PPIC Statewide Survey: Californians and Education

SAN FRANCISCO, April 22, 2015—As California schools begin administering new online standardized tests, most public school parents say they have heard nothing about them, according to a statewide survey by the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). 

A majority (55%) say they have heard nothing at all about the Smarter Balanced Assessment System, which replaces paper-based tests. The new tests are based on the Common Core math and English standards. About a third of public school parents (36%) have heard a little about the tests, and just 8 percent say they have heard a lot. Latino public school parents (54%) are much more likely than white parents (32%) to say they have heard about the tests.

While concerns have been raised about whether all schools have enough computers, bandwidth, and technology staff to effectively administer the online tests, most public school parents say they are very confident (29%) or somewhat confident (42%) that their local schools do.

Other states have found that the switch to the Common Core standards and new tests significantly reduced student scores. How do California public school parents expect students to score on the Smarter Balanced tests? A plurality (42%) predict that scores will be about the same as those on past tests, while 29 percent expect scores to be higher and 23 percent predict that they will be lower.

More generally, Californians are divided about whether standardized tests are accurate measures of a student’s progress and abilities, with 51 percent very or somewhat confident that this is true, and 46 percent not too confident or not at all confident. But few say there is too much testing in their local schools (24% too much in elementary and middle schools, 22% too much in high schools).

A year after the Common Core State Standards were implemented, 66 percent of public school parents have heard of them (43% a little, 23% a lot), while a third (32%) say they have heard nothing at all. White public school parents are nearly three times as likely as Latinos to say they have heard a lot (38% vs. 13%).

A third of public school parents (34%) say their child’s school or district has provided them with information about the Common Core standards and that this information has been adequate. But 20 percent say they have received inadequate information, and the largest share of parents (42%) say they received no information about the standards.

"Many public school parents are in the dark when it comes to Common Core," said Mark Baldassare, PPIC president and CEO. "Local schools need to do a better job of keeping parents informed as the state implements the new English and math standards.”

Based on what they’ve read and heard about Common Core, 47 percent of adults and 57 percent of public school parents favor the standards. There is a partisan divide, with Democrats (49%) much more likely to be in favor than independents (37%) or Republicans (30%).

Concerns have been raised about teachers’ readiness to teach the new standards—concerns that are shared by California adults (73% very or somewhat concerned) and public school parents (80% very or somewhat concerned). But Californians are optimistic that Common Core will meet two goals: Most (57%) are confident that implementing the standards will make students more college or career ready, and most (57%) are confident that the standards will help students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills. Public school parents express even higher levels of optimism (71% confident about each goal).

Baldassare summed up: "Most Californians are hopeful about the effect of Common Core on improving student achievement, but many worry that teachers are not fully prepared to implement these new standards in the classroom.”

Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos are much more likely than other groups to express confidence that Common Core will make students more college and career ready (75% Latinos, 65% Asians, 58% blacks, 44% whites) and help students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills (77% Latinos, 60% blacks, 51% Asians, 45% whites). Yet Latinos are also the most likely to express concerns about teacher preparedness to implement the standards (80% Latinos, 79% blacks, 70% Asians, 67% whites).

Most Expect New Funding Formula To Boost Achievement

As the state implements a new system for financing schools—the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF)—most Californians say they have heard nothing about it (75% adults, 69% public school parents). Across racial/ethnic groups, Latinos (30%) are the most likely to have heard a little or a lot about the LCFF, followed by Asians (27%), blacks (20%), and whites (19%).

When they are read a brief description of the LCFF, strong majorities of adults (70%) and public school parents (73%) favor it. Among those who have heard at least a little about the LCFF, 75 percent favor it.

The LCFF allocates extra money to districts with more English Learners and lower-income students. Californians have long expressed the view in PPIC surveys that school districts in lower-income areas of the state lack the same resources—including good teachers and classroom materials—as those in wealthier areas. Today, 82 percent hold this view, which is consistent with their support of the LCFF. A majority (59%) also say they are very concerned that students in lower-income areas are less likely than other students to be ready for college when they finish high school. About half of Californians (48%) say they are very concerned that English Learners score lower on standardized tests than other students.

The LCFF allows local districts more control over spending decisions, and it gives additional funding to districts with more lower-income students and English Learners. How confident are Californians that districts receiving the extra money will spend it to support these students? Most adults (56%) are at least somewhat confident, and public school parents (66%) are especially likely to express this view. Will the LCFF improve academic achievement of English Learners and lower-income students? Strong majorities of adults (68%) and public school parents (78%) say it will, at least somewhat. Latinos (85%) are much more likely to expect improvement than Asians (67%), blacks (62%), and whites (59%).

The LCFF requires each school district to get input from parents in designing a Local Control Accountability Plan. While 42 percent of public school parents say they were given information about how to get involved, most (54%) say they did not receive any. Lower-income parents (51% of those with household incomes under $40,000) were much more likely than wealthier parents (37% of those with incomes of $40,000 or more) to say their child’s school or district provided them with information.

Among the parents who received information about participating, most (72%) say they were not involved in the process. Notably, public school parents with lower household income are more likely than those with higher incomes to be involved (25% with incomes under $40,000 vs. 8% $40,000 or more).

State Funding For Schools Is Up, But Most Say It’s Not Enough

California funding for K–12 public education has been rising in recent years, but 60 percent of all adults and 70 percent of public school parents today say current state funding for their local public schools is not enough. Among likely voters, 54 percent say there is not enough funding. Asked to identify the most important issues facing public education today, Californians are most likely to mention lack of funding (16%) and quality of teachers (12%). Public school parents are most likely to mention lack of funding (18%), large class sizes (13%), and quality of teachers (12%).

How do residents think California K–12 education compares to that of other states? About a third of adults (35%) say California’s spending per pupil is lower than average and 26 percent say it is higher than average. Only 29 percent correctly say that spending per pupil is average. Asked about K–12 test scores, 46 percent correctly say California’s results are lower than average (11% higher than average, 38% average).

How can California significantly improve the quality of public schools? Just 9 percent say increased funding alone will do this, while 38 percent prefer using existing funding more wisely. The largest share (49%) prefers that the state do both.

The survey also asks a series of questions about ways to fund education projects.
A state bond for school construction projects: 66 percent of adults and 55 percent of likely voters say they would vote yes if there were a measure on the ballot.
A local bond for school construction projects: 65 percent of adults and 53 percent of likely voters would vote yes if their local districts put a measure on the ballot. (A 55% majority vote is required for passage.)
A local parcel tax for schools: 57 percent of adults and 49 percent of likely voters would approve an increase in local parcel taxes to benefit local schools. (A two-thirds majority vote is required for passage.) Half of adults (50%) think it is a good idea to replace the two-thirds requirement with a 55 percent majority vote to pass local parcel taxes for local public schools. However, only 44 percent of likely voters express support—short of the majority vote required to make the change.

More Key Findings
Half approve of Brown’s job performance—page 14
The governor’s approval rating is holding steady (50% adults, 53% likely voters), as is the legislature’s (42% adults, 36% likely voters). Approval of the way both the governor and legislature are handling of K–12 education is lower.
Local schools get record-high ratings for college, career preparation—page 18
Most adults (58%) say their local public schools are doing a good to excellent job of preparing students for college, and 48 percent rate their schools as good to excellent when asked how well they are preparing students for the workforce.
Half give local schools an A or B—page 20
While 53 percent of all adults give their neighborhood schools good grades, blacks are much less likely than other racial/ethnic groups to do so (blacks 38%, whites 50%, Latinos 59%, Asians 63%).

via: http://www.ppic.org/main/pressrelease.asp?i=1751

A breakdown of the governor's budget

Here's a breakdown of Gov. Jerry Brown's proposed budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1:

K-12, COMMUNITY COLLEGES: Would get $7.4 billion more this fiscal year and next. For next year, Brown proposes a 7.9 percent increase in school spending. K-12 per-pupil spending would grow by $306, to $9,667. Much of the infusion will pay off what the state already owes schools, part of the "wall of debt" that Brown pledged to dismantle.

UC AND CSU: The two state university systems would each receive a 4 percent increase -- $120 million each -- as long as they don't raise tuition.

SOCIAL SERVICES: The state will spend an extra $800 million on Medi-Cal because of a 2.1 percent increase in enrollment. Brown would also spend $483 million to eliminate a 7 percent cut to the hours of care In-Home Supportive Services recipients receive each month.

COURTS: Would receive about a $180 million boost, the second consecutive year the judiciary got a dose of good news after years of cutbacks in the hundreds of millions of dollars. The bulk of the increase is headed to the state's 58 trial courts, which will receive about $2.7 billion of the judiciary's $3.47 billion budget.

PRISONS: Spending on the California prison system would increase by 1.7 percent, raising the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to $10.1 billion. Prison reform groups expressed disappointment in the governor's decision to increase spending on incarceration.

TRANSPORTATION: The state Transportation Agency would get $15.8 billion. Brown has said he wants to fix California's crumbling roads, highways and bridges, but his budget proposal includes no plan for covering the $66 billion cost of those repairs.

PARKS AND ENVIRONMENT: Brown proposed spending $532 million on new water projects, funded by the Proposition 1 water bond approved by voters in November. Projects include recycled water, conservation and watershed improvement. The governor also proposed $20 million in new money for deferred maintenance at state parks; $1 billion from prior bonds to fund new flood-control projects; and $1 billion from the state's cap-and-trade program to fund high-speed rail, urban transit, building efficiency and other programs to reduce greenhouse gases.

via: http://www.mercurynews.com/education/ci_27292946/breakdown-governors-budget

Proposition 47 Passes!

Proposition 47 lowers penalties for some nonviolent, low-level offenses and in doing so gives women and men a fair chance to rebuild their lives. Penalties for six low-level offenses will be reduced from potential felonies to misdemeanors, shortening the time people spend behind bars.

At the same time Proposition 47 saves the state money, as high as $1.25 billion in the first five years. Those savings will be allocated to K-12 after school programs, mental health and substance abuse treatment programs and victim services programs.

Read our October 3, 2014, Huffington Post article in support of Prop 47.

Why did we support this proposition? Because Proposition 47 supports women. Women are more likely to have been convicted of a crime involving drugs or property, just the offenses covered by this initiative. In California, women are three times more likely to be in prison for forgery or fraud and twice as likely for petty theft.

Our research also shows that women suffer disproportionately upon release from prison. Our recent report Bias Behind Bars revealed that, compared to men, women incarcerated for felonies are less likely to obtain public benefits and find stable housing. Despite the low risk women with criminal records for nonviolent crimes pose to public safety, women also have more difficulty finding employment upon release. This is due to the over representation of women in the fields of retail, childcare and home health care—all fields where criminal records are of great concern. Some states legally bar those with criminal records from working with children and seniors. Fields that tend to be male-dominated, such as construction and manufacturing, generally are focused less on employees’ backgrounds.

The harmful effects of a felony charge extend beyond women’s lives to those of their families. Today, six out of 10 women behind bars are mothers of minors. Thousands of children are growing up without a mother at home to fix their meals, get them ready for school or contribute to the family income. While mothers are languishing in prison, children are languishing at home.

So how does Proposition 47 work? It changes six non-violent, low-level offenses (such as simple drug possession, petty theft and writing a bad check) from felonies to misdemeanors. Of course, women and men who commit these offenses would be held accountable for their actions… but they would not be considered felons, would avoid the stigma that comes with that charge, would serve in county jails closer to home and closer to their children and, because their sentences would be shorter, they would be reunited with their families sooner.

We wanted to acknowledge our Race, Gender and Human Rights (RGHR) giving circle for supporting Proposition 47 from the get-go by funding the organizing and outreach efforts by the Californians for Safe Neighborhoods and Schools.

The mission of RGHR is to promote human rights and racial and gender justice by challenging the criminal justice system and its use of mass incarceration in California.

via: http://womensfoundationofcalifornia.org/proposition-47-passes/

Californians like Common Core education, finance overhaul

Two major changes in California's public education system - adoption of "Common Core" academic standards and giving extra money to school districts with large numbers of poor and/or English learner students - seem to have gained favor with the state's residents.

A new poll by the Public Policy Institute of California tested the two changes now underway, along with a number of other education-related issues.

The poll found that 69 percent of adults support the Common Score approach to teaching, a system that's being adopted by a majority of the states as a way of ensuring that students leave public schools with skills in a variety of areas.

The change has been controversial, especially in other states, with those on the political right complaining that it will lead to federal control of school curricula. The concept was promoted by a bipartisan coalition of governors to replace the state-by-state determinations of what should be taught, how instruction should be given and how academic progress should be assessed.

The PPIC survey found that support was over 50 percent among all political subgroups but Democratic support was highest at 72 percent, while that among Republicans was 60 percent and among independents, 61 percent.

The change in school financing was championed by Gov. Jerry Brown on the theory that poor students and those not fluent in English need special attention to close what educators have called the "achievement gap."

The state Board of Education is finalizing regulations on how the Local Control Funding Formula is to be implemented, and there has been some criticism of the regulations that they leave too much discretion in the hands of local school officials. But Brown, citing the principle of "subsidiarity," has endorsed local discretion.

The PPIC poll found that 53 percent of all adults, and 57 percent of parents of public school students, are confident that the money will be spent wisely, and higher numbers, 68 percent and 71 percent respectively, believe the extra money will improve academic performance by the targeted kids.

The poll also tested support for Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg's push for universal pre-kindergarten, which would cost about $1 billion a year when fully implemented, and, like other polls, found very strong support for the concept - 73 percent among all adults and 80 percent among students' parents.

About 40 percent of adults surveyed were aware that California ranks below average on per-pupil school spending and 46 know that it's also below average in academic test scores.


PHOTO: At right, Maiya Miller, 8, hugs Principal Shana Henry on the first day of school at Pacific Elementary school in Sacramento on September 3, 2013. The Sacramento Bee/Renee C. Byer

via: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2014/04/californians-like-common-core-education-finance-overhaul.html

UC Berkeley students gather to discuss Bay Area education reform

UC Berkeley students gathered with Bay Area teachers and administrators in Dwinelle Hall on Saturday to discuss ways to reform K-12 education in the Bay Area.

The event — called the Educate the Bay Summit and last held in 2009 by the UC Berkeley Public Service Center — provided student groups and community organizations the opportunity to showcase their work in improving pre-K and high school student success.

The summit, sponsored by the ASUC, was organized by the offices of senators from various student political parties, including SQUELCH! Senator Emily Truax, CalSERVE Senator Briana Mullen, CalSERVE Senator Justin Kong and Independent Campaign for Common Sense Senator Solomon Nwoche.

Two of the summit workshops were facilitated by ASUC senators. In her workshop, Mullen addressed the challenges of being a tutor and how to better equip tutors to handle students who might come from backgrounds different from their own. CalSERVE Senator Destiny Iwuoma focused on the statewide IGNITE campaign, which centers on outreach to students of underrepresented backgrounds and preventing the expansion of local county jails.

The ASUC Senate recently unanimously passed a bill, co-authored by Truax, in support of increasing early childhood accessibility. The bill calls for the ASUC to endorse the Educate the Bay Summit and also for the Lobby Corps within the External Affairs Vice President’s office to advocate for California Senate Bill 837, which would create a new transitional kindergarten program and add a 14th year to K-12 education.

“I would hope people would get different perspectives on how inequality exists in K-12 education and find newfound solutions to mitigate these problems through student and community organizations,” Truax said.

The conference’s main speakers — Darrick Smith, a professor at the University of San Francisco, and Donald Evans, Berkeley Unified School District superintendent — both spoke about the diversity of the educational experience. A series of workshops followed, facilitated by community organizations and several student groups, such as People’s Test Prep Services, a campus organization that provides free SAT test prep classes to underserved high school students.

“It’s not like we can just go in the community and know what’s best for the community. We need to ground ourselves in the community,” said Katrina DeVaney, a UC Berkeley senior and executive director of People’s Test Prep Services. “You really need to be careful about how you’re approaching education.”

UC Berkeley junior Matt Nguyen, a Teach for America campus representative, emphasized the constitutional history of affirmative action and its implications for K-12 and higher education.

“We’re living in the Bay Area — one of the nicest places but also one of the most inequitable places as well,” Nguyen said. “Even after the summit, the conversation needs to continue.”

Jane Nho is the lead student government reporter. Contact her at jnho@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter@JaneNho.

via: http://www.dailycal.org/2014/02/23/uc-berkelety-students-gather-discuss-bay-area-education-reform/

Gov. Jerry Brown signs on-time budget into law

Gov. Jerry Brown's signing of the state budget Thursday was a sharp contrast from the grim visages and rueful statements that came with the past decade's spending plans.

Instead, Brown and legislative leaders wore big smiles and proclaimed a new era of fiscal stability and aid for struggling Californians as the governor signed the $96.3 billion spending document into law at the State Capitol.

"It is a big day for school kids, it is a big day for Californians who don't have health care or don't have adequate health care," Brown said, claiming other states are studying California's plan enviously to see how it was accomplished.

Most new revenues -- driven by the Proposition 30 income- and sales-tax hike that voters approved in November, plus a resurgent economy -- will go to K-12 education, which is always the general fund budget's largest section. This budget dedicates 41 percent of its funding to public schools, and every district will get more money to spend per pupil, while disadvantaged students will get even more funding.

But the budget also starts restoring some of the deep cuts made in recent years, with funding for dental care for the poor, child-care subsidies for working families and beleaguered trial courts. Meanwhile, it creates a $1.1 billion reserve and makes small payments toward the state's $27 billion "wall of debt."

The governor acknowledged California still has sizable long-term liabilities -- most notably its public employee pension funds -- but said that for the first time in years it has a balanced, on-time budget that addresses Californians' needs while remaining fiscally responsible. He used his line-item veto power to pare about $40 million, spread across a long list of programs, from the Legislature's plan.

State Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg said "budgets represent signposts of great progress or difficult times," and this one is the former: "Real people, hurt for so long, will get some help."

The biggest noneducation budget increase this year is for mental health services, he noted. "Thousands of people will benefit as a result, no more desperate family members having to see their loved ones in emergency rooms or in jails or on the streets."

Assembly Speaker John Perez, D-Los Angeles, said the budget "builds on the progress we've made over the last couple of years; he added that he's proud that California is creating jobs at a faster rate than any other state.

"It is a budget that says the fiscal health of the state is on the mend ... but also that we're committed to the health and well-being of all of the people who live in California," Perez said.

Among Perez's and fellow Democrats' biggest wins in this budget are middle-class scholarships, which will kick in for eligible Cal-State University and University of California students in the 2014-15 school year. When fully effective in 2017-18, they'll cover 10 percent of tuition and fees for families earning between $125,000 and $150,000; 25 percent for those earning less than $125,000; and 40 percent for those with a family income of $100,000 or less. CSU alone estimates 150,000 students may qualify.

Brown also Thursday signed a separate bill to expand Medi-

Cal eligibility to more than 1 million low-income people and streamline the program's eligibility and enrollment rules -- a key part of implanting the federal Affordable Care Act, known as Obamacare.

The state Senate approved the main budget bill 28-10 while the Assembly passed it 54-25 two weeks ago, with Republicans in both houses opposed.

Senate Republican Leader Bob Huff, R-Brea, said the budget "includes some positive steps forward in education funding and reform, but it does not keep the campaign promises made to Californians that all the money from the Proposition 30 tax increases would go to fund schools." He said he's also disappointed that the budget doesn't pay down enough debt or address the state's huge pension liabilities.

"Keeping promises to the people of California on education funding and paying off our state debt load so as not to burden future generations with our mistakes should have been the first priority, but unfortunately that did not happen," he said.

California Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye said she's "both pleased and concerned." On one hand, it's the first time in five years that the judicial branch hasn't taken more cuts, "the first step in the long road to restoring funding."

"On the other hand, we have a long way to go. In the last several years, about $1 billion in general fund support has been taken from the judicial branch," she said. "And we are out of one-time solutions and funding transfers to blunt the impact of such massive budget reductions in the future."

The extra $63 million in this year's budget may not be enough to reopen closed courts, bring back laid-off workers or stop furloughs, she said, "and it absolutely won't be enough to provide the kind of access to justice the public deserves."