD. Two, process for selection or development. Three, literacy PD considerations. Four, reporting requirements. And five, continuous improvement. Respondents indicated appreciation that the guidance allows for LEA flexibility in the process for selection or development of literacy PD programs. Includes suggestions for convening a literacy team. Includes leadership participation and onboarding. Demonstrates commitment to ensuring that professional learning and literacy is intentional, well planned, and tied to evidence-based practices. clearly states reporting requirements, attends to continuous improvement, and calls for the
361use of both qualitative and quantitative data. Revisions to the draft guidance based on public comment include adding statements to the introduction about funding allocation and timing as well as consideration of local context including student backgrounds and needs ensuring assets based and culturally sustaining practices per English learner roadmap principle one and educator school district and state level needs as well as local initiatives and program types for example English medium programs and multi multilingual programs and also providing additional considerations for eleas in the section which staff will participate in literacy PD including would teachers benefit from different types of training for example training specific to multilingual contexts and a note that eleas can consider teachers of students in grades other than TK to five for example teachers of four-year-old preschool children who are eligible for TK but
362enrolled in other um are enrolled in other California state preschool programs and also providing additional examples of LEA literacy team members in the process for selection or development, including other roles based on LEA needs such as multilingual and EL educators, teachers on special assignment focused on literacy and ELD and teacher librarians. also revising the literacy PD considerations to include resources in addition to time and adding the following questions for LEA consideration. How and when will follow-up support and coaching occur? How will PD support connections between training content and locally adopted materials? How will PD support TK educators with alignment to the California Preschool Transitional Kindergarten Learning Foundations? How will PD support educators with considerations specific to dual language settings? And also restructuring the continuous improvement section to consolidate the information into a series of three
363practices to improve clarity and to reduce redundancy and adding the following questions for LEA consideration. How will ongoing literacy PD be sustained? How will the literacy PD be aligned with other district initiatives to ensure coordination? How will evidence of literacy PD program impact be measured at the local level? How will ongoing structured opportunities for data analysis and educator reflection be provided? We would like to note that while including criteria specific to PD for biiteracy and dual language settings was not directed by the legislation, these considerations were incorporated into the guidance to support LEAs in addressing these needs according to local context. There were comments specific to funding, reporting, and program review that may inform and support future processes and communication. Questions specific to funding and reporting will be clarified on the CDE web page closer
364to the funding allocation and to the reporting process. In terms of the rubric and reviewer calibration process, comments specific to the interpretation of the optional criterion on evidence of positive impact may help frame the rubric and the calibration process. This criterion is intentionally open-ended and optional to allow for flexibility based on available data. We also wanted to address some additional trends and interest holder input. Various models were proposed to define precepts of effective professional development. The SB approved QPLS are referenced in the criteria for this purpose. In addition, the term evidence-based has been added as a qualifier preceding the term professional development. Addressing how grouping of educators will be handled will depend on program selected or developed as well as local need and context. The following questions from the guidance may support eleas in this
365purpose. Would teachers benefit from different types of training? For example, training specific to multilingual contexts? Which components are to be completed whole group, individually, and with a smaller group of colleagues or a coach? What onboarding and support will be needed for LEA and school leaders to ensure successful implementation of the inservice literacy professional development? Interpretation of which roles are included in certificated and classified staff who support any teacher who provides literacy instruction to students TK to 5 is dependent upon local context in structures. The current phrasing does not specify roles in order to allow for LEA flexibility. And I will now hand it over to my division director, Monnique Mlan. I think we need to um reset the Zoom because it has frozen for our um remote participant. So, if you can hang on for
366one second, Mon'nique, we'll just reset the Zoom. >> Let me know when you're ready. >> Okay. I think we got the go-ahad to proceed. So, Monnique, please take it away. Thank you. >> Thank you, President Darling Hammond, Vice President Glover Woods, Chief Deputy Robersonson, Superintendent Robersonson. Um, so I am Monique McWain and I'm happy to bring this presentation to a close. So, um, as Eve described, the California Department of Education made targeted revisions to the criteria and guidance appropriate to the scope of the professional development program covering the breadth of topics named in the statute. These additions, as mentioned earlier, are represented in bold italics and attachment one. The final document reflects statutory compliance, interest holder, and expert input, and the flexibility for local educational agencies to meet the complex literacy needs of our state's
367diverse students. So the next steps once the criteria and guidance are approved, the California Department of Education will post this document to the literacy professional development programs web page and release an invitation for professional development program submissions which will include an evaluation rubric. And to stay informed, um, we have our information on the slide, which is the California Department of Ed education, um, link to the literacy professional development programs web page as well as our email address. And just as a reminder, our recommendation, so the California Department of Education recommends that the state board of education approve the proposed criteria and guidance for the selection or development of literacy professional development programs. And as part of this recommendation, we suggest delegating authority to the state board of education and California Department of Education staff to
368make any necessary revisions, including any need for clarity and accuracy as the document is professionally edited and prepared for publication. With that, I hand this back to you. Thank you so much. Um, while we're waiting, uh, oh, first of all, let's put up the public comment slide. Thank you. Uh members of the public who wish to comment on this item can call the phone number and use the participant access code shown on this slide. Um and while we're waiting, I want to thank the CDE for the very quick work to prepare and receive public comments on this item while also providing anformational memorandum to the board which was posted in October. The statute did lay out clear direction and I want to commend the department for thoughtfully integrating the input from many interest holders given
369the depth and breadth of the comments received. Uh they have been working on this item on a timeline that would allow districts to actually tap this resource and and offer this professional development in the next school year. And I know that, you know, puts us on a very rapid time frame, but we do want this work to be going forward in the field, and we really appreciate the department's willingness to uh expedite uh this process. So, that said, uh are there any uh comments of in the room? >> There are eight people signed up for in-person public comment. Will the following people please line up at the microphone in the back of the room? Regina Chagala, Steve McDougall, McClean Rosanski, Andrea Ball, Lindseay Tornatori, and Angela Stigle. Good evening. My name is Regina Chgoya with
370California Federation of Teachers. Um, for item 16, please consider please consider adding please consider adding ter it's been a long day, everyone. Please consider adding terminology that includes biiteracy throughout the criteria and guidance because it reads as if it's like as if monilingualism is the goal. Um CFT would appreciate considering for small LEAs with limited staff when delivering professional development in this space. There are a number of moving pieces with this work and the tasks are varied. Um CTF also has concerns regarding the lack of practitioner voice during the public input period. Perhaps systematic outreach to practitioner representatives would be more effective. So CTF is willing to keep the lines of communication between CDE staff and practitioners open. So uh please let's talk. Thank you. >> Um yeah, no Steve. Yeah, no Steve. Yeah, you're
371good. >> Um good afternoon. I'm MLAN Rosanski. I'm a policy analyst at the Alama County Office of Education. Thank you to President Darling Hammond and Vice President Dr. Clever Woods as well as members for the opportunity to speak today. We did not have a chance to submit written feedback on the proposed literacy PD criterion guidance, but we reviewed the feedback and revisions and want to thank CDE staff for all the change that changes that they made in response to the feedback. We agree with much of this feedback as well as the edits that were made. We particularly appreciate the balanced approach to literacy development and the references to the state's roadmap which is an important guiding document in ASU's work on culturally and linguistically responsive pedigogy. We support an even greater prioritization of dual language
372immersion programs and pedigogies that then are reflected in the current drafts including recommended assessment benchmarks for multilingual learning. How overall however we believe this draft supports the state's goals and hope future actions continue to highlight the specific needs of dual language learners. Thank you. Good afternoon. My name is Natalie Shin with Californians Together. We support the development of strong criteria and propose several additions to ensure that all professional learning effectively serves English learners and promotes biiteracy across all instructional settings. Our recommendations center on three key areas. First, we urge the board to strengthen the criteria by ensuring professional development is culturally and linguistically responsive. Under area one, we ask for an explicit point requiring PD to be responsive to individual student needs, their cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and the specific program context, including both English
373medium and bilingual classrooms. Second, we must prioritize biiteracy and program differentiation. Under area two, we ask to include literacy/biiteracy when referencing literacy. And under the considerations, we ask for explicit questions on how PD will address the development of language and literacy in two languages and how it will be differentiated for all program models, including dual language and special ed. Finally, we must measure what matters. Under continuous improvement, we request that all quantitative and qualitative data gathered to assess PD effectiveness be disagregated by language of instruction and student proficiency levels. This is essential to ensure true coordination in alignment with English learner roadmap. Thank you. Thank you, Andrea Ball. Uh, here on behalf of the California School Library Association and the California Association of Suburban School Districts, President Darling Hammond, board members, Chief Deputy, we thank
374you for the and the department really thank you for all the work that went into developing this criteria. We are in support and we appreciate it. We think the resources accompanying this from the administration and the all the work that was done on the legislation. President Darling Hammond and referenced earlier today AB1454 really was brought together a diverse coalition for the benefit of students for professional development that will recognize the diversity of our students many of whom are English language learners, multilingual learners. And again to paraphrase or echo uh President Darling Hammond's comments, we appreciate the work of the department, the outreach you did and taking in uh public comment, addressing it, revising it um in the professional development criteria is going to make it even more valuable. Thank you. >> Good afternoon, Lindseay Tornator.
375On behalf of the California County Superintendent, um we support the CD's recommendation to approve the proposed criteria um and guidance for selecting the professional development programs. We would like to add to the chorus of applause and appreciation to the CDE for a job well done. We know it's not an easy lift. It's quite a big one to be so nimble and so responsive to all of the public comments. So really appreciated the uh analysis of how it was incorporated into the criteria. So thank you. Um, this action we believe is an important step for LEAs to ultimately select the PD that is most appropriate for their local context. And we know change happens at the local level and we um know how critical it is for all of California's teachers to feel supported and have
376access to the resources that they know will benefit their students best. Thank you. >> Angela Stagel. I'm a classroom teacher representing the 310,000 educators of the California Teachers Association. CTA believes in order for professional development to be successful, teachers must be primarily involved in determining what content will be delivered and by whom, when, and how. We are extremely disappointed with the very limited educator voice included in the feedback process. After reviewing the feedback survey, which was only open for nine days, and realizing that only 64 responses were submitted, with less than 10% of those being from TK12 educators, more should have been done and could still be done to elicit educator feedback. Teacher voice is crucial to any conversation regarding PD programs, and more must be done to ensure their voice is valued and heard.
377We would also like to see union representation in the LEA literacy team. Local unions have the right to consult and the right to bargain the impacts of those decisions, including labor representation on the LEA literacy team is necessary for the selection and implementation of literacy PD programs. Thank you. >> Will the following person please line up? Leilani Awanaldo. >> Hello, Leilani Ainaldo. behalf of the Association of California School Administrators, Access supports the proposed criteria and guidance, and we believe this effort represents an important step toward addressing California's ongoing literacy challenges by ensuring that educators and school leaders have access to highquality evidence-based means of teaching foundational reading skills that supports effective reading instruction. Implementing this guidance will help equip educators with the tools and strategies they need to help all students become confident, proficient readers.
378Thank you. We will now move to public comment on the phone line. >> Thank you. Caller with the last four digits 1014, please state your name and affiliation for the record. You have one minute. Your time starts now. >> Hi, my name is Pedro Molina with the First Aid Foundation, a nonprofit that provides school supplies and learning resources to low-income students across the Inland Empire Sanino area. We believe that education programs should include the proven partners like the institute of for multi-ensory education which has trained thousands of California teachers and delivered a high qual delivered high quality materials that improve classrooms learning. IMS updated O um O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OG plus uh course offers strong support for English
379learners. So um through Spanish language assessments, uh family letters and tools that build connections between languages, helping all students grow in their ability to read and write. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 4369, please begin your public comment. Good afternoon again. This is Sally Fox on behalf of Cababe. Cabab is supportive of the work that CDE and SBE have accomplished already related to this important item which aligns to the ELA EL framework's five themes. To ensure PD meets the needs of English learners and learners in multilingual programs, it must emphasize responsiveness to individual student needs, cultural and linguistic backgrounds, and instructional context. all English or one of several bilingual biliteracy models such as two-way dual language immersion or developmental bilingual programs. When literacy PD takes place, peer interaction with groups
380of colleagues or a coach should take into account the language of instruction and the language used for professional development. This models respect for biiteracy programs in multiple languages through professional use of the academic register of the target language. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 2157, please begin your public comment. >> Uh, good morning. My name uh Hello, president and members. My name is Isabel Solis, a 32-year educator and president of Los Amigosad, a nonprofit serving underserved families across California, including Imperial County. We are in strong support of the state board's leadership in establishing evidence-based literacy professional development standards. As advocates for students of low-income communities, we urge that implementation include participation from organizations with a proven record of success, such as the Institute for Multiensory Education, which has trained California teachers. These
381efforts are already making a measurable difference in students in the communities we represent. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 9490, please begin your public comment. >> Good afternoon. My name is Dorya Mendivil representing Mr. Marco Isandrea with the farmworker nonprofit La Cooperativa Campina de California here in strong support of the state board's leadership in setting evidencebased literacy professional development standards as advocate for lowincome communities and students. We want to ensure implementation allows participation by organizations with a proven record of success like the Institute for Multiensory Education which has trained over 15,000 of California teachers so far and prove high quality materials align with state standards in the rural lowincome communities like Fresno Bakersfield that we serve. The Institute for Multiensory Education's efforts have already helped thousands of students. IM updated Autumn Hill
382Plus course strengthens English learner support through cross linguistic connections, cog charts, and family letters in Spanish that build homeschool partnerships. It also includes Spanish language assessments to measure progress in students native language, ensuring students are equipped to accelerate literacy growth for learning. Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 5992. Please begin your public comment. >> Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond and board members. My name is Chan Chun and I'm currently a literacy specialist TOSA in Franklin McKinley School District in East San Jose and a teach California policy alumni. In my 27 years of experience as a teacher and literacy specialist, I know literacy is the foundation for academic success. We appreciate the speed with which the staff has developed this criteria and guidance for the selection of literacy professional development programs
383which will transform instructional practices. I was burdened with just in time support translating theory into practical application through modeling and feedback. This ensures teachers can focus on the critical task of rewiring a child's brain to read. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 5302. Please start your public comment. Good afternoon. My name is Dominique TA with EdVoice Institute. President Darling Hammond and board members. Thank you for your continued commitment to improving literacy instruction across California. The revised professional development guidance is a strong step forward. We're encouraged to see explicit and systematic instruction and foundational skills called out clearly. This ensures PD aligns with evidence-based literacy practices. The new emphasis on coherence between PD and locally adopted materials will help districts implement with consistency and purpose. We're also glad to see
384the inclusion of EL and special education teachers and LEA in LEA literacy planning and the addition of coaching and resource considerations to sustain learning over time. These revisions reflect a thoughtful collaborative approach that will strengthen both teacher prep and student outcome statewide. Thank you again for the opportunity to provide feedback and for continuing to move this work forward. >> Thank you. Next caller ending in 0696. Please start your public comment. >> Good afternoon, President Darling Hammond and board members. My name is Brian Monroy. I'm the policy manager with Teach Plus California. We appreciate the speed with which staff has developed this criteria and guidance for the selection of literacy professional development programs. We believe this is incredibly important work to transform instructional practices and to improve instruction. Teachers need ongoing job embedded datadriven hands-on professional
385development and coaching that is differentiated for their student population and the teachers existing knowledge of structured literacy instruction. While we shared a number of specific recommendations in our letter, I wanted to uplift one specific recommendation that the state also connects the selection of professional development to the robust guidance for the ELAL follow-up adoption and provides guidance for how recipients of the literacy coaches and reading specialists grant program can coordinate their use of coaches with the implementation of their selected professional development. Thank you. >> Thank you. This concludes public comment for item 16. Great. Thank you so much. Um, we're now open for board discussion. Yes, member DK. >> Hi. Thank you so much again for the presentation. I just had a little clarifying question specifically about the committee review application process. So, is there going
386to be or do you think that there's going to be a student that's going to be on the committee review selection? because if not, I think that'd be um an excellent opportunity to have. And echoing um a public comment I think that we received um where they mentioned like specific organizations that they wanted to be on it, I was wondering, do you guys have like any preset qualifications or like a set amount of members that you think are going to be serving on on the committee review selection committee? And yeah, >> those are excellent questions. And before you answer them, I'm really sorry to say this, but the Zoom has dropped again. >> Okay, [laughter] >> hold that thought. Don't forget what you asked and what you're going to answer. I think we need to
387uh get the tech folks to call back into the Zoom. to to respond to your questions and please refresh my memory if I do not respond to your whole question but um we will for the review process we normally will do a call for reviewers and we will request a variety of different um types of expertise. So in this case we want professional ment expertise, literacy expertise. I feel that that we could have a if student normally we don't have a student apply but we would welcome students to apply to be on the review committee. Um and the number of reviewers that we anticipate and will request often is based on the number of um applications or submissions that we receive um for the program. So we could for this particular project we anticipate having
388a robust number of reviewers to review the application submissions which we will be accepting December through January. So, thank you. Good. Any followup? Thank you. >> All right. Are there any other questions or comments? Member Rodriguez, >> I just wanted to follow up on I believe it was the CTA um speaker who talked about the short window. uh were I mean I was looking at who reviewed you know it seemed like it was there was a variety of people and a few were members of unions but I was just wondering about that short window for public comment. >> So we were we're working under a very um tight timeline in order to make sure that we're able to implement and local educational agencies will have the maximum time possible. Um we did open the window
389for the maximum amount of time we had available. Um, is that the ideal timeline to open it? We of course we would have welcomed a longer timeline, but unfortunately that was the timeline that we had to >> just to add to that, we would have had to wait until the next board meeting and then we would have missed the beginning of the school year for people to be able to access the professional development. So appreciate the elacrity with which the department was able to do that and I do hope that there will be teacher input and um union input at the local level as these professional development programs are being adopted. Um so member Patila Brownson I think I saw your hand go up a minute ago. >> Um yes if we could go back
390to slide seven. Um it's listed as an optional criteria of positive impact on student or educator outcomes. Um and similar to the the um study session previously, I feel like evidence-based is one of those terms of art that means different things to different people and it can mean that it's reflected in academic literature. It can mean that it's outcomes based. Um and if you can just talk a little bit more about how you're defining that but also as to why area three was determined to be better as an optional criteria. >> So um criterion three was not directed by the legislation. This was something that we had conversations with SBE staff about including and the reason um why it was determined to be optional is dependent upon what data may be available by those submitting
391PD programs. So this is specific the optional criterion um the full title is actually not there. We did get a lot of questions about this in our input survey. Um, and so this was expanded to be optional criterion for the selection of PD programs. So this is specifically looking at PD programs that are already in operation and um may be able to show in whatever ways they can positive impact either on students or on educator outcomes. being a new process um is is part of that as well to see what kind of data we're you know the PD providers are able to submit on this criterion. Um many of the comments that we received through the survey were specifically looking at this criterion for more specific um more specific information that it that the programs
392are having a positive impact. And so a lot of these suggestions were able to be incorporated into the guidance. So when eleas are actually implementing the PD programs um they would be looking for that evidence of positive impact and be able to adjust course. So, I I I realize the the language of the legislation references evidence-based, and I I think it's not a far stretch to think of evidence-based as outcomes as a valid and reliable indicator. I I just wonder if there's a way that we can structure it to enable um credit for organizations and models that actually do have an evidence base, but without boxing out more innovative um sort of methods that don't necessarily have an RCT associated with it. Um the thing that I know is um sort of available is just
393to sort of enable it as a plus factor. But I I I it strikes me as odd to if we know there is an evidence base for some methods that we wouldn't include it. Um seems like we are uh hamstringing ourselves unnecessarily. I don't want to um any newer programs at a deficit because I think that's oftentimes where innovation comes from and if there's evidence I think we should use it. >> I think the anticipation would be that once the rubric is created and once the review process happens that would be taken into account for there to be credit for having that evidence without you know like you said putting you know newer programs at a disadvantage. So having it be kind of extra bonus. I think that was kind of the intention of that
394wording. Um I do want to emphasize though that evidence-based um is absolutely part of area one and two. So those evidence-based strategies for both PD and for literacy instruction do need to be included and do need to be supported by the program. and the way that the statute includes and defines that evidence-based practice and it also aligns it to what was included in um for like the literacy standards for example for uh that were set in place via SB488 but it notes that it has to be explo so it notes evidence-based approaches as well as components for teaching effective literacy so explicit systematic instruction and foundational skills including print content concepts, phonological awareness, f uh uh word recognition, fluency, oral written language, vocabulary, background knowledge, uh reading comprehension, for example. So, that's the way that
395it it defines that in in the statute as far as what they're considering and what we're considering also in the criteria as evidence-based >> to to make it concrete. I think maybe rather than describing it as optional, maybe it's just to the extent if available because some some of these uh models are going to be able to say, "Yeah, we have an RCT and we know this has driven student outcomes or educator um confidence in uh working in those domains." And I think that should be important. And I think I'm getting dinged by someone's chimes. No. or or a phone. Um, yeah, >> thank you all. >> I think I think what I'm hearing is that if people have that evidence, they are invited to submit it. >> And so I think that's the intention
396and maybe we want to make that clear in the >> Yes, thank you for that. And I think we will definitely take that back and um work with the state board staff and and possibly making some revisions around that. >> Make it clear enough. Um, was there somebody else on? Were you waiting member Rosco Gonzalez? Yeah. >> Um, I think it was already said about including teacher voice, but I think I also want to do like a mix of educators in your lit local literacy teams. Um, of course they're just suggestions that it would include um teachers from bilingual programs, intervention settings, and and of course local union representatives um because as we know this will help take root and and maintain consistency with these implementations. >> Any other Did you have anything you wanted
397to respond on that? uh thank you for that and it is definitely a consider a consideration uh as we were putting this together we definitely wanted to include examples of who could be included in the literacy team for example but definitely didn't want to limit any um any uh local education agency according to their context from including others who they felt would be important in their process. Uh but definitely something that we will take back to see if there's others that we should include within those examples. Any other questions or comments? All right, seeing none, do I have a motion? >> Member Rodriguez. >> Member Rosco Gonzalez. >> All right. Thank you very much. >> All right. And Brooks, can you please call the role? >> I can. Member Yoshari. Member Rodriguez, >> yes. >>
398Member Pillow Brownson, >> yes. >> Member Rosco Gonzalez, >> yes. >> Member Olen, >> yes. >> Member McQuillin, >> yes. >> Member Lewis, >> yes. >> Vice President Glover Woods, >> yes. >> Member Esco, >> yes. >> President Darling Hem, >> yes. >> Member GK, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> All right. Uh, and with that, I uh thank you Monnique and team. We really appreciate it both the presentation and all the work that went into getting us here. Uh and we are going to uh continue the meeting and end today's session at 4:30 p.m. As a reminder, we begin tomorrow at 8:30 in the morning. >> All right. >> Thank you.