.
Feedback

Senate Bill Moves API Away From Standardized Tests

Gov. Jerry Brown approves Senate Bill 1458, which will require 40 percent of the API to be determined by measures that indicate college and career readiness.

Senate Bill 1458, which will shift California’s chief measure of a high school’s performance from a focus solely on state test scores to a broader gauge of student accomplishment and preparation for college and the work world, is now law.

Gov. Jerry Brown signed the bill Wednesday, Sept. 26, 2012. Its sponsor, Senate President pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, predicted in a press release that the bill “will prove to be one of the most significant education reform bills of the decade.”

Starting in 2016, test results of the California Standards Tests will comprise no more than 60 percent of a high school’s Academic Performance Index, or API, the three-digit score that has become such a big part of a school’s identity.

Existing law provides that pupil scores from certain standards-based achievement tests and the high school exit examination be incorporated into the API, as specified. Under existing law, the results of these tests constitute at least 60 percent of the value of the index.

“While we still need to learn more about how this will new legislation will be enacted, we are encouraged that the State is looking more broadly at student success,” said Elizabeth Schuck, assistant superintendent for Cabrillo Unified School District in Half Moon Bay. “Multiple measures of student achievement provide a much deeper and more accurate picture of a school's success.”

SB 1458 doesn’t dictate what the other elements comprising the 40 percent (or more) will be; the bill leaves that up to the State Board of Education and the Superintendent of Public Instruction to determine.

But it does make clear that those measures should reflect success in preparing students for higher education and the workplace. Steinberg has said these elements might include high school and middle school graduation and dropout rates, or factors such as the proportion of students who pass Advanced Placement exams, are eligible for a four-year state university (complete the A-G course requirements), graduate without need for college remediation in English and math, or have completed a Partnership Academy program in a career pathway and qualified for college credit in that area.

State tests would comprise at least 60 percent of an API score for middle and elementary schools under the bill. However, science and history, which currently are given little weight — science is tested only in fifth and eight grades — would have more emphasis. State Supt. Tom Torlakson would report to the Legislature next year on how that could be done.

The bill also includes an option that formal school inspections or visitations that would observe quality of teaching and take the pulse of less tangible qualities of a school: ties to the community, parental involvement, extracurricular life, and the overall school culture.

Torlakson would be authorized to establish school inspections if money is made available, shifting the burden back to Brown to make room in the state budget for them.

In addition, the bill instructs Torlakson to make recommendations a year from now on ways to replace the system that ranks schools by deciles and compares them with other schools with similar student demographics. This determines which schools are eligible for various state and federal programs and which should face academic sanctions.

Still, SB 1458 comes at a time when schools “are just beginning the transition to the new Common Core State Standards, which are based on college and career readiness goals,” said Schuck.

She’s referring to the state transitioning to the Common Core standards in math and English language arts, with new standardized tests that are two years away. The state will also adopt new science standards, with assessments that have yet to be written.

In November, the California Department of Education will report to the Legislature that standardized tests should be eliminated and which should be elevated in importance, such as science. Those recommendations could affect the composition of the API under Steinberg’s bill. With so much in flux, SB 1458 gives Torlakson and the state Board four years to institute changes to the API.

“The inclusion of college and career readiness goals are a positive step forward because they relate to what students need to know and beyond their high school experience,” said Schuck.

Senate Bill 1458 will impact all of our schools. Do you support the change? Do you think it's possible to gauge a student's college and career readiness?

Don’t be left out of the conversation taking place in Belmont--Sign up for our daily newsletter|Like Belmont|Patch on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter | Start your own blog

Don’t be left out of the conversation taking place in San Carlos--Sign up for our daily newsletter | Like us on Facebook | Follow us on Twitter| Start a blog

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from San Carlos Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Bob Winters June 18, 2013 at 08:51 am
Best of luck finding good homes, we already have two cats. You may want to consider this advertisingRead More technique: http://i41.tinypic.com/2s17tk0.jpg
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:07 pm
Marl Olbert said this right after refusing to second Matt Grocott's motion for 2 week delay of vote.Read More I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary. both in terms of compensation and provision I think part because he has never been a city manager before. and he had to prove himself. you can make a argument that that wasn't fair. if you think the person is capable for doing the job not necessarily the fact that they don't have the experience. it happens all over the place it happened to me personally it's just a part of the accepted process but another part of the accepted process is that if the person proves themselves you have to keep faith with them and if you don't you're actually sending a message You're saying that you can't trust us and i totally think that Mr. Maltbie is worth the pay, but besides that i think it is a issue of integrity and maintaining the integrity of the negotiation process and the hiring process that's why I'm going to vote yes for it.
Michael G. Stogner June 15, 2013 at 05:08 pm
I would like to know who those various people were who gave Mark Olbert that understanding.
Michael G. Stogner June 17, 2013 at 04:54 pm
Council member Mark Olbert one who refused to second Mr. Grocott's motion made an interestingRead More statement. "I wasn't here at the time but i talked to various people who were. It's my understanding that when Mr. Maltbie was hired into this position he was offered a significantly below market salary." I know for a fact that he didn't talk to Matt Grocott who was there. That leaves 3 potentials, 2 of them are deceased and the 3rd was Andy Klein who did not attend that meeting so he didn't vote. I would like to know who the "various people who were" are.
Marc Parent June 11, 2013 at 07:50 am
San Carlos just spent 10 Million after lawsuit from the "Bay Keepers", more activistsRead More wanting more money?
Holly Bell June 8, 2013 at 01:23 pm
Unbelievable!! Many voters are watching this issue closely and will remember this vote. Evidently,Read More these commissioners believe that resident's have no voice in city decision-making. Someone please name those commissioners who disregarded the loud-and-clear preference of the people. Time to clean house.
Bob Farkas June 8, 2013 at 02:01 pm
The two commissioners who voted for turf were John Seiling and Ray Merala. It was Ray's lastRead More meeting as a commissioner since he has termed out after 9+ years of service. I think they felt that the needs of the elite CYSO program should take precedence over neighbors and others who use the park. Youth sports seems a principal influencer at Parks and Rec. as they are the largest organized user of the facilities. I agree with many other opponents of this project that we all need to support adequate fields for youth sports. I just think these needs have to be in balance with those of the rest of the community. It was very disappointing that, although it is field availability which is purportedly driving this initiative, there was no available recent data to demonstrate the problem or an analysis of how much of the problem would be addressed by this measure. To a businessman like me, this seems a very unprofessional approach.
Concerned Taxpayer June 8, 2013 at 07:08 pm
This is purely a NIMBY issue. Lets just all be honest about that. The folks who live across fromRead More Highlands Park were the loudest opponents there and were citing all kinds of crazy issues when they should have just been honest and said,"I really don't want to look at more people and cars at the public park that is across the street from me and was there when I moved in." That is essentially the true gripe. NIMBY!!! A very weak argument and unelectable dishonest. Unless you can create more land we have to extend the use at existing parks and fields. This is very logical. We live in California and having to use astro turf stinks but we also live where there is no more available land to utilize. The commissions punted this to the council pure and simple. Well we already know who will vote against it. I am curious who will vote for it?????
Bill June 5, 2013 at 02:53 pm
This post makes zero sense. Bike lanes are a visual reminder to drivers that they must share theRead More road with riders. For every cyclist who is not observing the rules of traffic, I will show you 100 texting drivers. Removing bike lanes is not the answer.