By Annie Sciacca, KFF Health News

California public school teacher Mollie Blustein planned her pregnancy so that her daughter would arrive during summer break. But when the elementary school teacher went into premature labor and delivered her baby two weeks before the end of school, she faced another stressor: a huge pay cut.

The majority of California’s roughly 300,000 teachers don’t have access to the state-funded paid leave program that most new parents in the private sector do. Instead, many local school districts deduct the cost of a substitute teacher from educators’ pay during parental leave.

Because her daughter arrived before the school year ended, Blustein used 10 of her accrued sick days — paid time off she wanted to bank for later to bond with her baby or to care for her if she got sick.

Now, California lawmakers have given public school and community college employees up to 14 weeks of paid pregnancy leave in the education bill accompanying the state’s new budget, after Gov. Gavin Newsom endorsed the provision this year.

It’s a reversal for Newsom in his final year in office. In 2019, the governor vetoed a bill that would have given school employees at least six weeks of paid leave, and he did not publicly support a similar Assembly bill that died on the Senate floor in 2024. Several analysts said the issue appeals to voters on both sides of the aisle, ahead of Newsom’s potential 2028 presidential run.

State Department of Finance spokesperson H.D. Palmer said in an email that “educator workforce recruitment and retention has been a priority for the administration since the governor’s first day in office” but that the funding was not previously available.

Paid leave policies for educators and other state workers have garnered bipartisan support in recent years, including in conservative-led states such as Alabama, Louisiana, and Georgia, and blue states such as New Jersey, Washington, and Oregon, said Vicki Shabo, a senior fellow specializing in gender equity and paid leave at the think tank New America.

After the Supreme Court’s 2022 Dobbs decision overturned the constitutional right to abortion, some conservative lawmakers in states that banned abortion embraced paid leave for public employees to signal support for babies after they were born, Shabo said. Many limited the benefit to state employees and framed it as a tool to recruit and retain them.

Elizabeth Gedmark, a vice president at A Better Balance, a nonprofit that advocates for workplace equality, said paid leave “polls incredibly well across all political lines, because everyone agrees that you shouldn’t have to go back to work a day after you had a baby.”

In 2019, President Donald Trump signed into law a bill that gave federal workers 12 weeks of paid leave. But Shabo said the current administration hasn’t made any moves to expand paid leave.

Palmer, of the Department of Finance, said the state can now afford the roughly $218 million leave program because of billions of dollars in unexpected tax revenue, largely from personal income taxes tied to tech workers’ stock options. Much of that revenue is constitutionally guaranteed to schools, so it can’t cover other public workers who are also shut out of California’s paid leave system.

Many school district administrators have largely opposed paid leave in the past because of the cost. The state’s plan calls for districts to pay for the leave out of their annual cost-of-living raise, which this year is bigger than the law requires.

David Roth, superintendent of Buckeye Union School District in El Dorado County, said the math still isn’t great for some schools, and that “the real value reaching the classroom is smaller than the headline number suggests.”

The California Association of School Business Officials had opposed previous related legislation, saying it would create an “unfunded mandate,” but largely supports the new plan now that the start date has been pushed from July 1 to January 2027. The organization’s chief governmental relations officer, Sara Pietrowski, said concerns remain but that the group would work with the state to avoid additional fiscal challenges.

The proposal would close a gap that many Californians don’t realize exists. The state was one of the first to offer paid family leave — under its current program, eligible workers get up to 90% of their pay for up to 20 weeks of combined leave and disability benefits.

But most California teachers, 72% of whom are women, are shut out. The program is funded through a payroll deduction for state disability insurance, and public agencies are exempt from it. Districts can opt in, but the move must be bargained collectively, as recently happened in the Los Angeles Unified School District.

Most educators must use up their accrued sick days before receiving a fraction of their pay for the remainder of their leave, under a provision of the education code.

Because of that, it’s not uncommon for teachers to plan their pregnancy leave for summer breaks to try to avoid burning up their sick leave. But that can be challenging for those who have pregnancy complications or early deliveries, like Blustein, or those who experience challenges getting pregnant.

Erika Jones, an elementary school teacher in Los Angeles and the secretary-treasurer of the California Teachers Association, said her colleagues routinely teach until they go into labor, which can be disruptive.

It took one colleague around seven years to bank 77 sick days to use for a single pregnancy.

“Women go back sooner than they should have, because they don’t have the days,” Jones said. “You end up in this deficit zone.”

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

The University of California will still evaluate the role of the SAT in undergraduate admissions, despite media reports indicating that the revered public university system suspended those deliberations.

The confusion comes at a time when a growing chorus of professors and media commentators are pushing the UC to reinstate the SAT for undergraduate admissions, which the UC Board of Regents removed from the admissions process in 2020. That board decision overruled the UC Academic Senate’s recommendation that the UC keep its then-policy of relying on the SAT and the ACT. The regents’ vote was unanimous. 

The latest whiplash began last month, when the academic senate said it would launch a review of standardized tests in admissions and the high school classes that students must take to be minimally eligible for UC admissions. Monday afternoon, several news stories reported that an academic senate committee that oversees admissions decided to scrap that review.

However, two key officials at the UC said a new evaluation of the role of standardized testing in admissions is still on the table. One of those officials is the chair of the academic senate, Ahmet Palazoglu.

“The Academic Senate is not rescinding its commitment to a comprehensive review of standardized testing in admissions,” he wrote in a statement Monday night on the UC Office of the President website. He said the senate is merely revising its original timeline for a full review of the admissions process.

At a Tuesday meeting of the UC Board of Regents, the new board chair, Maria Anguiano, said the academic senate will finish its review by “no later than the end of this academic year,” which means around June 2027.

That speeds up the original timeline. An academic senate document issued last month said its final report and recommendation to the regents would come sometime in fall 2027.

Palazoglu clarified in an email Tuesday that the June timeline pertains only to the question of standardized tests in admissions. The academic senate will meet July 22 to decide on a separate approach to reviewing the high school courses students must take for UC eligibility. 

While the academic senate has considerable power at the UC, it cannot unilaterally return the SAT to undergraduate admissions. Only the board of regents can. Procedurally, the board must first hear least one informational item that’s on the agenda and then vote on any proposed policy at a subsequent meeting.

Students again oppose SAT use

The UC Student Association sent a letter to the regents this week opposing a return to the SAT. The association, which represents 237,000 undergraduate students at the UC, “does not believe SAT/ACT will result in better prepared students.” The letter notes that racial and ethnic diversity at the UC increased after 2020 while the system posted no decline in graduation rates.

“The role of public education is to ensure all students can access their right to a robust, quality learning experience, and the UC must not limit the number of students able to enter its halls,” the students wrote.

Students in 2020 urged the regents to remove standardized tests from admissions. The regents reaffirmed their ban on exams for admissions in 2021.

At the meeting, Anguiano hinted at her discomfort with the current discourse over the role of tests in admissions. “Recent public conversations have focused on admissions and standardized testing, too narrowly, in my opinion,” she said Tuesday.

Why faculty want the SAT back

More than 2,000 UC professors in science, technology, engineering and math have signed a petition urging the UC to reinstate the SAT or ACT as requirements for undergraduate admissions for STEM majors by fall 2027. Nearly 1,000 additional professors in other disciplines signed a similar letter to fully reinstate the SAT or ACT in the admissions process.

The petition from STEM professors said high school grades alone are not a sufficient measure of college readiness, pointing to increasing grade inflation and the growing number of students relying on artificial intelligence to complete assignments. That means some students aren’t prepared for the rigors of a UC education, they say.

Mina Aganagic, a physics and math professor at UC Berkeley, spoke Tuesday in favor of returning the SAT. “Without the SAT, our introductory courses are forced to reteach elementary and middle school material. This wastes opportunities, misallocating resources rather than increasing access,” she said.

But the leader of an influential nonprofit that advocates for increased access to the UC said focusing on the SAT is the wrong move.

“This is absolutely the wrong solution to an undefined problem,” said Jessie Ryan, president of the Campaign for College Opportunity. “What we know, based on the UC Office of the President’s own research, is that since going to test-free (admissions), our retention rates have remained stable and graduation rates have also increased.” 

She continued: “If, in fact, we want to address college preparation, we should be looking not at becoming more selective, but being more supportive to students across the state. Working with our K-12 partners to improve preparation, not slamming the door on thousands of students.”

Critics of the SAT maintain that the test is unfair to low-income students, who are less likely to be able to afford test preparation services to boost their scores. 

Standardized tests were just one factor in how campuses decided whom to admit. Other considerations included the quality of courses students take, how that courseload compares to students from the same high school, an applicant’s special talents or achievements and the location of their high school. 

Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation Monday permanently establishing California’s Farm to School program into state law ensuring public schools continue to receive locally sourced, farm-fresh produce.

“California is leading the nation in supporting children’s health by serving nutritious, locally grown school meals and providing food education that equips students with lifelong healthy habits,” Newsom said in a press release. “Supporting California farmers, local communities, and the health of California’s children remains a top priority, which is why we have secured permanent funding for California’s nation-leading Farm to School Program.”

The signing follows an announcement from Newsom and First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom last month that nearly 3.5 billion free school meals have been served since the implementation of the state’s “first-in-the-nation” universal school meal program in 2021. 

According to the food advocacy group Nourish California, more than 2 million children in the state live in households that struggle with food insecurity. 

“California’s kids deserve access to school meals that are locally sourced and full of nutrients to help them reach their full potential and thrive,” Siebel Newsom said. “Our Farm to School Program has been a lifeline for children across the state, not only providing free, healthy meals but strengthening local economies through food worker training and supporting California farmers and producers.”

Before now, funding through the Farm to School Incubator Grant Program was a cycle-by-cycle endeavor. The bill now locks in $24.6 million dollars in next year’s budget. The goal being to strengthen regional food systems and expand nutrition education.

“It’s hard to overstate how important this step is,” said Karen Ross, Secretary of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), which administers the program. “It will guarantee some certainty of market so that many small farms and local farms will have opportunities to grow a certain market as opposed to planting crops and hoping you can find outlets to sell it.” 

According to CDFA, 100% of the farmers funded by the program to date are small, mid-size, or socially and economically disadvantaged producers using climate-smart, organic, or regenerative practices. Every $1 invested, the incubator grants generate $2.10 of localized economic activity.

To bridge the gap between farmers and nutritional directors, Ross says CDFA employs 16 "regional navigators" across the state who act as “matchmakers”, helping schools identify local crops within 50 to 100 miles.

“By putting this kind of stability into a program, to say that this is at the level at which we can continue to grow this program, our goal is to reach 100% of the school districts,” she said.

The Farm to School Incubator Grant program, administered by CDFA, has directed $86 million dollars into 375 regional projects since 2021, reaching 49% percent of all public schools in the state, according to the Governor’s office.

Through Farm to School, Ross says farmers have seen increases in opportunities to get their produce into more food hubs, community food hubs, and aggregation sites.

Local Farmers benefit

Randy Stannard runs Root 64, a small one-acre urban farmstead in the Tallac Village neighborhood in Sacramento. He started it with his partner, Sarah McCammon, in 2017 and sells a wide variety of produce to local restaurants and through the Midtown Farmers Market. Root 64 also has a farmstand that sells every Saturday April through November.

The first grant Stannard ever wrote was a $20,000 proposal through the Farm to School program to acquire several commercial sized caterpillar tunnels—shade cloth coverings that can protect crops and extend seasons. 

“[That’s] a lot of money for us and a lot of really critical infrastructure that helped us make a big jump,” Stannard said.

Stannard now sells bulk produce directly to the Sacramento City Unified School District’s Central Kitchen, located just over a mile from the farm and to the Davis-based SPORK Food Hub, which serves over 40 school districts and is another beneficiary of Farm to School.

Being able to deliver healthy, nutrient-dense food to students in his own backyard evokes a sense of pride for Stannard.

“You just can't get higher quality produce than what they're able to get through us. And that feels great," Stannard said. “We have a son that goes to a Sacramento City Unified School. It's all kind of connected and it helps enhance our connection to the community.” 

For small and mid-sized farmers struggling against rising inflation and climate change, the permanent backing of the program represents more than just financial relief.

Kyle Forrest Burns runs Burns Blossom Farm, an organic, family-owned farm in Chico, with his wife, Mel Burns. He calls the job fulfilling, but it can also take its toll.

“As a farmer, you suffer from a lot of burnout, you suffer from depression, it's a pretty tough job,” Burns said. “Farming in the Central Valley where temperatures exceed 100 degrees, I often go ‘is this going to work?’ Seeing the government back projects like this helps me realize that with support we can make this work.”

Burns received a $306,000 grant from the program in 2023 which enabled him to build a new insulated wash and pack barn facility. He called Farm to School funding “instrumental” to the success and growth of his farm.

“Such a huge game changer to be able to have an insulated building in our climate as well as a giant shade structure to grow organic blackberries and raspberries in the Central Valley,” Burns said.

The funds went towards purchasing a Kubota tractor as well which allowed them to scale up and mechanize their farming. 

Burns Blossom Farm vendor tent at a farmers' market.Courtesy of Burns Blossom Farm

Taking the classroom outside

Both Burns and Stannard have leveraged their farms to not only feed school children healthy food but educate students about where that food comes from. 

As part of the Farm to School grants, Stannard’s expanded operations includes providing “experiential and educational opportunities” through the Urban Agriculture Academy (UAA) at Luther Burbank High School in Sacramento. 

The academy explores sustainable agriculture while focusing on impacts food justice, health, and nutrition can have on diverse urban communities, according to the Sacramento City Unified School District website. Root 64 uses its resources to help build up the school’s own on-site market garden and work with the school's internship program. 

“It's a food system,” Stannard said of supporting schools' agricultural programs. “Strengthening that creates resilience. It really builds a lot of strength in our regional economy. I think that's valuable.”

Burns has opened his farm to students, showing the importance of the connection to one's food by hosting hands-on food education through field trips and taste testing events.

“We had second graders out and I pulled the radish out of the ground in front of them, and they squealed with delight and shock. They had never seen a vegetable come out of the ground,” Burns said. “It's so exciting to just see this shiny gem unearthed out of the soil.” 

Burns finds that while the day-to-day grind of operating an organic farm can be grueling at times, he says being able to send food to school districts and educate children has been an "amazing" lifestyle. 

"I find a lot of gratification in sharing, and the fact that I get paid to share beautiful produce with people and children and schools is even more exciting.” Burns said. “If kids can witness that and see it, I believe they will share it with their parents and their friends, and it just continues to ripple outward."

School children on a field trip to Burns Blossom Farm to learn about where their fresh fruits and vegetables come from.Courtesy of Burns Blossom Farm

The Sojourner Truth African Heritage Museum has called Sacramento home for 30 years, and is considered the only museum in the region dedicated to preserving Black history. 

Shonna McDaniels founded the museum in 1996. Named after the legendary abolitionist and civil rights activist, its mission includes providing art education to students across the area and organizing community beautification projects throughout South Sacramento. 

“What better way to connect human beings together than in the form of creation and doing art,” said McDaniels. “And not only art, but of course history. I tell everyone that African-American history is world history. We've made so many contributions to this world and it's important for everyone to learn this history so we can feel better connected.”

McDaniels explains a lack of funding in recent years is putting the museum at risk of closure.

“We didn't think that having the only African American museum in Sacramento that we wouldn't get the help that we need,” she said. “It's heartbreaking. There's absolutely no help for us in Sacramento.”

The longtime museum is located inside Florin Square, home to a large collaboration of Black-owned businesses known as Black Wall Street. From floor to ceiling, the space is an eclectic exploration of African Americans and their legacy. 

“You're not going to see a lot of museums that are eclectic, like where art's everywhere and where there's information everywhere,” said docent Judah X Pimentel. “Museums have been normalizing minimalism a lot lately, and that they have been for years. But I like that it's more maximalist here, and that's a unique experience in itself.” 

Pimental explained the range of pieces include, but go beyond the Civil Rights Movement and slavery, to also celebrate the accomplishments of Black Americans as well as neglected parts of history at risk of being forgotten. 

“The history is deep and it's unfiltered. I think that's really important, to see it through the side of truth rather than sugarcoating.”

A longtime professional muralist and visual artist, McDaniels had been teaching art classes and organizing exhibits in Oak Park and Del Paso communities when she came across the space to open a museum in 1996.

“Art has always been part of my life. I tell everyone that I came into this world with a paintbrush in my hand,” said McDaniels. “I've seen so many generations grow up under my tutelage.”

What began as the Sojourner Truth Cultural Center, McDaniels explained her mission has always gone beyond museum walls. She along with a collective of artists regularly go into schools to uplift the next generation of creatives. 

“Our current exhibit are students from Sheldon High School,” said McDaniels. “The schools don't really have art like the way we present art. We do so much art engagement in our community. That would just disappear.”

The museum's creative footprint can also be seen throughout South Sacramento. 

“Beautification projects which include street banners, street murals on buildings and utility boxes,” explained McDaniels. “Every type of activation we do, we invite the community so they can feel a part of creating public art in their community.”

The Sojourner Truth Museum’s finances grew dire following an expansion during the pandemic. McDaniels explains she took a leap of faith in 2021 when a neighboring space closed, but the initial starter funding is now long gone.

“Our rent just went up tremendously,” she explained, adding that it’s been a challenge to receive enough grant funding. 

“Some of them have said that, ‘you all are a museum. We can't believe that you do all of the work that you do. We can't believe that you have a youth docent program, that you have an entrepreneur program, that you have a workforce development program, you're a museum,’” said McDaniels. “But they're not sending no one to come here and see what we're doing. Because the community knows what we do, what we've been doing for years. We just did a mobile tour at a local school. We served about close to 700 students.” 

McDaniels’ hopes are squared-in on the museum’s fundraising event, the 15th Annual Sacramento Banana Festival happening Aug. 15-16 at William Land Park. 

“The banana brings together other diverse groups of people around the world,” explaining the inspiration behind the festival.

“Initially people were like, ‘bananas don't grow in California.’ But yeah, there are banana farmers in California. The gentleman in West Sacramento, he actually comes out and sets up at every banana festival.”

McDaniels added it was the first banana festival in California, and inspired others. 

“People don't know that we actually helped cultivate the banana festival in Ventura, California,” she explained. “They loved what we did because we are a collective of artists. We made banana hats, banana jewelry, banana eating contest, banana bake-off, you name it. And they were like, well, can you all come and help us?”

As funding gaps loom, for McDaniels, the festival’s success is intertwined with the fight to keep the museum alive.  

“It's kind of been shocking to us. It's a tough one. But we're trying to keep that ball rolling.”

Insight Senior Producer Andrew Garcia contributed to this reporting.

This story was originally published July 2 on EdSource.

This week marked the deadline for California schools to comply with a state law that prohibits the use of culturally insensitive terms for Indigenous groups as school names or mascots. Over two dozen schools are named after Native American tribes, and potentially hundreds use the blacklisted terms for their mascots. 

Across the state, some schools have retired their school or mascot names in compliance with the prohibition, meant to ensure Native American culture is not mocked or misrepresented. Other schools have used an exception to the revised law that allows them to retain names, such as Chieftain or Apache, with the consent of local tribes. 

Whether or not schools keep their mascot names, the California Racial Mascots Act, or Assembly Bill 3074, has been a conversation starter at schools. 

“This is why this is such an important bill — to start this conversation,” Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo, D-Santa Clarita, said in 2024 as the revised law moved through the Legislature. “There are people who are really being harmed by it, and that’s why we have to have this conversation. We have to … make sure that that education happens.” 

Updated legislation expands restrictions 

California became the first state in the nation to ban the racial slur Redskins as a school or team name or mascot in 2015 under the initial California Racial Mascots Act. By 2017, schools were prohibited from using the term.

The updated law bans a list of terms for Native Americans, adding to the already-prohibited Redskins and capturing others with language that notes derogatory terms are “not necessarily limited to” those included in the bill.  The list ranges from terms for tribal leaders such as Chief to offensive terms some Native American groups only refer to as the “s-word.” 

Though less than 25,000 of California’s 5.7 million students identify as Native American, according to state data, many report being mocked or feeling isolated due to their school’s stereotypical portrayal of mascots or traditions that claim to honor the group. 

Julia Estrada, one of a few Native American students at Hart High School in Santa Clarita, told state lawmakers in 2024 that she experienced disrespectful behavior from classmates because of the school’s mascot at the time — the Indian. Her peers, with hands over their mouths, would make whooping noises as they came from a teepee during pep rallies, she said. She led a successful yearlong effort to change the mascot in 2020, which hadn’t been the norm.

Several Native American students had petitioned their schools to change their Native American-themed mascot names prior to the 2024 iteration of the law, but were turned down by school boards or administrators, according to Assemblymember James Ramos, D-San Bernardino, the legislation’s coauthor. Growing up on the San Manuel Indian Reservation in San Bernardino County, he said he attended schools that didn’t respect his culture.

“It goes deeper than the name being changed,” he said. “It goes deeper to the person being able to go to a campus, feeling welcome. If you’re going to a school that doesn’t even have respect for the Indian people … how does that individual feel and how are they expected to excel in education?”

Legislation creates conversations

The state law has led some schools to engage Native American groups in decision-making, and educate school communities on American Indian culture, as lawmakers hoped.

Since 2024, when the revised law passed, some schools have discussed with Native American tribes whether to change their names. 

For example, Fullerton High School in Orange County is changing its mascot as a result of a two-year process, the Orange County Register reported. The school attempted to retain the Indian name by seeking approval from tribes. The Native American groups declined and requested that the school change it. 

Fresno Unified School District in the Central Valley changed three school mascots after what it described as a “comprehensive engagement process.” 

The district created a mascot change committee with members of school leadership and its student inclusion and American Indian education departments. The committee conducted surveys of students, families and educators.

“We were especially intentional about listening to our Native American students and families, whose perspectives helped deepen our understanding and guide the process,” said Ryan Duff, principal at the 800-student Tenaya Middle School, which will go from being the Braves to the Titans. 

The 1,400-student Clark Intermediate School in the neighboring Clovis Unified School District was on the verge of changing its mascot as well. Incorporated in 1969 as part of the school’s founding, the Chieftain mascot, adopted as a sign of respect, had a deep history, district spokesperson Kelly Avants said. 

With the legislation specifically naming Chieftain as derogatory, the district had conversations with members of local tribes, students, families and staff about the mascot’s future. Without tribal support to retain the name at first, the district moved forward with plans for an alternative mascot. 

“People understood why the conversation was taking place,” Avants said, “but there was a lot of expression of sadness over saying goodbye to a symbol that has always been meant to celebrate and respect the indigenous culture of our community.”

Generations of families who attended Clark experienced that respect. So, the North Fork Rancheria of Mono Indians, the largest tribe representing Clovis Unified students of Native American descent, authorized the continued use of the name and mascot in December. 

“There are generations of family, community, friends and tribal citizens that attended Clark Intermediate School and are proud to claim Chieftains as their mascot,” a letter from the tribe said. 

The tribe said it recognized Chieftain, a noble leader, as a prideful term, not derogatory. 

“The authorization that was given by this tribe, we feel, carries a great responsibility with it for us to honor that,” Avants said.

Greater ‘responsibility’ to educate students about Native American culture

Tribes have signed off on long-standing school names not only in Clovis Unified but also in Sierra Unified and Sanger Unified, all in Fresno County.

For Sanger High School alumni and educators, the Apache had become a symbol of pride, said Ronnie Scott, the school’s activities director. Derived, in part, from the Lipan Apache Band of Texas, the Apache signified strength, unity, tradition and pride for Sanger High School students, who in 1931 voted for the name. 

Over the years, because of the school’s respectful use of the term, Scott said the tribe has blessed the use of the name at sporting events, both in 2006 and within the last seven years. The North Fork Rancheria tribe, with the Lipan Apache Band, provided written permission for its continued use.

“It gives us honor because you’re doing it in a respectful and honorable way,” said Richard Gonzalez, chief of the Lipan Apache Band tribe.

Following the support, Sanger High raised the Lipan Apache Band flag on campus — the first of many ways the school hopes to further honor the name. According to Scott, Sanger High wants to incorporate lessons about the tribe’s origins and values as well as different symbols, including the flag and its significance. 

Using the Native American names creates a responsibility among schools, Clovis Unified’s Avants said. Already, the district has a Native American parent and community group that meets to discuss ways to ensure students understand the responsibility that comes with having American Indian-themed representation, she said. 

As the legislation takes effect, some schools may continue to struggle with proper depictions of Native Americans. 

The legislation has been an opportunity for tribes and school districts to work together on ways to respect and honor Indigenous groups, Ramos said. Yet, many school districts are still not including the Native American perspective, he said.

“Until we start to unravel that, how are we going to start to move forward?” Ramos said. “I think the whole goal, and that would be my hope, is that we would start to be more inclusive of tribal culture, not against it.”

?This article was amended to reflect that about $1.8 billion for preschool programs was covered under Prop. 98, while about $1 billion came from the general fund. Additionally, community colleges were already funded under Prop. 98.

California is modifying how it pays for preschool by moving the entire California State Preschool Program under the same constitutional funding guarantee that supports students in transitional kindergarten through community college.

It might appear to be a simple shift from one funding bucket to another. But some education advocates say the decision to move all preschool funding under the same funding mechanism for TK-12 schools means financial stability for nonprofits and community-based organizations that also offer free preschool to eligible 3- and 4-year olds, while critics say the shift could reduce funding available for school districts and community colleges.

The change gained traction this spring after preschool providers outside school districts raised concerns about enrollment and financial strain, with some pointing to the expansion of transitional kindergarten.

Though they share identical educational standards, California has funded preschool programs differently depending on their operator. School district preschool programs are funded under Prop. 98, which assures schools and community colleges a minimum funding level of roughly 40% of the state’s general fund. Privately operated nonprofit preschools, meanwhile, have been funded from the general fund, which fluctuates with the state’s finances.

Last fiscal year, about $1.8 billion for preschool programs provided by school districts was covered by the Prop. 98 guarantee, while about $1 billion for preschool provided by private nonprofits came from the general fund.

“If community-based pre-Ks have a better option of getting Prop. 98 revenue in future years, it’s going to backstop the vitality of the nonprofit sector,” said Bruce Fuller, professor emeritus of education policy at UC Berkeley.

In his final state budget, Gov. Gavin Newsom agreed with that approach, moving the $800 million for nonprofit preschool programs into Prop. 98. The change means the entire California State Preschool Program will now be funded under the state’s constitutional education funding guarantee. The budget also expands eligibility, allowing the children of school district employees to automatically qualify for free preschool.

Opposing perspectives on Prop. 98

While some legislators and preschool advocates argued the change will provide greater financial stability for preschools outside school districts, others warn it could ultimately reduce funding available for K-12 schools and community colleges.

“Including preschool within the existing Proposition 98 allocation would effectively add another grade level to the guarantee without providing the new and necessary resources to support it in an ongoing fashion,” Troy Flint, spokesperson for the California School Boards Association, or CSBA, said in a statement.

The state is transferring $800 million from the general fund to Prop. 98 to cover the current cost of nonschool district preschool programs. But Flint said these costs are likely to grow as providers seek higher wages, higher annual cost-of-living adjustments and expanded services.

“As the program grows in the future, either due to expansions or annual (cost-of-living adjustments), we anticipate those costs will exceed the additional funding from the rebench, meaning nonschool-based preschool will eat into other Prop. 98 allocations and leave less money for TK-12 and community college students,” said Flint.

History repeats itself

California voters approved Prop. 98 in 1988, amending the state constitution to guarantee a minimum level of funding each year for K-12 schools and community colleges.

Soon afterward, lawmakers brought subsidized childcare and preschool programs under the Prop. 98 umbrella, where they remained until 2011. During the budget crisis following the financial fallout of the Great Recession, lawmakers removed nonschool district preschool providers from the Prop. 98 guarantee to ease pressure on education spending.

The debate surrounding that decision echoes today’s discussion.

Because Prop. 98 funding is based in part on the previous year’s spending level, removing preschool from the guarantee lowered the program’s funding base. Supporters of the move argued it was necessary during a fiscal crisis, while critics warned it could reduce education funding over the long term.

In the current budget year, different interpretations of why voters opted into Prop. 98 — and whether preschool should be included or not — have continued.

“This latest decision extends a concerning tendency to sidestep the rules of voter-approved Prop. 98,” said Flint, of the school boards association.

Supporters of this shift disagree. Fuller, of UC Berkeley, said returning all preschool funding to the state’s education funding formula is “sound public policy because this is an education function and meets the intent of the voters and language of Prop. 98.”

California has invested heavily in career technical education, earmarking $300 million annually since 2021 to help schools prepare students for jobs in fields such as healthcare, public safety and engineering. 

Yet, over the past five years, more than $115 million of that funding — an average of $23 million per year — never reached schools.

District leaders, advocates and legislators say the shortfall stems from the state’s allocation formula that does not fully distribute the career technical education, or CTE, funds.  

Lawmakers are advancing Assembly Bill 1590 to ensure all available CTE funding makes it to districts going forward. Some relief may come even sooner; districts that applied for funding for the 2026-27 school year will see all of the money distributed.

The bill’s author, Assemblymember Rhodesia Ransom, D-Stockton, said the current formula for allocating CTE money has left many schools unable to support career education programs. 

“It makes everybody scale back; that makes them have fewer certification programs, fewer learning opportunities and, then, fewer pathways,” Ransom said. “To me, that’s something that needed to be corrected.”

Why millions of dollars don’t make it to districts 

The CTE funding program requires school districts to provide a 2-to-1 match, meaning for every dollar they receive from the state, they must contribute $2. A district seeking $1 million in state funding, for example, must provide a $2 million local match. 

But if districts are unable to meet the match, the money reverts to the state’s General Fund rather than back into the pool of CTE funding where it can be redistributed to districts that could use it. 

That is problematic, some educators and advocates say, because it leaves money on the table even as many other districts have available matching funds for career education programs.

For example, in 2025, Merced Union High School District in the San Joaquin Valley applied for $6.7 million in CTE funding but received $1.7 million — $5 million less despite having the matching funds.

California Department of Education officials said districts often receive less than they request because demand exceeds available funding, the number of applicants changes each year, and the allocation formula, itself. 

It’s a formula that’s been debated many times since CTE money became an ongoing funding source in 2018. The department told EdSource it was determined to be the “most equitable and efficient mechanism” for maximizing CTE funds. 

Educators and advocates, however, say the formula disadvantages smaller districts. The formula recognizes very small districts through its first two funding categories, but once a district exceeds an Average Daily Attendance of 550 students, it is grouped into the largest category, said Nicole Newman, president of the Small School Districts Association. 

Districts with an ADA of 550 to 2,500 face the same challenges as smaller school systems and must compete with a broader range of districts. These districts often have limited administrative staff, a lack of grant-writing resources, difficulty recruiting CTE teachers, minimal access to industry partners and postsecondary institutions, and smaller local tax bases, Newman said. 

“A district with 600, 1,200 or 2,000 students competes within the same funding category as some of the largest school systems in the nation,” Newman said. 

The allocation formula, established by the state superintendent and State Board of Education, distributes 70% of funding based on district size, measured by ADA of students in grades 7-12. The remaining 30% is distributed using factors such as the number of vulnerable student populations, higher than average dropout rates and an area’s high unemployment rate, among others. 

Limited opportunities when funding is left on the table

With CTE grant funding, not only do funds remain unallocated, the money going to districts is not consistent each year. 

In Contra Costa County, located in the East Bay, a consortium of 10 school districts has built a robust CTE network offering about 300 classes and early childhood education apprenticeships, said Hilary Dito, director for college and career readiness at the county education office. In 2025, the consortium received $6.2 million, about $500,000 less than the year before. 

As a result of the drop, the county education office imposed a 17% reduction across the board. The county won’t be able to offer 300 classes next school year. At the district level, some school systems will not hire for positions vacated by retiring CTE teachers. There will be cuts to robotics, culinary arts and digital photography programs.

Dito worries those cuts will limit opportunities for students to figure out what they want to pursue. 

“One of our students from last year, senior year, got into a digital recording arts class,” she said. “Before that, (they) had no clue what they wanted to do. Now they’re at the community college with the same teacher. Without that class, I don’t know if that student would’ve found that path. These are the programs that can change someone’s life.” 

When funding is uncertain or inconsistent, districts struggle to sustain program offerings and create and scale industry partnerships, dual enrollment, internships and job shadowing opportunities, educators said. 

“Stability matters just as much,” said Newman, who is also superintendent of Wheatland Union High School District in Yuba City. “High-quality CTE programs take years to develop.”

Newman said her 1,200-student district would like to expand its agriculture pathway with updated facilities, new equipment and more livestock, but roughly $300,000 in state funding is barely enough to sustain existing programs.  

Immediate, but temporary, relief in sight

Ransom’s bill would require the state to revise the allocation formula so that all CTE money is distributed to eligible districts.  

Districts may see some immediate relief. For the 2026-27 funding cycle, all $450 million available, a one-time increase of $150 million for CTE grants this year, will be distributed to districts. State officials have not explained how that will happen. In previous years, the state has done two rounds of award allocations that still left money untouched. The $450 million is expected to be allocated in a single round. 

“If the dollars are available,” Ransom said, “we want them to reach the programs.” 

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

The nation’s largest public four-year university may soon be barred from replacing faculty with generative AI as a bill backed by a union of professors comes nearer to reaching the governor’s desk.

Few examples exist of the California State University’s attempting to replace faculty labor with generative AI tools, but the faculty union wants to prevent such efforts from ever getting off the ground. The bill so far has garnered no opposition from lawmakers and may clear the Legislature as soon as Monday.

“We do have some cases of the potential replacement of faculty work by AI, and so I personally am very concerned about closing the barn door after the horse has already gotten out,” said Kevin Wehr, a professor of sociology at Sacramento State, which is part of the Cal State system. Wehr leads the bargaining team for the faculty union, the California Faculty Association.

“We’re trying to keep ahead of a rapidly changing set of technologies,” he said in an interview.

Wehr and other faculty and union representatives Calmatters spoke with are especially alarmed about Cal State because of the system’s growing embrace of generative AI tools. Cal State signed a $17 million contract with ChatGPT last year to provide all students and faculty access to the company’s suite of education offerings.

A survey released by Cal State in the spring found that just over half of faculty reported AI affecting their teaching negatively. Just one-third of students indicated that their professors teach them how to use AI effectively, CalMatters reported. Cal State has since renewed its contract with ChatGPT, paying the company $13 million annually for the next three years, according to LAist. 

Cal State is one of several state agencies flagged in a government report that uses “high risk” AI tools, CalMatters reported. Those include cheating detection software for students taking exams remotely. 

Already, the system’s use of AI is creating tension between faculty and administrators. 

Next month, the state labor relations board will hold a meeting over the system’s purchasing of AI tools such as ChatGPT. The union filed an unfair labor practice charge last year when the system rolled out its new pivot toward AI.

In 2025 the faculty union filed a separate complaint with the labor board that Sacramento State was considering deploying AI chatbots that fed off the course material professors voluntarily submitted, a claim Cal State refuted. The union also contested an administrator’s proposed written recommendation that students seek out mental health support through AI tools in the event campus counselors weren’t available.

Cal State and the union settled the matter in March and the union withdrew its complaint. Sacramento State agreed that it wouldn’t “implement autonomous programs or bots with the primary purpose of performing bargaining unit work or evaluating faculty” without meeting and conferring with the union first.

“Many institutions of higher education are exploring options to integrate AI into their courses and curriculum,” said the bill’s author Sen. Sabrina Cervantes, a Democrat from Riverside, at a bill hearing in June. “In many instances, this has been done without any boundaries or guardrails.”

California Faculty Association represents coaches and mental health counselors in addition to professors. It has donated at least $3.4 million to state legislators and other candidates for state office since 2020. Cervantes has gotten at least $64,650 from the union since 2016, according to Digital Democracy, a CalMatters government disclosure tool.

Cal State has no position on the bill, but the role of AI broadly is a sticking point in ongoing labor contract negotiations between the union and the university system. 

A dispute over bots at Sacramento State

The California Faculty Association filed unfair labor practice charges against Sacramento State with the California Public Employment Relations Board last winter over what it said were campus efforts to replace some of the work of faculty, which the union maintained violated state labor law.

CalMatters obtained these records through a California Public Records Act request.

The union alleged that Alexander “Sasha” Sidorkin, the campus’s then chief AI officer, created a mental health chatbot for students and included a link to it in a resources webpage for students. The complaint indicates that the link was accompanied by the statement, “AI is better than nothing, when a counselor isn’t available.”

In a response, Cal State’s chancellor’s office wrote to the labor board that the union’s claims of unfair labor practices were bogus. Sidorkin didn’t develop any such bots and “there was no implementation of any AI bots to do any counseling work.” 

CalMatters spoke with Sidorkin by phone this week. Prior to the call, he had no knowledge that he was named in the complaint. Sidorkin called the union’s allegation “a misstatement of the fact.” He never created a bot, he said, but merely recommended that students use ChatGPT if they cannot find a counselor.  

Sidorkin, who has a new book out on using AI to teach in universities, said Sacramento State terminated the position of chief AI officer last April during a wave of systemwide layoffs and the campus took down the website affiliated with that role. 

He remains at the university as a professor of education and is a union member. Sidorkin shared a copy of the proposed syllabus language that he archived. He still stands by his recommendation that students be informed in their course syllabus that an AI tool during a mental health episode is better than nothing.

Patrick Oberle, an associate professor of geography at Sacramento State and a union member, said the faculty association took up the issue because it represents counselors who the university could attempt to outsource. CalMatters spoke with him before speaking with Sidorkin.

The union filing also alleges that Sidorkin created an AI-powered tool to interpret the faculty union’s contract with the university system. The union argued this too violated state labor relations law and that the tool itself produced incorrect information. “When the union objected, the CSU ceased use of the contract interpretation bot,” the complaint read.

And Sidorkin solicited faculty for their course syllabi and materials “to receive a customized AI tutoring bot for their classes.” The complaint included an email from Sidorkin to faculty that Sac State leaders told him to retract the request, though he seemingly opposed the move.

“This technology is available on the open market through multiple platforms; however, you will not be able to build them through my office at this time,” he wrote then. He told CalMatters that some 18 professors sent their course material to him the first day he invited submissions.

A human resources director at Sacramento State wrote to a faculty member reassuring her that any bots by administrators need to be bargained over between the union and Cal State “before being used, posted, published, shared, or distributed,” according to a copy of the email.

Sidorkin told CalMatters that the union’s filing the charges was a mistake.

“It’s not a good PR move also on the union’s side because they look like they’re Luddites, and this is not true,” he said, adding that dozens of faculty at Sacramento State alone have developed AI chatbots in support of their courses for students after Cal State purchased ChatGPT accounts for faculty and students last year.

“I am disappointed in my union,” he added.

Faculty fears of AI mission creep

Oberle, the professor, fears that without guardrails, a university could chip away the work of instructors in ways that hurt student learning and diminish the joy of teaching.

One concern? That a campus may encourage professors to shift more of their grading to AI to then grow the number of students per class. That hasn’t happened in a formal way, yet.

That would mean less human engagement with instructors for students. And it could reduce the need to hire additional professors as others retire, which would limit the power of the faculty union.

“We’re trying to accommodate the folks who are deeply opposed to AI’s very existence, and also accommodate the folks that are very excited about all of its possibilities,” Oberle said. 

The point of the unfair labor practice charge, he said, wasn’t to tie the hands of Cal State administrators, but to underscore that using AI to potentially replace labor requires a conversation with faculty. 

More battles over AI in the workplace

Cervantes’ bill is one of several in California aimed at curbing the role of artificial intelligence in the workplace, but others are far more divisive.  Senate Bill 947, would prevent employers from relying solely on AI tools to discipline or dismiss employees. That legislation has the support of labor unions and some nonprofits skeptical of generative AI. Business groups oppose it, including the California Chamber of Commerce as well as ride-hail company Lyft. Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar bill last year.

Another, Senate Bill 903, would ban psychotherapists from offering therapy through chatbots and place other limits on the use of AI tools in transcribing patient sessions or communicating with patients. It would also ban bots from making independent therapeutic decisions. The California Chamber of Commerce and California Medical Association oppose it.

“We know technology can augment humans, but it should never replace humans,” said Assemblymember Mike Fong, a Democrat from Alhambra and chair of the Assembly’s committee on higher education, when speaking about Cervantes’ Cal State faculty bill. 

Moments later, the committee voted 10-0 to pass the measure. 

On a recent Friday morning, Fresno Unified high school students learned about the rise and fall of major companies in the stock market — from Walmart’s longevity to Apple’s surge past oil companies and Amazon’s emergence as a $1 trillion company.

Earlier that week, students at the Farber Educational Center, an alternative learning campus, had finished a competitive project for their personal finance class. Using $100,000 in pretend money, they invested in the stock market and tracked their strategy’s success.

The state’s third-largest school district, a pioneer in developing these personal finance courses, offers a preview of how educators will meet California’s new high school graduation requirement, teaching students life skills such as banking, managing debt and building wealth. 

California will require all high schools to offer a personal finance course starting in 2027-28, and all students must take the class beginning with the graduating class of 2031. By adding the course at most of its high schools before the legislation, Fresno Unified emerged as an early adopter — so much so that the state tapped one of the district’s educators to help guide the statewide rollout. 

Since the 2023-24 school year, Jeff Allen has led the creation and implementation of personal finance courses across Fresno Unified, helping turn them into some of the district’s most sought-after electives. 

The California Department of Education selected Allen to lead the statewide rollout because of his hands-on approach in implementing Fresno Unified’s program. Already, Allen has authored a curriculum guide for the state’s educators.

“He demonstrated a combination of subject-matter expertise and direct, district-level implementation experience, along with a strong understanding of scheduling, credentialing and classroom realities,” said Scott Roark, a spokesperson for the state department of education.   

‘I wish I had that’

In 2024, the state Legislature added personal finance to what every California high school graduate must learn. Assembly Bill 2927 made California the 26th state to require a stand-alone personal finance course for all public high school students.

Making personal finance a graduation requirement has received little resistance because adults recognize its value, Allen said.  

“You say personal finance, and it’s like a universal, ‘Oh, I wish I had that,’” he said. “You do not see that physical reaction (to other subjects) from parents and community members the same way that you see it with personal finance because, as an adult, you understand what you didn’t know and how you paid the consequences for it.”

That sentiment resonates with students, too, including 18-year-old Daniel Tecomulapa at the Farber Educational Center.

“I wanted to be better with my finances,” Daniel said. 

The practical benefits students receive from learning personal finance has motivated many educators to teach the course. KongMia Her, who teaches the class at Farber, said he wants students entering adulthood to avoid the financial mistakes he made. 

“I didn’t have any education,” Her said. “No one taught me at school or at home.”

Fresno Unified personal finance classes

Following a class project, teacher KongMia Her reviewed the different strategies that students used to invest in stocks on May 22, 2026.Lasherica Thornton/EdSource

Her is among 17 Fresno Unified teachers this year who are instructing 730 students in the course.

Most Fresno Unified high schools offer personal finance as a yearlong course, though state law will only require one semester. Regardless of length, the district’s personal finance classes already cover the 13 topics mandated under AB 2927. 

The lessons on retirement plans, savings, investments and credit scores have been some of the most meaningful for students in Her’s class at Farber. 

The teens learned why they didn’t yet have credit scores, for example. During a call to Experian, Daniel discovered he had not owned his credit card long enough to develop a credit profile. 

Students also learned how to build and maintain strong credit, including by making payments on time.  

“(The class) teaches you to manage money correctly,” 16-year-old Autumn Walker said. 

Over the past three years, Allen has supported and coached teachers, reviewed lessons and organized professional development.

Because the classes are already aligned with state standards, and most educators are in their second year of teaching the course, Allen is now helping teachers enrich the personal finance classes through community partnerships and programs.

So, teachers are going beyond the classroom, bringing in speakers from local credit unions, Rotary clubs and businesses. 

During a financial literacy event at Farber, community organizations presented students with real-life scenarios about how food, housing and transportation costs affect budgets. At McLane High, students use the on-campus bank as part of the course. At Edison High, students pitched business ideas in a “Shark Tank”-style project that required them to calculate startup costs, needed investments and profit margins. 

The qualifications required to teach personal finance in Fresno Unified will change under the state mandate. Right now, any teacher with a single-subject credential can teach the course in the district. Beginning 2027-28, however, only teachers credentialed in four subject areas will be eligible to teach the class.

Other school districts aren’t waiting for the state mandate to begin teaching personal finance. Pasadena Unified, Yosemite Unified in Oakhurst and San Luis Coastal Unified have launched courses at multiple high schools. 

Elk Grove Unified in Sacramento County has offered a course since 2021, with enrollment growing each year.  

Supporting teachers and schools

Staffing is often a challenge when schools must add new graduation requirements, but the state’s personal finance law gives districts several years to train teachers before the requirement takes effect.

Allen, who led the rollout in Fresno Unified, wrote the state’s personal finance curriculum guide to help districts create their own courses. He said he authored the guide to make the implementation of the new mandate less daunting for rank-and-file teachers.

He intentionally organized the curriculum guide around three questions: why personal finance education matters, what students should learn and how schools can put the course into practice. 

And Allen continues to support districts as the state rolls out the requirement. Nearly 700 educators registered for a late May webinar he led on legislative requirements, implementation challenges and professional learning opportunities. 

Allen highlighted ready-made resources districts can use, including the Next Gen Personal Finance platform, so teachers don’t have to build courses from scratch. Teachers statewide can access hours of professional development on topics ranging from car buying to “buy now, pay later” plans — lessons to pass down to their students. 

Allen said personal finance classes generate some of the highest student engagement he has seen. Students enter class eager to pick up where the conversation left off the day before, he said. 

“This is clearly seen by families, by students as one of the most, if not the most, relevant topics that they can be exposed to right now.”

A statewide initiative to help university dropouts reenroll and complete their degrees has cultivated a promising playbook that could raise California’s postsecondary attainment rates, according to a new study.

The California Reconnect program has outperformed state and national benchmarks for reengaging students who “stopped out,” meaning they obtained some college credits but did not complete a degree, a study by nonprofit research firm Education Northwest found. The program has achieved an overall reenrollment rate of 8.15% across a pool of more than 25,000 learners — nearly three times California’s statewide average of 2.9% and the national average of 2.7%.

“California is showing a path forward for reaching the adults who started college and never finished,” said Leanne Davis, researcher and author of the study. “What’s striking is not just that coaching works, but how consistently it works — across different institutions, different demographics and different points of stop-out.”

In California, more than 5.9 million adults under age 65 have some college credit but no degree. Despite making progress in reengaging students, California will likely not reach its targeted 70% student attainment rate by 2030. Achieving that goal would yield about $4.4 trillion in net economic gains for the state over the next 50 years, according to the Georgetown Center on Education and the Workforce. 

Ruth Bauer, president of InsideTrack, an Oregon-based higher education nonprofit that oversees the California Reconnect initiative, attributed the program’s results to a multistep process. 

First, counselors and specialists make persistent efforts to reach and stay in contact with lapsed students, she said. Then, they work with public colleges and universities to create paths toward completion, connect students to financial aid and help them find ways to balance school with other life priorities. 

Adult learners most often leave college because of financial pressure, work obligations, family and caregiving responsibilities and poor mental health or stress. 

“Most of the students we work with are adults, so they have a lot of competing priorities,” Bauer said. “And higher education is often structured for the traditional student that is focused solely on school.”

For many students, going back to school marks the culmination of a deeply personal journey.  

Jaima Mavity (left) attends her student Nancy Palacios’ (right) graduation in May.Courtesy of Jaima Mavity

Jaima Mavity, a student success specialist at InsideTrack, said one student she first reached out to last spring, Nanci Palacios, graduated from CSU San Marcos last week and now plans to attend graduate school for social work. Palacios had dropped out of college for two years due to mental health struggles and her father’s cancer diagnosis.

During the reengagement process, Palacios’ self-doubt turned to resilience, Mavity said.

“She had this understanding that she had the power inside of her as a student to continue moving forward,” Mavity said. 

Getting students back in the door

Bauer said the first step to reengaging students is effective outreach. California Reconnect reached adult learners through email, phone calls and text messages. About 85% of students responded to a reenrollment pitch via text.

“Colleges are often designing their outreach around what is most convenient for them. Email is cheap, scalable, but most of the students we’re trying to reach had stopped checking their student email accounts,” said Davis. “A text message meets people where they actually are, and it’s a lot lower stakes.”

The study pointed to ongoing support as the next driver of both reenrollment and retention. Students who received one-on-one support returned to college at a rate of 19%, compared to 4.5% of those who did not receive support. 

Adult learners in the program were also more likely to stay enrolled and complete their degrees. More than one-third of learners who received coaching stayed for the subsequent academic term, compared to about one-fifth who reenrolled but did not meet with a coach. 

To keep students enrolled, Davis said colleges should provide ongoing and focused support to returning students, prioritize learners closest to degree completion and connect reenrolled students to more career services and workforce pathways.

Colleges that retained more reenrolled students, for example, had a dedicated reenrollment staff, active coordination with coaches and technical assistance for returning students, Davis said. At colleges with lower retention rates, students often run into “a series of bureaucratic frictions,” such as long holds or unclear advising pathways, she said. 

“Coaches could really help get people in the door, but they can’t substitute for the institutional readiness on the other side that has to meet the students and help keep them there,” Davis said. 

Beyond surface-level support

First-generation and Hispanic students, who are more likely to stop going to college than other populations, also showed the highest gains in reenrollment, according to the study. First-generation students comprised nearly two-thirds of all learners who persisted after reenrolling. Hispanic students, who represent the state’s largest undergraduate population, comprised 43% of reenrolled students and nearly half of those who stayed enrolled. 

But financial pressures remain one of the top barriers for all students who want to reenroll. The cost of attending college continues to rise in California, and rising expenses can make it harder for adult learners to afford to go back. 

“What has stayed the same is when you hear that cost is a barrier, maybe it’s about the fact that childcare is more expensive than it is about tuition, or it could be that they have to cut back on their hours at work in order to handle the workload,” Bauer said. 

In response to financial pressures, Mavity said she has seen more of her students reenroll in affordable programs at community colleges rather than four-year public universities. She also pointed to mental health and accessibility issues as more common reasons that students have stopped attending college in recent years. 

“What I’ve seen change is that colleges are offering more counseling and mental health support, things like student accessibility services,” Mavity said, adding that these resources are often key factors in a student’s decision to return. 

In an effort to boost enrollment, California has streamlined college entry with policies such as automatic admissions. Bauer said state leaders need to invest equally in maintaining that enrollment. 

“It’s a continual issue that schools face, and reenrolling students will help them financially, but they have to invest in the resources to do it first before they get that benefit,” Bauer said. 

A controversial adult charter school in Sacramento will remain open after the county Board of Education reversed a decision by Twin Rivers Unified School District to close the school.

The decision marked the end of a long journey for students and staff of Highlands Community Charter and Technical Schools, who had already endured school site closures and staff layoffs after a state audit found the school had improperly collected $180 million in public funding and violated multiple education rules.

Twin Rivers Unified staff cited many of the same problems revealed in the audit for the decision to revoke the school’s charters.

The hundreds of students, staff and community activists, many who arrived via bus to pack Tuesday night’s Sacramento County Board of Education meeting, cheered with jubilation following the board’s decision. 

Nearly 300 supporters, some wearing T-shirts emblazoned with the slogan “It’s never too late,” filled multiple rooms at the venue. About 40 of them shared stories of hardship improved by instruction from caring teachers, many explaining that the school helped them to learn to speak English and earn a high school diploma. Some expressed fear that the school’s closure would mean the end of their education.

“I want to get my diploma so I can put it on the wall,” said Sonya Bonnett, a Sacramento mother of four as she shook with emotion. “I’m 68 years old. It’s time for me.”

The charter school network, which serves adult students in its two schools — California Innovative Career Academy and Horizon Community Charter — has become both a lifeline for vulnerable students and a symbol of California’s charter oversight failures.

A difficult decision

The county school board’s decision wasn’t an easy one. 

Lawyers explained that the board was only to consider whether the evidence in the record supported the district’s decision to revoke the schools’ charters. Board members struggled with conflicting testimony from the district and the charter. In the end, they could not agree.

The motion to reverse the revocation of each of the charters passed on a 4-3 vote after a four-hour hearing.

“This vote gives our students and staff the opportunity to continue the important work of rebuilding this institution and delivering on our mission,” Executive Director Jonathan Raymond said in a statement. “Our students deserve stability, support and the opportunity to complete their education. We remain fully committed to transparency, accountability, and continuous improvement.”

The charter school opened in 2014 with the aim of helping adult students, many formerly incarcerated or new immigrants, to earn a diploma, improve English language skills or learn a trade. Within a decade, it was serving 13,700 students at 50 sites statewide.

Twin Rivers weighing its options

The adult charter school will now return to the oversight of Twin Rivers Unified. The district can appeal the county board’s decision to the California State Board of Education.

“At this time, no decision has been made about whether to pursue an appeal,” said Zenobia Gerald, district spokeswoman, via email. “We’ll be discussing next steps with our Board of Trustees.”

The district did not make a school administrator or board member available for an interview with EdSource.

Twin Rivers Unified, which earned $12.9 million in oversight and facility fees from the charter school between 2019-20 and 2023-24, was criticized in the audit — along with the County Office of Education and the California Department of Education — for not providing adequate oversight to the charter school. 

Even before the audit, Highlands Community Charter had been the subject of investigations and media scrutiny. County school board trustee Heather Davis questioned why the district took so long to take action. 

“Why is Twin Rivers so passionate now, when it was going on for a long time,” she said Tuesday night. “Where were they?”

Raymond takes the helm

Raymond, Sacramento City Unified’s former superintendent, has spent the last 10 months trying to rebuild trust in the charter school. He took its reins in July after the audit became public. He immediately asked the charter school’s board members to step down.

Raymond told EdSource Wednesday that he took the job because the mission of the charter school inspired him. He also saw an opportunity to return to Sacramento and to reestablish old relationships to help the public regain trust in the charter.

Since then, Highlands leaders have revised academic, operational and fiscal policies to bring them into compliance with state law and their charter, according to Raymond. They have hired new school leaders and impaneled three new board members.

Raymond acknowledges that the charter’s former leadership were not good stewards of public funding.

“Look, that was on someone else’s watch,” Raymond said. “It’s not going to be on my watch.”

Moving to Yuba City?

Despite the victory, the work isn’t over. Raymond is looking for a new authorizer — setting his sights on Yuba City Unified in Sutter County.

Raymond has filed a petition with the district, spoken with its leadership and is hopeful that an agreement will be in place by September. The school would operate in both Sutter and Sacramento counties, he said.

“It’s a tight timeline, but it’s doable, and we’re excited about that,” he said.

Sutter County officials approached the charter about bringing their career, technical and adult education programs to their county.

“We’ve realized that a lot of the population we serve — immigrants and refugees — are now moving up to Sutter County because it’s more affordable than Sacramento County,” Raymond said. “And there are also jobs up in Sutter County.”

The school, which was forced to close most of its sites and put students on waiting lists after the audit, will expand again, Raymond said, noting that enrollment has grown by 800 students since January.

No matter where the school lands, Raymond says he has three goals for the near term — build trust and restore integrity; raise operational, professional and academic standards; and make decisions in the best interest of the students.

“As I said to the board,” Raymond said, “my promise was we would become a school that this community and county and our state could be really proud of.” 

By Ricardo Cano, EdSource

Higher education leaders were cautiously optimistic in January when Gov. Gavin Newsom unveiled a proposed budget that included a combined $716.3 million in new base funding for the University of California and California State University. Their sentiment remained largely unchanged Thursday, as Newsom’s revised budget maintained the proposed funding for universities. 

UC and CSU officials breathed a sigh of relief because it wasn’t a given that the funding earmarked in the governor’s January budget would remain intact in his May revision. The state’s university systems do not receive the minimum funding guarantees that TK-12 schools and community colleges get under California’s Proposition 98, and must compete with other dueling priorities covered in the rest of the state budget.

Newsom’s updated budget appropriates $350.6 million in new base funds for UC and $365.7 million for CSU, meaning UC would receive $5.3 billion from the state’s general fund and CSU would get $5.6 billion.

Those funds represent a 5% annual budget increase that had been promised by the state to UC and CSU under a five-year compact agreement. In exchange for the state funding boost, the two university systems must work to raise graduation rates and enroll more in-state residents. 

Newsom’s May proposal would still defer paying out $129.7 million for UC and $143.8 million for CSU until next year. The deferred funds represent a 3% base increase for both systems.

Still, the investments in the state budget would aid California’s public universities as they face intense scrutiny from the Trump administration, which has sought to investigate the institutions and withhold millions of dollars in public research grants.

“The UC funding included in the May revision will help ensure that the university remains affordable and accessible to California students,” UC President James B. Milliken said in a statement. “As the University of California faces ongoing federal funding uncertainty and increasing operational and labor costs, state funding for UC is more important than ever.”

California’s community college system, meanwhile, would receive a $197.7 million increase from the state’s Prop. 98 general fund, reflecting a 4.31% cost-of-living adjustment for TK-12 schools and community colleges.

“Gov. Newsom’s May Revise reflects strong confidence in the California Community Colleges and the critical role we play in California’s economic future,” Chancellor Sonya Christian said in a statement.

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Until last month, California was poised to join nearly a dozen other states that ban cell phones in K-12 schools. But under pressure from school boards and administrators, lawmakers scaled back a bill that would have required such a blanket ban.

“I was disappointed, but I take the long view on this,” said Torrance Democratic Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, an author of the bill. “There’s still a growing global concern that too much cell phone use has detrimental effects on students.”

The bill, AB 1644, builds on an existing law in California that requires schools to limit, if not outright ban, students’ cell phone use during the school day. A slew of studies have shown that cell phone use is a serious distraction for students that affects their mental health, social-emotional development and ability to concentrate in class.

Confusing and unnecessary legislation?

Muratsuchi’s bill would have required all schools to draw up policies banning students from using cell phones while they’re on campus or on a school-related trip. School board and school administrator groups opposed the bill because they said a “one-size-fits-all” policy undermines districts’ ability to enact their own rules suited to their own specific students’ needs. 

They also argued that the bill conflicts with the existing law that requires schools to come up with policies limiting cell phones on campus. Those policies are supposed to go into effect in July. Having two laws on the issue would be confusing for school staff and may invalidate the policies they’d already been working on, they said.

“AB 1644 creates a ‘do-over’ just one year (after the previous law passed), creating unnecessary frustration and confusion,” the Association of California School Administrators wrote to the Assembly Education Committee. 

In response to those complaints, lawmakers removed high schools from the ban.

Student Keiran George uses her cellphone as she steps outside the Ramon C. Cortines School of Visual and Performing Arts High School in downtown Los Angeles on Aug. 13, 2024.Damian Dovarganes/AP Photo

Outcomes in Contra Costa and Los Angeles

Many school districts in California, including Los Angeles Unified, have already banned cell phones. A recent study cast doubt on whether cell phone bans have any impact on test scores, attendance or other measures of student success, but individual districts say the policies have made a difference.

Mount Diablo Unified, in the San Francisco Bay Area’s Contra Costa County, has seen improvements since banning cell phones. In a presentation to the school board, teachers said students are more focused in the classroom, have livelier discussions and conversations, fight less and don’t get “riled up” about social media posts.

At Northgate High School in Walnut Creek, reports of harassment fell 33% and bullying dropped 50% since the district banned cell phones.

The only complaints, according to the presentation, were that students didn’t have access to their phone cameras to take pictures of assignments and that locking up students’ phones cut into classroom time. The authors of the report also said some students found ways around the ban.

‘All these zombies’

Rishaan Marwaha, a high school freshman from Newport Beach, was so fed up with cell phones he testified at the Assembly Education Committee hearing last month to urge lawmakers to pass AB 1644.

“Tech companies are making all this money off students’ phone addiction,” he said. “It’s not a fair fight because students are a vulnerable population. … School should be a place for learning.

Marwaha said he was a phone addict himself. He would spend hours scrolling through Instagram reels, “when I could have been doing things I actually like, like playing basketball or going to the gym.”

He eventually removed Instagram from his phone, but saw his classmates suffering from the same addiction. 

“I’d walk through school and it felt like all these zombies,” he said. “Some people were so addicted, they’d make up excuses to go to the bathroom just so they could look at their phones.”

He was disappointed the bill got scaled back, but he’s hopeful the state will enact a high school cell phone ban at some point. After all, he said, “in the past people managed without cell phones  OK. I think we’ll be fine.”

This is Muratsuchi’s third bill related to schools and cell phones, each inching closer to a total ban. The previous two cell-phone-related bills were enacted into law, and he believes this one will pass, as well, now that it’s been amended.

“I hope this is part of an ongoing movement to recognize that technology can provide benefits as well as harms,” said Muratsuchi, a candidate for California schools superintendent. “We need to have responsible regulations to make sure we’re helping students navigate technology successfully.”