In 2013–14, California enacted an ambitious—and essential—reform to improve educational equity by directing state resources to districts and schools that educate large numbers of economically disadvantaged students. The reform is called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); it allocates funding to school districts based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status and provides greater flexibility to use the allocated funds than the previous school funding formula allowed. In addition to the LCFF, which is based on average daily attendance (ADA), districts receive funds based on the proportion of students they serve who are English learners, income eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and foster youth. The equity multiplier, a new policy passed in 2023, is designed to provide even more funding for disadvantaged students.
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 aftermath of COVID-19 poses a serious threat to California's education, expecting a drastic decline in tax revenue. School closures will harm all students academically and emotionally, highlighting educational inequalities. Policymakers must reimagine the system as Governor Newsom's proposed budget investments face uncertainty amidst growing needs post-pandemic. The education funding system shifted in 2013 with the Local Control Funding Formula, providing additional funds for districts with high-need students. However, the pandemic has rendered the new support system, reliant on the California School Dashboard, irrelevant. Issues such as inadequate timing and inconsistent district identification for assistance surfaced in a pre-pandemic report. A revised support system should engage diverse expertise, span multiple years, involve stakeholders, and address emerging post-pandemic needs. Simply patching the existing system won't surpass pre-pandemic outcomes; policymakers must seize this disruption to overhaul California's education structures.
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.
Michael W. Kirst discusses the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the CA overhaul of accountability based on local control of education policy. The federal law requires multiple measures for accountability, including some with state choice. Databases for English learners will change significantly. Federal requirements for teacher evaluation will be deregulated significantly. State assessments are all over the place and will be hard to summarize. California is building an integrated federal/state/local accountability system that includes 23 metrics, primarily for local use in Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that focus on improving budget strategy. Longitudinal data bases from the past will be difficult to integrate with these policy shifts.
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.
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.
Why California Should Retire the Free or Reduced-Price Meal Measure—and What the State Should Do Next
In 2013–14, California enacted an ambitious—and essential—reform to improve educational equity by directing state resources to districts and schools that educate large numbers of economically disadvantaged students. The reform is called the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF); it allocates funding to school districts based on student characteristics such as socioeconomic status and provides greater flexibility to use the allocated funds than the previous school funding formula allowed. In addition to the LCFF, which is based on average daily attendance (ADA), districts receive funds based on the proportion of students they serve who are English learners, income eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and foster youth. The equity multiplier, a new policy passed in 2023, is designed to provide even more funding for disadvantaged students.
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.
In Pandemic’s Wake, California Needs to Rethink System of Support for Schools
The aftermath of COVID-19 poses a serious threat to California's education, expecting a drastic decline in tax revenue. School closures will harm all students academically and emotionally, highlighting educational inequalities. Policymakers must reimagine the system as Governor Newsom's proposed budget investments face uncertainty amidst growing needs post-pandemic. The education funding system shifted in 2013 with the Local Control Funding Formula, providing additional funds for districts with high-need students. However, the pandemic has rendered the new support system, reliant on the California School Dashboard, irrelevant. Issues such as inadequate timing and inconsistent district identification for assistance surfaced in a pre-pandemic report. A revised support system should engage diverse expertise, span multiple years, involve stakeholders, and address emerging post-pandemic needs. Simply patching the existing system won't surpass pre-pandemic outcomes; policymakers must seize this disruption to overhaul California's education structures.
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.
Michael Kirst on New Federal and State Policies
Michael W. Kirst discusses the new federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and the CA overhaul of accountability based on local control of education policy. The federal law requires multiple measures for accountability, including some with state choice. Databases for English learners will change significantly. Federal requirements for teacher evaluation will be deregulated significantly. State assessments are all over the place and will be hard to summarize. California is building an integrated federal/state/local accountability system that includes 23 metrics, primarily for local use in Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAP) that focus on improving budget strategy. Longitudinal data bases from the past will be difficult to integrate with these policy shifts.
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.
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.