Across California, thousands of high school students are preparing for their next steps, but nearly half remain effectively excluded from public four-year universities, having not completed the AG course sequence required for admission to the University of California and California State University systems.
Although it was developed as an admissions framework for the University of California, AG now shapes much more than eligibility on UC campuses. It has become one of California’s clearest signals about what it means to be ready, influencing graduation requirements, course offerings, advising practices, core schedules and educational priorities. AG also shapes students’ educational pathways and their understanding of what matters in high school, whether or not they attend a UC campus.
Much of the conversation focused on helping more students complete GA requirements through expanded advising, tutoring, summer classes and changes to the core schedule. These investments are important. But they only address one aspect of the problem. An equally important question is whether GA reflects what students need to know and be able to do today, and whether our definition of preparedness has kept pace.
The world students are preparing to enter is fundamentally different than it was when AG was founded. Advances in artificial intelligence, rapid technological change, changing workforce demands, and increasing civic complexity require graduates who can think critically, solve new problems, communicate effectively, collaborate across differences, and continue to learn throughout their lives.
California itself is taking a broader view of preparedness. The State emerges Portrait of a learneradopted by the State Board of Education in May, emphasizes critical thinking, communication, problem solving, collaboration, adaptability and character – skills that schools are increasingly being asked to cultivate but which remain largely invisible within A–G.
California schools are already meeting these demands. Through career pathways, dual enrollment, community schools, work-based learning, community-based and project-based learning, and other approaches, educators are developing richer ways for students to acquire and demonstrate the knowledge and skills they need for college, career, and civic life.
Schools across California are demonstrating that rigorous learning extends far beyond the traditional classroom. It is time for the University of California to consider how A–G might evolve to reflect what we learn from these efforts.
HAS Hoover High SchoolIn the San Diego Unified School District, project-based learning connects academic courses to the surrounding community. Five career-focused STEAM (science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics) academies combine college preparatory and advanced placement courses with career exploration, interdisciplinary projects, and real-world applications. More than 50 community organizations help educators extend learning beyond the classroom, providing students with opportunities to apply their academic knowledge to issues and challenges in their community. Here, college preparation and career-related learning do not compete but are intentionally integrated.
At San Diego Unified San Diego Met High Schoolinternships are essential, and educators are rethinking how learning from these experiences is assessed. Students use evidence from internships, projects and reflections to demonstrate skills such as empirical reasoning, problem solving, collaboration, communication, adaptability and more.
At UCLA Community School In the Los Angeles Unified School District, educators are showing how even traditional college-level courses can connect rigorous academic research to real-world issues and civic action. Through AP Research, students study issues such as immigration, mental health, technology, education, and representation, then build on that research through civic action – developing policy briefs, public presentations, social media campaigns, and school projects. Rigorous academic research becomes the foundation for meaningful action.
These schools have not lowered expectations. They raised them.
Yet much of this learning is not fully visible in the California admissions framework.
The question is not whether students should take rigorous courses in English, math, science, history, or world languages. They should. The question is whether our definition of readiness can recognize what students demonstrate through community-based research, interdisciplinary problem solving, authentic internships, civic action, and other applications of academic knowledge.
Our admissions policies must evolve with them.
This is why California needs a broader conversation about the future of AG, and why the voices included in that conversation matter. The UC Board of Admissions and School Relations (BOARS), and ultimately the Board of Regents, have considerable influence over how California defines preparation. But K-12 educators are doing the daily work of preparing young people for college and careers, and schools across the state are testing approaches that integrate academic rigor with the broader skills young people need to succeed.
UC should engage these educators and their students as it examines whether and how A–G should evolve. Instructors can help answer questions that cannot be answered by reviewing course requirements alone:
- What does rigorous learning look like when students apply their knowledge outside of the classroom?
- What can internships, research projects, and other authentic demonstrations teach us about student preparation?
- How could AG recognize and strengthen the broader vision of preparedness that California has already begun to embrace?
This is not an argument for weakening academic expectations. It’s an argument for learning from educators and schools that are expanding what rigorous preparation can look like and for ensuring that AG reform reflects what California now knows about preparing young people for college, careers, civic life, and lifelong learning.
California schools are already evolving. It’s time for UC to open a conversation about the future of A–G and listen carefully to the educators and students who are already showing us what the future of prep can look like.
•••
Marisa Saunders is a principal investigator and co-director of the UCLA Center for Community Schooling. Michael Matsudaformer school district superintendent, is the principal in residence at the Loyola Marymount University School of Education.
The opinions expressed in this commentary are those of the authors. EdSource welcomes comments representing diverse points of view. If you would like to submit a comment, please review our guidelines and contact us at commentary@edsource.org.
This story was originally published by EdSource.
