California does not use a student-level growth model to measure school performance, which is uncommon among states. This brief refutes common beliefs about growth models and provides evidence that they are inaccurate or unsupported. It suggests that California should adopt a growth model to replace the current "change" metric in the California School Dashboard, with student-growth percentiles and residual-gain growth models as two specific models that would more accurately identify schools that require support.

Governor Newsom’s first Budget Proposal increases funding for education in California. There are areas of substantive overlap in the Budget Proposal and research findings from the Getting Down to Facts II (GDTFII) research project, released in September 2018, which built an evidence base on the current status of California education and implications for paths forward. As the Budget moves from proposal to reality, it is critical that the evidence from GDTFII continues to inform the policy process.

Effective data use is crucial for continuous improvement, but there is confusion about how it differs from data use for other purposes. This report explains what data are most useful for continuous improvement and presents a case study of how the CORE data collaborative uses a multiple-measures approach to support decision-making.

Flexible funding formulas have made high-quality summer learning programs more accessible for school districts seeking to close the achievement gap. Programs that combine engaging summer camp activities with intentional learning goals can help students develop a love of learning and prevent summer learning loss. These programs incorporate lesson plans and evaluations of learning into a fun and engaging environment.

The shift towards multiple-measure dashboard accountability has potential for promoting more meaningful learning, but also comes with challenges. Lessons learned from research on CORE Districts show that a shift to flexibility and capacity building efforts has challenges. Oakland Unified School District's approach suggests that districts have agency to modify mindsets by modeling inquiry, openness, and flexibility, giving stakeholders space and authority to manage accountability and improvement.

Child poverty in California limits educational success for disadvantaged children, but schools struggle to identify effective solutions. Colombia's Escuela Nueva model has successfully educated marginalized rural children since 1975, raising academic and non-cognitive outcomes in tens of thousands of schools worldwide. This brief describes how Escuela Nueva works and discusses how California's schools might implement core aspects of the model to better serve disadvantaged students.

Achievement gaps in education cannot be solved by looking at the school day alone, as young people also have varied experiences outside of school. Free and affordable learning experiences after school and in the summer are essential strategies for equalizing student outcomes. California districts have greater regulatory and financial flexibility to address achievement gaps under the Local Control Funding Formula. This brief describes how local education leaders are mobilizing expanded learning to close the opportunity gap and recommends key steps for districts.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) aims to improve educational equity by providing additional funds to districts with disadvantaged students. Districts are required to engage with their communities and develop Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to identify priorities and allocate funds. However, there are concerns about the quality of LCAPs, lack of stakeholder involvement, and limited transparency. To improve the effectiveness of LCFF, districts must ensure meaningful stakeholder engagement and use data to guide decision-making.

California is implementing four new policy initiatives for education, including the Common Core State Standards and a new accountability system. PACE provides research-based information to help drive continuous improvement in schools. Alternative schools are available for vulnerable students, but the current accountability system does not adequately address their needs. The California Department of Education is considering the development of a new accountability system for alternative schools that aligns with Local Control Accountability Plans.

California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

ESSA allows states to design accountability systems and measures to meet new college and career readiness goals. With the lack of adequate measures, states will need to develop new measures and structures. The CORE Districts in CA, with its innovative accountability system and waivers from No Child Left Behind, is a model for other states. Reports from CORE-PACE highlight the impact of decisions such as subgroup sizes and test score growth on identifying low-performing schools. States can use the district waiver provision to help develop and refine their accountability systems under ESSA.

This report examines the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and how schools can be identified for support and improvement using a multiple measures framework. The authors find that different academic indicators measure different aspects of school performance and suggest that states should be allowed to use multiple measures instead of a summative rating. They also find that non-academic indicators are not given enough weight and suggest a clarification in federal policy.

Policy changes in California create an opportunity to improve education for 1.4 million English learner students. Research suggests improving classification and alignment between services, systematic data collection and improving opportunities in schools. This could benefit large numbers of students without requiring large investments.

The California Academic Performance Index (API) is limited by demographics, instability, and narrow focus on test scores. Experts recommend tracking individual students' progress, measuring achievement growth over multiple years, and using alternative performance measures. Improving API could enhance accountability systems and target educational improvements.

This report commemorates the fifth anniversary of the Getting Down to Facts project, which sought to provide a thorough and reliable analysis of the critical challenges facing California’s education system as the necessary basis for an informed discussion of policy changes aimed at improving the performance of California schools and students. The report focuses on the four key issues that received emphasis in the Getting Down to Facts studies: governance, finance, personnel, and data systems.

Education reform efforts in Los Angeles and the US have failed due to the focus on governance and rules. The solution is to invest in capacity building, creating incentives and agency for students and teachers, easing adoption through regulatory relief, and financing those working on new learning models. The goal is to update the century-old model of learning, called Learning 1.0, with a new model, Learning 2.0, that builds an education system around the learning system. This approach is based on research into unconventional learning models.

The call for improved education persists annually within PACE, emphasizing the perpetual need for progress. Even with strides made, the organization does not consider its mission accomplished. Guided by three core principles—allocating resources to disadvantaged schools, granting autonomy to local districts, and rigorous evaluation of educational efficacy—PACE remains dedicated to fostering lasting policy reform and enhanced educational performance across California's system. Leveraging experience from Michigan State's Education Policy Center, PACE's leadership continues to drive the...

Getting Down to Facts is an extensive investigation of CA's public education system commissioned by a bipartisan group of CA leaders. The project aimed to describe California's school finance and governance systems, identify obstacles hindering resource utilization, and estimate costs to achieve student outcome goals. The project resulted in 23 reports by scholars, which highlight that the current school finance and governance systems fail to help students achieve state performance goals, particularly those from low-income families. The reports provide a framework for assessing reform options.

This report advocates for a continuous improvement approach to education in California, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive data system to inform decision-making and evaluation at all levels of the education system. It also recommends the use of research-based practices and the development of partnerships between schools and community organizations to support student success. The report emphasizes the importance of equity and suggests strategies for addressing achievement gaps and providing more resources to under-resourced schools.

California's accountability system, PSAA, has been examined by three independent studies, revealing five key issues. The system established specific performance targets, rewards, and sanctions for schools, but budget constraints and differences with NCLB require changes. The STAR testing and school assessment system needs review, and Governor Schwarzenegger proposed simplifying the school finance system. The brief aims to inform policymakers, clarify complex accountability issues, highlight educators' views, and outline four major implications.

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 mandates all states to demonstrate “adequate yearly progress” towards state proficiency goals. This report explores how to measure sustained improvement in California public schools, and how demographic and school-level variables relate to student achievement. Annual Academic Performance Index scores alone do not indicate sustained improvement, so it is recommended to consider student progress over a longer time frame and all known variables that impact it.