PACE research is prominently featured in the repository on chronic absenteeism established by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE). The collaborative serves as a valuable resource hub, offering toolkits, materials, and various other assets related to chronic absenteeism in educational settings. PACE's contribution to this repository includes two research briefs focusing on chronic absenteeism. The first brief involves PACE's in-depth analysis of student chronic absenteeism data from the CORE Districts, exploring the utilization of chronic absence metrics within a multi-metric accountability system. The second brief delves into the chronic absence performance levels of California's districts, schools, and student groups, utilizing recently released data from California's School Dashboard. This brief also investigates the pivotal role played by chronic absence in determining differentiated assistance, providing insights into the impact on school performance. Together, these research briefs offer valuable perspectives and data-driven insights into addressing and understanding chronic absenteeism in the context of California's educational landscape.
After an extensive and inclusive process involving eight hearings, numerous meetings, collaboration with stakeholders, a survey of over thirty organizations, and two years of deliberation by a diverse Commission that included community members and elected officials, the California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education (BRC) has unveiled its draft recommendations. The draft report, which references PACE's Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) report titled "Early Childhood Education in California," provides detailed recommendations across nine key areas. These proposals are informed by input from various sources, a thorough examination of current and past proposals, insights from other states, and existing models within California. The report outlines a comprehensive framework advocating for substantial reforms centered on equity, two-generation policies, and a targeted focus on children, families, and the early care and education workforce. The culmination of this rigorous process underscores the Commission's commitment to shaping meaningful and impactful policies in the realm of early childhood education.
California has embraced Social Emotional Learning (SEL) as a crucial aspect of education, integrating emotional management, positive goal setting, empathy, and relationship skills into academic success. This commitment is evident in the state's adoption of SEL components in its educational standards and accountability systems. However, while the state is implementing surveys to gauge school climate, it's yet to fully understand how these relate to academic progress or link social-emotional learning to overall school improvement. The CORE districts have taken strides by measuring specific competencies like self-management and growth mindset, finding that these skills predict student performance at different academic levels. Yet, educators need guidance on using this data for improvement. PACE is studying the CORE districts' innovative accountability system to pinpoint successful policies and practices regarding SEL, aiming to reduce disparities among student sub-groups. Understanding how learning environments foster SEL can inform efforts to improve education across California and potentially nationally. Moving forward, California needs to focus on developing educators' capacity to utilize SEL data effectively and invest in integrating SEL in both school-day and expanded learning environments for continuous improvement.
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) revolutionized school assessment by emphasizing a comprehensive approach over No Child Left Behind's (NCLB) test-focused model. California shifted from NCLB's single-number school ratings to a multi-dimensional dashboard system to better assess school performance. However, ESSA's current draft regulations advocate for a single, summative rating for identifying struggling schools, contradicting the spirit of multiple measures. The approach of condensing diverse measures into one rating would yield misleading outcomes. For instance, PACE found that schools performing poorly on one indicator might fare well on others. Such simplification fails to identify struggling schools accurately, a crucial step for offering necessary support. PACE recommends a tiered approach, considering each indicator separately, rather than amalgamating them into a single score. California's pursuit of a detailed, dashboard-style accountability system aligns with this approach, offering a more nuanced understanding of school performance and supporting tailored improvement strategies. A dashboard not only informs parents better but also enables informed decisions on school choices, focusing on continuous improvement rather than misleading rankings.
This is one of the most exciting, daunting and critically important moments in California's education policy history. We are all in uncharted territory. Policymakers and educators at all levels of the system are wrestling with the virtually simultaneous implementation of four radically new and promising policy initiatives: the Common Core State Standards (CCSS); computer adaptive assessments developed by the Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium; the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); and a new accountability system that focuses on Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) and an evaluation rubric rather than the traditional Academic Performance Index (API) scores. The implementation of these major reforms has redefined the roles and responsibilities of virtually every education actor—from state policymakers to county superintendents to local school boards, teacher, and parents. States across the country are watching to see whether California will succeed in implementing these reforms and how they can replicate parts of what state superintendent Tom Torlakson calls "the California Way."
Within-School Disparities in Students’ Experiences of Safety, Support, and Connectedness
Commentary author
Adam Voight
Published
Summary
A new study delves into racial and ethnic disparities in academic achievement within California middle schools and their correlation with school climate, a concept encompassing safety, relationships, and participation opportunities. Analyzing data from the California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey (Cal-SCHLS) across 754 middle schools, the research focuses on Black-White and Hispanic-White racial climate gaps. It identifies differences in students' perceptions of safety, relationships, and participation based on race within the same schools. Notably, Black students reported lower levels of safety and relationships compared to White peers, while Hispanic students experienced lower safety, relationships, and participation opportunities than their White counterparts. The study also links larger racial achievement gaps to corresponding disparities in perceived safety, relationships, and participation. It emphasizes the importance of considering subgroup-specific climates instead of a general school-level assessment. Particularly relevant for California's education system, which integrates school climate measures into its accountability systems, the study highlights the need for targeted action plans addressing diverse subgroup experiences to promote educational equity.
The primary aim of state finance systems across the U.S. is to achieve equalization, especially in states with local school funding under legal scrutiny. California’s current revenue limit and Governor Brown’s proposed formula both follow the traditional foundation state-aid model. In this structure, state aid per pupil is calculated as the foundation amount minus the required tax rate multiplied by assessed property wealth per pupil. Determining the foundation amount involves historical, political, and cost-based considerations. California’s current system heavily relies on historical expenditure levels from the 1970s, adjusted for inflation and equalization. Brown's proposal seems influenced by state average revenue limits after budget-induced cuts. Setting the foundation amount based on the actual cost of education remains a point of contention. California’s approach, compared to other states, tends to lag in per-pupil spending despite achieving equalization post-Serrano. States often adopt foundation formulas, aiming to increase spending in poorer districts ('leveling up'), yet California's spending remains lower on average. The ongoing debate emphasizes balancing actual educational costs, political feasibility, and historical context. Brown’s proposed base amounts, while lower than past estimates for California's educational needs, are not significantly different from those in other states using the foundation formula. However, comparing base amounts across states requires understanding that these figures represent the minimum cost to educate students without additional needs or district-specific characteristics.
Data and Evaluation
PACE research is prominently featured in the repository on chronic absenteeism established by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE). The collaborative serves as a valuable resource hub, offering toolkits, materials, and various other assets related to chronic absenteeism in educational settings. PACE's contribution to this repository includes two research briefs focusing on chronic absenteeism. The first brief involves PACE's in-depth analysis of student chronic absenteeism data from the CORE Districts, exploring the utilization of chronic absence metrics within a multi-metric accountability system. The second brief delves into the chronic absence performance levels of California's districts, schools, and student groups, utilizing recently released data from California's School Dashboard. This brief also investigates the pivotal role played by chronic absence in determining differentiated assistance, providing insights into the impact on school performance. Together, these research briefs offer valuable perspectives and data-driven insights into addressing and understanding chronic absenteeism in the context of California's educational landscape.
Early Childhood Education in California Takes a Step Forward
After an extensive and inclusive process involving eight hearings, numerous meetings, collaboration with stakeholders, a survey of over thirty organizations, and two years of deliberation by a diverse Commission that included community members and elected officials, the California Assembly Blue Ribbon Commission on Early Childhood Education (BRC) has unveiled its draft recommendations. The draft report, which references PACE's Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) report titled "Early Childhood Education in California," provides detailed recommendations across nine key areas. These proposals are informed by input from various sources, a thorough examination of current and past proposals, insights from other states, and existing models within California. The report outlines a comprehensive framework advocating for substantial reforms centered on equity, two-generation policies, and a targeted focus on children, families, and the early care and education workforce. The culmination of this rigorous process underscores the Commission's commitment to shaping meaningful and impactful policies in the realm of early childhood education.
Can Social-Emotional Skills Drive Continuous Improvement?
California has embraced Social Emotional Learning (SEL) as a crucial aspect of education, integrating emotional management, positive goal setting, empathy, and relationship skills into academic success. This commitment is evident in the state's adoption of SEL components in its educational standards and accountability systems. However, while the state is implementing surveys to gauge school climate, it's yet to fully understand how these relate to academic progress or link social-emotional learning to overall school improvement. The CORE districts have taken strides by measuring specific competencies like self-management and growth mindset, finding that these skills predict student performance at different academic levels. Yet, educators need guidance on using this data for improvement. PACE is studying the CORE districts' innovative accountability system to pinpoint successful policies and practices regarding SEL, aiming to reduce disparities among student sub-groups. Understanding how learning environments foster SEL can inform efforts to improve education across California and potentially nationally. Moving forward, California needs to focus on developing educators' capacity to utilize SEL data effectively and invest in integrating SEL in both school-day and expanded learning environments for continuous improvement.
California’s Dashboard Data Will Guide Improvement
The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) revolutionized school assessment by emphasizing a comprehensive approach over No Child Left Behind's (NCLB) test-focused model. California shifted from NCLB's single-number school ratings to a multi-dimensional dashboard system to better assess school performance. However, ESSA's current draft regulations advocate for a single, summative rating for identifying struggling schools, contradicting the spirit of multiple measures. The approach of condensing diverse measures into one rating would yield misleading outcomes. For instance, PACE found that schools performing poorly on one indicator might fare well on others. Such simplification fails to identify struggling schools accurately, a crucial step for offering necessary support. PACE recommends a tiered approach, considering each indicator separately, rather than amalgamating them into a single score. California's pursuit of a detailed, dashboard-style accountability system aligns with this approach, offering a more nuanced understanding of school performance and supporting tailored improvement strategies. A dashboard not only informs parents better but also enables informed decisions on school choices, focusing on continuous improvement rather than misleading rankings.
The PACE Perspective on 'The California Way'
This is one of the most exciting, daunting and critically important moments in California's education policy history. We are all in uncharted territory. Policymakers and educators at all levels of the system are wrestling with the virtually simultaneous implementation of four radically new and promising policy initiatives: the Common Core State Standards (CCSS); computer adaptive assessments developed by the Smarter Balance Assessment Consortium; the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); and a new accountability system that focuses on Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) and an evaluation rubric rather than the traditional Academic Performance Index (API) scores. The implementation of these major reforms has redefined the roles and responsibilities of virtually every education actor—from state policymakers to county superintendents to local school boards, teacher, and parents. States across the country are watching to see whether California will succeed in implementing these reforms and how they can replicate parts of what state superintendent Tom Torlakson calls "the California Way."
The Racial School Climate Gap
A new study delves into racial and ethnic disparities in academic achievement within California middle schools and their correlation with school climate, a concept encompassing safety, relationships, and participation opportunities. Analyzing data from the California School Climate, Health, and Learning Survey (Cal-SCHLS) across 754 middle schools, the research focuses on Black-White and Hispanic-White racial climate gaps. It identifies differences in students' perceptions of safety, relationships, and participation based on race within the same schools. Notably, Black students reported lower levels of safety and relationships compared to White peers, while Hispanic students experienced lower safety, relationships, and participation opportunities than their White counterparts. The study also links larger racial achievement gaps to corresponding disparities in perceived safety, relationships, and participation. It emphasizes the importance of considering subgroup-specific climates instead of a general school-level assessment. Particularly relevant for California's education system, which integrates school climate measures into its accountability systems, the study highlights the need for targeted action plans addressing diverse subgroup experiences to promote educational equity.
School Finance 102
The primary aim of state finance systems across the U.S. is to achieve equalization, especially in states with local school funding under legal scrutiny. California’s current revenue limit and Governor Brown’s proposed formula both follow the traditional foundation state-aid model. In this structure, state aid per pupil is calculated as the foundation amount minus the required tax rate multiplied by assessed property wealth per pupil. Determining the foundation amount involves historical, political, and cost-based considerations. California’s current system heavily relies on historical expenditure levels from the 1970s, adjusted for inflation and equalization. Brown's proposal seems influenced by state average revenue limits after budget-induced cuts. Setting the foundation amount based on the actual cost of education remains a point of contention. California’s approach, compared to other states, tends to lag in per-pupil spending despite achieving equalization post-Serrano. States often adopt foundation formulas, aiming to increase spending in poorer districts ('leveling up'), yet California's spending remains lower on average. The ongoing debate emphasizes balancing actual educational costs, political feasibility, and historical context. Brown’s proposed base amounts, while lower than past estimates for California's educational needs, are not significantly different from those in other states using the foundation formula. However, comparing base amounts across states requires understanding that these figures represent the minimum cost to educate students without additional needs or district-specific characteristics.