Legislature(2013 - 2014)HOUSE FINANCE 519
04/05/2013 01:30 PM House FINANCE
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB31 | |
| HB136 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 136 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 31 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 31
"An Act requiring school districts to develop and
require completion of a history of American
constitutionalism curriculum segment; and providing
for an effective date."
1:35:06 PM
REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER, SPONSOR, introduced the
legislation. The bill would require school districts to
create a curriculum segment on the history of American
constitutionalism and would require students to complete
the course prior to graduation. He acknowledged the
potential challenge of voting for an unfunded curriculum
mandate. He asserted that the bill represented a special
case and would tweak the current American history course
curriculum. He believed many schools were already in
compliance with the proposed bill and that its
implementation would not impose a significant burden on
school districts.
Representative Keller explained that the curriculum
pertained to the values and documents that had been
instrumental in forming the U.S. Constitution; the bill
would require the course work to look at American
constitutionalism as portrayed in the Declaration of
Independence, first state constitutions, Article of
Confederation, U.S. Constitution, federalist papers, and
the Bill of Rights; the course requirements under the bill
recognized the significance of the documents. He believed
the documents were a great gift to mankind; American
constitutionalism was a statement on human rights that had
been used globally. He referred to the statement that all
men are created equal and discussed rights including the
freedom of speech. He noted that the rights tended to be
taken for granted.
Representative Keller continued that he had introduced the
bill in 2011 shortly before the Egyptian president Hosni
Mubarak had been removed from office. He recalled that
multiple constitutions had been created in Egypt in recent
years; he pointed to riots in the streets and the ongoing
struggle. He stated that the values of American
constitutionalism provided the ability to make decisions
related to events occurring in other countries. He pointed
to the contrast between a country such as Egypt where
rights were determined by the military and the U.S. where
rights were inherent.
1:39:18 PM
Representative Keller continued to discuss rights under the
U.S. constitution. He pointed to differences between the
U.S. Constitution and the rights in other countries such as
China. He elaborated that the people were in charge in the
U.S. and authorized government authority. He discussed
freedom of religion and expression in the U.S. compared to
other countries. He communicated that the intent was not to
speak against districts that were not currently teaching
the curriculum. He read a quote by Thomas Jefferson:
As we work together to advance cost-effective justice,
we must remember that the greatest guarantee of a
strong future for all three branches of government is
a citizenry that understands and embraces the
fundamental principles of democracy.
Representative Keller referred to a past State of the
Judiciary speech by Chief Justice Walter Carpeneti. He
noted that Chief Justice Carpeneti spent a significant
amount of time increasing student awareness. He discussed
an online program created by Chief Justice O'Connor. He
provided a quote by Chief Justice Carpeneti: "Join me in
the effort to instill in our young people the same
knowledge and respect for our laws and institutions of our
country that we are all privileged to share."
1:43:02 PM
STUART THOMPSON, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference), spoke
in support of the legislation. He read a statement (copy on
file):
Per legislative rules, your committee's responsibility
is to evaluate the fiscal efficacy of HB 31. The
Education Committee has already evaluated and verified
its educational efficacy. So is the American
Constitutionalism History Literacy Act financially
worth making law? I testify as follows that it is.
The Legislature is charged with competently directing
payment of Alaska government bills, and intelligently
investing public money in constitutionally established
avenues like education. Education is an investment
because it can return many times the value of what's
put into it. One of the greatest returns education
delivers is the individual and cooperative ability to
resolve problems that hinder quality of life. This
bill addresses chronically unresolved problems of our
state and nation by targeting the constitutional
illiteracy and the lack of discipline at using our
political heritage that propagates them.
These problems include national bankruptcy; runaway
national unemployment; national economic addiction to
defense spending that makes military adventurism a
necessity; a pathetic loss of ability to harness
science to stimulate economic diversity; vulnerability
to super-corporation bullying and blackmail because
they are too big to truly enforce law on or to do
without (like the oil companies in Alaska); mediocre
skill development of America's people-making
corporate, business and individual welfare a
necessity; etc. , etc.
Constitutionalism the multi-partisan discipline it
engenders and our political heritage represent an
overflowing vault of problem-solving riches. Yet this
treasure is being treated by our state and nation-
using Christ's analogy-like pearls cast before swine.
Passing this bill will help create citizens and
leaders who are truly capable of ensuring government
of the People, by the People, and for the People shall
not perish from this earth from the awful terrorism of
ignorance.
Thank you for your attention. On request, I can
testify further about constitutional illiteracy and
repudiation of our political heritage. Good luck on
your deliberations.
1:46:23 PM
Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony.
Representative Gara asked for verification that the
curriculum would include every amendment to the
Constitution that came subsequent to the original Bill of
Rights. He mentioned women's suffrage and the right for 18
year-olds to vote.
Representative Keller replied that all amendments under the
Constitution would be covered.
Representative Wilson asked which schools currently had the
curriculum and which did not. Representative Keller did not
know whether the information had been gathered. He pointed
to page 2, line 17 specifying that superintendents would
bring the proposal forward for approval by each school
board. School boards would set the criteria used to
determine whether a student had successfully completed the
curriculum. He noted that the bill placed trust and respect
in each district's abilities.
Representative Wilson supported the concept, but believed
it was important to know which schools were currently
teaching the subject; she wanted to ensure the bill was
necessary. She asked why the bill did not add the subject
to the high school graduation test.
Representative Keller replied that his intent was to leave
the standards up to the individual school districts.
1:50:30 PM
Representative Wilson agreed with leaving the standards up
to districts if the bill only mandated adding the
curriculum; however, the bill was tied to graduation and
she believed there should be consistency. She asked for a
walk through of the implementation including what tests
would look like and the approval process.
Representative Keller replied that each school district
would have approval authority over the curriculum
implementation; the Department of Education and Early
Development was not required to monitor the standards. The
bill placed trust in history teachers. He was not aware of
any other legislative mandated curriculum segments that
were a part of the graduation exam.
Representative Costello expressed appreciation for the
sponsor's attention to the subject. She communicated a
concern related to content standards and read from a copy
of the standards "A student who meets the content standard
should understand the ideals of this nation as expressed in
the Declaration of Independence, the United States
Constitution, and the Bill of Rights". She detailed that
the standards mentioned various forms of government.
She discussed that the subjects could be introduced to
students at any age; some students had the opportunity to
go to Washington D.C. to experience the governmental
process first-hand. She observed that current content
standards allowed teachers to teach at different stages
based on the makeup of their classroom. She wondered if
making the course a graduation requirement would cause
teachers at earlier grade levels to discontinue any
teachings on the subject, which would be the opposite of
the bill's intention.
Representative Keller answered that there was nothing in
the bill that restricted when the course was taught; the
superintendent or the school district had to be satisfied
that a student had completed a curriculum segment as
defined by each district. He believed the bill was
complimentary to the current standards.
1:55:12 PM
Representative Costello relayed that the current system was
based on a Carnegie unit (students received Carnegie units
for seat time). She wondered how the bill would affect
students in high school. She believed that the high school
exit exam should be addressed if districts were required to
write and teach the material. Additionally, she believed
teaching the material was currently required.
Representative Keller responded that he had wanted the
maximum amount of flexibility for local school boards. He
did not see the necessary connection to the exit exam.
Representative Costello believed the bill would affect
schedules in high schools because class requirements would
be added. She wondered whether the sponsor had spoken with
high school administrators about the issue. Representative
Keller answered that the intent was not to add additional
time requirements to classes. The segment would be approved
by the local school boards; if extra seat time was added it
would be the school district's choice.
Representative Costello asked if the sponsor had considered
asking DEED to create the curriculum. She believed that
requiring districts to create the curriculum could be
inefficient and costly. She stated that the curriculum
could be created or purchased and was an involved process.
She provided an example of the replacement of the math
program in Anchorage.
Representative Keller understood the amount of work
creating curriculum entailed. He believed some of the
districts had adequate curriculum segments in place. He
elaborated that the bill had been on the books since 2011
and he had received positive feedback from the school
districts. He reminded the committee that there was a
significant amount of curriculum that was already complete
including the material promoted by Chief Justice Carpeneti
and other.
1:59:21 PM
Representative Kawasaki asked for the definition of
curriculum segment. Representative Keller believed the key
word was "syllabus," which included a measurement of a
student's success. He detailed that the curriculum segments
would be packages assembled by teachers to accomplish
certain goals; teachers would build lesson plans based on
their goals for students.
Representative Kawasaki wondered whether the language in
the bill was superfluous if schools already taught on the
subject. Representative Keller replied that he had met
numerous students who had not been educated on the subject.
He noted that some students had not been taught the three
branches of government. He believed the bill would raise
attention to the importance of the values included in the
founding documents. He clarified that Alaska's schools were
not all teaching the subject; however, many of the engaged
and good schools were.
Representative Kawasaki asked if the sponsor knew of any
specific school districts that did not teach the Articles
of Confederation, the state constitution, Constitutional
Congress, Declaration of Independence, and other.
Representative Keller answered that his personal experience
with students who had not received an education on the
subject implied that some schools were not teaching the
material.
Representative Kawasaki discussed that the Fairbanks North
Star Borough School District currently included
constitutionalism in its content standards. He detailed
that the standards highlighted the Articles of
Confederation and writing and ratifying the new
constitution. He added that the National Center for History
in Schools specified that children were exposed to the
Articles of Confederation in the fifth grade and how to
assess accomplishments and failures of the first
continental congress in seventh grade, etc. He believed
much of the required material listed in the bill was
included in current content standards. He added that the
one problem was linking the teachings to the graduation
requirement.
2:03:46 PM
Representative Keller was not trying to rewrite content
standards. He believed the bill was complimentary and would
enhance the teaching of the values included in the founding
documents.
Co-Chair Austerman liked the idea of including something on
the books that would guarantee the teaching of the U.S.
Constitution; however, he was concerned that the bill only
dealt with districts. He referred to the Kodiak school
system and shared that in the past high school students had
been allowed to turn in homework until the end of each
quarter even though it had been required earlier in the
quarter; he noted that the student would have failed in
Anchorage or Mat-Su if they had not turned the homework in
on time. He was concerned that without a set standard
throughout the state students transferring from one
community to another may not be adequately prepared. Apart
from the concern he was supportive of the bill.
Additionally, he wondered whether the subjects should be
taught in conjunction with Alaska history.
Representative Keller answered that including the subject
requirement in statute would provide the opportunity to
examine progress in the future. He asked Co-Chair Austerman
to repeat the second question.
Co-Chair Austerman reiterated his questions.
Representative Keller replied that the bill did not address
students moving from one community to another. He had
considered including Alaska history in the requirement, but
had elected to leave the language broad. He had not wanted
to impose too many mandates.
2:07:27 PM
Representative Gara asked for assurance that the bill would
not prevent teachers from teaching "less proud" moments in
U.S. history. He provided an example related to a time when
the First Amendment had been interpreted to allow a person
to be sent to jail for protesting World War I.
Representative Wes Keller replied that the bill would not
[prevent teachers from teaching all aspects of the
country's constitutional history]. He stated that the
values included in the constitution would provide students
with guidelines for critical thinking on what was right and
wrong in human government.
Representative Gara pointed to page 2, line 25. He surmised
that the subject would be taught in an American history or
other similar course. He wondered how to measure whether a
student completed the curriculum segment described in
Section (a) on page 2 if they received a B grade in the
overall course. He asked whether completion of the course
would be sufficient. He asked whether there would be a
separate disqualifying parameter from graduation based on
the specific portion of the course.
Representative Keller replied in the negative. He relayed
that the implementation would be up to local school
districts; the districts would make a determination on
criteria defining a successful completion of the segment.
He did not want the legislature to write the standards.
Representative Gara asked whether the sponsor would have a
problem with the addition of clarifying language specifying
that a student had to complete the course in which the
curriculum was contained.
Representative Keller was opposed to the potential change
in language. He believed that the language "completing a
course" sounded like seat time; he believed that
satisfactorily completing a curriculum was completely
different.
2:11:28 PM
Vice-Chair Neuman mentioned his shared fight for the rights
of home school parents. He discussed that some programs
allowed parents to choose their curriculum. He detailed
that curriculum was bought based on the fact that it met
certain grade level standards; however, parents had the
right to choose the books they use. He thought the bill may
require parents to have curriculum approved by school
districts.
Representative Keller answered that curriculum for the Home
School Support program had to be approved by the local
school board, which had been established in regulation.
Vice-Chair Neuman stated that the IDEA [Interior Distance
Education of Alaska] program was different than the Mat-Su
program. He stated that the IDEA program was one of the
largest home school programs in the state because it
allowed parents to choose the curriculum; he did not
believe that the school board approved the curriculum or
books. He opined that the task would be time consuming.
2:14:39 PM
Representative Keller replied that the task was large and
believed the school boards did approve the home schooling
curriculum. He shared that his grandchildren were currently
enrolled in the IDEA program; the approval of curriculum
was a process that was imposed on the local school
districts. He recalled that in recent years there had been
debate on the issue focused on how the school boards could
approve curriculum that included religious books. He was
confident there was currently a process in place that
required school boards to approve home school curriculum.
Co-Chair Stoltze relayed that members wanted to examine
some issues related to the legislation. He asked members to
work with his office on the bill. He was an advocate of
better knowledge curriculums, but he understood that the
legislature did not set curriculum; he felt strongly that
it was the role of the school boards. He believed the
concept would have passed easily if it had been a
resolution to the State Board of Education. He believed the
legislature had a shoddy record related to setting
curriculum and micromanagement of the school boards.
Representative Wilson asked the sponsor to look into which
districts already had the curriculum.
Co-Chair Stoltze reiterated his request for members to work
with his office on anything related to the legislation.
Representative Keller thanked the committee for its time.
HB 31 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
2:19:08 PM
AT EASE
2:23:05 PM
RECONVENED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 136 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Supporting Document ISER Report January 2013.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Sponsor Statement .pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| Ak History stand 06.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| BILLS-108hr1078ih.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| AS 14.03.075.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| BILLS-108s504rfh.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| Chief Justice Walter Carpeneti.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| Civic's dunces Natl.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| Handouts, Morality and Common Sense - Opinion - PatriotPost.US.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 ACLU Support.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 4 AAC 04.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 AK Content History 06.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 AK ED PLAN 14 pages.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 Hb 5 Haines Support ltr.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 5 HB 31 |
| HB 31 HB 5 support 1.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 5 HB 31 |
| HB 31 HB 5 support.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 5 HB 31 |
| Hb 31 pricepaid.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 Sectional.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 sponsor.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB 31 unconstitutional laws 44 pages.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |
| HB136-NEW FN OOG-OMB-03-29-13.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 Supporting Document Powerpoint Presentation.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 136 CS Workdraft Supporting Document.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 136 |
| HB 31 Additional Support.pdf |
HFIN 4/5/2013 1:30:00 PM |
HB 31 |