The educational landscape in the U.S. features a significant number of English Language Learners (ELLs), yet their funding and educational needs remain understudied. Laws mandate providing resources for ELLs, but research on funding for this group is limited. Costing out studies, used to determine educational costs, lack focus on ELLs, despite their exponential growth. Four primary methodologies assess these costs, but they inconsistently include ELLs. Current research suggests states allocate insufficient funds for K–12 education, and ELLs are not adequately addressed in costing out studies. The literature emphasizes the need for adapted methodologies that account for the complex and diverse needs of ELL students. In California, a hub for ELL education, the discussion around a weighted funding formula prompts consideration of how to incorporate ELL needs. Though there's no definitive funding model for ELLs, existing research offers insights for policymakers, stressing the necessity of considering these students' multifaceted backgrounds and educational requirements. Achieving equity in ELL education necessitates refining costing out methodologies to better understand and cater to their diverse needs. Addressing these complexities is essential to ensure ELLs receive equitable resources for an adequate education.

The challenges faced by California school districts are complex, demanding leaders to navigate diverse educational philosophies and implement explicit equity-oriented policies. A study on an urban California district revealed that, beyond technical issues, ideological differences among leaders, teachers, and principals can compromise the development of ambitious, equity-oriented instructional policies. Embracing political trends, influenced by federal policies like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top, may narrow the educational focus to economic goals, emphasizing standardized testing and basic skills. This shift detracts from broader academic objectives, such as fostering community engagement and critical thinking. A new study underscores the significant role of ideology in shaping district instructional policies and highlights the potential consequences of aligning with political trends that perpetuate educational inequities for historically underserved communities. Ultimately, the findings illustrate how societal and institutional trends can intensify existing disparities by promoting policies that prioritize narrow economic purposes of schooling over holistic educational goals.

California voters express widespread concern about the state of their schools, with 42% giving schools a grade of D or F, and 57% believing they have deteriorated in recent years. The inadequacy of school funding is acknowledged, with over 40% rating state efforts poorly on a 10-point scale. Evidence from the PACE/USC Rossier Voter Poll reveals bipartisan skepticism about school funding, with Democrats slightly more optimistic. However, challenges loom for two funding initiatives on the November ballot. Despite recognition of funding issues, voters harbor deep skepticism about the state's ability to use resources efficiently, posing a significant political hurdle. The poll indicates voters' persistent doubt about the state's trustworthiness in spending money wisely, presenting a challenge for advocates of increased educational spending. The divisive debate among supporters of different funding propositions further complicates matters, potentially leading to the failure of both initiatives and significant consequences for the state's education system. Despite concerns about schools and acknowledgment of the need for more funding, voters appear skeptical about the achievability of educational improvement, posing a potential challenge for initiatives in the November elections.

A recent study examines the implementation of standards-based reform, particularly the alignment of state policies with teachers' instructional practices. Drawing on surveys from over 10,000 teachers in mathematics, science, and English language arts, the research identifies key correlations. It finds that teachers exhibit greater instructional alignment in states where standards and assessments align well, where standards cover a broader range of topics, and where there is a higher degree of accountability. The results have implications for California's Common Core implementation, highlighting the importance of improving alignment between assessments and standards. Additionally, the findings suggest that highly focused standards may pose challenges for teachers, necessitating additional support for fundamental changes in instructional content and form. This study underscores the significance of coherent state policies in enhancing instructional alignment and offers insights for improving educational practices in California and beyond.

In Tierney and Hallett's chapter, "Homeless Youth and Educational Policy: A Case Study of Urban Youth in a Metropolitan Area," the authors make a significant contribution to understanding and addressing the educational needs of homeless students. They highlight the broadness of the homeless label, emphasizing the diversity of backgrounds and experiences within this group. The focus on high school-aged homeless youth, a fast-growing yet understudied subgroup, is identified as crucial due to the unique challenges they face, including stigma and detachment from supportive relationships. The authors provide a useful typology for understanding the different subpopulations of homeless students, emphasizing the need for nuanced insights into their situations. The chapter also underscores the critical intersection of policy, student/family conditions, and school design in addressing homelessness. The authors' recommendations for school design, despite potential fiscal and political challenges, are praised for their thoughtfulness and ecological awareness. Notably, Tierney's leadership role in advocating for research and action in support of homeless students, given his influential position, is seen as encouraging and likely to have a positive impact on the broader field of education research.

American community colleges enroll 46% of U.S. undergraduates, with a majority being African American and Hispanic students. Facing budget constraints, California community colleges are vital, and the Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) program, successful in middle and high schools, is explored as a model for supporting underprepared students. A case study examines AVID's initial implementation in a northern California community college, revealing positive impacts on student focus, organization, and motivation. Challenges include faculty resistance and institutional change. The implementation aims to transform college culture to better serve underrepresented students transferring to four-year institutions. With Governor Jerry Brown's funding cut for high school AVID programs, AVID in community colleges gains importance. AVID for Higher Education emphasizes essentials like retention and graduation time. The study offers a framework for leveraging AVID's potential in higher education, supporting underprepared and historically underrepresented students in community colleges.

California has the lowest elementary school counselor-per-student ratio in the U.S., with most schools lacking counselors. A recent study found that states adopting aggressive counseling policies experienced positive changes in student learning and behavior. Mandates for a minimum counselor–student ratio or subsidizing counselor employment reduced teacher-reported instructional issues and lowered problems like fights, cutting class, stealing, or drug use. Greater counselor availability correlated with improved student learning and mental health. The findings suggest substantial benefits from additional elementary school counselors, making them potentially cost-effective interventions. Even in tight fiscal times, mandating a minimum level of mental health services in schools could be wise, leading to better student and teacher welfare. Future research could explore the most effective form of mental health services in schools, considering counselors, social workers, or psychologists in school-based health centers.

Researchers investigate the efficacy of California's technical assistance response to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) requirements, specifically focusing on District Assistance and Intervention Teams (DAITs) in low-performing districts. A new study spans three years and examines the impact on student achievement in math and English language arts (ELA) for Program Improvement Year 3 (PI3) districts, separating them into DAIT and non-DAIT groups. The findings reveal a statistically significant positive impact of DAITs on math achievement, with suggestive evidence of improvements in ELA scores. Additionally, DAITs contribute to reducing achievement gaps among different student groups. While the study cannot pinpoint the specific actions of DAITs leading to improved outcomes, it highlights their potential role in enhancing focus on data-guided instruction, shaping district culture with high expectations, and increasing within-district accountability. Results suggest that intensive technical assistance interventions, such as DAITs, could be a cost-effective means of improving student achievement in low-performing schools and districts, emphasizing the importance of exploring technical assistance provisions in accountability policies for broader applications.

The Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) conducted surveys from 2010 to 2012, gathering data on California school districts' response to recent state actions affecting their budgets. Echoing RAND's findings, the LAO observed widespread use of categorical flexibility, with districts shifting Tier 3 funds toward general purposes. Over 90% of 2012 respondents noted that categorical flexibility facilitated budget development, aligning with RAND's conclusion that it helped maintain fiscal solvency, staff retention, and core educational programs. These findings highlight the impact of the state's budget crisis on districts' use of Tier 3 flexibility. While some advocate for increased local discretion over K–12 funds to encourage school-based decision-making, fiscal constraints and Tier 3 limitations suggest a different reality. Despite challenges, district feedback from both surveys indicates a preference for expanded near-term categorical flexibility and the permanent elimination of most existing categorical programs. The surveys imply that recent flexibility provisions, amid significant budget reductions, have reshaped districts' budgeting and program prioritization. The current disconnect between Tier 3 funding allocations and student needs underscores the necessity for fundamental restructuring in California's K–12 funding system, contingent upon the state's ability to monitor student achievement and ensure accountability.

California grapples with crucial decisions on school funding allocation, debating between categorical funding and flexible use of funds. In 2007–08, 40% of state funds for K–12 education were categorical, but a 20% reduction and removal of restrictions from 40 programs (Tier 3) in the following year allowed districts more fiscal flexibility, providing a unique opportunity to observe outcomes. A 2010 study by RAND Corporation, UC Berkeley and Davis, and San Diego State University assessed the impact. The survey involved chief financial officers in 223 districts. The findings indicate that most districts used the newfound flexibility to balance budgets and preserve existing programs rather than initiate new initiatives. The flexibility allowed reallocation of categorical aid money into general funds, affecting specific programs. Teacher professional development and general-purpose school improvement funding were commonly reallocated. Notably, major categorical aid decisions were predominantly made by district office staff and superintendents, not school principals. The fiscal environment, marked by an 18% reduction in state funding since the recession, strongly influenced allocation decisions. Researchers conclude that the hope for widespread innovation through local control proved unrealistic, although flexibility allowed districts to respond adeptly to changing fiscal conditions during a budget crisis.

PACE's "Conditions of Education in California" has been relaunched with a renewed focus on new research addressing critical issues in California education. The blog aims to foster an informed discussion of policy challenges within the state's education system. Jennifer Imazeki, a Professor of Economics at San Diego State University, has taken on the role of Managing Editor. With expertise in the economics of education, Imazeki has contributed to various reports and projects on topics such as school finance reform and teacher labor markets. The blog's initial posts delve into research on the impacts of increased flexibility in categorical program funding. The platform invites readers to engage in the conversation and subscribe to the blog for regular updates through the RSS feed. Researchers are encouraged to reach out to Jennifer if they have work relevant to the policy community. The relaunch aims to contribute to a more informed dialogue to address the challenges facing California's education system.