To browse all LAO publications, visit our Publications page.
January 17, 2006 - In adopting the Master Plan for Higher Education, the Legislature envisioned an efficient process for students to transfer from community college to the University of California (UC) and the California State University (CSU). Thus, the plan calls for UC and CSU to accept all qualified community college students into their respective systems. This report reviews current transfer admission policies and identifies institutional barriers that can make the transfer process difficult for qualified students. We conclude that the current process lacks the systemwide standardization envisioned in the Master Plan, and recommend steps to make the transfer process more efficient and effective for students.
December 9, 2005 - Is Community College Enrollment Funding Keeping Pace With Demand? (revised December 2005) This is one of a series of issue briefs examining important questions about higher education funding in California. For more information on this topic, or to request other briefs from this series, contact the Legislative Analyst’s Office Higher Education section at (916) 319-8339, or visit our website at www.lao.ca.gov.
November 10, 2005 - Presented to the Community College Student Fee Policy Working Group.
September 15, 2005 - Presented to the Assembly Education Committee and Senate Education Committee.
June 30, 2005 - Where does the funding for higher education come from? How are costs divided among various groups (such as undergraduate and graduate students)? What role do student fees play? How is financial aid funded? How does the state decide how many students to fund in a given year? The purpose of this primer is to address these and other questions related to the funding of higher education in California, so as to aid policymakers and other interested parties in their deliberations and decision making.
May 18, 2005 - Presented to the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on May 18, 2005.
May 18, 2005 - Presented to the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on May 18, 2005.
May 17, 2005 - Presented to the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on May 17, 2005.
May 16, 2005 - Presented to the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on May 16, 2005.
May 9, 2005 -
This paper summarizes our recent report on the success and shortcomings of high schools in California. High school represents a critical phase in the educational
development of K-12 students. Our report examines high schools through the lens
of three groups of high school students.
Our Findings
Dropouts (Students Who Fail to Graduate).
About 30 percent of the entering ninth grade class fails to graduate on time.
Research and data suggest that the factors leading to student dropouts are in
place by the time students enter ninth grade. Despite decades of trying,
research has not identified programs or services that consistently reduce
dropout rates.
The "General" Track (Students Who Graduate Without
Qualifying for a Four-Year University). This includes about 45 percent
of entering ninth grade students. About one-half of this group attends college
after graduation and the other one-half enters the labor force. Research and
data indicate that many in this group do not have clear postgraduation goals,
which prevents these students from using
high school most effectively to make a smoother transition to adult life.
The "University" Track (Students Who Graduate and
Qualify for Admission to the State’s Public Four-Year Universities).
These students account for about one-quarter of entering ninth grade
students. Entering college freshmen frequently lack the English or mathematics
skills required for study at the university level. Higher education admissions
and placement policies contribute to the problem, as they fail to clearly
communicate the skill levels needed for success in college.
Our Recommendations
Despite considerable differences in the problems facing
these groups, several themes emerge in our recommendations that are consistent
across the groups. Our recommendations address the problems experienced by high
school students by strengthening accountability, improving information, and
increasing flexibility.
Accountability
We recommend the Legislature "fine
tune" accountability programs by:
Information
We also suggest several ways the
Legislature could employ information to help make high schools more responsive
to student needs by:
Flexibility
Flexibility also is a theme of our
report. Improvements could be made by:
The Bottom Line
While many critical factors are outside of the state’s
control, we think our recommendations provide a strategic approach for how the
state can contribute to improving high schools.
May 6, 2005 - California City School Superintendents 2004-05 Executive Board Meeting. Budget implications for K-12 education in the coming year.
May 2, 2005 - Presented to the Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on May 2, 2005.
April 28, 2005 - Presented to: Senate Budget Committee No. 3 on Health and Human Services
April 25, 2005 - Presented to Senate Budget and Fiscal Review Subcommittee No. 1 on Education
April 21, 2005 - Presented to the Sacramento Economics Roundtable on April 21, 2005.