This article provides 10 recommendations based on the PACE report to help educators and district leaders provide high-quality instruction through distance and blended learning models in the 2020-21 school year. Despite the challenges of COVID-19, research can guide decisions about student learning and engagement. These recommendations can be used as a framework to prioritize quality instruction.

In the run-up to 2020 elections, where do California voters stand on key education policy issues? This report examines findings and trends from the 2020 PACE/USC Rossier poll. Key findings include rising pessimism about California education and elected officials, continued concern about gun violence in schools and college affordability, and negative opinions about higher education. However, there is substantial support for increased spending, especially on teacher salaries.

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.

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.