Good morning and thank you all for being here today. I appreciate this opportunity to outline for you what we've accomplished since my first state of education speech a year ago, my priorities for 2005, and what I believe is the most critical issue facing K-12 education in California today.
In the past two years as elected state superintendent of public instruction, I've seen brilliance and innovation in California schools. In Kings County — the children of migrant farm workers, learning about physics while shooting rockets in the air with school partners from NASA. At the Port of Long Beach — kids who were once failing in school, learning hands-on about international trade, while getting the academic skills to prepare them for college. In Sacramento — a middle school working closely with an intervention team to lift its scores out of the academic basement — and jumping 50 points on the Academic Performance Index.
I've also seen schools lacking not only resources but lacking focus. Schools needing books and supplies, leadership and direction.
But my travels to many of California's 9,000 schools have made it abundantly clear there is no simple description that applies to all of them. Is California's typical school the one in the inner city, cramped for space and supplies? Or the suburban school, with a brand new library but no money for books to stock its shelves? Is it the school in the wealthy neighborhood, where parent donations pay for the school band, new uniforms, arts and extracurricular programs — programs we've sadly come to view as "extras" in our schools?
Is the California school one where 57 languages are spoken, or just two?
You and I know that the public schools in this magnificent state are all of these things. In them are the success stories that inspire us and renew our faith, and also the deep societal challenges that often seem insurmountable. Here are some statistical snapshots of our schools.
On the positive side:
- Our students learning English are improving on tests of fluency, with 43 percent testing as early advanced or advanced in English proficiency, compared to just 25 percent in 2001.
- The number of California students taking Advanced Placement courses has grown by 62 percent over the past 7 years, to more than 330,000.
- California students are scoring better than ever on college admissions exams, and more students are qualifying for UC and CSU.
- More than half of our second-graders are now proficient on rigorous state math standards.
And here are some of our challenges:
- Forty percent of our students come from low-income or impoverished families.
- One in four students is learning the English language.
- Approximately one quarter of California's teachers today are either not fully credentialed or are teaching a subject they are not trained to teach. The need for preparation and recruitment is especially acute in special education, science, and math.
- Forty-three of our school districts are on the financial brink. Seven have already undergone state takeovers.
There's not just one problem facing our schools, nor is there one solution that will lead them all to succeed. But some things are clear about the state of education in California :
We have built an outstanding, internationally acclaimed system of academic standards that describes what every student should learn in every grade. And we've created an effective, credible state system of accountability that publicly holds schools accountable for educating our children. A few years ago, when revenues were high, we began investing generously in this system. We invested in new textbooks. Professional development for teachers. Recruitment incentives. Interventions to low-performing schools. Extra help for children at risk of falling behind. And in those years, with focus on rigorous instruction and investments to support our goals, we saw steady, significant gains in student achievement. Today, our expectations remain high but our investments have bottomed out. I'll discuss this dichotomy in more detail in a few minutes. But first let me update you on what we're doing at the Department of Education to see that students get the very best services we can provide.
A year ago, also in the context of a difficult budget year, I outlined an ambitious set of goals for 2004.
- To stay the course with high standards and resist any effort to roll back accountability in our schools.
- To reduce the bureaucratic burden of paperwork and data requests that all too often distracts school employees from their primary mission of educating children.
- And to reform high schools from the inside out — holding higher expectations for all high school students so that all graduates are truly prepared to succeed in either college or the workplace.
Accomplishments
I'm pleased to say that together, with the hard work of our teachers, school boards, administrators, and para-educators, we did stay the course with high standards in California schools. The Legislature passed and Governor Schwarzenegger signed a bill I sponsored to reauthorize the state's testing program, making sure that our students are assessed annually on their progress toward meeting rigorous state standards. We resisted pressure to lower our standards, and we led a national discussion on a fairer way to hold our schools accountable under No Child Left Behind. I want to thank the Governor for standing firm for high standards in California this past year.
We strengthened high school principal training to include professional development in coaching, mentorship, and intensive, individualized support. Now I'm calling for expansion and enhancement of AB 75, the principal training program, and AB 466, the intensive teacher professional development program, so the promise of these top-quality programs can be fulfilled.
At the Department of Education, we did make significant headway in reducing the burden of paperwork placed by Sacramento on our school districts. We have eliminated more than 10 percent of the information required by the state from local schools, districts, and programs. And this year we will have reduced by 37 percent the data collections over which my department has control. Meanwhile, we continue to push back on the increasing demands for data from the federal government, challenging requests we believe are duplicative or unnecessary. I pledge to continue this effort to reduce the bureaucratic burden on our schools.
I've talked about high school reform to thousands of people all over California this past year. There is now broad agreement that high school must be made more challenging, more rigorous, and, at the same time, more relevant to our students' lives and futures. I'm pleased to see that the imperative of improving high schools is now recognized as a priority not only of mine and of the Department of Education, but of the President, the National Governors Association, and of educators up and down this state. More than 4,000 of our educators from 54 California counties came to Sacramento at their own expense to attend the summit on high school reform I hosted with help from the Gates Foundation last October. Clearly this shows there is a widespread desire to improve our high schools. We need to build on this momentum, and continue the hard work of implementing the lessons learned from our high school summit.
I understand the resistance to adopting college prep, the so-called "a-through-g" requirements, as a default high school curriculum. But I continue to believe that if high school is truly to prepare our young people for life beyond the K-12 system, we must strengthen graduation requirements. And I'm convinced that we'll be able to both define and win acceptance for a rigorous, relevant curriculum that will truly prepare our high school graduates to chart their own successful futures. I will also continue working on development of a state review process for high school instructional materials, to let districts know how closely materials are aligned to our standards
We also know smaller learning communities can make a positive difference for high school students, and charter schools offer an opportunity to develop successful small high schools. The Charter Schools Division in my department is ready to support the expansion of high quality charter schools that might serve as models for high school reform. We look forward to working with Governor Schwarzenegger and his administration in this effort.
In pressing for high school reform I have come to some important conclusions:
Number one: If we are to raise our expectations for high school students, we must do a better job of preparing students to achieve high standards before they ever reach high school. Too many of our students start school a lap behind their peers, not yet ready to learn, and too few of those unprepared youngsters ever catch up to their classmates.
Number two: I continue to recognize and respect that not all students are on a path to college. But preparation for the workplace of today and tomorrow is as demanding as preparation for college. Today's sheet metal workers, for example, need four to five years of apprenticeship and training that includes knowledge of algebra, geometry, trigonometry, and technical reading. We must both strengthen and expand our career technical education programs.
In March, I will be bringing to the State Board of Education standards for career technical education that describe the skills and knowledge our high school students must now have.
Number 3: We do need to create smoother transitions from middle school to high school, and high school to college, as I called for last year. But helping our students successfully meet the demands of high standards will require much greater cooperation and communication among all systems of education — from preschool to primary school, and all the way through college. It will require of our entire public education system a grand and unified vision of what it means to provide a world-class education for California students.
Goals
Now we've made some strides in this area. We've developed remedial guides for our middle school students, to help strengthen their academic foundation before high school. The Early Assessment Program this year for the first time gave nearly 40 percent of our 11th graders a realistic look at their readiness for college. That could not have been done without unprecedented cooperation among the California State University, the Department of Education, State Board of Education, and our schools. This is truly a first-in-the-nation model of partnership between K-12 and higher education. It promises to improve teacher preparation programs to better respond to the demands of standards-based instruction. It will help us increase the rigor in high school curriculum by clearly showing our high school students that it takes more than just a grade-point average to be ready for college success. And, with continued collaboration of this kind, I hope that someday the California Standards Test might replace the SATs for admission to CSU.
But today I am proposing that we expand on this model of cooperation. I am establishing a council to better coordinate how we deliver education to California students at all stages of life — from preschool through college. The California P-16 council will help create a comprehensive, integrated system of student learning in our state.
The P-16 council will be charged with examining ways to improve student achievement at every level of our public education system. This collaboration will help us as a state stay consistent and focused on high standards. And it will help us make progress on priorities and goals I have for 2005:
The first of those goals is to continue the work we've begun on high school reform. P-16 councils at the state and regional level will bring high schools, higher education institutions, parents, business, and labor leaders together with a goal of shaping more rigorous, more relevant high school programs.
Another of my initiatives this year will be to lay the foundation for quality preschool for all in California. I am convinced that the achievement gap that is most severe in our high schools will not be closed unless we start before kindergarten to prepare all students for academic success .
Friends, the goal of making voluntary preschool available for all California children is ambitious, and it's expensive. But it is no longer a pie-in-the-sky objective. Preschool for all is an idea whose time has come. Solid research tells us that investing in preschool is not only the right thing to do for our children, it is an investment that will pay tremendous economic and social dividends in the long run.
Preschool will help us raise achievement levels for all children in California, and it offers real hope for closing the achievement gap. I am convinced that that through legislation or ballot initiative, California should and will find a way to make voluntary preschool for all a reality . And I want to be sure our education system is ready for this opportunity. I want all California 4-year-olds to be given the foundation that truly prepares them for school and a lifelong love of learning.
My goals are to:
- define "quality preschool" by developing standards for what we should expect every preschooler to learn and be able to do,
- to build a first-class professional learning system for preschool teachers,
- to create a results-based accountability system for public preschools,
- to create a seamless transition from preschool through first grade and
- to involve all stakeholders — families, businesses, educators at all levels, and communities — in the effort of supporting high quality preschools.
I believe preschool should be as much about social development as early academic skills, and it should be a place that builds confidence, competence, and joy in learning. We are developing preschool content standards that reflect this view and, by this spring, a draft of the standards will be available for public review.
If universal preschool is to succeed we must also develop better training and support for preschool teachers. In the past, our preschool instructors have been the "forgotten" teachers. They faced lower expectations and lower pay. I want to create a credential program for preschool teachers, through partnerships between community college districts and local universities. Preschool teachers should also have the benefit of the kind of ongoing, sustained professional development we try to provide in California for K-12 teachers.
It will take cooperation and support from all of us — policymakers, educators, parents, communities, and businesses — but if we do it right, preschool for all offers the potential to significantly improve the success of our students and our schools.
And, finally, I want to address another issue I'm concerned about and will be focusing on this year, and that's the health and fitness of our students. Now, sometimes when I talk about this issue I am asked, why not stick with academics, and leave health and fitness to the health experts? Because, my friends, the health of our students is everybody's responsibility. Physical health affects learning, and schools have a role to play in developing lifelong habits of nutrition and fitness. Yet sadly, here in California and across the nation, we face a crisis of childhood obesity, poor nutrition, and poor fitness. On this issue, I agree with Governor Schwarzenegger. It is time to promote and support a culture of health and fitness in our schools, and I look forward to working with the Governor and the Legislature to do so.
Last year, physical fitness testing of our students found 32 percent were overweight, and close to three quarters were unfit. And nationwide, researchers found only 51 percent of children and youth eat even one serving of a fruit or vegetable each day. These unhealthy trends will harm our students in school and throughout life if we do not act.
Accordingly, this year I will support legislation calling for development and adoption of health education standards for our schools.
California has wisely prohibited sales of sodas with little or no nutritional value at our elementary and middle schools throughout the school day. I am going to support expanding this prohibition to our high schools. I'm also establishing an advisory group to develop strategies for improving the nutritional quality of foods and beverages sold on school campuses.
We can do a great deal to address childhood obesity by making sure that all children who are eligible for free breakfast and lunch at school participate in these important programs. Our food policies at schools directly affect students' readiness and ability to learn. So I'll be working with the Governor, the Legislature, and State Board of Education to adequately fund school meal programs. We'll be working with the State PTA to educate parents about better nutrition and the importance of exercise. And finally, I'll work with the Legislature and State Allocation Board, and with businesses and communities through our P-16 councils, to make sure that when new schools are built, they include adequate space and facilities for meals and for physical education programs.
Conclusion
Healthy students. Children who are ready to learn. High school graduates prepared to succeed. Shouldn't California expect all of these things? We know there is a budget deficit. We know there are tensions and choices being forced between health care and transportation and school needs. Some have called it a "Sophie's choice," between funding health programs for the poor and elderly or funding our schools. I believe it's not a choice between health care and schools. It is a choice between tax relief for the wealthiest Californians — those who have benefited most from federal tax cuts — and funding for health and schools. Investment in our schools now is the most rational way to improve California's economy. Without that investment, our businesses will not have a prepared work force to hire. Our services and our quality of life will decline as the costs of social services increase. Saving money by shortchanging schools is no savings to California at all.
We have created world-class expectations for our students and schools in California, but we simply aren't funding our schools at the level they need to produce world-class results. We have developed an outstanding program of intensive, standards-based professional development — but have funded training for only about one-fifth of our teachers. The High Priority Schools Program, aimed at raising achievement in our most challenged schools, is under-funded by half, and that is slowing the recovery of struggling schools. Our students who face the greatest difficulties at home — learning English, overcoming poverty — also face the greatest challenges at school: less experienced teachers. Crowded classrooms. Lack of science labs, libraries, and counselors.
My colleagues in education, to make sure that all students have a chance at success in this increasingly demanding world, we must close the pernicious achievement gap that leaves poor children, African American and Latino students, and the learning disabled lagging far behind. I realize funding isn't the only answer to this problem. But I know and you all know that without adequate funding — and yes, carefully and responsibly targeted funding — we cannot provide all of our students with all of the tools that research has proven will help them succeed. Just a few weeks ago three important reports were released on this subject:
- The Fordham Foundation gave California an "A" for having some of the best-in-the-nation standards for English and math.
- A RAND Corporation report said our schools are dismally under-funded, that student achievement ranks near the bottom in the nation and that Californians are investing far less in schools than they did in the 1970s.
- And, adding to the chorus, Education Week's "Quality Counts" ranked California 8th from the bottom of all states in per-pupil spending.
Now, Governor Schwarzenegger in his State of the State address referred to an elephant in the living room. But when it comes to education, he was either in the wrong room, or pointing to the wrong elephant. The elephant in our living room, my friends, is not a spending problem. It is that California is not investing in its future. Our state is not fulfilling the promise voters enacted with the passage of Proposition 98, under which they intended to restore California's schools to their position of excellence. Voters intended to give school districts a stable and predictable source of funding so that, like any good business, they can plan their budgets and prioritize funding year to year.
Because of the broken promise of funding Proposition 98, our schools are faced with cutting programs in the middle of the school year. Raising class sizes, sending lay-off notices, canceling music classes, eliminating bus service — these are the kinds of decisions being made in districts throughout California because of that broken promise. As a state, we are not investing in the best teachers by paying incentives to take on the greatest challenges at our lowest performing schools. We are not fully paying the costs of class size reduction. Nor are we adequately investing in school libraries, counselors, or physical education.
I certainly don't buy the premise that we don't need to invest in these things, that all we need to do is get rid of some ineffective teachers, and student achievement will improve. Yes, we must find ways to staff our most challenging schools with the most qualified teachers. But, by and large, our teachers have done yeoman's work trying to meet tough new state and federal expectations. My friends, the problem with our schools is not our teachers. The problem is that education is significantly under-funded in this state.
Now I am the first to say, and you've heard me say before, money is not the sole solution to better student achievement. Nor do I believe we should just pour extra money into our public schools without a careful examination of what return we can expect on our investment, and without holding schools accountable for that return. But over the past four years, California's schools have been shortchanged by $9.8 billion on the promise of Proposition 98. Let's look at what fulfilling that promise might look like for our schools this year:
If we had only fulfilled the promise of Proposition 98, we could provide double the number of new textbooks for our students this year. We could provide brand new history-social science textbooks for every California student, and replace outdated books and materials in every California classroom. We could extend class size reduction to every grade, and no longer have some of the largest class sizes in the nation. We could more than double the amount of teacher training the state is now providing, to offer two-week intensive training in our standards to every California teacher. We could also keep open 100 schools that are now threatened with closure, fully fund pupil transportation, AND fund preschool for all 4-year-olds in California this year!
So, I am fighting to restore the $2.3 billion our schools deserve this year under the terms of Proposition 98. But let's not kid ourselves that this amount will restore our schools to where they should be. My friends, even if we increased per-pupil spending by 25 percent today, we would not come even close to what New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, Vermont, or even Wyoming spend to educate their students. We'd still not be in the top ten states when it comes to investing in our children.
California has the most diverse and challenging student population in the nation. It is past time for our state to examine and identify the true costs of providing an excellent education to every child, regardless of background or challenges brought to the classroom. Thirty other states have taken a serious look at this question. Some of them appointed expert commissions to examine data and research, and then create formulas for funding that are adequate and fair. Others were forced by court order to do so. Why? Because in a democracy, we need all of our citizens to be educated to the same high standards. Because not all children come to school with equal preparation, but it is our obligation in a democracy to prepare our children equally to succeed in the world.
I don't think we should wait for a judge to tell us how to fund our schools. We owe it to our children — this generation of children — to find a way to educate all of them well. California needs to address this question of the true cost of a quality education. If the Governor again stalls this discussion, I will jump-start it.
I do not believe the citizens of California truly are willing to sacrifice the future of their children in order to pay for other important budget priorities. I don't believe they want the Governor to gut Proposition 98, and I for one will fight to see that his proposal to do so doesn't fly. I also do not believe Californians want to sacrifice the future of their children simply to save a few dollars paid in taxes. I do not believe this because I've seen what Californians have done when given the choice of whether to let their school facilities deteriorate shamefully, or to pay more in local taxes to build more schools.
Here's what Californians did when we lowered the vote threshold for passage of local school bonds from a two-thirds requirement to 55 percent voter approval. In the past year alone, voters in districts from Eureka Unified to Escondido Union have passed 114 of 122 local school bond measures put before them. By more than 90 percent, they have said, "Yes, we'll pay more for the schools our kids deserve," and they raised nearly $10 billion. That's enough money to build 500 elementary schools, 138 middle schools, and 61 high schools — a school a day for nearly two years.
And, thanks to the lowering of the voter threshold from two-thirds to 55 percent — a change I worked hard to pass — California's school facilities are today moving from appalling to adequate. My friends, it is time to do for school programs what we have begun to do for our school buildings. It is time to let the voters choose to stop starving our schools. Our state and our communities should not have to choose between health care and education, between preparing kids for college and maintaining our roads, public safety in our low-income neighborhoods and well-trained teachers in our low-income schools.
Let's not just give voters the option of deciding whether to hand the Governor a meat cleaver with which to indiscriminately chop vital services in the middle of a budget year. Let's give them the option of a positive choice for public education. Let them decide whether they are willing to pay for the services our students need, without sacrificing the health of our seniors, the safety of our roads, the care of our most vulnerable citizens. Let them decide, with a 55 percent vote, whether they want to raise parcel taxes for their local public schools. It's time for us to lower that vote threshold to pass parcel taxes, from-two thirds to 55 percent, to support operations of our public schools.
California's educators and policymakers have worked hard to develop standards and an accountability system that are nationally renowned. We don't need a new system of school reform. Our standards are among the highest in the nation. But if we continue starving the programs that support those high standards, we are setting our students up for failure. I believe Californians will refuse to do that. I truly believe my fellow citizens will listen to the teachers and administrators, and to our students, and step forward to once again invest wisely in our schools. We have the most challenging, the most diverse, the most promising students in the nation. I believe in the promise of all of our students. I believe that in California, our students are still priority No. 1.
Thank you.
JACK O'CONNELL
State Superintendent of Public Instruction
*Superintendent may depart from prepared remarks.
