Search

This brief is part of a continuing series for California education leaders on key policy issues related to teachers and teaching. With California in the process of revising its K-12 math framework and with educators and students grappling with lost instructional time during the COVID-19 pandemic, now is an opportune moment to examine ways to better understand and support effective math instruction in the Golden State. Accordingly, this brief summarizes California-specific findings from a nationwide survey on math teachers' perceptions of their materials, instruction, and professional learning. These insights into teachers' perspectives, along with a curated collection of resources and sources of support, can be used to inform timely improvements to math education in California.

There are 1.1 million English learner (EL) students in California, representing 18 percent of the statewide student population (California Department of Education [CDE], 2021b). Following some background on California's standards-aligned instructional materials and on the state's EL student population, this brief summarizes California findings from a nationwide survey on teachers' perceptions of their instructional materials for EL students. The brief highlights teachers' views on the adequacy of their instructional materials for their EL students, how they address any inadequacies, whether the materials help them to provide culturally relevant instruction, and what value they place on particular elements of the materials. Finally, the discussion section of the brief includes implications for improving materials and for strengthening professional learning.

This knowledge brief is part of a continuing series designed to inform California education leaders about key policy issues related to teachers and teaching in the Golden State. The brief outlines the current policy environment surrounding math instruction in California, summarizes California information from a nationwide teacher survey on teachers' experiences with professional learning during the 2019/20 school year, and highlights options for instructional supports for California math teachers.

This knowledge brief is part of a continuing series designed to inform California education leaders about new research findings on key state policy topics. To better understand the reopening planning process and other issues related to education during the pandemic, WestEd conducted telephone interviews with County Office of Education (COE) leaders from five different counties about how school closures due to COVID-19 impacted their work with districts and schools. The five COE leaders who were interviewed for this brief represent different corners of the state: Tehama, Tulare, Orange, Napa, and Placer counties. Across these counties, common themes emerged throughout the interviews around how COVID-19 has impacted COE work with schools and districts. Most notably, the school closures have changed how COEs and local educational agencies (LEAs) collaborate and communicate with each other, with their students and their families, and with service providers. To place these findings from California in a national context, the authors of this brief also analyzed data from RAND's 2020 American Educator Panels, the American School Leader Panel (ASLP) and the American Teacher Panel (ATP) surveys. Although responses from California teachers cannot yet be isolated in these data, the ASLP and ATP results are among the first large-scale survey data releases to include responses to COVID-related questions, providing a glimpse into how school leaders and teachers in the United States are viewing the issues that WestEd researchers discussed with COE leaders.

California public schools enroll some 1.2 million students who are classified as English learners (ELs), representing a little more than 19 percent of the statewide student population. Given the size of this population and given the state's efforts over the last decade to recommend to districts materials lists for high-quality, standards-aligned materials for all students, education leaders need to understand teachers' perceptions of the quality and suitability of materials available for use with their EL students. This information can help inform the provision of differentiated supports that meet the needs of schools, teachers, and learners across the Golden State. This brief, produced by the CA Analysis for Learning & Engagement (CALE) project, summarizes survey data about California teachers' views of and experience instructional materials in relation to their EL students. It draws from a survey that included items about subject-matter materials in general, along with items about the cultural relevance and linguistic appropriateness of the materials, digital materials, and teachers' modification of materials for EL students. To place California's results in a national context, the authors also compared California's subject-specific teacher responses to those of teachers in other states who responded to the same survey.

Researchers, policymakers and educators are increasingly focused on the accurate identification, assessment, and referral of English learners (ELs) with disabilities, stemming in part from both the under- and over-identification of ELs for special education services, as compared to non-ELs identified for these services. Appropriate decision making is important because ELs with disabilities who are not identified will miss out on services that they need. Conversely, ELs who are misidentified as having a disability receive special education services that they do not require, which may reduce time available for EL services and participation in the general classroom, potentially reducing access to rigorous academic content, and result in social stigma (Umansky, Thompson, & Díaz, 2017; Sullivan, 2011; Garcia & Tyler, 2010; Bianco, 2005; Higgins, Raskind, Goldberg & Herman, 2002). To ensure that students are receiving optimal instruction and appropriate interventions and assessments, state, district, and school leaders will need to develop or improve the systemic processes educators and administrators work through. Providing manuals with consistent and practical guidance (and professional learning on their use) is one means to do so. The purpose of this report is to describe ideas and lessons learned from leaders in four states (Connecticut, Michigan, Minnesota, and Virginia), a statewide association (Special Education Local Plan Area [SELPA] Administrators of California Association), and a school district (San Diego Unified School District [SDUSD]), all of which have developed manuals. It is hoped that these ideas and lessons will assist leaders who are creating or are in the process of revising procedures and policies of their own. The report presents findings from telephone interviews conducted with the authors of six manuals from December 2017 to January 2018, probing the impetus for getting started; the manual development process; dissemination and professional learning; and lessons learned during manual development.

While the literature on learning disabilities and on second-language acquisition is relatively extensive within the field of education, less is known about the specific characteristics and representation of English learner students with learning disabilities. Because there are no definitive resources and processes for identifying and determining best placement for English learner students with learning disabilities, schools, districts, and states struggle with this issue. As a result, English learner students who may or may not have learning disabilities are both over- and underrepresented in special education. This report aims to inform policymakers interested in developing procedures, including the use of guidelines and protocols, for identifying, assessing, and placing English learner students who may or may not have learning disabilities. The report describes (1) the key issues discussed in the research literature and (2) current state procedures for the 20 states with the largest English learner populations. The following are appended: (1) Methods; (2) Research and policy literature reviewed in this report; and (3) State resources related to assessing and supporting English learner students with learning disabilities. An annotated bibliography of references cited in the report and other references related to English learner students who may have learning disabilities is also included.

Math in Common® (MiC) is a five-year initiative that supports a formal network of 10 California school districts as they implement the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics (CCSS-M) across grades K-8. This research brief explores how best to select or develop and use classroom observation systems in order to document instructional shifts and inform MiC school district improvement efforts. The report is organized into three main sections: (1) An exploration of what the research literature says about existing observation systems and several design considerations for successful observation systems; (2) A detailed discussion of several considerations of these findings for school districts as they implement observation systems in order to better track and understand how teachers are implementing the Common Core State Standards in Mathematics in their classrooms; (3) An annotated bibliography for recent publications on classroom observations that might be of interest to school districts interested in exploring these ideas in more depth. The following are appended: (1) Methods for Annotated Bibliography; and (2) Classroom Observation Analysis Tool. [For Volume 1, "Under Construction: Benchmark Assessments and Common Core Math Implementation in Grades K-8. Formative Evaluation Cycle Report for the Math in Common Initiative, Volume 1," see ED559581.]

Research shows that children benefit when they are served by stable and highly trained center-based staff and caregivers. Responding to the unequal distribution of child-care supply across the state and a need for well-trained caregivers, First 5 California approved an initiative to train early care and education (ECE) staff using different project models. This brief evaluates six demonstration projects. The aims of these projects include recruiting staff, reducing barriers to progress or completion of training, increasing retention in the ECE field, and building local capacity and infrastructure for coordinated training and retention efforts. PACE is evaluating the models between January 2001 and July 2003. Respondents participate in telephone interviews, data from which are analyzed using descriptive methods. Results show that participants are ethnically diverse. Overall, the majority of participants live with a partner or spouse and have children. Many new trainees require extensive counseling and informal support. Lack of financial aid is a crucial barrier. Each project addresses these challenges differently. Innovative practices for recruiting, supporting, and retaining participants; policy implications; and areas for future research are discussed. (RT)

This policy brief examines programs from California and elsewhere in the United States for attracting and retaining quality preschool and child-care staff and places these programs within the broader context of K-12 reforms. While this brief is specifically aimed at early-childhood-education planners and policymakers, it contains information for educators at all levels about experimental efforts and lessons on systemwide reform. The brief reviews the evidence on the scope and effectiveness of existing K-12 recruitment and retention policy strategies in the United States to determine those that may be transferable to early education. It begins with a broad review of what is known about these state initiatives. It then provides detailed examples and analyses for each program area from education nonprofit and research centers. It then reviews the evidence to determine the variety and effectiveness of existing programs. Few of the programs highlighted have been formally evaluated, and fewer still have collected data on cost-effectiveness. Finally, the brief returns to the question of how these program models may or may not fit the problem of teacher and staff turnover in the early-care and education arenas. (Contains 7 endnotes, 7 tables, and 62 references.) (WFA)

Noting that the quality of child care and early education available to lower-income families has received considerable attention over the past decade, this study explored variability in the quality of California day care centers and preschools. Participating in the study were 170 centers and preschools situated among 20 California zip codes, clustered in three counties: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Santa Clara. All the zip codes selected contained significant concentrations of lower-income families. Findings indicated that the majority of centers displayed high levels of quality along structural measures, such as class size, the ratio of children per adult, and staff education levels. About one in six failed to meet recommended quality standards. Some quality indicators were slightly lower for centers located in communities with less supply, possibly due to directors' attempts to accommodate greater family demand for enrollment slots. Center quality was not consistently influenced by community conditions such as poverty levels, ethnic composition, or maternal employment rates. Quality was higher among centers receiving stronger flows of public subsidies. Analysis of findings centered around the success of state agencies in building high quality among centers in lower-income communities as well as the policy challenges that remain. Maps indicating the sampled communities by zip code are appended. (Contains 14 references.) (KB)

School choice, as one avenue toward educational reform, must be placed in context, according to this brief policy analysis. Prepared mainly for policymakers in California and stressing implications for public education in California, the report briefly discusses five samples of school choice: (1) magnet schools; (2) charter schools; (3) open enrollment; (4) voucher experiments; and (5) tax credits for private-school enrollment. The report describes how these choice mechanisms are intended to work and what is known about their actual effects on students, parents, and local educators. One key finding is that the claims made by advocates of choice programs far exceed the hard evidence required to judge actual results. The report also touches on accountability as a reform strategy and urges policymakers and local interest groups to consider accountability reforms alongside the desire to spawn more diverse forms of schooling. (WFA)