Cayla J. v. California, a case brought in 2020, was recently decided. The case, brought by 14 low-income students of color from Oakland and Los Angeles, landed on a settlement of two billion dollars, which will go towards California children whose education suffered during school shutdowns. The money will specifically be allocated to students whose education was most harmed during the pandemic. State officials are also committed to compelling districts and schools to implement tactics, such as in-school tutoring, that have been proven to help students. This lawsuit is a part of addressing the inequities that existed in education before the pandemic that were painfully exacerbated by online and home learning.
Public education funding in the U.S. already needed a desperate revamping due to sharp differences between money allocated to high- and low-poverty districts. Districts with higher rates of poverty, with a higher percentage of students of color, receive less funding per student in comparison to school districts in more affluent communities that serve mostly white students. Currently, the system is ripping off students living in poverty as the funding is too dependent on state and local resources. The federal government has to play a bigger role to help eliminate not only county-to-county inequities, but inequities in different states.
While in Gov. Gavin Newsom’s 2024-25 state budget, the $128 billion for education remains largely unimpacted, there are concerns that it was only by the skin of the government’s teeth that this funding was maintained and is not as stable as one might think. Legislative analysts have explained that this was made possible by certain maneuvers such as “delay[ing] recognizing the budgetary cost of payments the state provided to schools in 2022-23,” which will do more harm down the line to Califonia’s budget while also setting a terrible precedent. Funding is likely to be billions less than the budget makes it appear.
There was concern about education funding in 2023 overall as experts predicted a “looming education funding crisis” that state and federal governments were unequipped to address. A 2022 report released by the Southern Education Foundation, Economic Vitality and Education in the South (EVES) showed that Black, Brown and low-income students were significantly more likely to face academic disadvantages due to a lack of funding and resources. The report also highlighted how students’ access to nutritional food, up-to-date technology, reliable internet service and professional support was cut off, to the detriment of their academic development.
Cayla J. v. California was brought specifically after the slow dispersal of student resources during school shutdowns and the significant differences in the allocation of those resources. There was also a notable difference in the quality of remote education between districts. These inequities left many students boxed out of their own education as schools were not meeting minimum instructional times as the state refused to enforce them. In Oakland and Los Angeles Unified, students missed over 200 in-person days of instruction each. With their refusal to intervene and lack of follow-through, the state did and has, for long before the spread of COVID-19, failed in its constitutional mandate to prevent educational inequities. Writing fat checks without ensuring they’ll make a difference is negligence.
Adding insult to injury, learning at home presented many of the same challenges faced by adults who struggled with remote work. Beyond the lack of access to resources, being at home poses pressures that students had distance from at school. Many students with increased family commitments and caretaker commitments had to balance those demands with their education simultaneously without the support of professionals. It’s far easier to be distracted in a home environment versus a more controlled classroom.
The effects of state failures came to a head with the release of standardized testing scores that paint a discouraging picture of California students. Reading scores declined to only 46.7%, meaning less than half of the students could not meet grade-level benchmarks. Despite slight improvement, approximately 66% of California students do not meet their grade-level math standards. Even worse, there was a three-point increase in students from families facing “socioeconomic disadvantages” as compared to the year before. The scariest part is the fear that these students may not be able to catch up and increased struggles will discourage students from finishing their education or pursuing higher education.
California may have irreparably harmed these students, and there’s no set playbook for how to undo the damage. The money from this suit can help bridge the gap and serve students most affected by the pandemic and learning loss, but there are no guarantees. These students deserve more than two billion dollars, and while helpful, it is nowhere near what is needed to fill the gaps in the education system.
