With a new governor, state superintendent and legislators in Sacramento and a diminished federal role in education, there is an opportunity for California’s leaders to take stock of recent educational reforms and make necessary improvements. There are also a host of new and looming issues in K-12 and higher education. As California’s leaders confront these and other issues, where do California voters, including parents, stand on education and education policy? The newest edition of the USC Rossier/PACE Poll shares voter perspectives on a wide range of education issues.

American schools have long suffered from inequitable distribution of funding, resources, and effective teachers. The LCFF reform in California is a promising solution to address achievement gaps for high-need students, but successful implementation is critical. Research has found that stakeholder engagement, explicit equity frameworks, and evidence-based programs are crucial to ensure positive impact. Studies have also revealed challenges such as underspending funds and insufficient stakeholder engagement, highlighting the need for continuous improvement.

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%.

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.

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.

In 1987, the Superintendent of Public Instruction released a document detailing the average costs of California schools for 1985-86, providing a brief summary of school expenditures. However, this report lacks in detail, and this report aims to provide more comprehensive and realistic data on school expenditure patterns. The report serves as an analytical base for exploring issues surrounding school expenditures in California, and the data was provided by the state Department of Education staff.

The California Staff Development Policy Study was initiated to assess the possibilities and limitations of staff development in improving classroom teaching and learning. The study aims to answer four questions related to California's investment in staff development, how staff development activities are administered, and how teachers and administrators judge their effectiveness. The study yields eight main conclusions, presented in terms of investment and focusing on improving the capacities and commitments of California's educators.

California's waiver authority provides school districts relief from Education Code, allowing them to seek alternatives to state requirements subject to local and state review. Waivers are automatically approved unless denied by the State Board of Education, which rarely happens over local objections. Program waivers are rare despite clamor for needed flexibility, possibly due to districts being unaware of the process, viewing it as time-consuming, or using suboptimal local procedures. Oversight hearings are recommended to explore the potential of the waiver process.