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

Credit: 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. 

Jeff Allen, the educator leading implementation for personal finance

Experience: Has taught social science classes in Fresno Unified schools for more than 20 years

Current roles: Fresno Unified teacher on special assignment helping create and implement personal finance courses throughout the district since the 2023-24 school year and lead author chosen by the California Department of Education to write the state’s personal finance curriculum guide and support implementation of the course statewide 

“I grew up and I was fortunate enough to have parents that told me the value of putting money into a bank, but that’s where it started and stopped. To see that that’s not even a standard baseline was both discouraging and encouraging,” Allen said. “Discouraging that that’s where we were, but encouraging that we could bring that information so easily.”

Credit: Lasherica Thornton/ EdSource

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.”

This story was originally published by EdSource.

18%

Share of students who began at a California community college in 2019-20, and transferred to a four-year postsecondary institution within four years.

68.6k

Number of California community college students who transferred to a University of California (UC) or California State University (CSU) campus in 2025. Among them, 28.2% transferred to a UC campus and 71.8% to a CSU campus.

6.9%

Percent decline in California community college students transferring to University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) campuses between 2021 and 2025, representing 5,057 fewer community college transfer students attending a UC or CSU.

44%

Share of community college students who transferred to UC and CSU who were Latino in 2025, the highest of any ethnic group, followed by white at 22%, Asian at 18% and Black at 4.5%.

2094

Number of students from Pasadena City College who transferred to UC or CSU campuses in fall 2025, the most of any community college in California. De Anza Community College in Cupertino ranked second with 1,891 transfers, followed by Mount San Antonio College in Walnut with 1,889.

This week’s idea came from a reader who works with community college students. Use the submission form below to share your own.

Related Reading

New UCLA program aims to help students struggling to transfer from community colleges

April 28, 2026

National University to accept all California Community College transfers

April 28, 2026

UC system aims to increase California community college transfers

March 27, 2026

This story was originally published by EdSource.

On car rides to and from school, my mom gave me pop quizzes on my multiplication tables. When we went shopping, she paid in cash, and I raced against the cashier to calculate the remaining change, blurting out the answer before the receipt printed. In school, classmates slid their math worksheets onto my desk, asking questions about problems they struggled with. 

As a freshman in high school, I was placed into Algebra II — a class typically taken by juniors. My schedule quickly filled with AP courses, most of them in STEM. One summer, I job shadowed a civil engineer and took an electrical engineering course, where I built and programmed a small robot I named “Sir Bertram.” But somewhere in between walking construction sites and sodding circuits, I became interested in a different side of engineering. 

When I started at UC Irvine, I was a biomedical engineering major. I enjoyed AP biology in high school, and merged that interest with engineering. But when I took my first BME class, it wasn’t what I expected. 

Instead of building prosthetics or programming robotic arms, I was researching patents and attending lectures about cardiovascular diseases. For my final project, I worked with three other students to write a research paper about heart valve replacements, spending hours sifting through patents and blueprints. The deeper I got into biomedical engineering, the more I dreaded it. 

Spending years on one project, stuck in a lab with the same small group of people, was not how I wanted to spend my working life. I wanted to juggle multiple projects at once, travel and meet a plethora of people. 

By the end of my first quarter, I had come to the realization that paralyzed me with fear. I didn’t want to be an engineer. 

After multiple meetings with career advisers, I decided that the communications field aligned with my career goals. But UCI doesn’t have a communications major, so I chose something adjacent to it. In my junior year, I switched my major to literary journalism. 

When I told my parents, my mom asked if I’d still be able to graduate on time. When I reassured her that I could, she offered nothing but support. My dad hesitated.

“Your whole life, I’ve seen you want to be an engineer,” he said. “Are you sure you want to leave that behind?” But after sensing my resolve, he told me that he believed I could adapt. 

Secretly, I shared his concerns. I tossed and turned at night, worried that pursuing journalism meant abandoning the part of me shaped by STEM. 

When I took my first journalism class, I was shaking in my 4-inch black leather go-go boots. 

I’d spend hours writing a draft, only to delete and rewrite most of it the next day. I spiraled over never feeling fully finished with a piece, missing the clear-cut solutions I was used to back in STEM. During my first round of peer reviews, I envisioned my paper riddled with critiques from my peers and professor telling me I wasn’t good enough. The thought made my stomach turn. 

My first few drafts came back with multiple marks in the margins, asking me to “show, not tell,” and AP-style corrections scattered across the page. But there were also passages highlighted, with comments saying “I like this!” or “Great job!” After writing workshops, classmates asked me how I structured my story or for advice on how to approach sources for an interview. 

With each annotated draft and conversation after class, I became more confident. Although I still struggle with impostor syndrome, my peers and professors have never made me feel like one. 

Did I completely abandon my STEM identity? No. When I pay in cash, I still calculate the remaining change in my head. When my younger sister struggles with her math homework, I’m still the first person she calls for help. Sir Bertram still sits in the corner of my closet. 

But do I feel more fulfilled now that I’ve found something else I enjoy just as much? 

Absolutely. I was invited to the Magic Castle in Los Angeles, the most prestigious magic club in the world, because I wrote a profile on one of their magicians. I’ve met people in my journalism classes who I’ll be friends with forever. I was even accepted into the EdSource Student Journalism Corps, and got my first article published earlier this year. 

For those of you afraid of taking a different path in college, or even in life, I encourage you to take that leap. You don’t have to lose yourself in the process — you might just find a more complete version.

Amelia Angeles is a fourth-year literary journalism major at UC Irvine and a member of the EdSource California Student Journalism Corps.

•••

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us at commentary@edsource.org.

This story was originally published by EdSource.

David Boyer is stuck in a waiting game. For more than 18 months, silence from the National Institutes of Health on a crucial grant decision has thrown his research developing treatments for Alzheimer’s disease into uncertain territory.

His application received a favorable impact score, the main metric used for NIH funding decisions, so the postdoctoral scholar at UCLA figured he would hear good news by spring of 2025. Instead, he has heard nothing.

Without the funding, he has less to spend on his experiments, which require thousands of dollars worth of materials, including advanced microscopes. In a worst-case scenario, it’s possible he could lose his job if the grant doesn’t come through. 

“It’s really up in the air whether I would be able to continue getting funded,” said Boyer, who is part of UCLA’s Eisenberg Lab. 

Boyer is not alone. Federal funding for scientific research, from agencies such as NIH and the National Science Foundation, has been upended under the Trump administration, with fewer grants being awarded and some existing grants being canceled altogether. Even researchers with stable funding worry that their grants could get suspended or will not be renewed. 

But now, Boyer and other researchers at California universities have some hope that they could get a reprieve — from California voters. 

The University of California is pushing to get a $12 billion state bond on the November ballot that would fund scientific research projects at California universities, research institutes and private companies. In addition to UC and California State University campuses, private universities such as Stanford and the University of Southern California would also be eligible for the bond money.

For the bond to appear on the ballot, the state Legislature first needs to approve Senate Bill 895. The bill’s sponsors include UC and UAW 4811, the union representing 48,000 academic workers at UC, including thousands of researchers.

The bill was approved last week by the Senate and now heads to the Assembly. It must be passed and signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom by June 25 to make the ballot.

“As the federal government cuts and destroys scientific funding, as it creates long-term instability and uncertainty, as science has now become a political football in this country, let’s make sure that California retains and expands our leadership in scientific research,” state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, said on the Senate floor last week just before the vote. Wiener is one of the authors of the bill. 

If passed and approved by voters, the measure would create the California Foundation for Science and Health Research, which would award the grants using “an open, competitive, scientific peer review process,” according to the bill.

The bond would not be a cure-all for research funding if federal spending continues to dwindle. UC alone gets nearly $6 billion annually in federal support for research. 

“There is nobody else who can substitute for research funding on the scale the federal government supplies,” said Simon Atkinson, vice chancellor for research at UC Davis.

Still, Atkinson and other proponents of the bond agree that it would benefit researchers in California not to rely so much on the federal government, especially under the Trump administration, which proposed a $5 billion cut to NIH for 2027. Last week, The New York Times reported that NSF had slowed funding to Harvard and other institutions targeted by the White House, though the impact on California campuses is unclear.

Having another potential funding source would be welcome news to Ximena Anleu Gil, a plant biologist at UC Davis who researches how to breed more plants in environmentally friendly ways.

Related Reading

Federal grant cuts hit California universities hard, putting research in limbo

May 28, 2025

There is one year remaining on the grant that funds Gil’s position in UC Davis’ Meyers Lab. The prospect of not having the funding renewed is stressful for Gil, who is the main provider for her family, which includes her partner and 7-month-old daughter. 

“I’m very scared of what could happen. If I’m laid off, we’re screwed,” Gil said. “But having another source of potential funding, that would already feel like a big relief.”

If voters approve the bond, the legislation requires that priority be given to replacing funding slashed by the federal government. 

In California, 782 grants have been terminated by the federal government since January 2025, according to the website Grant Witness, a project tracking terminations under the Trump administration. 

Most of those grants have been restored under court orders, but dozens remain canceled, including one at UC San Francisco’s Center for AIDS Research that paid for training for undergraduate students. 

Under that grant, students from nearby Hispanic-Serving Institutions, including San Francisco State University, would spend the summer at UCSF doing HIV research. At the end of the summer, the center would hold a symposium where undergraduates present their findings.

The idea was to expose those students to the field and get them interested in HIV research, said Monica Gandhi, director of the center. 

“There are fewer and fewer people going into infectious disease research at a time when infectious diseases are all over,” Gandhi said. “It really just got them excited, and we thought it would help grow our biomedical research workforce in a really important topic.”

If California’s bond goes through, Gandhi said she expects the center would immediately apply for a grant to restart that program. 

Federal funding remains intact for the rest of the AIDS research center, which organizes all HIV research across UCSF. But it’s not clear how long that will be the case. Gandhi said the center is waiting for a formal notice from NIH to apply for a grant renewal, which she said normally would have come by now. 

“There are all these little ways they are making it harder to get funding,” she said. “Having a California-based initiative that isn’t political and will have the grants be judged on their scientific merit would be amazing. And I think it will go a long way.”

This story was originally published by EdSource.

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, 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. 

Related Reading

How much do California colleges and universities spend on Canvas?

June 1, 2026

Inside California community colleges’ persistent struggle to stamp out financial aid fraud

May 28, 2026

California colleges introduce AI majors to meet rising demand

May 19, 2026

This story was originally published by EdSource.

With millions of ballots still to be counted in California, Chino Valley Unified school board President Sonja Shaw has a clear lead in the state superintendent of public instruction primary with 24.9% of the vote, followed by San Diego Unified school board President Richard Barrera with 18.9% of the vote. 

None of the other candidates have more than 10% of the vote at this point.

Although all the polling places have reported, it’s not over yet. The top two candidates moving on to the Nov. 3 general election won’t be decided until all the mail-in ballots and provisional ballots are counted. In a state with 23 million registered voters, the process could take up to 30 days, according to the Secretary of State’s Office.

The late votes are likely to lean Democrat, as they have historically made up the majority of the mail-in voters in the state. This year, that might be even more true, as many Democrats held on to their ballots until a clear Democratic leader emerged in the governor’s race.

The two candidates at the front of the pack for the state superintendent of public instruction position agree that student test scores are too low and that the proposed restructuring of the California Department of Education is a bad idea, but they disagree about almost everything else.

Shaw, who notoriously had state Superintendent of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond ejected from a Chino Valley Unified school board meeting, wants to end California policies prohibiting school staff from disclosing a student’s sexual orientation or gender identity. She also wants to prohibit transgender students from participating in girls’ sports.

Barrera, a senior policy adviser at the state Department of Education, disagreed with Shaw’s position during an April EdSource forum, saying the laws protect LGBTQ+ students. Barrera also would like more public funding for student support and to help districts recruit and retain teachers. 

There wasn’t much excitement around the superintendent’s race until late April when outside organizations began spending to support their preferred candidates. 

A voter survey released in early April found that none of the 10 candidates for superintendent of public instruction had more than 10% of support among likely voters. About a third of the voters surveyed said they didn’t know who they would vote for in the race.

When education unions began to spend in the race, they did not coalesce behind one candidate. The California Teachers Association’s independent expenditure committee spent $5 million on the Barrera campaign. The California Federation of Teachers committee spent $200,000, and a political action committee for the California School Employees Association spent $175,000 on the Al Muratsuchi campaign; while a political action committee for the Service Employees International Union spent $250,000 on the Anthony Rendon campaign. 

Related Reading

What does the state superintendent actually do and how might that drastically change?

January 30, 2026

Meet the state superintendent candidates: Sonja Shaw, Chino Valley Unified board president

April 20, 2026

Meet the state superintendent candidates: Richard Barrera, San Diego Unified board president

April 16, 2026

Hilton, Becerra lead in governor’s race

Although education has not been a central issue in the gubernatorial race, the next governor will face major decisions about school funding and may have to execute a plan to move oversight of the California Department of Education from the state superintendent of public instruction to a new education commission, if the plan is approved by the Legislature.

Republican Steve Hilton, a political commentator, and Democrat Xavier Becerra, the former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, are leading the primary election for governor with 27.8% and 25.4% of the votes, respectively.

The front-runners are followed by Democrat Tom Steyer, a billionaire investor, with 19.6% of the vote, and Republican Chad Bianco, Riverside County sheriff, with 11.3% of the vote.

The four top vote-getters emerged from a crowded field of 61 candidates all vying to replace California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who will be termed out after eight years.

Hilton has said he would change state policies that prohibit parental notification when students indicate they may be transgender and that allow transgender athletes to participate in girls’ sports. He also said he will hold teachers accountable for student performance by rewarding the best and firing the worst. 

During the campaign, Becerra highlighted his efforts to expand early childhood education when he was U.S. Health and Human Services secretary. He has also said he would ensure all California communities have good schools and that college is more affordable.

Steyer has proposed investing more money in public schools and increasing teacher pay to help recruit and retain them. He would like free education from universal preschool at age 3 to community college. He proposes paying for it by raising taxes on corporations and wealthy individuals.

Bianco would like to expand career technical education and high-performing charter schools. His other ideas include increasing the focus on reading, writing, math and science, increasing funding for teacher training and recruitment, promoting mental health supports and ensuring all schools have an assigned law enforcement officer.

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Even while I swallow the lump in my throat, I can’t say that I regret my decision to graduate from high school as a sophomore. 

Nearly 12,000 California students participated in the High School Equivalency Test, or the Hi-SET, from 2024 to 2025, according to its annual statistics report. The Hi-SET allows students to complete separate tests in subjects such as language arts, math, science and social studies, and if they pass, they can graduate early. 

My dad told me about the Hi-SET in eighth grade. He has always been one of my biggest cheerleaders, pushing me to reach higher, and he brought up the graduate-early idea the summer before freshman year because he knew, way before I did, that I was ready for college. 

I was skeptical — I had been enrolled in an independent study program throughout elementary and middle school, and all I wanted was to finally have a normal education. I argued with him about how high school would give me the chance to make friends, pursue sports and have a steady schedule, things I didn’t have with my current schooling. 

Despite my objections, I kept my dad’s proposal in mind. I liked the idea of taking the road less traveled and setting myself apart, even if the thought scared me just a little. 

High school was a change of pace from independent study. I tried out for the cheer team and made it as a junior varsity captain, became the president of my own Cinema Club, discovered my love for journalism and formed a close-knit group of friends.  

Still, there was this voice in the back of my head pushing me to consider testing out. 

I had fallen in love with my life as a high schooler, but I knew in my heart that I could be doing more. There was this nagging feeling that this wasn’t the right path for me. 

I felt like my life was diverging into two roads, and for the first time, I was afraid to take the untraveled one. 

It took me about three months to just take the tests and see if I wanted to commit afterward. My hands shook as I enrolled in the Hi-SET tests, and my heart pounded when I actually took them online. A few weeks later, I received emails congratulating me on passing them, and months later, an official certificate of proficiency. 

The certificate was thick with a glossy seal. At that point, I knew what my decision would be.

I told my friends I was leaving high school. I withheld the storm of emotions brewing within me as we hugged, promising to hang out, even though I knew most of those promises would not come true — our lives were far too different now. I only allowed myself to cry in the comfort of my bedroom, letting waves of grief wash over me as I mourned what could have been.  

I would have to start over again in community college. 

Planning for college as a freshly minted 17-year-old was not easy. I had to drive 30 minutes to my chosen school, Los Angeles Pierce College, four times in two weeks just to get paperwork sorted out. My first day on campus was filled with dread and anxiety, my hands trembling as I sat in my statistics class with a group of 20- to 40-year-olds. 

The spring semester was when I began to come out of my shell and actively seek out journalism opportunities, my passion. Like the golden poppies blooming on my walk to class, I began to open up and connect more with my classmates and professors, which gave me the confidence to join the student newspaper, magazine and radio. 

With the support of my new campus community, I pursued everything I wanted to do. It was bittersweet seeing my high school friends on Instagram and TikTok, living their own lives without me, but I understood that this was a part of life — people change, they grow and they move forward. 

Even though my high school graduation occurred earlier than most, I don’t feel like I missed out on anything. I didn’t go to prom or senior sunset, and I couldn’t participate in any of the milestones that come with being an upperclassman in high school. 

However, I was able to find a new community that encouraged me to pursue opportunities and helped me find them. I have done things that I didn’t think I was capable of, and most importantly, I’ve been able to return the favor to others. 

Change is frightening, but staying the same is scarier. When you are presented with a choice between the road less traveled and the comfortable, beaten path, I say listen to my dad’s words and take a leap of faith to venture into the unknown. 

Olivia Muñoz is a second-year student at Los Angeles Pierce College studying journalism and film. She is a member of the EdSource California Student Journalism Corps.

•••

The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author. EdSource welcomes commentaries representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a commentary, please review our guidelines and contact us at commentary@edsource.org.

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Although candidates often campaign on education policy, the state superintendent is a nonpartisan elected office whose primary job is to oversee the California Department of Education — not set TK-12 policy alone.

EdSource is tracking results as votes are counted in the days ahead.

See the latest results below. The two candidates who receive the most votes advance to the November election.

Related Reading

Barrera and Shaw to battle for state superintendent in November election

June 5, 2026

Shaw advances in race for California superintendent of public instruction

June 3, 2026

Rendon concedes, endorses Barrera for state superintendent

June 3, 2026

This story was originally published by EdSource.

California’s next governor will inherit school district budget shortfalls, declining school enrollment and pressure to preserve education programs championed by Gov. Gavin Newsom. Voters may also elect a state schools chief with a dramatically reduced role. 

Related Reading

California schools chief primary race draws a surge in outside spending. Here’s the data

June 1, 2026

Although education has not been a central issue in California’s crowded gubernatorial race, the next governor will face major decisions about school funding, college affordability and potential changes at the California Department of Education. 

District leaders, struggling with financial deficits, will be looking to Sacramento for help balancing their budgets. Families will be eager to see if the campaign promises of expanded financial aid for their college-bound students come true.

The next governor will likely face high expectations from taxpayers and school districts, despite budget constraints. The new governor will succeed Newsom, who made education a priority by significantly increasing per-pupil funding, investing in community schools, expanding universal transitional kindergarten, providing free school meals for all students, increasing after-school and summer programs, supporting teacher recruitment efforts and approving legislation that changed how children are taught to read.

Soon after taking on the new role, the governor may also have to execute a plan to move oversight of the California Department of Education from the state superintendent of public instruction to a new education commission, if it is approved by the Legislature.

How are they polling?

Democrat Xavier Becerra, the former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services, is leading the race, with 23% support, according to a Public Policy Institute of California poll released May 27. He is followed closely by Republican Steve Hilton, a political commentator and former adviser to U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, with 20%; Democrat Tom Steyer, a billionaire investor, with 15%; Republican Chad Bianco, the Riverside County sheriff, with 13%; and Democrat Katie Porter, a former congressional representative, with 12% of voter support.

Although 61 candidates are on the ballot, polling suggests most of the other candidates have garnered little voter support.

The race looks different than it did earlier this year. Democrat Eric Swalwell, former U.S. representative for California’s 14th congressional district, was the front-runner before he dropped out on April 12 following allegations of sexual misconduct. Former State Controller Betty Yee also dropped out in April due to lack of financial and voter support.

Voters appear less excited about the race for superintendent of public instruction than they do for the gubernatorial race. A voter survey released in April by the PPIC found that none of the 10 candidates for the office had more than 10% of support among likely voters. About a third of the voters surveyed said they didn’t know who they would vote for in the race.

According to the survey, the leading contenders include San Diego Unified school board President Richard Barrera, Chino Valley Unified school board President Sonja Shaw, Assembly member Al Muratsuchi, former State Sen. Josh Newman, former Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, Los Angeles Community College District board member Nichelle Henderson and San Francisco public school teacher Ainye Long. 

The next superintendent of public instruction may have a completely different role if lawmakers approve legislation transferring oversight of the California Department of Education from the elected superintendent to a new education commission. 

Instead of running the department, the superintendent would likely be charged with evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of state education programs.

The two top vote-getters in both races will advance to the Nov. 3 general election.

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Eyes glazed. Minutes passed. Box checked. Rinse and repeat. 

That scene is one symptom of a broader frustration. Parents and educators have watched screens take over more of the school day, whether through usage targets like weekly i-Ready minutes, kids drifting onto YouTube when they finish early, or learning games that are more game than learning. The frustration is real.

So this spring, Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) is responding with strict screen-time limits, a familiar approach many families use at home. The proposed policy would sharply restrict screen use in elementary classrooms, including a daily cap of 20 minutes in second and third grade, and 30 minutes in fourth and fifth grade. While this might be an effective tactic to get children off Roblox after dinner, applying this strategy in the classroom is misguided at best and pedagogically reckless at worst. If adopted, this policy will harm the students it claims to protect and undermine the teachers expected to carry it out. 

While I understand the impulse, limiting screen time by the clock mistakes the symptoms for the disease. Much of the research alarming families and educators focuses on recreational screen use at home. That work is worth taking seriously, but linking recreational and educational device use is a false equivalence. Doomscrolling on TikTok and typing an essay are both forms of “screen time” in the same way 3D glasses and prescription lenses are both eyewear. 

Related Reading

PodcastSchool screen time is rising. California parents are asking where to draw the line

April 2, 2026

Supporters of this proposal will point out, fairly, that there is research on classroom screen use as well. A 2022 study of American fourth and eighth graders found that more time on devices in language arts class predicted lower reading scores, even after accounting for income, disability, teacher experience, and other factors — a sobering finding, yes, but citing it alone is cherry-picking. 

That same study found that what students did on devices made all the difference. When students used them for drill-and-practice activities, scores dropped. When students used devices for activities like authentic projects and evidence gathering, scores rose. 

As I would tell my fourth graders, put a star by that last sentence. 

The harm does not come from the screen or the time spent on it. The harm comes from the kind of work the screen is used for. To a clock, 30 minutes of mindless drilling and 30 minutes of genuine research are the same 30 minutes. For us teachers, knowing the difference is the job. 

Used effectively, digital tools enable students to revise work efficiently, collaborate productively, access challenging material and identify reliable online sources. Those uses should not be treated like clicking through a gamified lesson or opening Minecraft.

The proposal also carelessly ignores the digital divide. Children from under-resourced communities often arrive with less practice using digital tools fluently and critically than their wealthier peers. School is one of the few places where that gap can be closed. This proposed policy risks leaving already disadvantaged students underprepared for our digitized world. 

LAUSD’s own Digital Futures Guide says technology should create “real-time, real-world learning experiences” that are authentic, relevant, inclusive and aligned with future learning and work. I wholeheartedly agree. But the answer to screen-time waste is not a screen-time limit. If the district wants that vision to mean anything, it should curb passive entertainment and low-value drill activities, protect teacher discretion, and remove incentives that turn digital tools into box-checking exercises. 

I have watched students waste time on screens. I have also watched them use those same devices to act on meaningful feedback, build persuasive arguments, revise their writing and find answers to fascinating questions. A strict usage limit punishes both kinds of screen time equally. 

Supporters may hope a cap forces better choices. More likely, meaningful digital work will lose out to whatever is easiest to justify, and screen time becomes another compliance fight.

Families of nearly half a million students count on LAUSD to prepare their children for the world they actually live in. This policy does not do that. It gets in the way of the teachers who do. The board must vote it down and start over.  

•••

Dylan Elliott is a fourth grade teacher in the Los Angeles Unified School District and a doctoral student in curriculum and instruction at the University of Virginia. The views expressed are his own.

Related Reading

Essential or excessive? Schools grapple with use of i-Ready to support learning 

May 12, 2026

Los Angeles Unified to limit screen time for all students, prohibit use among youngest students

April 21, 2026

Parents push for reduced screen time a year after Los Angeles Unified bans cellphones

April 2, 2026

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Most notably, the California Teachers Association’s independent expenditure committee spent over $5 million on consulting and ads to support Richard Barrera, a longtime San Diego Unified board trustee, with the California Charter School Association spending an additional $40,000 on TV and online ads for him.

There was less movement on direct donations to campaigns.

Between the previous April 18 campaign finance filings and the May 16 deadline, the last before Tuesday’s primary, candidates for state superintendent of public instruction raised more than $300,000 in direct monetary donations.

Related Reading

Still deciding before Election Day? See where California superintendent candidates stand

May 30, 2026

That’s an increase of 18% over the previous total across the eight candidates who filed their forms electronically.

Anthony Rendon, a former state Assembly speaker, saw both the most money and the largest increase with nearly $155,000. The total monetary donations to his campaign increased by 36% — though he also came into the race with $1.1 million from his previous campaign for state treasurer.

Al Muratsuchi, a state Assembly member, is second with $61,000 in contributions, followed by Josh Newman, a senior fellow at UC Irvine, with $42,000.

While not at the top in totals, Sonja Shaw, board president of the Chino Valley Unified School District, added the most individual donors, with 318 people or organizations giving to her campaign for the first time since the last filing.

Barrera’s outside support also comes with direct donors, with 195 new first-time donors in the latter half of April and first half of May. While Rendon’s monetary contributions led the pack, he only added 37 new donors, although that more than doubled his previous total of 28.

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Lillian Ansari’s daughter, Atrina, endured two years of long commutes from Oakland to Marin to attend her nonpublic school.

Cars provided by Oakland Unified School District shuttled Atrina, then 12, across the busy Richmond-San Rafael Bridge for school commutes that could — at the worst — take up to four hours given other students that had to be picked up along the way and traffic accidents. One such drive left Atrina, who has tuberous sclerosis complex, autism and epilepsy, “a mess when she got home,” her mom said, recalling her daughter’s tendency to freeze up after disruptions to her routine.

The 100 or so Oakland students who attend nonpublic schools — specialized private schools that serve public-school students with disabilities — are left with no other option than to commute outside their district’s boundaries because no such schools exist in the city. Students are placed in these private schools by the district, which are specialized for students with disabilities, where they receive tailored support for behavioral learning. 

But now, for the first time, Oakland Unified is moving to help create a local nonpublic school option — an effort that could spare students with disabilities from lengthy commutes across the Bay Area and save money for the district.

Jennifer Blake, head of special education at Oakland Unified, said the district has contemplated opening a nonpublic school, or NPS, since 2019.  This marks the first time OUSD has formally issued a request for proposal, inviting NPS contractors to apply to lease district facilities. 

Partnering with an NPS could be a win for both the district and families, Blake said. She pointed to a model used by Seneca Family of Agencies and West Contra Costa Unified School District, in which Seneca operates an NPS in a WCCUSD-owned facility at a reduced cost while reserving seats for local students. Blake said OUSD hopes to create a similar arrangement that prioritizes Oakland students through benefits such as enrollment preference or reduced free tuition.

NPS placements are approved and funded when a school district determines it cannot adequately serve a child with disabilities, or when families can prove that a specialized private program would better meet their child’s needs. Ansari, whose son also attended a nonpublic school, said securing those placements through OUSD was time-consuming and exhausting.

Ansari’s son, now 21, has autism and dyspraxia. He attended OUSD schools through fifth grade, where Ansari said he often “masked” — suppressing behaviors associated with autism to fit in socially. Teachers often told her he was doing well, she said, but at home he would collapse from anxiety and stress. 

“He wasn’t acting out, and in their eyes, he was fine, he was OK, because he wasn’t flinging chairs across the room,” Ansari said.

When Ansari and her husband asked the district for additional support, she said her son’s individualized education program, or IEP, team told them he was fine as long as he could access his education. The family then began searching for a private placement and found Springstone School, an NPS in Lafayette. 

During a campus visit, Ansari recalled her son turning to her and saying, ‘Mommy, pinch me, I can’t believe it. These kids are all like me here.’ ” 

Related Reading

L.A.’s special education parents constantly advocate — and students still feel unsafe at school, survey finds

May 6, 2026

That sense of belonging became a deciding factor for the family, Ansari said. 

“As an adult, I want to be with people that get me,” she said. “I want to be among my peers. Why would I want less for him?”

Nonpublic school placements typically begin with the IEP process. If an IEP team — usually made up of family members, a general education teacher, a special education teacher, a district administrator and at least one other person — determines a student cannot get a free appropriate public education, the team may recommend an NPS placement. 

Parents can still request an NPS, even if the IEP team does not recommend one. This is what Ansari and her husband did. She said the district rejected their Springstone placement request. Tuition at the school starts at about $36,000 a year, relatively low for a Bay Area NPS. 

“Their language they were using and the way they were treating us was like, are we still talking about my kid, or are we negotiating buying a used car,” Ansari said. “It really felt like it just comes down to the money.”

After the district denied their request, the Ansaris faced a choice: keep their son in public school or pay for Springstone School themselves. They chose to enroll him at the school and hired an attorney. 

Over the next six months, the family gathered evidence showing their son was doing significantly better at Springstone. Ansari said the district ultimately approved the placement through his IEP. A few years later, the family went through a nearly identical process with their daughter.

Jennifer Blake, head of special education at Oakland Unified District, said she could not comment specifically on Ansari’s case but pushed back on the idea that families must fight the district for NPS placements. “If data show a student’s needs cannot be met in a public school setting,” she said, an IEP team should carefully consider an NPS placement.

Free and appropriate education

Funding for special education has long been a challenge. Under the Individual with Disabilities Education Act, passed in 1975, the federal government pledged to cover about 40% of the cost of educating students with disabilities. Karma Quick-Panwala, director of children and family advocacy services with the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, said that today the government only pays around 13% of the cost, leaving districts struggling to fully fund services. 

“But that is not an excuse under the law, unfortunately,” Quick-Panwala said. “So we need to look at how creative can we be to resolve disputes at the local level.”

Anjanette Pelletier, a special educator for 25 years and director of management consulting services at the School Services of California, said parents across California often struggle to secure nonpublic school placements for their children.  

One challenge, she said, is a statewide shortage of placement options for students with more intensive support needs. “Sometimes the delay [in placement] is not that we disagree,” Pelletier said. “It’s that we can’t find a spot.” 

Pelletier said another source of conflict is that parents are focused on what they believe is best for their children, while districts must follow strict legal requirements about what services and placements they can offer — and when they can offer them — even in cases when it’s clear a child would benefit from an alternative placement.

“Sometimes, where the gap happens is when parents say, ‘I’ve been trying to get into a nonpublic school or this specific setting,’ and the district says, ‘We’re obligated to try these other things first,’ ” Pelletier said. “It’s a very frustrating process for families, and often for the staff of classrooms, too.”

Part of those legal obligations under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act involves educating students in the least-restrictive environment, which typically means a general education classroom whenever possible. According to Quick-Panwala, California data show that 60% of students with IEPs spend at least 80% of their school day in general education settings. Research has found that students with disabilities often perform better academically and socially when educated alongside nondisabled peers, she added. 

“And then vice versa, our nondisabled students are learning more about how to navigate many different diversities and intersections,” Quick-Panwala said. “We want to see our public schools embrace educating students with disabilities in general education classrooms, and providing them with the support and services they need there.”

Credit: Caly Luna Plowman

IEP services: denials, delays and attorney involvement

Quick-Panwala previously helped Bay Area families secure NPS placements through her work at the Community Alliance for Special Education. She said it’s “not uncommon to see denials or delays in getting the appropriate support and services,” adding that many Bay Area families seek legal help to obtain NPS placements. The high cost of tuition can contribute to district resistance, she said.

Sara Mohn is a parent who sought legal help to secure a NPS placement for her daughter through OUSD. Mohn’s daughter, Ila, now 18, has attended Star Academy in San Rafael since middle school. The school specializes in supporting students with learning disabilities such as severe dyslexia. Before that, Mohn and her husband paid about $25,000 a year to send Ila to a private elementary school without OUSD’s support. 

Around fourth grade, the family reconsidered a public school and asked OUSD to reevaluate Ila for the first time since she was 5 years old. Mohn said the new assessment showed significantly lower scores than her earlier evaluation, which raised concerns for the family. They eventually paid $6,500 for an independent evaluation and requested an NPS placement through the district.  

The process, Mohn said, was expensive, time-consuming and frustrating.

“I was on the other side of the table than the district,” Mohn said. “My kid wasn’t at the center of the decision-making.”

Mohn said families’ experiences often depend on the IEP team involved. She said she knows another Star Academy family whose placement process through OUSD was smooth because their team was thoughtful and supportive. 

Blake said she could not comment specifically on Mohn’s case, but noted that the “data-driven recommendations” made by IEP teams do not always align with what families want for their child. She added that the district offers an alternative dispute resolution facilitator to work with  families of students with IEPs.

According to Blake, the facilitator has helped resolve many disagreements without attorneys or formal legal action. This school year, the district received 38 requests for facilitation services. Of those, 19 were resolved without escalation, 12 remain in progress and only one advanced to a due process complaint, which typically results in a “resolution session” between the parents and the district, and sometimes even a formal hearing.

An NPS in Oakland

Two years ago, the Ansari family moved across the Bay to the Novato Unified School District so Atrina could live closer to her nonpublic school. Now her commute is no more than 45 minutes, one way, and Ansari said the change has significantly reduced stress on the family, “at least to not have a bridge between us.”

Ansari said opening a nonpublic school in Oakland could not only shorten students’ commutes but also help them build friendships and stronger community connections. Because many students travel from across Northern California to attend Bay Area NPS programs, she said, her children do not have close friendships with their classmates.

“A lot of times we don’t even know the other families,” Ansari said. “In public schools, the families end up being friends — they’re all going to after-school activities and going on vacation together … So having a school in the community would hopefully support that being able to meet after school or have more family engagement.”  

At Star Academy, Ila Mohn said she feels comfortable and safe. On a Friday afternoon in March, Ila and her mother sat in the living room of their Oakland home, each holding a fluffy cat as the sun set through the tall windows behind them. 

“Do you, at your school, feel like you have a sense of belonging there?” Mohn asked her daughter.

“It’s my house — it’s my home,” Ila replied before correcting herself. “No, well, here’s my home.”

“But it’s your home away from home,” her mother said.  Ila nodded, “Yeah.”

Related Reading

New bill proposes reforming special education by empowering California families

March 26, 2026

Special education experts urge California schools to invest in early education amid rising costs

March 27, 2026

Special education has become a flash point in negotiations with teachers

February 24, 2026

This story was originally published by EdSource.

28.8

million

Dollars spent by California public colleges and universities in the last year on record (2024-2025) on Canvas, the learning-management platform, owned by Instructure.

Service was restored after Instructure reached an agreement with the hacking group and reported that all the data was returned. But questions remain: Why was the learning platform that so many depend on vulnerable to attack? And, what does it say about California higher education’s dependence that the engine of education ground to a halt without Canvas? 

7.8

million

Cost to provide Canvas access across the 23 California State University campuses.

7

million

Cost to provide Canvas access across the 10 University of California campuses.

Officials at the California State University system told EdSource that the total 2024-25 cost to CSU campuses was $7.8 million; UC representatives reported that the cost for the University of California totaled a little less, $7 million, for the same fiscal year. The California Community Colleges system spends roughly $14 million annually on Canvas.

14

million

Cost to provide Canvas access across the 116 California Community College campuses.

With nearly 3 million students in combined enrollment, the cost to California to provide access to Canvas at its public colleges and universities is less than $10 per student. State officials have provided millions in supplemental funding to the colleges to adopt a common learning-management platform, with the idea that there would be cost savings. One resolution suggested savings from using Canvas could be used for professional development or investing in personnel.

But the recent hack has prompted questions about higher ed’s dependence on Canvas. CalMatters reported that state Sen. Melissa Hurtado, a Bakersfield Democrat, has called for a legislative audit into Canvas. “The Canvas breach exposes the growing risks of concentrating massive amounts of student records, academic systems and institutional operations into a single platform,” she said.  

This story was originally published by EdSource.

The timing could not be worse. Across the country, educators are reporting something troubling: Fewer students are showing up to class, and they’re carrying more fear when they do.

A fall 2025 survey from the EdWeek Research Center found that nearly half of educators surveyed say students have expressed increased fear or anxiety related to immigration enforcement. Twenty-four percent reported declines in attendance. Twenty-one percent said more students are seeking counseling support — just as districts implement budget cuts that reduce counselor positions. School counselors, already managing caseloads far beyond recommended ratios, are being asked to do more with less.

As education advocates have warned, this climate of fear continues to take its toll on students’ sense of safety and belonging nationwide. 

In California, state leaders have taken important steps to protect students, including strengthening safe-haven school policies intended to keep immigration enforcement off campus. These policies matter. They send a clear message about the values of the schools and rights of students.

But policy alone does not regulate a nervous system. It does not calm a student who spends the day at school worried about a peer, parent, family or community member. It does not automatically restore a sense of belonging.

 If students’ ability to show up to school and learn depends on whether they feel safe, then schools must invest in supports that operate inside the daily rhythms of school life aimed at restoring the safety students need to learn. We need to protect professional school counselors from budget cuts, and we need new models that can extend their reach when caseloads are overwhelming. 

One promising approach has been California’s peer-to-peer youth mental health pilot, implemented across eight high schools with funding from the state of California’s Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. As EdSource has reported, the peer-support program is showing early gains in student well-being and what can be done in times of tighter budgets.

The model is simple but powerful: Students are trained to serve as peer mentors and wellness ambassadors, operating school-based wellness centers and providing structured support to classmates throughout the day. Peer support is well-established as an evidence-based intervention in the adult mental health space. What is innovative about these models is the firm belief that teens, when supported by a network of caring adults, can provide culturally affirming support and connection.

At Serrano High School in San Bernardino County, one of the eight schools participating in the pilot program, students run the Diamondback Den, a wellness center that offers restorative circles, lunchtime activities and one-on-one peer support. A 12th-grade peer leader at Serrano described leading a bilingual circle for Spanish-speaking students: “They had a place where they could speak in their native tongue and have a good time.” For newcomer students, that kind of space can be more than stabilizing; it can be transformative.

At El Cerrito High School, one first-year student stated that the peer program “gave me more fun and experience in my first year of living in the United States and helped me adapt to life here faster.”

At Oakland Technical High School, a ninth grader applying to become a peer wellness mentor wrote, “I know what it feels like to be in pain, and I don’t want anyone else to go through it alone.” Multiple students there reported that they sought help at the wellness center specifically because it felt safer talking to another student first, before seeking assistance from an adult.

Peer support programs do not replace counselors or psychologists. They extend the ecosystem of care at a moment when that ecosystem is under strain. Schools in the pilot program report that peer counselors help address everyday challenges — conflict resolution, vaping prevention, attendance check-ins — allowing the limited number of school counselors to focus on students with more complex needs. They create entry points. They normalize help-seeking. And critically, they operate during the school day, on school campuses, lowering the threshold for students to ask for support.

Research tells us that when students feel safe and connected, attendance improves and academic outcomes follow. In a climate where often-violent immigration actions are shaping student behavior nationwide, peer-based models of care offer something that legal protections alone cannot: proximity, trust and immediacy.

California is testing what may be one answer to a national challenge. But sustaining and scaling these models will require continued investment. Programs like the peer-to-peer model are funded through the state’s Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, which will sunset this year, meaning schools could lose both counselors to budget cuts and peer programs to expired funding. As demand for counseling rises and school budgets tighten, peer programs cannot be treated as optional enrichment. They are part of the infrastructure of belonging.

We know what fear does to student attendance, learning and belonging. We know what helps: peer support that meets students where they are. 

California cannot let proven programs disappear at the moment students need them most. State leaders must act now to sustain and fund these models. 

Students are already building the structures that help them feel safe and welcome. We need policymakers to catch up.

•••

Raven Jones-McKinney is the director of peer-to-peer youth mental health at The Children’s Partnership.
The opinions expressed in this commentary represent those of the author.  

Related Reading

Students become lifeline for peers facing suspensions, mental health struggles 

February 10, 2026

PodcastWhen students counsel other students

February 24, 2022

Peer counseling gains popularity as California schools beef up student mental health services

February 18, 2022

This story was originally published by EdSource.

Choose a candidate and a question below to see a summary of their answers. Click on the bottom link to read their full, unedited responses.

This story was originally published by EdSource.