The Huffington Post (8/5, Diepenbrock) carries a 3,145-word article from The Hechinger Report on the challenges and seemingly ever-changing rules associated with California’s new system of school funding that “gives schools their first significant authority over spending since the late 1970s.” The state was slow to issue rules for the system, educators say, and some groups complain that some districts failed to achieve the system’s goals of better serving students with the most needs, setting goals that were measurable, or clearly show how programs would meet goals, yet there is “nearly universal praise” for “bringing educators closer to their communities and providing insight into what the state’s neediest students require.”
California Governor Opposes School Construction Bill In Private
The Los Angeles Times (7/24, Skelton) reports that the “debt-dumping governor” of California Jerry Brown is opposing a school construction bill privately, although he hasn’t taken a public stance on the measure. Insiders say that the trouble with the school bill is that the need is “spotty” and not universal. Urban districts are losing enrollment, while some outlier, less expensive, areas are seeing their numbers of children multiply. The bill would let the state issue bonds to cover the costs of school construction, but the governor is opposed to issuing new bonds.
California Budget Includes Funds For Pre-K
The Los Angeles Times (6/16, Megerian, Mason) reports that the California Legislature “approved a $156.4-billion state budget on Sunday,” for the fiscal year starting July 1. Among other things, “it funds preschool for children from poor families, increases welfare grants and continues expanding public healthcare under President Obama’s federal overhaul.”
The Sacramento (CA) Bee (6/16, Siders, White) notes that the budget will start to “pay down an estimated shortfall of more than $74 billion in the teachers’ pension fund,” and “includes $264 million for new children’s programs, including 11,500 preschool slots for low-income 4-year-olds by June 2015 and another 31,500 slots in future years.”
The San Jose (CA) Mercury News (6/15, Richman) reported on a series of ballot measures which will determine how the funds are spent.
California Lawmakers Strike Compromise On Pre-K Expansion. The Washington Post (6/13, Wilson) reported in its “Govbeat” blog on a legislative compromise in California that, if approved, would give “hundreds of thousands of low-income children...access to pre-school education.” The agreement was announced Thursday and was expected to go before the full state Senate and Assembly in a full budget proposal by Sunday. Gov. Jerry Brown (D) has not said whether he will sign it or veto the overall budget, but he has line-item veto power as well. The proposal “would provide hundreds of millions of dollars to offer preschool access to 234,000 low-income four-year olds.” The Post says legislators settled on $85 million for fiscal 2014-15 while “another $85 million would go toward improving pre-school quality, including $50 million in grants to local school districts and $35 million in one-time funding for professional development for teachers.”
Lawmakers Predict “Good News” For Pre-K In California Budget
The Los Angeles Times (6/12, Megerian) reports that California Assembly Budget Chairwoman Nancy Skinner (D) predicted “good news” for pre-schools in California’s upcoming budget. The Times says not many details are available yet publicly but Senate leader Darrel Steinberg (D) said, “We’re going to make some good, solid investments in kids, in infrastructure, and in some other key areas.” The Times says “Steinberg originally wanted to provide every California child with preschool, at an annual cost of $1.5 billion,” but “he later pared down his proposal to $378 million to pay for preschool for all 4-year-olds from low-income families.” Gov. Jerry Brown has insisted on “more conservative revenue projections” but has opened “the door for lawmakers to spend more than he originally proposed.”
Bill Would Make Kindergarten Mandatory In California
The Pleasanton (CA) Weekly (6/7, Aguilar) reports the California State Assembly approved a bill that would require children to attend kindergarten before they enter first grade, although the bill doesn’t require children to attend kindergarten when they’re five. Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan (D), a sponsor, said the bill was inspired in part by “the new Common Core State Standards,” which “have academic expectations for kindergarten students.” Assemblywoman Shirley Weber (D), another sponsor, said the state is designing much of its educational policy “around the assumption that California’s children will attend kindergarten.”
California Superintendent Of Public Instruction Race A “Proxy War Between Big Labor And Big Donors”
In an over 2,000-word article, EdSource Today (5/30, Fensterwald) reported that the race for California superintendent of public instruction has become “an expensive proxy war between big labor and big donors” due to the differences in the views of the top two candidates, Tom Torlakson and Marshall Tuck, on charter schools, teachers unions, and education reform. Still, both support the state’s new school financing system, the Local Control Funding Formula, as well as the Common Core State Standards.
Lawsuit Targets Learning Time For “Low-Performing” California Schools
The San Francisco Chronicle (5/30, Tucker) reports that students from seven “low-performing” schools in California “filed an unusual class-action lawsuit against the state and its top education officials Thursday, claiming they have received far less learning time than other, more affluent kids across the state.” According to the Chronicle, the case differs from other education lawsuits – which tend to focus on “equal access to tangible resources” – in that it “addresses a more fundamental part of a public education: the time it takes to learn.” According to the Chronicle, the lawsuit, which was filed by the ACLU Foundation of Southern California and the pro bono law firm Public Counsel, “identified several reasons for what it calls lost learning time, including a lack of teachers at the start of the school year, incomplete class schedules, the aftermath of traumatic lockdowns, overreliance on substitutes to fill long-term vacancies and ‘service’ courses that require students to do office work or other tasks.”