Why You Should Oppose AB 318

AB 318 by Assemblywoman Caballero is a measure that we should all oppose.  It is a legislative effort to apply a one-size fits all approach to Independent Study programs across the state.  The measure will be heard in the Senate Education Committee next Wednesday.  Please weigh in with Ms. Caballero and the Senate Education Committee members and let them know that you oppose this bill (View).

  • AB 318 would negatively impact California’s independent study programs by mandating that a teacher meet with each student once per week- either in person or by live visual means.
  • The weekly student/teacher face-to-face meetings would need to be documented and can only be excused with a good cause documented by an administrative process.
  • The bill increases the teacher role with the role of Child Protective Services.
  • This would create a ‘one-size’ fits all approach to all independent study programs.
  • This also would negatively impact schools by placing these extra requirements on teachers and the administration without taking into account the diversity of the students that they serve. This extra burden would increase because the bill would deny schools ADA for not complying with its provisions.
  • The bill treats all students the same without taking into account their educational needs and living circumstances. Some students may be traveling, competing, have medical issues, mental health/emotional challenges, or have jobs that prevent them from a face to face ‘check in’ every week during school hours.
  • This bill would take teachers away from on-campus classes, electives, science labs and remedial support by requiring the weekly face-to-face meetings with their entire roster. Adding more teachers to maintain the current robust program increases program costs.
  • This bill impacts rural teachers who travel distances to meet with students. Programs may need to add more teachers to cover the mileage each week. (Increased program costs)
  • The bill does include an exemption, that the principal can grant on an individual basis, but that is problematic because it would increase the principals’ workload as they monitor each student’s situation and progress in an effort to grant the exemption.
  • This bill causes more audit issues within Independent Study.

If you have any specific questions, please feel free to contact any of the CCIS board members.

AB 318 Update

July 5, 2017: The bill got out of Senate Education today 4-2 with two amendments. Though they are not in print, here’s my understanding of what they are:

  1. Changing the ‘in person’ check in from once a week to once every other week. (*This doesn’t matter to us- this is still a new requirement that is mandated and does not fit all programs and will add to audit issues)
  2. Protecting the school district, schools, and teacher from any liability if they do not check in or miss the check in somehow. ( *Not sure how this will protect anyone if something actually happens to a child)

Now the bill will be headed to the Senate Appropriations Committee where they will ‘work’ up a cost for the implementation of the bill. It should be heard in a few weeks. As you know, if the bill costs over a certain amount it will go on the Suspense File in Appropriations.

What we need to do now is figure out a cost number to implement the provisions of the bill, because of the high costs Appropriations can hold it in committee. Its so sad when our lawmakers don’t take the time to understand an educational option that has been in place for over 40 years, yet they want to step in and mandate how it operates.

We urge you to share your opposition of this bill and the negative impact it would have on your program with the people listed. You may review a sample letter here.

Author:
Assemblywoman Anna Caballero
State Capitol, Room 5158
Sacramento, CA 95814
phone: (916) 319-2030
fax: (916) 319-2130
email: assemblymember.caballero@assembly.ca.gov

Here are the members of the Senate Education Committee:

Senator Ben Allen, Chair
State Capitol, Room 5072
phone: (916) 651-4026
fax: (916) 651-4926
senator.allen@senate.ca.gov

Senator Cathleen Galgiani
State Capitol, Room 5097
phone: (916) 651-4005
fax: (916) 651-4905
senator.galgiani@senate.ca.gov

Senator Connie Leyva
State Capitol, Room 4061
phone: (916) 651-4020
fax: (916) 651-4920
senator.leyva@senate.ca.gov

Senator Tony Mendoza
State Capitol, Room 5100
phone: (916) 651-4032
fax: (916) 651-4932
senator.mendoza@senate.ca.gov

Senator Richard Pan
State Capitol, Room 5114
phone: (916) 651-4006
fax: (916) 651-4906
senator.pan@senate.ca.gov

Senator Andy Vidak
State Capitol, Room 3082
phone: (916) 651-4014
fax: (916) 651-4914
senator.vidak@senate.ca.gov

Senator Scott Wilk
State Capitol, Room 4090
phone: (916) 651-4021
fax: (916) 651-4921
senator.wilk@senate.ca.gov

19 Comments

  1. Gary Takahashi

    I oppose bill AB318! This is an unnecessary bill, an unnecessary increase of bureaucracy, and another unnecessary use of financial resources.

    Please persuade other Senators to reject this bill.

    Reply
  2. SMJ

    It would be great if this organization created an online opposition and gathered signatures, etc.

    Reply
  3. Angelic

    I oppose bill AB318 as it would implement unnecessary procedures that would only take away from limited financial resources that we already have.

    Reply
  4. Tai

    I oppose bill AB318 because it puts unnecessary burdens on teachers and students and takes away individual learning freedoms!!!

    Reply
  5. Jody Graf, Ed.D.

    On June 27, 2017 the Senate Education Committee met to discuss AB 318. The Monterey USD superintendent made an appearance and spoke to the bill. Branche Jones and Jeff Rice provided the opposition to the bill and were able to underscore the liability on a school or district if a meeting is missed, if a waiver is in place and something happens. Education Committee Chair, Senator Benjamin Allen (a former school board member) was interested in the liability issue, he saw how this could easily become a bigger issue. He held the bill over for a vote only hearing for next Wednesday, July 5th, to see if the author and Allen’s staff could create a workable solution.

    The bill was amended to add section 51747, which means that it would now apply to all independent study students.

    The next update on this bill will be following the July 5th hearing and vote, unless I receive other news in the meantime. I think it is a good thing that we didn’t have a vote – still room to consider amendments.

    Reply
  6. Belinda

    I oppose bill AB318 as it puts unnecessary financial use of educational funds and unnecessary burdens on teachers and students.

    Reply
  7. Diana McLaughlin

    I oppose bill AB318 as it puts unnecessasry burdens on the teachers, parents, and the students. Each child learns at their own pace and cannot be lumped into 1 category of learning. This bill is a complete downward spiral for our education system.

    Reply
    • M

      I agree with your opposition, the missing component is the fact that the system of education in this country is already broken. More legislation in either direction is simply a bandaid approach.

      Reply
  8. Linda F. Palmer

    I oppose this bill because I have not seen any studies showing detrimental consequences to independent study students under the current structure. There appears to be no need to micro-manage student and parental efforts. It is a waste of valuable education resources and does not take into account any special circumstances for any child or family; and “special circumstances” are often the reason that independent study is chosen or required in the first place.

    Reply
  9. Machele

    I understand that at first glance, to our legislators who do not understand Independent Study or the students we serve, this bill looks simple. They ask ‘what is so hard about meeting with a student face to face one time a week?’ That is the heart string of this bill, not the facts about this bill. This bill will decimate most of the quality independent study programs that offer weekly classes, electives, labs, remediation, quality home visits that allow for deeper academic support, etc.. Teachers will be pulled away from all of those activities in order to have a physical meeting each week for 30 min. to check off this new audit requirement. This bill requires schools to hire more staff just to continue to offer the good programs they currently offer. Who can afford that? And if a teacher thought a 30-minute meeting is what a student needed to be successful in the program, they can already require that. This bill devalues all of the ‘social’ events that are usually the bigger concern for people who don’t understand independent study.

    Reply
  10. Britny

    Does this apply to traditional homeschool? Or just independent study through charters and public school?

    Reply
    • Lesley Clifton

      This would apply to public school independent study programs.

      Reply
  11. Marina

    I am a homeschool mother of four children and I oppose the bill. If this bill is passed, I will pull my children out of a charter school and homeschool without the assistance of the charter. I’ve done it before and I’ll do it again. Yes, I would have less support both academically and financially but at least I wouldn’t have to be burdened by all this absurd nonsense. My children are involved with lots of academics and sporting events so this bill would be difficult to meet. My weekly agenda is busy with homeschooling and activities for my kids and I just do not have that time-luxury to meet weekly with our teacher. My children are thriving as is, so it is my sincere hope that this does not pass.

    Reply
    • Pam

      100 percent agree with your perspective… asa fellow homeschooling mom. Sigh. God help us.

      Reply
  12. Dorothee Ledbetter

    This bill originated with cases of child abuse and death in Monterey county, and its intent is to insure the safety of students, rather than assess their academic progress. This intent could be satisfied without weekly in-person contact and any academic standard-setting, and is already mandated by state law (CANRA, the Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act). All teachers are well aware that they are mandated reporters.

    It would be interesting to compare whether cases of child abuse occur more or less frequent in independent study programs. My guess would be: Less. Note to senators: Don’t let a few unusual incidents make life hard or impossible for the vast majority of us who hum along nicely, benefit students with all kinds of learning modalities, and help the school system develop educational models for individualized, interest-based learning according to the CA Ed Code: 58500. The governing board of any school district may establish and maintain one or more alternative schools within the district.

    For the purposes of this article, an alternative school is defined as a school or separate class group within a school which is operated in a manner designed to:

    (a) Maximize the opportunity for students to develop the positive values of self-reliance, initiative, kindness, spontaneity, resourcefulness, courage, creativity, responsibility, and joy.

    (b) Recognize that the best learning takes place when the student learns because of his desire to learn.

    (c) Maintain a learning situation maximizing student self-motivation and encouraging the student in his own time to follow his own interests. These interests may be conceived by him totally and independently or may result in whole or in part from a presentation by his teachers of choices of learning projects.

    (d) Maximize the opportunity for teachers, parents and students to cooperatively develop the learning process and its subject matter. This opportunity shall be a continuous, permanent process.

    (e) Maximize the opportunity for the students, teachers, and parents to continuously react to the changing world, including but not limited to the community in which the school is located.

    58507. Alternative schools shall be operated in a manner to maximize the opportunity for improvement of the general school curriculum by innovative methods and ideas developed within the alternative school operation and to improve the general level of education in the State of California as provided in Section 58510. …

    58510. Each district operating an alternative school shall annually evaluate such school. …

    Reply
  13. Lesley Clifton

    AB 318 Update

    Our CCIS advocate talked to the Senate Education staff on Friday afternoon and went back and forth around language protecting the teachers/school from liability. It doesn’t look like we are going to get any help from the Chair so we are continuing to pursue no votes from some of the committee’s Democratic members. Our advocate told them we will stay opposed and fight the bill. We will also need to get ready to fight the bill in Senate Appropriations if it gets out of Education. It will be up for vote only on Wednesday.

    We need your help!

    If you have not sent a letter opposing AB 318, please do so today! We have a sample letter here. If you have any questions, please reach out to a CCIS Executive Board member.

    Thank you for helping CCIS oppose AB 318.
    Lesley Clifton, CCIS Executive Director

    Reply
  14. Lara

    It is time to limit the governments’ micro managing ways! I strongly oppose this bill. The school system in this country is broken, failing its’ students at every turn. Charter schools are a refuge for parents who want to take control of their children’s education. Not every child can adequately learn in a traditional school setting. Charter schools, with their independent learning options, open the door to a better and well rounded education. Weekely meetings would impede this learning process, taking time away from what is important, the students’ education. Support charter schools and the incredible learning opportunities they provide, examine the tremendous success achieved by students at charter schools. Lawmakers, I beseech you, advocate for your constituents who will be negatively affected by this bill.

    Reply
  15. Mkilgore

    AB318 UPDATE
    The bill got out of Senate Education today 4-2 with two amendments. Though they are not in print, here’s my understanding of what they are:

    1. Changing the ‘in person’ check in from once a week to once every other week. (*This doesn’t matter to us- this is still a new requirement that is mandated and does not fit all programs and will add to audit issues)

    2. Protecting the school district, schools, and teacher from any liability if they do not check in or miss the check in somehow. ( *Not sure how this will protect anyone if something actually happens to a child)

    Now the bill will be headed to the Senate Appropriations Committee where they will ‘work’ up a cost for the implementation of the bill. It should be heard in a few weeks. As you know, if the bill costs over a certain amount it will go on the Suspense File in Appropriations.

    What we need to do now is figure out a cost number to implement the provisions of the bill, because of the high costs Appropriations can hold it in committee. Its so sad when our lawmakers don’t take the time to understand an educational option that has been in place for over 40 years, yet they want to step in and mandate how it operates.

    Reply
  16. Machele Kilgore

    Your voice is needed! Please speak out against the fiscal impact of AB318

    AB 318 is in Senate Appropriations. It will have to get out of that committee by September 1st. The legislature reconvenes from break on August 21st and Appropriations should have a hearing that day. They will also have a hearing the following Monday and then a Suspense File hearing probably that Thursday. The Suspense File hearing is for all measures before the committee that essentially spend money. They get a regular hearing (which the author may waive) and then they get a Suspense File hearing. The high cost analysis of AB 318 may be enough to get it suspended!

    We need YOU!

    AB 318 will have a huge financial impact at the school site levels and we need for you to emphasize your concern about that. Please email the names below with your concerns about the increased fiscal impacts to our sites. AB 318 will require many schools to hire more teachers to cover the requirements of the bill (with no increased ADA), it will cause increased mileage to meet with students on a weekly basis, increased technology needed to cover face to face visual meetings for staff and families, increased number of teacher hours and administrative hours for the paperwork and the documentation required weekly for each student, we need to consider the costs of training required to inform staff of the changes in legislation this will cause and also to train staff on how to spot the issues they will now be more liable to identify, and this will also impact of the time and costs issues of the audits. These are just a few of the biggest financial increases to our school sites if AB318 is passed.

    Please select any or all of the above concerns to write about. Be specific if you can about your program concerns.

    Here is the committee contact information. Lenin Del Castillo (lenin.delcastillo@sen.ca.gov) is the Democratic consultant and Cheryl Black (cheryl.black@sen.ca.gov) is the Republican consultant.

    Your immediate response is greatly appreciated.

    Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You May Also Like