SB 520 — Student instruction: California Online Student Incentive Grant programs.
Last action — From Assembly without further action.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
3Passed Senate
-
4Passed Assembly
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
(1) The Donahoe Higher Education Act authorizes the activities of the 4 segments of the postsecondary education system in the state. These segments include the 3 public postsecondary segments: the University of California, administered by the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and the California Community Colleges, administered by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Private and independent postsecondary educational institutions constitute the other segment. Provisions of the Donahoe Higher Education Act apply to the University of California only to the extent that the regents act, by resolution, to make them applicable. This bill would establish the California Online Student Access Incentive Grant programs as 3 separate programs under the administration of the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California State University, and the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, for each segment respectively, in consultation with their respective statewide academic senates. The bill would require the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California State University, and the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, in consultation with their respective statewide academic senates, to each develop a list of 20 high-demand lower division courses at his or her segment that are deemed necessary for program completion, deemed satisfactory for meeting general education requirements, or in areas defined as transferable lower division courses under the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum. For these courses, the bill would require the president and chancellors, in consultation with their respective academic senates, to each provide up to 15 incentive grants to faculty and campuses to facilitate intersegmental and intrasegmental partnerships and partnerships between online course technology providers and faculty to significantly increase online options for students and high school pupils for the fall term of the 2014–15 academic year. The bill would require the online courses supported by incentive grant funds to be placed in the California Virtual Campus. The bill would require that matriculated students of campuses of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, and California high school pupils, who complete online courses supported by incentive grant funds and achieve a passing score on corresponding course examinations, be awarded full academic credit for the course at the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, as applicable. The bill would provide that funding for the implementation of this provision would be provided in the annual Budget Act, and express the intent of the Legislature that the receipt of funding by the University of California for the implementation of this provision be contingent on its compliance with its requirements. The bill would prohibit public funds from being used to fund any private aspect of a partnership developed under the bill between faculty of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges and an online course technology provider. This bill would provide that intellectual property developed by a segment in the implementation of the bill would be owned and managed by that segment according to its existing policies. Because this provision would require community colleges to award academic credit under these circumstances, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, until January 1, 2014, establishes the California Virtual Campus to facilitate ongoing collaboration and joint efforts relating to the use of technology resources and high-speed Internet connectivity to support teaching, learning, workforce development, and research. Existing law, until January 1, 2014, authorizes the California Virtual Campus grant recipient to convene at least 4 leadership stakeholder group meetings annually comprised of representatives from the State Department of Education, the California Technology Assistance Project, and other related programs administered through the department, including adult education, local educational agencies, the California Community Colleges, the California State University, the University of California, independent colleges and universities, the California State Library, and representatives from community-based organizations to ensure the efforts affecting segments represented are appropriately meeting the needs of those segments. This bill would extend the provisions establishing the California Virtual Campus until January 1, 2017. This bill would require the representatives in the stakeholder group meetings from the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California to include, but not be limited to, faculty members from these institutions. This bill would make additional nonsubstantive changes in these provisions. By requiring faculty members from community college districts to attend these meetings, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
Bill Text
- Amended 05/28/13 - Amended Senate Current pdf May 28, 2013
- Amended 04/25/13 - Amended Senate pdf April 25, 2013
- Amended 04/17/13 - Amended Senate pdf April 17, 2013
- Amended 04/01/13 - Amended Senate pdf April 01, 2013
- Introduced 02/21/13 - Introduced pdf February 21, 2013
- SB520 View text html
Action History
-
From Assembly without further action.
-
From committee without further action.
-
Referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 28. Noes 0. Page 1202.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 1016.) (May 23).
-
Set for hearing May 23.
-
Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 20.
-
Hearing postponed by committee.
-
Set for hearing May 13.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 787.) (May 1). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
Set for hearing May 1.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.
-
Set, second hearing. Testimony taken. Further hearing to be set.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.
-
Set for hearing April 24.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on ED.
-
Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author.
-
Set for hearing April 10.
-
Referred to Com. on ED.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 24.
-
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Garcia · Cosponsor
- Steinberg · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 1 co-sponsors · 120 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Steinberg
Co-sponsors (1)
- Garcia
Not signed on (120)
120 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 120 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 25 | 0 | 0 | 11 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 28 | 0 | 0 | 11 |
| % of votes cast | 72% | 0% | 0% | 28% |
How each member voted (39)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Not Voting |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Lieu | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Not Voting |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Torres | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Wright | — | Not Voting |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Not Voting |
| Block | — | Not Voting |
| Knight | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Not Voting |
| Monning | — | Not Voting |
| Pavley | — | Not Voting |
| Price | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Corbett | — | Not Voting |
| Emmerson | — | Yea |
| Evans | — | Not Voting |
| DeSaulnier | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Yee | — | Not Voting |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Not Voting |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Steinberg | — | Yea |
| Walters | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Padilla, Stephen C. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 8 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 89% | 0% | 0% | 11% |
How each member voted (9)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Block | — | Yea |
| Wyland | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Not Voting |
| Correa | — | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 520 do?
- (1) The Donahoe Higher Education Act authorizes the activities of the 4 segments of the postsecondary education system in the state. These segments include the 3 public postsecondary segments: the University of California, administered by the Regents of the University of California, the California State University, administered by the Trustees of the California State University, and the California Community Colleges, administered by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges. Private and independent postsecondary educational institutions constitute the other segment. Provisions of the Donahoe Higher Education Act apply to the University of California only to the extent that the regents act, by resolution, to make them applicable. This bill would establish the California Online Student Access Incentive Grant programs as 3 separate programs under the administration of the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California State University, and the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, for each segment respectively, in consultation with their respective statewide academic senates. The bill would require the President of the University of California, the Chancellor of the California State University, and the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, in consultation with their respective statewide academic senates, to each develop a list of 20 high-demand lower division courses at his or her segment that are deemed necessary for program completion, deemed satisfactory for meeting general education requirements, or in areas defined as transferable lower division courses under the Intersegmental General Education Transfer Curriculum. For these courses, the bill would require the president and chancellors, in consultation with their respective academic senates, to each provide up to 15 incentive grants to faculty and campuses to facilitate intersegmental and intrasegmental partnerships and partnerships between online course technology providers and faculty to significantly increase online options for students and high school pupils for the fall term of the 2014–15 academic year. The bill would require the online courses supported by incentive grant funds to be placed in the California Virtual Campus. The bill would require that matriculated students of campuses of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, and California high school pupils, who complete online courses supported by incentive grant funds and achieve a passing score on corresponding course examinations, be awarded full academic credit for the course at the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges, as applicable. The bill would provide that funding for the implementation of this provision would be provided in the annual Budget Act, and express the intent of the Legislature that the receipt of funding by the University of California for the implementation of this provision be contingent on its compliance with its requirements. The bill would prohibit public funds from being used to fund any private aspect of a partnership developed under the bill between faculty of the University of California, the California State University, or the California Community Colleges and an online course technology provider. This bill would provide that intellectual property developed by a segment in the implementation of the bill would be owned and managed by that segment according to its existing policies. Because this provision would require community colleges to award academic credit under these circumstances, it would constitute a state-mandated local program. (2) Existing law, until January 1, 2014, establishes the California Virtual Campus to facilitate ongoing collaboration and joint efforts relating to the use of technology resources and high-speed Internet connectivity to support teaching, learning, workforce development, and research. Existing law, until January 1, 2014, authorizes the California Virtual Campus grant recipient to convene at least 4 leadership stakeholder group meetings annually comprised of representatives from the State Department of Education, the California Technology Assistance Project, and other related programs administered through the department, including adult education, local educational agencies, the California Community Colleges, the California State University, the University of California, independent colleges and universities, the California State Library, and representatives from community-based organizations to ensure the efforts affecting segments represented are appropriately meeting the needs of those segments. This bill would extend the provisions establishing the California Virtual Campus until January 1, 2017. This bill would require the representatives in the stakeholder group meetings from the California Community Colleges, the California State University, and the University of California to include, but not be limited to, faculty members from these institutions. This bill would make additional nonsubstantive changes in these provisions. By requiring faculty members from community college districts to attend these meetings, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.
- Who sponsors SB 520?
- SB 520 is sponsored by Garcia and Steinberg.
- What is the current status of SB 520?
- This bill died with 2013-2014 Regular Session. It reached “Passed Senate” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track SB 520?
- Track SB 520 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 520
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 520
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →