Section 33328 Of Article 1.5. Effective Educational Programs And Practices From California Education Code >> Division 2. >> Title 2. >> Part 20. >> Chapter 3. >> Article 1.5.

. (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.