Article 1.5 - Effective Educational Programs and Practices

California Education Code — §§ 33320-33328.5

Sections (11)

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

(a)The purpose of this article is to identify, develop, validate, and disseminate effective educational programs and practices operated by state and local educational entities, in order to improve the educational services provided through public elementary and secondary schools to persons between 3 and 21 years of age.

(b)It is the intent of the Legislature that any state funding under this article not supplant any educational program funding that would otherwise be allocated to any school district, county office of education, or public postsecondary education institution.

§ 33321

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall establish procedures within the State Department of Education to accomplish all of the following:

(a)Annually identify the critical needs for which effective educational programs and practices are to be identified, developed, and disseminated to public schools.

(b)Coordinate the identification and development of effective programs and practices with appropriate offices in the State Department of Education, schools, school districts, county offices of education, institutions of higher education, the Legislature, business and industry, and the community.

(c)Ensure that all programs developed under this article are objectively evaluated for impact on pupil learning, cost effectiveness, and the overall instructional program.

(d)Develop and implement procedures to ensure that educators throughout the state are made aware of the effective programs and practices identified under this article.

(e)Periodically prepare and report information about project results to the Legislative Analyst.

(f)Identify and coordinate appropriate federal and private funding to support the development and dissemination of projects and programs identified under this article.

(g)Establish, where appropriate, project partnerships with other public and private agencies, including business and industry, for the purposes of this article.

§ 33321.5

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

In performing the responsibilities set forth in Section 33321, the Superintendent of Public Instruction shall consult with high school and elementary school teachers, high school and junior high school principals, school district administrators, members of school district governing boards, county superintendents of schools and other county office of education administrators, and representatives of public postsecondary educational institutions, the California State Facilitator Project of the National Diffusion Network, and business and industry.

§ 33322

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

The State Board of Education may authorize the funding of any proposal of a school district, county office of education, public postsecondary educational institution, or other public educational agency for the development of an educational program, where the board determines that the proposal does all of the following:

(a)Provides an effective, cost-effective solution to a current or anticipated statewide educational need in public elementary or secondary schools.

(b)Demonstrates that teachers, and experts in the subject matter of the proposal, collaborated in the development of the proposal.

(c)Contains a professional development component that maximizes teacher commitment and integration of the program into the existing instructional program.

(d)Contains a method of evaluating resulting changes in teaching, pupil performance, and the instructional program, as appropriate.

(e)Provides for development and evaluation of the proposal in collaboration with postsecondary educational institutions and other educational agency resources.

§ 33323

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

The State Board of Education, upon review of the recommendation of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, shall validate, as an exemplary educational project, each project developed by the State Department of Education, a school district, county office of education, or public postsecondary educational institution that it determines to meet the following criteria, whether or not the project was developed pursuant to state funding provided under Section 33322:

(a)The project accomplishes the objectives set forth in Section 33322.

(b)The project contains a plan for the statewide dissemination of the program, to be coordinated with state, regional, and school district staff and program service providers, including, but not limited to, postsecondary educational institutions.

(c)Without any increase in state costs, the project may be adopted by other school districts or county offices of education, as appropriate, with a reasonable probability of accomplishing the objectives realized in the original educational setting.

§ 33324

Amended by Stats. 1989, Ch. 1360, Sec. 20.

(a)The State Department of Education shall annually disseminate to each school district, county office of education, resource agency or consortium as described in Article 2 (commencing with Section 44680) of Chapter 3.1 of Part 25, and other public educational entity, as appropriate, information regarding effective educational projects and programs developed and validated pursuant to this article, in addition to projects included in the National Diffusion Network.

(b)The California State Facilitator Project, county offices of education, and other regional educational agencies are encouraged to assist in the dissemination of information regarding effective educational programs.

(c)The State Board of Education, upon review of the recommendation of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, may authorize funds for any proposal of a school district or county office of education for the adoption of an effective educational project, in an amount not exceeding the initial start-up costs of the project, where the board determines that the proposal does all of the following:

(1)Establishes a local need for the adoption or adaptation of the project.

(2)Contains a plan that evidences the commitment of resources necessary to implement the adoption of the project and that coordinates the project with existing educational programs. In the case of a school, that plan should be articulated with the school district plan.

(3)Contains a method of evaluating resulting changes in teaching, pupil performance, and the instructional program.

(4)Has been validated pursuant to Section 33323.

(d)The Superintendent of Public Instruction may assist in the implementation of projects adopted pursuant to subdivision (b), either by the department or pursuant to Section 33326.

§ 33325

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

All proposals submitted to the State Board of Education for funding pursuant to Section 33322 or 33324, or for validation pursuant to Section 33323, shall be evaluated by the State Department of Education, in consultation with school districts, county offices of education, and other appropriate public and private nonprofit educational agencies. Based on those evaluations, the department shall submit its recommendations to the board concerning the funding or, as appropriate, the validation of each proposal.

§ 33326

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

The State Board of Education, upon review of the recommendation of the Superintendent of Public Instruction, may authorize funding for any proposal of a county office of education, postsecondary educational institution, consortium of local educational agencies, the National Diffusion Network State Facilitator, the State Department of Education, or other appropriate educational entity to provide assistance, pursuant to this article, in the development, implementation, evaluation, dissemination, or adoption of an exemplary educational project. This assistance may include, but is not limited to, the implementation of professional development activities and the coordination of services with other educational agencies, programs, resources, and professional development providers.

§ 33327

Added by Stats. 1988, Ch. 1636, Sec. 1.5.

(a)The State Department of Education, in performing the identification, development, evaluation, dissemination, or adoption of projects and practices under any state or federal categorical education program, shall perform those functions in accordance with the procedure set forth in this article, as feasible and to the extent authorized by law.

(b)To the extent authorized by law, the department shall apply the funding made available under each of those categorical education programs for the functions described in subdivision (a) to the costs of performing those functions in the manner directed by that subdivision.

§ 33328

Added by Stats. 1999, Ch. 1009, Sec. 1. Effective October 10, 1999.

(a)It is the intent of the Legislature to evaluate the effectiveness of programs developed for English learners subsequent to Proposition 227 in order to ensure that only programs successful in teaching pupils English and allowing them to meet content standards are adopted by districts. After the results of the evaluation and the dissemination of accurate information on effective programs, a foundation will exist upon which to hold school districts accountable for the program choices made and the subsequent results. It is also the intent of the Legislature that the evaluation identify any necessary changes in law to promote programs that can document success and to allow those programs to continue or expand.

(b)The Superintendent of Public Instruction, in consultation with the State Board of Education, shall convene a working group for the purpose of selecting a contractor, on a competitive basis, to conduct an independent evaluation of the effects of the implementation of Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 300) of Part 1 (Proposition 227) on the education of pupils attending kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in California public schools. The working group shall be comprised of representatives of the Governor, the Superintendent of Public Instruction, the State Board of Education, the Assembly Committee on Education, the Senate Committee on Education, the Assembly Committee on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, and other interested parties selected by the working group. The evaluation shall be rigorous and shall consider the long-term effects of programs upon pupils. The evaluation shall consider supplemental instruction programs for English learners in grades 4 to 8, inclusive, established pursuant to the English Language Acquisition Program (Ch. 4 (commencing with Sec. 400) Pt. 1) enacted pursuant to Chapter 71 of the Statutes of 1999. The contract shall provide for two interim reports and one final report.

(c)(1) The first interim report shall set benchmarks, survey program methods, and select samples for long-term study. The first interim report shall include, but shall not be limited to, samples regarding rural, suburban, and urban, school districts and programs in which any of the following conditions exist:

(A) Pupils have obtained waivers and are receiving a portion of their instruction in their primary language.

(B) Pupils are in structured or sheltered English immersion.

(C) Pupils who are English learners are placed in an English language mainstream classroom and are receiving no special services.

(2)The second interim report shall present comparisons of student performance, shall analyze the preliminary effects of Proposition 227 and shall make preliminary findings and recommendations regarding how a school district may modify its implementation of Proposition 227 to improve pupils’ academic achievement and acquisition of the English language.

(3)The interim reports shall also contain preliminary findings and recommendations, if any, regarding modifications and revisions to Proposition 227 that are necessary to facilitate implementation in a way that will maximize academic achievement and the acquisition of the English language.

(4)The first interim report shall be delivered to the Governor and the Legislature on or before October 1, 2000. The second interim report shall be delivered to the Governor and the Legislature on or before May 17, 2002.

(d)The final report shall present results from sample programs that detail achievement data and do all of the following:

(1)Identify programs that are effective in teaching pupils the English language.

(2)Identify curriculums for limited-English-speaking pupils that are effective in enabling these pupils to meet state and district standards.

(3)Compare program benefits, and detail any unintended consequences.

(4)Identify programs, if any, that are not effective in teaching pupils the English language.

(5)Identify curriculums, if any, for limited-English-speaking pupils that are not effective in enabling these pupils to meet state and district standards.

(e)The final report shall be delivered to the Governor and the Legislature on or before October 1, 2005.

(f)This section shall be implemented only if funds are appropriated for the purposes of this section.

§ 33328.5

Amended by Stats. 2025, Ch. 67, Sec. 46. (AB 1170) Effective January 1, 2026. Repealed as of January 1, 2031, by its own provisions.

(a)For purposes of this section, the following definitions apply:

(1)“Artificial intelligence” means an engineered or machine-based system that varies in its level of autonomy and that can, for explicit or implicit objectives, infer, from the input it receives, how to generate outputs that can influence physical or virtual environments.

(2)“Educator” means a certificated or classified employee of a local educational agency or charter school.

(3)“Local educational agency” means a school district or county office of education.

(b)The Superintendent shall convene a

working group for all of the following purposes:

(1)Developing guidance on the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not harm, pupils and educators.

(2)Developing a model policy, reflecting available research, for local educational agencies and charter schools regarding the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not negatively impact, educational quality, pupil critical thinking and writing skills, creativity, and the essential work of educators.

(3)Identifying other ways in which the state can support educators in developing and sharing effective practices involving artificial intelligence that minimize risk and maximize benefits to pupils and educators.

(c)(1) The working group shall include all of the following:

(A) Current, credentialed public school teachers serving in elementary and secondary teaching positions.

(B) Classified public school staff.

(D) School district or county office of education administrators.

(E) University and community college faculty, including academics with expertise in artificial intelligence and its uses in education.

(F) Representatives of private sector business or industry, with expertise in artificial intelligence and its uses in education.

(G) Pupils enrolled in public school.

(2)At least one-half of the working group shall be composed of current, credentialed public school teachers serving in elementary and secondary teaching positions with knowledge of the use of artificial intelligence in education.

(d)The working group shall do all of the following:

(1)(A) Assess the current and future state of artificial intelligence use in education, including both of the following:

(i)The current state of artificial intelligence used by local educational agencies and charter schools, including all of the following:

(I) Technologies most commonly in use.

(II) The typical cost of those technologies.

(III) The ownership structure of those technologies.

(IV) The ownership structure of pupil- and employee-created materials.

(V) The licensing agreements for those technologies.

(VI) The ability to access source code for those technologies.

(VII) The degree to which educators were involved in the decision to use artificial intelligence.

(VIII) Artificial intelligence as a topic of instruction in developing class content.

(ii) Anticipated and potential

developments in artificial intelligence technology in education.

(B) (i) Conduct at least three public meetings to incorporate feedback from pupils, families, and relevant stakeholders into the assessment required by subparagraph (A).

(ii) Public meetings held pursuant to clause (i) may be held by teleconference, pursuant to the procedures required by Section 11123 of the Government Code, for the benefit of the public and the working group.

(2)(A) Detail current uses of artificial intelligence in education settings including through the identification of all of the following:

(i)Examples of human-centered artificial intelligence that aid, further, and improve teaching and learning, including in ways that do

not exacerbate existing inequities, and the work of educators.

(ii) Examples of human replacement artificial intelligence that could negatively impact pupil development, jeopardize pupil data security, or risk the jobs of educators.

(iii) Examples of strategies to ensure that there are opportunities for stakeholders to offer meaningful feedback before any given form of artificial intelligence is introduced to pupils or educators.

(B) In performing the work required by this subdivision, the working group shall solicit input from educators and pupils on their experience using the technologies identified in subparagraph (A).

(3)On or before January 1, 2026, develop guidance for local educational agencies and charter schools on the safe use of artificial

intelligence in education that addresses all of the following:

(A)Academic integrity and plagiarism.

(B)Acceptable and unacceptable uses of artificial intelligence for pupils and educators.

(C)Pupil and educator data privacy and data security.

(D)Parent and guardian access to information that pupils enter into artificial intelligence systems.

(E)Procurement of software that ensures the safety and privacy of pupils and educators, and the protection of their data.

(4)On or before July 1, 2026, develop a model policy for local educational agencies and charter schools regarding the safe and effective use of artificial

intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not negatively impact, pupils and educators. This policy shall include all of the following topics:

(A)Academic integrity and plagiarism.

(B)Acceptable and unacceptable uses of artificial intelligence for pupils and educators.

(C)Pupil and educator data privacy and data security.

(D)Parent and guardian access to pupil information.

(E)Procurement of software that ensures the safety and privacy of pupils and educators and their data.

(F)Effective use of artificial intelligence to support, and avoid risk to, teaching and learning.

(G)Effective practices to support, and avoid risk to, educators and pupils.

(H)Strategies to ensure that artificial intelligence does not exacerbate existing inequities in the education system.

(I)Professional development strategies for educators on the use of artificial intelligence.

(5)Identify other ways in which the state can support educators in developing and sharing effective practices that minimize risk and maximize benefits to pupils and educators, including, but not limited to, establishing communities of practice on the use of artificial intelligence in education.

(6)On or before January 1, 2027, submit a report to the appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature, in compliance with Section 9795 of the

Government Code, presenting the assessment required by paragraph (1) and any findings or recommendations related to the assessment.

(e)The department shall post on its internet website the guidance developed pursuant to paragraph (3) of subdivision (d) and the model policy for local educational agencies and charter schools developed pursuant to paragraph (4) of subdivision (d).

(f)The working group shall be subject to the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act (Article 9 (commencing with Section 11120) of Chapter 1 of Part 1 of Division 3 of Title 2 of the Government Code).

(g)The working group shall be dissolved upon submission of the report required by paragraph (6) of subdivision (d) to the Legislature.

(h)This section shall remain in

effect only until January 1, 2031, and as of that date is repealed.