Donate
PPIC Logo Independent, objective, nonpartisan research

Search Results

Filters Sort by:
blog post

Learning Recovery Is Uneven for Urban and Rural School Districts

By Saayili Budhiraja, Thomas Pearson, Emmanuel Prunty, Niu Gao

Half of California's K–12 students are enrolled in urban or rural districts. Compared to the rest of the state, these districts have seen a slower pace of recovery from pandemic learning loss.

Report

Upgrading Technology Infrastructure in California’s Schools

By Patrick Murphy, Niu Gao

As California schools move into online testing and online learning, an adequate technology infrastructure is no longer an option, but a necessity. To fully benefit from digital learning, schools will require a comprehensive technology infrastructure that can support a range of administrative and instructional tools. An earlier PPIC report found that most schools need significant technology upgrades in order to accommodate online learning. What upgrades do schools need most, and how much will they cost? How can policymakers help ensure that all students have access to 21st-century learning tools?

This report describes findings based on new statewide data. First, schools need high-density wireless networks, increased bandwidth, and overall network infrastructure upgrades. The challenges are greater in large schools, mostly because of the high cost of wireless networks for large groups of users. Second, IT staffing continues to be an issue in most schools. Only a third of schools have staff onsite to support desktop and local network configuration.

To estimate the costs of upgrading technology infrastructure, we created two scenarios. Our baseline scenario—which includes minimum bandwidth for digital learning, one device for every two middle- and high-school students, and one IT staffer for every 300 computing devices—would cost an additional $1.5 billion over the next three years. Our target scenario—which involves additional bandwidth and one device to every middle- and high-school student—would cost significantly more: $3.8 billion. In either scenario, staffing costs are more than 60 percent of the total.

As the state explores ways to address these ongoing technology needs, we offer several recommendations. First, continue and maintain sustained funding for technology investment, particularly for staffing. Second, provide targeted technical assistance to address severe staffing problems. Third, to ensure that all students have full access to digital learning, take advantage of federal funding and explore innovative partnerships with private sector to cover the cost of home broadband access for students from lower-income families.

Report

The Impact of COVID-19 on Science Education

By Niu Gao, Kathy DiRanna, Maria T. Chang Fay

COVID-19 school shutdowns were especially disruptive for science education, which has long been a lower priority than math and English language arts. But as California schools recover from the pandemic, state policymakers can take steps to promote equitable investments in science literacy.

blog post

What’s in Store for California’s Economy?

By Sarah Bohn

California starts the year with low unemployment, rising wages, and falling inflation—but also with residents expressing pessimism about the state's economic outlook. We look at what's ahead for the California economy.

Report

Measuring Institutional Costs at California’s Public Universities

By Patrick Murphy, Kevin Cook, Talib Jabbar

California has recently increased its investment in higher education after many years of reducing state support. At the same time, the state’s four-year public systems, the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU), are currently poised to raise tuition for the first time in several years. If the past is any indication, intense discussions lie ahead about the need for additional higher education resources.

We offer a constructive starting point for those discussions by introducing a straightforward and objective assessment of institutional costs. We rely on a measure that connects institutional costs to the number of degrees UC and CSU produce. This measure provides a clear understanding of trends in California’s institutional costs and allows comparisons with colleges and universities in other states. It also offers higher education institutions the opportunity to demonstrate progress toward their goals in an accessible, transparent way.

Applying this measure to California’s public four-year institutions, we find that:

  • Institutional costs per degree across UC and CSU fell significantly—17 percent—from 1987 to 2013. This is an important savings in a state that will need to amp up its number of college graduates to meet future economic demand.
  • At UC, the cost per degree fell 6 percent over the period—from $116,000 to $109,000. UC’s institutional costs in 2013 were lower than a comparison group that included both public and private institutions across the nation. But UC’s costs were higher than a national comparison group of public schools only.
  • At CSU, the cost fell 33 percent—from $67,000 to $45,000. CSU’s 2013 costs were lower than both types of comparison groups—one that included public schools only and one that included both public and private institutions.

We recommend that policymakers and higher education leaders use the cost per degree measure as a way to frame higher education finance discussions. It provides a consistent, reliable, and objective measure of institutional costs and performance. For the measure to be most effective, accurate data reporting will be essential. We also recommend the reintroduction of a state-level higher education authority to add validity to the process of gauging institutional performance. Using the measure within a larger framework of agreed-upon goals would go a long way toward improving higher education finance policy in California.

Report

Exploring the Potential for Water-Limited Agriculture in the San Joaquin Valley

By Caitlin Peterson, Cameron Pittelkow, Mark Lundy

As irrigated farmland comes out of production in the San Joaquin Valley, valley residents will face increased pests, weeds, and dust—as well as a loss of employment and economic activity. Water-limited cropping is one alternative to fallowing that can improve soil health and air quality, create habitat, and keep land in production.

blog post

The PPIC Statewide Survey: Reflections at the 20th Anniversary

By Mark Baldassare, Abby Cook

Attitudes of Californians have evolved on key issues over the years. PPIC’s polling has also changed, but its high standards and commitment to delivering accurate, independent, nonpartisan information has not.

Search results are limited to 100 items. Please use the Refine Results tool if you are not finding what you are looking for.