Steinberg introduces new proposal for reforming school rating system


Darrell Steinberg, President pro Tempore of the California State Senate

Darrell Steinberg, President pro Tempore of the California State Senate

After his last legislative effort on the subject was brusquely rejected by Governor Jerry Brown, Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, is making another effort to reform California’s dozen-year-old method of ranking its public schools.

The outcome of the bill will be another test of whether Brown and the leading Democrat in the state Senate will be able to come to an agreement over key education strategies. If only because schools consume a dominant share of the state’s General Fund, Democratic leaders have a compelling reason to come up with a unified approach to school reform.

Last October, Gov. Brown, in a memorable veto message, rejected Steinberg’s proposal for an “Education Quality Index” as outlined in his bill (SB 547) which had been approved by both the state Senate and Assembly.

But Steinberg has introduced a new bill, SB 1458, which retains the Academic Performance Index (API), the state’s system for ranking its schools on a scale of 200 to 1000, although in a substantially amended form. The index was established by the Public School Accountability Act of 1999. A score of 800 indicates that the school has attained a certain level of proficiency.

The bill takes into account some of Brown’s criticisms of Steinberg’s earlier legislation in his veto message, including less emphasis on test scores as well as a more locally-driven system of evaluating schools using local panels that would not rely on test scores.

If approved by the Legislature, the bill would reduce the proportion of the index based on test scores to 40 percent, rather than the current 60 percent. It gives the State Superintendent of Public Instruction the authority to incorporate still to be defined measures of “college and career preparedness,” as well as of science and social science.

Currently, the API includes only measures of English Language Arts and math, plus how students do on the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE).

The bill also calls for including measures of how successfully students are going from elementary to middle school, and from middle school to high school, and then into the work force.

Significantly, the legislation also calls for eliminating the decile ranking system, whereby schools are ranked on a scale of 1 to 10 based on their API score. Currently schools get two decile rankings — one compared to all schools in the state, and another “similar schools” ranking comparing it to schools with a similar demographic make up and other factors.

It also gives the Superintendent of Public Instruction the authority to “develop and implement a program of school quality review.”

The review would be conducted by “locally convened panels to visit schools, observe teachers, interview students, and examine student work, if an appropriation for this purpose is made in the annual Budget Act.”

According to estimates by Education Sector, setting up such panels, similar to “inspectorates” that constitute the core of the British system of evaluating its schools, would require over 800 inspectors, and would cost between $65 million and $130 million annually.

 

 

Filed under: None

Tags: , ,

Comments

EdSource encourages a robust debate on education issues and welcomes comments from our readers. The level of thoughtfulness of our community of readers is rare among online news sites. To preserve a civil dialogue, writers should avoid personal, gratuitous attacks and invective. Comments should be relevant to the subject of the article responded to. EdSource retains the right not to publish inappropriate and non-germaine comments. EdSource encourages commenters to use their real names. Commenters who do decide to use a pseudonym should use it consistently.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

 characters available

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

2 Responses to “Steinberg introduces new proposal for reforming school rating system”

  1. Frances O'Neill Zimmerman said

    on February 28, 2012 at 11:31 am

    It’s misleading to say that Darrell Steinberg’s latest end-run around public school academic accountability “retains the Academic Performance Index” when in fact, it reduces from 60% to 40% the impact of standardized annual tests results in reading and math and an 8th grade-level California High School Exit Exam when determining a school’s standing.

    We prefer humanistic leeway in many areas of life, but we need to KNOW what’s happening to our children
    in their basic school subjects and how our schools stand overall in the state and in relation to one another based on similar socio-economics. That’s what the API provides Californians. If Steinberg wants to improve something, he should turn his attention to improving the tests themselves to include writing samples and other academic subjects.

    Steinberg’s proposed SB 1458 is actually another attempt to dismantle academic accountability based on standardized tests. This newest iteration is “death by inches” directed at a system that’s been under attack ever since its inception, mostly by the teachers union. It’s offered now in the hope that Democratic Governor Jerry Brown will cave in. SB 1458 reduces the primacy of academic performance, adds a lot of obfuscation to the accountability process and — no surprise here — tacks on a toothless subjective local “program of school quality review” that would cost a fortune and do not a jot to improve what actually happens in classrooms.

  2. Gary Ravani said

    on March 1, 2012 at 1:58 pm

    The American Academy of Sciences, amongst other notable education experts, assert that our current state tests lack validity and reliability. The CDE will attest that the CSTs are unreliable at the edges (low and high) of student performance. This has been recognized to the extent that states and the USDE will expend billions in instituting new tests that have improved validity and reliability. At least that’s what the “advertising” is claiming. Of course the new tests will also be aligned with the new standards. (This because the old standards did so much for education!?)

    The bottom line, so to speak, is that we really don’t get a very accurate picture of what kids are really learning under the current system. Some would insist that bad information is better than no information. I don’t share that viewpoint.

    The other assertion of the Academy of Sciences is that the reliance on test scores for education policy decisions is narrowing and demeaning the curriculum. Test score fans should think about that.

Template last modified: