SB 1067 would require annual math assessments for kindergarten through second grade beginning in 2028–29. The bigger question for parents is whether schools will have the support to help children who are identified as falling behind.
California is preparing to make early math screening part of every public school child’s education.
Senate Bill 1067, which has passed the Legislature and is heading to Gov. Gavin Newsom, would require schools to assess students in kindergarten through second grade for foundational math skills every year, beginning no later than the 2028–29 school year.
But the test itself is not really the story. The bigger question is what happens after a child is identified as struggling.
California is betting that finding math problems earlier will give schools a better chance to fix them before they become much harder to overcome. Supporters point to research showing that early math intervention can produce meaningful gains when students are identified and given targeted help.
For parents, however, there is another question:
Will schools have enough teachers, tutoring and other resources to actually provide that help?
Why California wants to start so early
Math builds on itself.
A child who struggles with basic number concepts in kindergarten can face more difficult addition and subtraction in first grade, followed by increasingly complex math in later grades.
The Legislature’s findings for SB 1067 say students who fall behind in early math often do not catch up on their own. The bill also links low third-grade math achievement with weaker performance later in school and lower chances of taking advanced courses, graduating from high school and attending college.
California’s math performance gives the issue urgency.
Recent reporting has highlighted that roughly two-thirds of California public school third-graders do not meet the state’s grade-level math standard. The state’s poor math performance has pushed lawmakers and educators to look for ways to identify problems earlier.
New research also strengthens the case for early intervention.
A University of Oregon meta-analysis of more than 100 studies involving more than 21,000 young children found that high-quality early math interventions produced significant improvements in student performance. The researchers concluded that early screening paired with intervention can help identify children who need support while there is still time to act.
That distinction matters.
Screening a child is not the intervention.
What SB 1067 would actually do
If Newsom signs the bill, California would build a statewide system for identifying early math learning needs.
The State Board of Education would establish criteria for appropriate assessments by July 31, 2027. The California Department of Education would then publish a list of approved assessments by January 31, 2028.
School districts, county offices of education and charter schools would select their assessments by June 30, 2028.
Beginning no later than the 2028–29 school year, schools would assess students in kindergarten, first grade and second grade every year.
The assessments are supposed to measure foundational math knowledge and learning needs.
They are not supposed to be a disability diagnosis.
The law also specifically says the results cannot be used for high-stakes purposes such as evaluating teachers, holding schools accountable, deciding whether students should be promoted or retained, identifying gifted students or labeling a child as having exceptional needs.
And there is an important detail for California parents:
Transitional kindergarten is not included.
The bill specifically defines kindergarten as excluding transitional kindergarten.
What happens if the test shows a problem?
This is the most important part of SB 1067.
If an assessment indicates that a student needs additional math support, the school must provide appropriate support based on the child’s needs.
That could include evidence-based math instruction, progress monitoring, targeted small-group instruction, one-on-one or small-group tutoring, or additional evaluation.
In other words, California is not simply creating a system to tell parents:
“Your child is behind.”
The law is designed to require schools to respond.
That is also where the policy becomes much harder to implement.
California’s teachers already face crowded classrooms, staffing challenges and competing demands. Critics of the proposal have questioned whether schools will have enough resources to help all of the children who may be identified as struggling.
The Los Angeles Times reported concerns from educators who argued that screening alone cannot solve the state’s math problems if teachers are not given the tools and resources needed to respond to the results.
That criticism gets to the heart of the legislation:
A screening system can identify a problem much faster than a school system can solve it.
For Latino families, one question matters especially
California’s schools serve a large and diverse population of children who speak languages other than English at home.
That creates an important test for SB 1067 itself:
Is California measuring a child’s math ability or accidentally measuring how well the child understands English?
The bill attempts to address that problem.
The state must consider whether assessments are culturally and linguistically appropriate. The approved list must include tools developed for English learners and non-English learners, in languages reflecting students’ primary languages when those assessments are available.
If a child does not speak enough English to take an English-language assessment, the law says the student should be assessed in their primary language when an appropriate assessment is available.
If one is not available, schools must consider the child’s developmental history, educational history, math progress, home background and evolving English proficiency before evaluating the child’s foundational math skills.
A five-year-old who is learning English should not be mistaken for a five-year-old who cannot understand numbers.
And parents should be able to understand the results, too. SB 1067 requires schools to provide parents information about the assessment and make their child’s results available, along with information explaining the results and any planned additional support. Parent notifications must comply with California’s translation requirements.
The debate: early warning or another test?
Supporters see SB 1067 as a prevention strategy.
Their argument is straightforward: if a child is struggling with math, schools should know early enough to do something about it.
That approach is similar to California’s move toward early screening for reading difficulties. California began annually screening kindergarten through second-grade students for reading difficulties in the 2025–26 school year.
Critics have a different concern.
Young children do not all learn math in the same way. A short assessment may capture some skills while missing others, particularly the hands-on and developmental aspects of early math learning. Critics have also questioned whether another assessment requirement will actually improve instruction without additional resources.
Both concerns can be true.
California can need better information about children’s math skills and still need to be careful about how that information is collected and used.
What parents should know now
SB 1067 would not immediately change what happens in your child’s classroom.
The major implementation dates are still ahead:
- By July 31, 2027: California establishes assessment criteria.
- By January 31, 2028: The state publishes its approved assessment list.
- By June 30, 2028: School districts and other local education agencies select their assessments.
- By the 2028–29 school year: Annual K–2 math assessments begin.
Parents should also remember what the assessment is not.
It is not supposed to determine whether a child passes kindergarten.
It is not a teacher evaluation tool.
It is not a school ranking system.
And it is not, by itself, a diagnosis of a learning disability.
Instead, it is supposed to answer a simpler question:
Does this child appear to need more help with foundational math — and what kind of help?
The real test begins after the test
California has spent years trying to close academic gaps that became more visible during and after the pandemic.
Parriva has looked into how those gaps continue to affect Latino students, including the challenges facing children in Los Angeles Unified schools. Read Parriva’s coverage of the education challenges facing Latino students.
SB 1067 takes that concern down to the earliest grades.
That could be key.
A child who receives effective help in kindergarten or first grade has more time to build the skills needed for later mathematics.
But the policy will ultimately be judged by something that happens after the assessment.
If a child is identified as struggling, does that child get a skilled teacher, targeted instruction and enough time to catch up?
Or does the family simply receive another piece of paper saying their child is behind?
That is the real test of SB 1067.
California is about to get much better at finding early math problems. The harder challenge will be making sure every child who is identified gets the help to overcome them.
