As part of Davis' plans to improve schools last year, a lot of money was thrown at the underperforming (bottom 1/3 or 1/4 of) schools with the requirement that the ones that continued to "fail" would be taken over by California.
Because of the earlier, smaller projections for the budget deficit, the threshold for "failing" was lowered. Therefore, a much reduced number of schools -- only 9 -- qualified for the state-mandated takeover. The rest of the previously-failing schools, whether they improved or regressed compared to past scores, are now "passing" schools.
Now that the budget deficit projection has ballooned, there might be insufficient funds for the nine failing schools to be taken over by the state. So, perhaps nothing will happen to them yet.
The news media keep parroting Davis' optimistic claim that he has raised test scores. If that were so true, then
(1)why would the state need to lower the threshold for failing?
(2)why will we likely get a slate of education bonds on the November ballot?
According to the rosy picture Davis paints about test scores and smaller classrooms class sizes, there should be no failing schools, and all the higher test scores would have lifted the "failing" schools into true success instead of an artificial "pass" created by a lower pass/fail threshold.
Is Davis going to takover the NINE failing schools, or are they the source of the relaxed threat?