Each year, the California Department of Education unveils the results from statewide testing, and consistently, the outcome reveals a troubling trend.
This year, more than half of the students assessed did not meet the basic standards in English, while nearly two-thirds fell short in math and science. These aren’t isolated drops; they’re indicative of a persistent pattern of failure.
Politicians in Sacramento are eager to spin this year’s modest increase of $1.5$ to $2$ percentage points in scores as an indication of progress, despite the fact that scores are still disheartening and below pre-pandemic levels. This is not a trend; it’s merely political maneuvering.
Throughout my district, I hear a common sentiment: parents feel excluded from their children’s education and struggle to get clear information about what is being taught or how their children are truly performing.
Teachers express their dedication to their students but feel neglected and ill-equipped to manage the challenges in the classroom, such as larger class sizes, behavioral issues, and learning losses. They chose this profession to teach, not to navigate bureaucratic obstacles.
The Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO) has indicated that student outcomes are closely linked to school climate and attendance; however, teachers are provided with minimal resources to confront these challenges. Many educators are leaving due to stress and lack of support.
This predicament is not the fault of parents or teachers; it stems from a system that has lost sight of its primary purpose: serving the students.
Years of unilateral control and political protectionism have transformed our educational institutions into a system that serves special interests rather than children.
As student performance declines, Sacramento continues to obstruct reforms that could provide assistance. Charter schools—particularly flexible, non-classroom-based programs—have demonstrated their effectiveness in helping struggling students succeed. Yet, instead of fostering success, the state aims to dismantle them.
One instance is Assembly Bill 84 (D-Muratsuchi), which seeks to abolish the current funding process and increase oversight costs for charters. The proposed regulations would not be applicable to traditional school districts, solely targeting flex-based charters. There was significant backlash from the charter school community, leading to the bill’s failure this session, but it is expected to return in January.
Another proposition, Senate Bill 414 (D-Ashby), presented a more balanced approach by enhancing oversight, transparency, and accountability for charters, ultimately benefiting students who require more educational options. Unfortunately, it was vetoed following union pressure.
When I brought forth SB 612 aimed at expanding career and technical education—providing high school students with pathways to real-world jobs in fields such as health care, construction, and technology—it was defeated along party lines. This occurred not because it wouldn’t aid students, but because it didn’t align with the prevailing political agenda.
This represents a failure of leadership; it’s protectionism.
This year, California is allocating $133.8 billion for K–12 education, an amount exceeding the total defense budgets of many countries. Yet, the issue lies not in the volume of spending, but rather in its allocation.
The LAO has reported that California’s achievement gaps are “large and persistent,” especially among low-income, Latino, and Black students. Regardless of record funding, those gaps have widened instead of narrowing.
Taxpayers are not witnessing tangible results. Teachers lack the support and training they need. Parents are not receiving transparency.
Not every student will attend a four-year university—and that is acceptable. However, every student is entitled to an education that equips them for life.
This necessitates offering families genuine choices, supporting teachers in their classrooms, and restoring respect for skilled trades and career training. Students should acquire skills that lead to well-paying jobs rather than merely memorizing answers for exams.
It also requires providing teachers with the tools and flexibility to address contemporary challenges: smaller class sizes, improved training, and reduced mandates from Sacramento. If we don’t invest in teachers as much as we do in infrastructures, the upcoming generation will continue to lag behind.The LAO and EdSource have both cautioned that we are moving toward a future where millions of students graduate unprepared for college, employment, or even basic self-sufficiency. This is not solely an educational issue; it is fundamentally an economic one.
I aspire for my daughter and her classmates to thrive in a state where diligence and education still open doors—not in a system that keeps them closed. Parents seek accountability, functional schools, supported teachers, and students prepared for the real world.
This situation did not occur by chance. However, we can rectify it by resisting special interests, amplifying successful initiatives, and positioning families back in control.
Our children deserve better. And so does California.
Suzette Martinez Valladares represents California’s 23rd Senate District.
