PACE research is prominently featured in the repository on chronic absenteeism established by the California Collaborative for Educational Excellence (CCEE). The collaborative serves as a valuable resource hub, offering toolkits, materials, and various other assets related to chronic absenteeism in educational settings. PACE's contribution to this repository includes two research briefs focusing on chronic absenteeism. The first brief involves PACE's in-depth analysis of student chronic absenteeism data from the CORE Districts, exploring the utilization of chronic absence metrics within a multi-metric accountability system. The second brief delves into the chronic absence performance levels of California's districts, schools, and student groups, utilizing recently released data from California's School Dashboard. This brief also investigates the pivotal role played by chronic absence in determining differentiated assistance, providing insights into the impact on school performance. Together, these research briefs offer valuable perspectives and data-driven insights into addressing and understanding chronic absenteeism in the context of California's educational landscape.

Educators face growing pressure to utilize data for informed decision-making, yet the research supporting this movement remains underdeveloped. A recent Educational Administration Quarterly article delves into organizational factors influencing data use, drawing from four California school systems. Across traditional districts and charter management organizations (CMOs), state and federal accountability systems heavily shape data use. These systems prioritize data from state assessments and benchmark exams, crucial for program improvement and attracting families in charter schools. Organizational conditions, like decision-making structures, financial resources, and regulatory environments, impact resource allocation for data use. While financial constraints universally limit efforts, CMOs’ decentralized structures enable investments in human capital and technology. These findings highlight tensions arising from diverse accountability demands and propose revisiting metrics underpinning success. They also suggest avenues for sharing best practices, such as districts aiding teacher support while CMOs demonstrate advanced data management systems. Policymakers can leverage these insights to navigate accountability complexities and foster cross-system learning.

Performance-based accountability (PBA) encourages using achievement data for school improvement, including student assignment decisions. A recent study focuses on Florida elementary schools under PBA to understand their practices. While all schools used performance data (test scores, course grades) for student assignments, there was little variation between high- and low-performing schools. Despite PBA's intent to assist struggling students, researchers found no significant shift in assigning them to more effective teachers. Schools aimed for balanced classrooms, distributing high, middle, and low performers equally across teachers. Principals emphasized fairness and conducive learning environments over targeting struggling students to specific teachers. This study reveals that while PBA influenced using performance data for assignments, it did not prompt schools to allocate struggling students to the most effective teachers. Principals prioritized fairness, maintaining balanced classrooms, and spreading students evenly across teachers rather than concentrating struggling students with particular educators.

Research consistently highlights disparities in teacher quality, with schools serving disadvantaged students often having less qualified educators. A new study in Education Finance and Policy shifts focus to disparities within schools, finding lower elementary grades (K–2) have teachers with weaker credentials compared to upper grades (3–5) in the same school, impacting the crucial early educational experiences of disadvantaged students. Researchers also explore how school-based accountability programs exacerbate these disparities. No Child Left Behind widened the quality gap between lower and upper grades, prompting principals to shift stronger teachers to higher grades to optimize overall school test performance. For California, heavily invested in early childhood education, this emphasizes the need for quality instruction continuity from preschool to early elementary grades. With early testing starting in second grade, policymakers must consider the unintended consequences of accountability systems on teacher distribution within elementary schools. Otherwise, there is a risk of inadvertently harming children's vital educational development during these crucial formative years.

Year-round school calendars, widely adopted in California due to school crowding, aim to evenly distribute school days. Multi-track calendars, seen as cost-saving, accommodate larger student bodies. There is a belief that redistributing summer breaks could counteract summer learning loss, particularly for disadvantaged students. Research highlights caution regarding year-round schooling. While cost savings are clear, academic gains haven't materialized, impacting high-risk student groups negatively. California showed notably negative effects compared to neutral outcomes in Wake County, North Carolina, where multi-track calendars were used widely. This disparity emphasizes considering demographics; schools with substantial minority or low-income populations may face different challenges. The findings caution policymakers against risking student achievement solely for minor savings. Tailored approaches for schools based on their demographics are suggested. The academic benefits of year-round schooling remain scarce, except for addressing severe overcrowding. Yet, amid tightening budgets, year-round schools are cautiously endorsed as a financial reform, urging further examination and context-specific considerations in policymaking.

The "what gets tested, gets taught" adage needs updating to "what gets tested and included in school accountability, gets taught." During No Child Left Behind, science took a backseat to reading and math due to its optional status in accountability measures. Examining states' pre- and post-NCLB performance on NAEP for grades four and eight showed that integrating science into accountability positively impacted fourth-grade scores without affecting math or reading. Eighth-grade results showed no similar link, likely due to dedicated science teachers. Fourth-grade classrooms often burden a single teacher with multiple subjects, leading to a focus on tested areas like reading and math. Research involving fourth-grade teachers in states incorporating science scores confirmed increased science teaching time. California's testing of science from fifth grade misses the earlier integration potential highlighted in this research. While the Elementary and Secondary Education Act reinstated science testing, it still leaves the accountability weight to states. Considering the global need for STEM education, consistently aligning science with reading and math in assessments appears practical. Acknowledging the persistent focus on school accountability, integrating science into assessments is a sensible step to address the current fragmented attention on science education.

The Urban School Leaders (USL) program at California State University Dominguez Hills, backed by a five-year federal grant, embodies a partnership between LAUSD districts and the university. Its goal is to prepare leaders for high-needs schools, enhance staff development, and foster student achievement. Adapting to students' needs and the evolving demands on schools has prompted ongoing reflections and changes within the program. Continual adjustments maintain curriculum rigor while integrating theoretical knowledge with practical experiences. The program's evolution is a collaborative effort involving curriculum review, aligning with standards, and emphasizing research-based practices. Forming and nurturing partnerships with school districts necessitates time, flexibility, and creativity, ensuring meaningful dialogues among stakeholders to address LAUSD's student needs. This ongoing learning process emphasizes the importance of active experiences and reflective learning for educational leaders. The success of the program holds promise for policy implications, establishing a new paradigm in leader development, emphasizing ongoing university-district partnerships, transforming urban communities, and embedding research as a regular practice within educational settings. This model foresees universities becoming hubs for continual development, fostering a transformed educational landscape by nurturing stable communities and promoting ongoing research-driven improvements.

Educational technology has often fallen short of expectations, but the Internet's emergence could revolutionize learning. It enables individualized learning, tailoring pace and style to students. Adaptive software makes learning smarter, offering support and challenges. Moreover, it reshapes the rigid educational hierarchy into an open network. Despite technology's advancement, policy struggles persist. While development continues, California’s educational model remains antiquated. Strategic policies could shift this landscape. Supporting tech applications in key areas like English Language Learning or Special Education promises significant returns. Deregulation, while not wholesale, could unlock potential by allowing online courses statewide, shifting from seat time-based credit, and introducing the California Diploma. Rather than a single virtual school, a network, Learning 2.0.net, offers diverse resources. It divides into information, learning, and credit systems. It illuminates educational pathways, aggregates quality learning materials, and allows test-based credits, challenging conventional classroom constraints. Internet technology's potential upheaval mandates a transformative educational adaptation. While policy can't control technology’s spread, it can guide its integration, fostering a paradigm shift in public education.

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 contemporary education system lacks Learning 2.0 due to misplaced priorities, fixating on regulations and mandates rather than holistic system design and capacity enhancement. To enable Learning 2.0, three crucial actions are imperative. First, embrace 21st Century tools for continuous learning design, fostering experimentation in institutions such as charters and pilot schools. Second, facilitate deregulation, allowing flexible financing and progress evaluation based on subject mastery rather than seat time. Lastly, invest in a learning infrastructure focused on students as end-users, promoting open-source courseware and a network of learning utilities. This transformative approach aims to establish a peer-to-peer collaborative system, emphasizing the importance of the commons where teachers contribute and adapt. The ongoing political battles around technology regulations overlook the essential question of who constructs Learning 2.0. Teachers should serve as educational artisans, actively involved in crafting learning experiences rather than solely managing external learning technology. To support this, the state should fund computer access, incentivize teacher participation, and establish design standards, aligning with Learning 2.0's vision for an adaptable, collaborative educational landscape.

The statewide data system, CALPADS, essential for education policy evaluation, faced funding cuts under Governor Jerry Brown's recent veto, drawing attention to its significance. CALPADS promises to provide comprehensive data for researchers and analysts, addressing critical policy questions. However, the existing data sources like CBEDS and PAIF have been invaluable for assessing statewide education trends, although some crucial details seem to have vanished in the transition to CALPADS. The Professional Assignment Information Form (PAIF) previously held detailed teacher assignment data, vital for understanding staffing changes, course offerings, and district responses to budget cuts. However, the 2009-10 file lacks this essential information, hindering timely assessments. The California Department of Education's (CDE) transition to CALPADS seems to have caused this data gap, raising concerns among researchers. While CALPADS is expected to integrate credential information in CALTIDES by 2012, the current absence of this critical data poses challenges for immediate research needs. Addressing these transitional issues is crucial to maintaining essential information sources amid the uncertainties in California's education landscape.

The California Teachers Association's preliminary assessment of the Quality Education Investment Act (QEIA) showed positive outcomes, yet it is a disappointing occasion for two key reasons. Firstly, QEIA's implementation coincided with severe budget cuts in California, limiting its intended significant boost for struggling schools to merely shielding them from the fiscal crisis rather than driving transformative change. Secondly, QEIA's evaluation, designed as a quasi-experiment, lacks the essential randomized assignment of funds, hindering any conclusive understanding of the impact of these resources. The evaluation's ongoing focus on case studies won't offer substantial insight into QEIA's effectiveness, portraying it as a missed chance for impactful educational improvement.

For nearly three decades, PACE has facilitated discussions on California's education policies by integrating academic research into key policy challenges. Traditionally, this involved publishing policy briefs, organizing seminars, and producing the annual 'Conditions of Education in California' report, offering comprehensive data and analysis on the state's education system. The launch of "Conditions of Education in California" as a blog marks a shift to engage a wider audience and enable ongoing updates. This platform, authored by PACE-affiliated researchers across California, aims to share new data, compelling research findings, and insights on current legislation and policies. The objective remains fostering informed discussions on education policy challenges in California, now extending the conversation to policymakers, educators, and citizens. This inclusive dialogue is crucial to drive the necessary policy understanding and momentum for improving the state's education system.