TEXTBOOK ADOPTION

Opportunity to Learn -- The Williams Settlement

Lack of textbooks and other instructional materials that reflect a state's current academic standards can be a factor in litigation charging a state or school system with failure to provide its students with the "opportunity to learn" the knowledge and skills for which they are being tested.

The Eliezer Williams, et al., vs. State of California, et al. (Williams) case was filed as a class action in 2000 in San Francisco County Superior Court. The plaintiffs include nearly 100 San Francisco County students, who filed suit against the State of California and state education agencies, including the California Department of Education (CDE). The basis of the lawsuit was that the agencies failed to provide public school students with equal access to instructional materials, safe and decent school facilities, and qualified teachers.

The case was settled in 2004, resulting in the state allocating $138 million in additional funding for standards-aligned instructional materials for schools in the first and second ranks (known as deciles) determined through the 2003 Academic Performance Index (API) Base. The settlement includes another $50 million for implementation costs and other oversight-related activities for schools in deciles one through three (2003 API Base). These two amounts were included in the state budget, signed in July 2004 by Governor Schwarzenegger. Another $800 million will be provided for critical repair of facilities in future years for schools in deciles one through three (2003 API Base). The settlement will be implemented through legislation adopted in August 2004: Senate Bill (SB) 6, SB 550, Assembly Bill (AB) 1550, AB 2727, AB 3001. Up to 2.3 million California public school students may benefit from funding from the Williams case settlement.

As a result of the Williams case, the CDE has proposed changes to the School Accountability Report Card (SARC) that all schools must update and publish annually. The proposed changes will help all schools report the overall condition of their facilities, the number of teacher misassignments and vacant teacher positions, and the availability of textbooks or instructional materials. The proposed changes were submitted to the State Board of Education, which approved the changes at its meeting on November 9, 2004. The new Williams-related reporting elements are being amended into the 2003-04 SARC template, which is expected to be released by December 15, 2004. More information is available at the SARC Web page.
From: http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/ce/wc/wmslawsuit.asp

Williams case info from CDE
     http://www.cde.ca.gov/eo/ce/wc/wmslawsuit.asp
ACLU website on Williams case
     http://www.decentschools.org/
CA County Superintendents Edu Service Asso (Williams implemenation updates)
     http://www.ccsesa.org/ccsesaAtWork/stories/storyReader$33
Williams Lawsuit Settlement
     http://wwwstatic.kern.org/gems/ccsesaAtWork/WilliamsOverview.pdf
     http://wwwstatic.kern.org/gems/ccsesaAtWork/WilliamsLegPackage.8.252.pdf

 

Williams Settlement Complaints Process

 

The Williams Settlement is designed to ensure all California public schools provide students with the basic resources they need to learn, including:

  • Every student, including English Learners, must have enough textbooks and materials to use in class and to take home.
  • Every school and classroom must be clean, safe, and in good condition.
  • Every student must have a well-trained teacher according to standards set by the state and federal government.

If basic resources are not provided, individuals can initiate the following complaints process. The complainant:

  1. Receives and reviews the complaint procedures from the from the local educational agency (LEA). LEAs are also known as school districts.
  2. Files a written complaint by following the steps described by the LEA complaint procedures.
  3. Provides the LEA investigator with documents and other evidence related to the allegations in the complaint.
  4. Files a written appeal within 15 days to the California Department of Education (CDE) for resolution if he or she finds the decision of the LEA is incorrect.
  5. Specifies in the appeal, the reason for the appeal to CDE and why the LEA facts are incorrect and/or the law is misapplied. The appeal packet shall contain a copy of the original complaint to the LEA and a copy of the LEA decision.
  6. Requests a reconsideration within 35 days to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) if he or she finds the determination of the CDE’s finding of facts are incorrect or the law is misapplied.