If we really want to support California’s teachers, start with a better curriculum

Capitol Weekly welcomes Opinions on California public policy or politics. Please read our guidelines for opinion pieces before submitting an Op-Ed. Submissions that do not adhere to our guidelines will not be considered for publication. 

OPINION — As students headed back to classrooms this fall, every conversation about supporting California’s teachers seemed to start in the same places: pay, mental health resources and school safety. While those are very real and urgent priorities, they also leave out a key component that shapes a teacher’s daily experience: the quality of the curriculum they’re handed on day one.

Walk into almost any classroom in California, and you’ll find a teacher who has quietly become something their job description never mentioned. That’s because when materials are not designed with multilingual learners in mind, teachers become unpaid curriculum writers or translators. 

They stay up late rebuilding lesson plans that should have arrived ready to teach and print out supplemental worksheets because the textbook assumes every student in the room learns the same way, at the same pace and in the same language. That work is often invisible and doesn’t show up on a timesheet, but it shows up in the numbers.

According to a 2026 State of Teaching Report, nearly half of California teachers surveyed plan to retire or quit within the next 10 years. Nationally, an estimated 35% of teachers plan to leave the profession over the same period. These are not abstract statistics but instead represent a workforce quietly reaching its breaking point.

The strain is sharpest in precisely the fields where we can least afford to lose great teachers. A nationwide survey of teachers revealed that 70% of teachers do not feel prepared to teach English Learners, and 64% do not regularly use district or school-provided materials. Turnover rates run higher than average among teachers of English as a Second Language and bilingual education (19.0%), foreign languages (18.3%), career and technical education (17.5%) and special education (16.4%). 

These are fields that already require specialized expertise, additional certification and targeted professional development. When we also give these teachers materials that don’t reflect or connect with the learners they serve, we’re asking them to do two jobs and calling it one.

This isn’t a hypothetical: California is in the process of adopting new English Language Arts (ELA), English Language Development (ELD) and Spanish Language (SLA) materials, culminating with a statewide Board of Education vote scheduled for November. This process updates approved curriculum options for TK-8 students in California to align with current literacy guidelines and follows last year’s adoption process for math materials.

Adoption cycles like this don’t come around often, which means California’s education leaders are currently determining what instructional materials will sit on teachers’ desks — and in students’ hands — for years to come. Districts that delay reviewing their materials risk locking in another generation of curriculum that wasn’t built for all students, including the English Learners who comprise nearly 20% of California public school enrollment.  

As leaders, we must make decisions that support our teachers, not just our students. And the research backs this up: High-quality instructional materials have a greater impact on teaching and learning than smaller class sizes. We all have line items in our budgets for curriculum materials and professional development. So, the question is whether the people making these decisions have the knowledge to spend it well. 

Although materials for California’s growing English Learner population have improved since the last adoption, education leaders still need guidance on what those changes are and what to look for. These are difficult choices to make, and they are being made right now, in board rooms and adoption committees across the state. We don’t have to make them alone. It is our responsibility, as leaders, to either build the knowledge to make the right choices ourselves or find partnerships to guide us in making these decisions well. 

So, what can curriculum decision-makers do right now? They should understand what “Must-Have” features to look for in instructional materials and what questions to ask of publishers. These leaders should also bring EL experts and educators into adoption committees from the very beginning of the process, not just at the end.

District leaders should also know they don’t have to figure this out alone. Peer districts, professional networks and resource hubs exist to help them make the most impactful decisions during this cycle and the next. Because teachers shouldn’t have to choose between using what they’re given and doing right by their students. Strong curriculum eliminates that false choice, and that’s what teachers deserve.

Crystal Gonzales is executive director of the English Learners Success Forum.