California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

Over the past several years, there has been much attention and advocacy around “PreK-3 Alignment,” both in California and nationwide. The push for alignment comes in the face of a growing body of research documenting the benefits of attending high quality preschool, along with concerns about the fading of the benefits of preschool by third grade that has been found in many studies. Supporters of preK-3 alignment note that child development is a continuous process, and that skills developed in one grade must be built upon and reinforced in later grades.

The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) replaced categorical funding for schools in California in 2013, providing flexibility, targeted student funding, and local accountability. Two years in, research shows optimism and concern. The Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP) faces challenges, stakeholders need more engagement, and implementation requires capacity and overcoming the emerging teacher shortage. Public awareness of LCFF lags at 65%.

The majority of community college students are required to take remedial math courses that can delay their progress through college, disproportionately affecting African American and Latino students. High school grades may be better predictors of success in college math courses than placement tests, and about a quarter of students placed into community college remedial math courses could have succeeded in college-level courses. New assessments and placement practices at the community college level, along with new K-12 Common Core-aligned tests, may change the face of remedial placement in CA.

The traditional algebra-based math curriculum, thought to be necessary for college success, has led to increased enrollment in remedial math classes. Some are promoting alternatives such as statistics and quantitative reasoning for non-algebra intensive fields, with promising early results. However, universities are wary of these alternatives, creating a dilemma for transfer students. California's history of math reform makes it a particularly salient issue in the state.

The traditional U.S. math curriculum, consisting of two years of algebra and one of geometry, is being called into question as new technologies and evolving disciplines highlight the importance of statistics, modeling, computer science, and quantitative reasoning. The emphasis is shifting to differentiated "math pathways" with distinct trajectories based on students' goals, in order to develop the capacity to apply math skills to solve problems in various contexts. These decisions will impact the academic opportunities of millions of students nationally.

California's new accountability system aims to provide meaningful learning for students, allocate resources to schools and districts based on student needs, and offer professional development for educators. The system holds schools and districts accountable through Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs), professional accountability, and performance accountability across eight priority areas. This system is a departure from the state's previous policy of setting performance targets based on standardized test scores.

CA is undergoing significant changes in its education system. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) has decentralized authority and responsibility, with the Local Control Accountability Plan (LCAP) focusing on local strategies for improvement. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) aim for improved instruction and deeper learning, but require significant changes. A PACE/USC Rossier poll surveyed California voters on their knowledge and opinions on these changes, including the Vergara case, teacher employment policies, and charter schools.

California adopted the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) in 2010 to provide clear learning standards for math and English from kindergarten to Grade 12. CCSS requires a change in teaching approaches, moving away from memorization and towards problem-solving and evidence-based arguments. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) coincides with CCSS implementation, and local actors must decide on strategies and resource allocation. The state still has key roles to play, but most decisions are made locally in consultation with parents and the community.

California has adopted new Common Core State Standards (CCSS), English Language Development (ELD) standards, and Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS). The state has provided funding to support CCSS implementation, and new curriculum frameworks are nearing completion. The report focuses on early implementers of CCSS to identify lessons learned and potential pitfalls, aiming to inform practitioners and policymakers about the variety of CCSS implementation strategies California school districts are choosing.

The Common Core presents challenges for school districts in teaching and learning. This guidebook provides evidence-based solutions to build teacher capacity, address curriculum gaps, design assessments, leverage technology, engage stakeholders, and manage change. It emphasizes the importance of design thinking, focusing on essential change management practices, and connecting the initiative to a broader vision for improved teaching and learning. The goal is to promote innovation, build reciprocal accountability, and effectively address both technical and human dimensions of change.

A PACE/USC Rossier poll in August 2013 surveyed California voters' views on the state's education system and recent changes, including the implementation of the CCSS, new assessments, funding increases, and the Local Control Funding Formula. The poll covered various education-related topics, such as curriculum, standardized tests, evaluations, and accountability. It also asked for opinions on Governor Brown's handling of education and Proposition 30. This was the third poll of its kind, with previous findings summarized in a 2012 report.

California has long been viewed by the rest of the nation as leader in many areas, including education. The state’s K-12 and higher education systems were once the envy of other states. Of late, though, the news from the Golden State has not been so rosy. For the last three decades California has faced increased demands on public services while suffering through economic cycles that have had exaggerated effects on the state budget. The result has been increased competition for limited resources, budget uncertainty and steadily eroding state dollars for a local schools.

CA's school finance is highly regulated, with state funding allocated through categorical programs. In 2008-09, 40 Tier 3 programs were given fiscal freedom, leading to concerns that districts with more Tier 3 funding were disproportionately affected by the state's budget crisis. However, data show that all districts lost a similar share of their budget, with no large-scale changes in spending. Districts with more Tier 3 funding spent relatively more on alternative education, adult education, and non-instructional goals, and more of their budget on pupil services and special education.

California's system of school finance is highly regulated and prescriptive. A large share of state funding is allocated through categorical programs, that is, programs whose funding is contingent upon districts using the money in a particular way or for a particular purpose. In 2008–09, the strings were taken off 40 of those programs, collectively known as the "Tier 3" programs, as part of a budget deal that also reduced the funding for those programs.

This report commemorates the fifth anniversary of the Getting Down to Facts project, which sought to provide a thorough and reliable analysis of the critical challenges facing California’s education system as the necessary basis for an informed discussion of policy changes aimed at improving the performance of California schools and students. The report focuses on the four key issues that received emphasis in the Getting Down to Facts studies: governance, finance, personnel, and data systems.

Governor Jerry Brown has called for a major overhaul of California’s school finance policies. His proposal for a weighted pupil funding system would simplify the rules that govern the distribution of funds to schools and school districts, while targeting a larger share of available resources to the schools and students with the greatest needs. In this policy report Mary Perry offers an overview and analysis of the policy change that the Governor has proposed.

The Early Assessment Program (EAP) is a national model for increasing the number of students who are prepared for college and careers upon graduating high school. It has been recognized by two national consortia as the model for designing new high school assessments aligned with Common Core State Standards. The report highlights the EAP's key features and potential to strengthen coherence and alignment in California's educational system, reviews research on its impact on student success, and suggests modifications to increase its value to students and educators.

Education reform efforts in Los Angeles and the US have failed due to the focus on governance and rules. The solution is to invest in capacity building, creating incentives and agency for students and teachers, easing adoption through regulatory relief, and financing those working on new learning models. The goal is to update the century-old model of learning, called Learning 1.0, with a new model, Learning 2.0, that builds an education system around the learning system. This approach is based on research into unconventional learning models.

The Quality Teacher and Education Act (QTEA) was passed in 2008 in San Francisco, authorizing $198 per taxable property to be collected by the SFUSD for 20 years. CEPA and PACE collaborated with the SFUSD to evaluate the implementation and impact of QTEA on teacher compensation, support, and accountability. This report documents the first-year implementation of QTEA and its effects on the recruitment and retention of high-quality teachers, improvement of the teacher workforce, and removal of less effective teachers using a mixed-methods approach.

This report provides policy guidance for new state assessments aligned to Common Core State Standards. It aims to inform the work of the two consortia funded by the U.S. Department of Education in developing the assessments. The report includes three papers addressing issues of computer adaptive assessments, assessment of English learners, and assessing science. The authors' vision of new assessments goes beyond the horizon of current practice and emphasizes the need to use new technologies to provide useful and timely information to students and teachers.

This report explores how 10 California school districts responded to the deregulation of $4.5 billion in education funding, which became entirely flexible in 2009. The study investigates how district leaders made budget decisions and what local factors influenced their responses. The research was conducted by a team of scholars from the RAND Corporation, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and San Diego State University.

This report discusses the effects of California's partial release of categorical funds to local school boards in 2009. The increased flexibility has provided an opportunity to observe how districts respond to the policy change, but the impact is difficult to isolate as most districts have been struggling to maintain core services during a severe budget crisis. The report includes preliminary results from an ongoing study of district responses to the increased categorical flexibility.

The James Irvine Foundation sponsors the Linked Learning approach as a strategy for improving California high schools' performance. PACE was asked to gather evidence on the cost of linked learning programs. The report explores how traditional high schools use their resources and how much school districts spend on their high schools to achieve current performance. It proves challenging to judge whether reform strategies like Linked Learning cost more than, less than, or the same as traditional high school programs.

The report is a primer on alternative teacher compensation, which provides information about different models for teacher pay, and analyzes the benefits and challenges of each model. It highlights the reasons for the interest in alternative compensation, such as improving teacher quality, increasing teacher retention, and addressing teacher shortages. The report also examines the potential impact of alternative compensation on student outcomes, and offers recommendations for policymakers and practitioners considering implementing such programs.