The California State Board of Education’s Sept. 11 meeting discussed several items related to the Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) template instructions and guidance on digital learning integration and math. It also continued the conversation from the board’s July study session about state policies and how to promote student and school success.
In response to changes made to California Education Code (EC) Section 52064.4 over the past year by the passage of Senate Bill 153, the board adopted revisions to the instructions for the LCAP and Annual Update template for the 2025–26 through 2027–28 LCAP years.
Two options were proposed for how the new requirements could be implemented: (1) would require local educational agencies consolidate all actions supported with Learning Recovery Emergency Block Grant (LREBG) funds into a single goal and (2) would allow LEAs the flexibility to integrate actions supported with LREBG funds into the existing LCAP.
CSBA, as part of a coalition of district and county offices of education and other associations including the Association of California School Administrators, submitted a letter to the board in favor of option two.
“We support Option 2 because it presents a flexible approach that respects the diverse needs and unique contexts of LEAs by allowing LEAs the option to integrate actions supported with LREBG funds into their existing LCAP frameworks,” the letter reads. “Option 2 aligns with the principles of local control and autonomy. This flexibility is essential, as it will better accommodate the varied ways in which LEAs will utilize their LREBG funds to improve outcomes for their students. It also supports the LEAs’ ability to adapt their LCAPs in a manner that best fits their operational structures and strategic goals. Finally, we would be remiss to not point out that this change is coming amid a current three-year LCAP cycle. We strongly believe Option 2 will enable LEAs the maximum flexibility to incorporate their LREBG funds in a manner that aligns with the larger strategic plan they have already adopted in partnership with their families and communities.”
SB 153 added requirements to, among other things, include and identify actions supported with LREBG funds; identify at least one metric to monitor the impact of each action supported with LREBG funds; identify the rationale for selecting each action supported with LREBG funds and an explanation of how each action addresses the needs identified; and explain how research supports each action being supported with LREBG funds.
“LEAs already have actions embedded in their existing LCAPs that are supported by these funds,” said Board Vice President Cynthia Glover Woods. “So, as we look at how to embed the statutory requirement, I think it’s very important for us to keep in mind that there are already things in place and we want to create as little disruption as possible with the process that will be needed to meet these requirements.”
Following discussion of the pros and cons of each option, the board was overwhelmingly in support of option two, which members agreed would provide the most flexibility to LEAs.
The board also approved a revised California Digital Learning Integration and Standards Guidance (DLISG) document that includes updated guidance throughout Section B: Standards Guidance for Mathematics in alignment with the recently adopted Mathematics Framework.
In addition to technical edits, changes were made to reflect the multiple high school pathways, ensure all updated content connections and “big ideas” from the Mathematics Framework were present, adjust many figures and tables, replace select vignettes and remove references to outdated technology.
Innovating education in California
The second day of the board’s July meeting was dedicated to a study session during which members participated in a discussion about California’s policies and progress toward student and school success in a rapidly changing world.
“The expectations for what students need to know and be able to do are going to be radically different as we engage in very rapid changes,” to areas including curriculum, personalization and experiential learning, competency-based assessments and more, said Board President Linda Darling-Hammond. “What they are, we can’t even completely envision. Districts have been asking for greater supports and flexibility to meet these needs.”
This month’s meeting included an extensive follow-up on what is known as “The California Way: Strategies for Supporting Local Educational Agency and School Innovations,” with a presentation from Paolo DeMaria, president and CEO of the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE).
DeMaria discussed some of the ways in which state boards of education across the country are evolving their state’s public education systems and supporting innovation to meet contemporary needs for whole child education and new kinds of learning.
The conversation touched on many of the topics that emerged from the small group conversations during the SBE’s July meeting, including considerations around assessment, teacher credentialing, innovation, the profile of a graduate and use of local indicators. Among them:
- Lifting up successful models of education that allow for meaningful, experiential education adjusted to meet students’ lives and needs.
- Creating a sense of safety and encouragement for innovation at the local level and identifying incentives for responsible innovation that will move systems forward while evaluating current systems and regulations to understand what is and is not working and what could and/or should be changed.
- Supporting competency-based learning.
- Discussing next steps in developing a statewide portrait of a graduate, such as reviewing existing locally developed graduate portraits to determine common characteristics identified in the district-adopted portraits.
- Considering competency-based credentialing to allow teachers who have the right skills to serve students who have particular needs, as well as micro-credentialing for fields where there are specific skills that are needed, especially for new fields in the rapidly changing economy and education system (career technical education, computer science, etc.).
Glover Woods noted that it’s important that education follows the lead of other sectors such as health and banking that have overhauled the way they operate to meet the modern needs of their users, despite the challenges of doing so.
“It’s time for the difficult conversation on how to do schooling better for students in the current day and age, and the challenge being, we’ve all gone through the factory model. So, trying to think of what innovation might look like, trying to wrap our minds around what this means for these systems we’ve had in place forever, really is a difficult one and kind of scary for some people,” she said. “It’s imperative that we, in our field, embark on these very uncomfortable and difficult conversations around innovation.”
Members of the board noted that study sessions are merely a way of enhancing board members’ learning and discussions don’t necessarily represent decisions about what the SBE will take up. Some areas discussed are outside of the SBE’s authority.
In other State Board news:
- This meeting was the first for Julia Clauson, the board’s new student member. Clauson, a senior at Bella Vista High School in Sacramento, will also be serving her third year on the Superintendent’s Student Advisory Council in the San Juan Unified School District; leading the second publication of a districtwide literary magazine that she founded in her junior year; and acting as a liaison between the student equity committee and the staff Equity Team at her school.
- The board heard an overview of a new communications document developed by the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium to support a better understanding of student assessment results in relation to grade-level achievement. The document summarizes test components, the reporting of test scores, and how to interpret and use them appropriately. Board member Kim Pattillo Brownson noted the importance of helping school leaders communicate results with families to ensure a broader, more accurate understanding of the scoring system, in which scoring a two out of four shows students have demonstrated foundational knowledge. “I’m trying to think about how we might aid LEAs in helping to translate some of this so that the assumption isn’t, ‘If your child has a two, they can’t read,’ for example,” she said.
- The SBE approved an amendment to the Reading Difficulties Risk Screener Selection Panel’s review process. Originally, the panel was scheduled to approve the final list of screening instruments and release the screener information for selected screeners at its upcoming November meeting. That deadline has been extended to December.
The next State Board meeting is scheduled for Nov. 13-14, 2024. View the full meeting calendar.
