Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

SB 612 - An Act to Amend Sections 99200, 99200.5, 99201, 99202, 99203, and 99206 of the Education Code, Relating to Instructional Strategies.

Postsecondary education: instructional strategies. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
Existing law provides for the establishment and maintenance of subject matter projects by the Regents of the University of California with the approval of the Concurrence Committee. Existing law provides that these subject matter projects are to create opportunities for researchers, higher education faculty, and elementary and secondary school faculty to work together to identify exemplary… More
Existing law provides for the establishment and maintenance of subject matter projects by the Regents of the University of California with the approval of the Concurrence Committee. Existing law provides that these subject matter projects are to create opportunities for researchers, higher education faculty, and elementary and secondary school faculty to work together to identify exemplary teaching practices, examine and develop research on learning, knowledge, and educational materials, and provide support to teachers to develop and enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Existing law requires the Concurrence Committee to provide a final report to the Governor and to appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2011, including specified information relating to the subject matter projects.

This bill would add 2 areas of emphasis for the subject matter projects. The first would provide teachers with instructional strategies for delivering career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content in a manner that is linked to high-priority industry sectors identified in the California Career Technical Education Model Curriculum Standards as adopted by the State Board of Education. The Concurrence Committee, in consultation with specified entities, would determine the priority of industry sectors. The 2nd would provide teachers with instructional strategies for ongoing collaboration on the delivery of career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content.

The bill would enlarge the Concurrence Committee by adding a representative appointed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and make other changes. The bill would repeal the requirement of the January 1, 2011, report and, instead, require a report on or before January 1, 2016. This provision would be inoperative on January 1, 2018.

This bill would add the goal of providing teachers with support in the implementation of career-oriented, integrated academic and technical courses that meet course requirements for admission to the University of California and the California State University, and align with high-priority industry sectors, as specified.

Existing law authorizes 6 topical subject matter projects.

This bill would add physical education, arts, and world language, as specified, as topical subject matter areas.

Existing law establishes a project advisory board within each subject matter project.

This bill would make various changes to the board structure, including decreasing representation of specified groups, and adding a representative selected by the advisory board who is from an industry sector that principally utilizes the discipline addressed by the project.

Existing law requires the project advisory board of each statewide subject matter project to use specified criteria in recommending funding for local project sites.

This bill would add a criterion for local project sites that serve middle or high school teachers and would require the project advisory board to give special consideration to sites that utilize or are preparing to utilize instructional strategies to deliver career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content.

Existing law repeals the article relating to instructional strategies on January 1, 2013, unless a later enacted statute deletes or extends the date on which it becomes inoperative.

This bill would extend that date until January 1, 2018.

This bill, except for a specified provision, would become operative only if an appropriation is made in the annual Budget Act, or if federal funds are appropriated, or both, for the purposes of this bill. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 
Assembly Vote: On Passage

PASSED on September 2, 2011.

voted YES: 51 voted NO: 26
3 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend Sections 99200, 99200.5, 99201, 99202, 99203, and 99206 of the Education Code, Relating to Instructional Strategies.

SB 612 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
Existing law provides for the establishment and maintenance of subject matter projects by the Regents of the University of California with the approval of the Concurrence Committee. Existing law provides that these subject matter projects are to create opportunities for researchers, higher education faculty, and elementary and secondary school faculty to work together to identify exemplary teaching practices, examine and develop research on learning, knowledge, and educational materials, and provide support to teachers to develop and enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Existing law requires the Concurrence Committee to provide a final report to the Governor and to appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2011, including specified information relating to the subject matter projects.

This bill would add 2 areas of emphasis for the subject matter projects. The first would provide teachers with instructional strategies for delivering career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content in a manner that is linked to high-priority industry sectors identified in the California Career Technical Education Model… More
Existing law provides for the establishment and maintenance of subject matter projects by the Regents of the University of California with the approval of the Concurrence Committee. Existing law provides that these subject matter projects are to create opportunities for researchers, higher education faculty, and elementary and secondary school faculty to work together to identify exemplary teaching practices, examine and develop research on learning, knowledge, and educational materials, and provide support to teachers to develop and enhance content knowledge and pedagogical skills. Existing law requires the Concurrence Committee to provide a final report to the Governor and to appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature on or before January 1, 2011, including specified information relating to the subject matter projects.

This bill would add 2 areas of emphasis for the subject matter projects. The first would provide teachers with instructional strategies for delivering career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content in a manner that is linked to high-priority industry sectors identified in the California Career Technical Education Model Curriculum Standards as adopted by the State Board of Education. The Concurrence Committee, in consultation with specified entities, would determine the priority of industry sectors. The 2nd would provide teachers with instructional strategies for ongoing collaboration on the delivery of career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content.

The bill would enlarge the Concurrence Committee by adding a representative appointed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, and make other changes. The bill would repeal the requirement of the January 1, 2011, report and, instead, require a report on or before January 1, 2016. This provision would be inoperative on January 1, 2018.

This bill would add the goal of providing teachers with support in the implementation of career-oriented, integrated academic and technical courses that meet course requirements for admission to the University of California and the California State University, and align with high-priority industry sectors, as specified.

Existing law authorizes 6 topical subject matter projects.

This bill would add physical education, arts, and world language, as specified, as topical subject matter areas.

Existing law establishes a project advisory board within each subject matter project.

This bill would make various changes to the board structure, including decreasing representation of specified groups, and adding a representative selected by the advisory board who is from an industry sector that principally utilizes the discipline addressed by the project.

Existing law requires the project advisory board of each statewide subject matter project to use specified criteria in recommending funding for local project sites.

This bill would add a criterion for local project sites that serve middle or high school teachers and would require the project advisory board to give special consideration to sites that utilize or are preparing to utilize instructional strategies to deliver career-oriented, integrated academic and technical content.

Existing law repeals the article relating to instructional strategies on January 1, 2013, unless a later enacted statute deletes or extends the date on which it becomes inoperative.

This bill would extend that date until January 1, 2018.

This bill, except for a specified provision, would become operative only if an appropriation is made in the annual Budget Act, or if federal funds are appropriated, or both, for the purposes of this bill. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend Sections 99200, 99200.5, 99201, 99202, 99203, and 99206 of the Education Code, Relating to Instructional Strategies.
Author(s)
Darrell Steinberg
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Postsecondary education: instructional strategies
Major Actions
Introduced2/17/2011
Referred to Committee
Passed Senate Committee on Education4/27/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/16/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Appropriations5/26/2011
Passed Senate6/01/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Higher Education6/21/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Education7/06/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations8/25/2011
Passed Assembly9/02/2011
Passed Senate9/08/2011
Presented to the governor (enrolled)9/21/2011
Became law (chaptered).10/08/2011
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
select this voteSenate Committee on EducationDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.4/27/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Education
8 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsPlaced on Appropriations Suspense file.5/16/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
9 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.5/26/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Appropriations
6 voted YES 2 voted NO 1 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateSenate 3rd Reading SB612 Steinberg6/01/2011This bill PASSED the Senate
27 voted YES 10 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on Higher EducationDo pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Education.6/21/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Higher Education
5 voted YES 2 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on EducationDo pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.7/06/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Education
7 voted YES 2 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass as amended.8/25/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
12 voted YES 5 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
currently selectedAssemblySB 612 Steinberg Senate Third Reading By BROWNLEY9/02/2011This bill PASSED the Assembly
51 voted YES 26 voted NO 3 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateUnfinished Business SB612 Steinberg Concurrence9/08/2011This bill PASSED the Senate
26 voted YES 10 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced2/17/2011
2/17/2011Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
2/18/2011From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 20.
3/03/2011Referred to Com. on ED.
4/08/2011Set for hearing April 27.
select this voteVote4/27/2011Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
5/03/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 2. Page 760.) (April 27).
5/04/2011Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
5/06/2011Set for hearing May 16.
select this voteVote5/16/2011Placed on Appropriations Suspense file.
5/16/2011Placed on APPR. suspense file.
5/20/2011Set for hearing May 26.
5/26/2011From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 2. Page 1120.) (May 26).
select this voteVote5/26/2011Do pass.
5/27/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
6/01/2011Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 27. Noes 10. Page 1246.) Ordered to the Assembly.
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage6/01/2011Senate 3rd Reading SB612 Steinberg
6/02/2011In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
6/09/2011Referred to Coms. on HIGHER ED. and ED.
select this voteVote6/21/2011Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Education.
6/22/2011From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on ED. (Ayes 5. Noes 2.) (June 21). Re-referred to Com. on ED.
select this voteVote7/06/2011Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
7/12/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 7. Noes 2.) (July 6).
7/13/2011Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
8/17/2011Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
select this voteVote8/25/2011Do pass as amended.
8/26/2011From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.) (August 25). Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
8/29/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9/02/2011Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 51. Noes 26. Page 2870.) Ordered to the Senate.
9/02/2011In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
currently selectedAssembly Vote on Passage9/02/2011SB 612 Steinberg Senate Third Reading By BROWNLEY
9/08/2011Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 26. Noes 10. Page 2421.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage9/08/2011Unfinished Business SB612 Steinberg Concurrence
9/21/2011Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 1 p.m.
10/08/2011Approved by the Governor.
10/08/2011Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 632, Statutes of 2011.

Total contributions given to Assemblymembers from interest groups that…

$62,400
$795,150
$37,887
$707,290
$1,602,727
$0
5 Organizations Supported and 0 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Amend Sections 99200, 99200.5, 99201, 99202, 99203, and 99206 of the Education Code, Relating to Instructional Strategies.: SB 612 Steinberg Senate Third Reading By BROWNLEY

5 organizations supported this bill

American Federation of Teachers
Assembly Committee on Education (2011, July 5). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from leginfo.ca.gov.
California Chamber of Commerce
Assembly Committee on Education (2011, July 5). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from leginfo.ca.gov.
National Education Association
Assembly Committee on Education (2011, July 5). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from leginfo.ca.gov.
Roche
Assembly Committee on Education (2011, July 5). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from leginfo.ca.gov.
University of California
Assembly Committee on Education (2011, July 5). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved July 7, 2011, from leginfo.ca.gov.

0 organizations opposed this bill

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Assemblymembers in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2011 – December 31, 2012.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$6,500$0
Luis AlejoDCA-28$20,500$0
Michael AllenDCA-7$61,100$0
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$20,600$0
Toni AtkinsDCA-76$36,116$0
Jim BeallDCA-24$58,800$0
Bill BerryhillRCA-26$22,200$0
Marty BlockDCA-78$77,800$0
Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$18,150$0
Susan BonillaDCA-11$32,450$0
Steven BradfordDCA-51$23,950$0
Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
Joan BuchananDCA-15$27,700$0
Betsy ButlerDCA-53$20,700$0
Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
Nora CamposDCA-23$14,570$0
Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$17,400$0
Connie ConwayRCA-34$57,591$0
Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
Roger DickinsonDCA-9$22,100$0
Tim DonnellyRCA-59$1,500$0
Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
Paul FongDCA-22$55,100$0
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
Beth GainesRCA-4$8,806$0
Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$72,500$0
Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
Mike GattoDCA-43$36,100$0
Rich GordonDCA-21$39,700$0
Jeff GorellRCA-37$17,150$0
Shannon GroveRCA-32$500$0
Curt HagmanRCA-60$11,300$0
Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
Isadore HallDCA-52$55,700$0
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$20,050$0
Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
Roger HernandezDCA-57$40,085$0
Jerry HillDCA-19$51,400$0
Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
Ben HuesoDCA-79$21,900$0
Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
Brian JonesRCA-77$17,100$0
Steve KnightRCA-36$1,000$0
Ricardo LaraDCA-50$58,800$0
Dan LogueRCA-3$12,000$0
Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$1,500$0
Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
Allan MansoorRCA-68$6,500$0
Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
Jeff MillerRCA-71$26,600$0
Holly MitchellDCA-47$31,683$0
Bill MonningDCA-27$41,800$0
Mike MorrellRCA-63$3,500$0
Brian NestandeRCA-64$19,000$0
Jim NielsenRCA-2$0$0
Chris NorbyRCA-72$8,500$0
Kristin OlsenRCA-25$19,400$0
Richard PanDCA-5$73,994$0
Henry PereaDCA-31$54,894$0
John PerezDCA-46$79,651$0
Manuel PerezDCA-80$42,400$0
Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$31,450$0
Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
Norma TorresDCA-61$19,300$0
David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
Don WagnerRCA-70$14,800$0
Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$25,050$0
Das WilliamsDCA-35$29,987$0
Mariko YamadaDCA-8$13,800$0

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Katcho AchadjianRCA-33$6,500$0
Luis AlejoDCA-28$20,500$0
Michael AllenDCA-7$61,100$0
Tom AmmianoDCA-13$20,600$0
Toni AtkinsDCA-76$36,116$0
Jim BeallDCA-24$58,800$0
Bill BerryhillRCA-26$22,200$0
Marty BlockDCA-78$77,800$0
Bob BlumenfieldDCA-40$18,150$0
Susan BonillaDCA-11$32,450$0
Steven BradfordDCA-51$23,950$0
Julia BrownleyDCA-41$0$0
Joan BuchananDCA-15$27,700$0
Betsy ButlerDCA-53$20,700$0
Charles CalderonDCA-58$0$0
Nora CamposDCA-23$14,570$0
Wilmer Amina CarterDCA-62$0$0
Gilbert CedilloDCA-45$0$0
Wesley ChesbroDCA-1$17,400$0
Connie ConwayRCA-34$57,591$0
Paul CookRCA-65$0$0
Mike DavisDCA-48$0$0
Roger DickinsonDCA-9$22,100$0
Tim DonnellyRCA-59$1,500$0
Mike EngDCA-49$0$0
Mike FeuerDCA-42$0$0
Nathan FletcherRCA-75$0$0
Paul FongDCA-22$55,100$0
Felipe FuentesDCA-39$0$0
Warren FurutaniDCA-55$0$0
Beth GainesRCA-4$8,806$0
Cathleen GalgianiDCA-17$72,500$0
Martin GarrickRCA-74$0$0
Mike GattoDCA-43$36,100$0
Rich GordonDCA-21$39,700$0
Jeff GorellRCA-37$17,150$0
Shannon GroveRCA-32$500$0
Curt HagmanRCA-60$11,300$0
Linda HaldermanRCA-29$0$0
Isadore HallDCA-52$55,700$0
Diane HarkeyRCA-73$20,050$0
Mary HayashiDCA-18$0$0
Roger HernandezDCA-57$40,085$0
Jerry HillDCA-19$51,400$0
Alyson HuberDCA-10$0$0
Ben HuesoDCA-79$21,900$0
Jared HuffmanDCA-6$0$0
Kevin JeffriesRCA-66$0$0
Brian JonesRCA-77$17,100$0
Steve KnightRCA-36$1,000$0
Ricardo LaraDCA-50$58,800$0
Dan LogueRCA-3$12,000$0
Bonnie LowenthalDCA-54$1,500$0
Fiona MaDCA-12$0$0
Allan MansoorRCA-68$6,500$0
Tony MendozaDCA-56$0$0
Jeff MillerRCA-71$26,600$0
Holly MitchellDCA-47$31,683$0
Bill MonningDCA-27$41,800$0
Mike MorrellRCA-63$3,500$0
Brian NestandeRCA-64$19,000$0
Jim NielsenRCA-2$0$0
Chris NorbyRCA-72$8,500$0
Kristin OlsenRCA-25$19,400$0
Richard PanDCA-5$73,994$0
Henry PereaDCA-31$54,894$0
John PerezDCA-46$79,651$0
Manuel PerezDCA-80$42,400$0
Anthony PortantinoDCA-44$0$0
Jim SilvaRCA-67$0$0
Nancy SkinnerDCA-14$31,450$0
Cameron SmythRCA-38$0$0
Jose SolorioDCA-69$0$0
Sandre SwansonDCA-16$0$0
Norma TorresDCA-61$19,300$0
David ValadaoRCA-30$0$0
Don WagnerRCA-70$14,800$0
Bob WieckowskiDCA-20$25,050$0
Das WilliamsDCA-35$29,987$0
Mariko YamadaDCA-8$13,800$0

Interest Groups that supported this bill

$ Donated
Teachers unions$795,150
Pharmaceutical manufacturing$707,290
Chambers of commerce$62,400
Schools & colleges$37,887

Interest Groups that opposed this bill

$ Donated
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range