The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing school closures are significantly impacting students, particularly in terms of educational equity. Economic challenges are disproportionately affecting lower-income families, impacting students' access to learning resources. Research suggests that funding levels correlate with academic outcomes, signaling potential setbacks due to anticipated budget constraints. Californians have expressed a strong priority to address racial inequality in education, as highlighted in the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier voter poll. This poll demonstrates widespread support for initiatives like increasing teachers of color and implementing ethnic studies in schools, especially when substantiated by research on their positive impact. However, responses vary among different racial and political groups. As we navigate post-pandemic recovery, it's crucial to focus on addressing these disparities using a diverse range of policy approaches outlined in the brief. This will ensure broader support and sustained efforts toward educational equity.
The 2020 PACE Annual Conference unveiled the latest PACE/USC Rossier Poll results, showcasing California voters' views on key education-related issues. Presenters emphasized the poll's value in understanding voter concerns. Key findings revealed growing pessimism about school quality, a preference for across-the-board teacher salary increases, and concerns about college affordability and fairness in admissions. Voters also stressed addressing gun violence in schools. The panel discussed the state budget, highlighting the need for enhanced higher education accessibility, increased teacher salaries, and a more nuanced approach to education funding. They debated the governor's budget's alignment with voter priorities, noting the need for more support in higher education and teacher salaries and a more effective approach to recruiting teachers.
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.
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.
California voters express widespread concern about the state of their schools, with 42% giving schools a grade of D or F, and 57% believing they have deteriorated in recent years. The inadequacy of school funding is acknowledged, with over 40% rating state efforts poorly on a 10-point scale. Evidence from the PACE/USC Rossier Voter Poll reveals bipartisan skepticism about school funding, with Democrats slightly more optimistic. However, challenges loom for two funding initiatives on the November ballot. Despite recognition of funding issues, voters harbor deep skepticism about the state's ability to use resources efficiently, posing a significant political hurdle. The poll indicates voters' persistent doubt about the state's trustworthiness in spending money wisely, presenting a challenge for advocates of increased educational spending. The divisive debate among supporters of different funding propositions further complicates matters, potentially leading to the failure of both initiatives and significant consequences for the state's education system. Despite concerns about schools and acknowledgment of the need for more funding, voters appear skeptical about the achievability of educational improvement, posing a potential challenge for initiatives in the November elections.
"Getting Down to Facts" is a new research initiative commissioned by Governor Schwarzenegger's Committee on Education Excellence, state Democratic leaders, and Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Led by Susanna Loeb, a Stanford Graduate School of Education Professor and PACE codirector, this project seeks to explore California's school finance and governance systems. Its objective is to provide comprehensive insights essential for assessing the effectiveness of potential reforms. The initiative addresses three key questions: the current state of school finance and governance, optimizing existing resources for improved student outcomes, and evaluating the need for additional resources to meet educational goals. The studies from this project are expected to be available by January 2007.
Moving Forward from COVID-19
The COVID-19 pandemic and ensuing school closures are significantly impacting students, particularly in terms of educational equity. Economic challenges are disproportionately affecting lower-income families, impacting students' access to learning resources. Research suggests that funding levels correlate with academic outcomes, signaling potential setbacks due to anticipated budget constraints. Californians have expressed a strong priority to address racial inequality in education, as highlighted in the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier voter poll. This poll demonstrates widespread support for initiatives like increasing teachers of color and implementing ethnic studies in schools, especially when substantiated by research on their positive impact. However, responses vary among different racial and political groups. As we navigate post-pandemic recovery, it's crucial to focus on addressing these disparities using a diverse range of policy approaches outlined in the brief. This will ensure broader support and sustained efforts toward educational equity.
Summary of the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier Poll Results Presentation
The 2020 PACE Annual Conference unveiled the latest PACE/USC Rossier Poll results, showcasing California voters' views on key education-related issues. Presenters emphasized the poll's value in understanding voter concerns. Key findings revealed growing pessimism about school quality, a preference for across-the-board teacher salary increases, and concerns about college affordability and fairness in admissions. Voters also stressed addressing gun violence in schools. The panel discussed the state budget, highlighting the need for enhanced higher education accessibility, increased teacher salaries, and a more nuanced approach to education funding. They debated the governor's budget's alignment with voter priorities, noting the need for more support in higher education and teacher salaries and a more effective approach to recruiting teachers.
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.
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.
Voter Distaste for Sacramento Could Sink Education Initiatives
California voters express widespread concern about the state of their schools, with 42% giving schools a grade of D or F, and 57% believing they have deteriorated in recent years. The inadequacy of school funding is acknowledged, with over 40% rating state efforts poorly on a 10-point scale. Evidence from the PACE/USC Rossier Voter Poll reveals bipartisan skepticism about school funding, with Democrats slightly more optimistic. However, challenges loom for two funding initiatives on the November ballot. Despite recognition of funding issues, voters harbor deep skepticism about the state's ability to use resources efficiently, posing a significant political hurdle. The poll indicates voters' persistent doubt about the state's trustworthiness in spending money wisely, presenting a challenge for advocates of increased educational spending. The divisive debate among supporters of different funding propositions further complicates matters, potentially leading to the failure of both initiatives and significant consequences for the state's education system. Despite concerns about schools and acknowledgment of the need for more funding, voters appear skeptical about the achievability of educational improvement, posing a potential challenge for initiatives in the November elections.
Getting Down to Facts
"Getting Down to Facts" is a new research initiative commissioned by Governor Schwarzenegger's Committee on Education Excellence, state Democratic leaders, and Superintendent Jack O'Connell. Led by Susanna Loeb, a Stanford Graduate School of Education Professor and PACE codirector, this project seeks to explore California's school finance and governance systems. Its objective is to provide comprehensive insights essential for assessing the effectiveness of potential reforms. The initiative addresses three key questions: the current state of school finance and governance, optimizing existing resources for improved student outcomes, and evaluating the need for additional resources to meet educational goals. The studies from this project are expected to be available by January 2007.