English learners: reclassification: English language proficiency assessment.
Summary
Existing law requires each school district that has one or more pupils who are English learners, and, to the extent required by federal law, each county office of education and each charter school, to assess the English language development of each pupil in order to determine the pupil's level of proficiency, as specified. Existing law requires the State Department of Education, with the approval of the State Board of Education, to establish procedures for conducting the assessment and for the reclassification of a pupil from English learner to English proficient. Existing law requires those reclassification procedures to use multiple criteria in determining whether to reclassify a pupil as proficient in English, including, among other things, an assessment of language proficiency using the English language development test that is developed or acquired by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, as provided. This bill would, commencing July 1, 2026, require the reclassification procedures developed by the department to authorize an English learner to be reclassified if the English learner achieves an English Learner Progress Indicator score of 3H or above on the English Language Proficiency Assessments for California and the English learner also satisfies the other multiple measures criteria developed by the department, as specified. To the extent this bill would impose additional duties on local educational agencies, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. 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 the statutory provisions noted above.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2025
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 21, 2025
Last action Feb 2, 2026
Maddy AI version diff · 1 comparison
What changed between versions
02/21/25 - Introduced
→
AB1360
·
1 edit
MINOR
No substantive policy changes were made between these two versions of AB 1360. The differences are entirely presentational: the bill text was reformatted from a traditional legislative document layout (with line numbers, page headers, and column formatting) into a web page format with navigation elements, a digest key section, and site-level links. The actual statutory language of Section 313 and Section 2 is identical in both versions.
TECHNICAL
The bill was reformatted from a traditional legislative document layout (with line numbers, page breaks, and column headers) into a web-based presentation with navigation menus, a digest key block, and site-level links. No changes to the statutory text itself were made.
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
6
Key actions
2
Committee
3
Feb 2, 2026
Lower · Passed
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
lower
Mar 13, 2025
Committee
Referred to Com. on ED.
lower
Feb 22, 2025
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 24.
lower
Feb 21, 2025
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Joaquin Arambula
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1360
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1360. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline