Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
03/26/2010 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB367 | |
| SB221 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 367 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | SB 221 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 221-SCHOLARSHIPS/ LEGISLATIVE TASK FORCES
8:24:38 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the final order of business would be
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 221(EDC), "An Act establishing an
advisory task force on higher education and career readiness in
the legislative branch of government; and providing for an
effective date."
8:24:51 AM
TIM LAMPKIN, Staff, Senator Gary Stevens, Alaska State
Legislature, presented CSSB 221, as the vehicle to establish a
task force addressing the disconnect in the educational
pipeline, particularly as it regards the K-12 and
university/postsecondary systems. The task force will be
comprised of 18 stakeholders from various agencies in the state,
including members of the legislative branch. The goal will be
to meet during the next 1-2 years, and discover means to improve
the program.
8:25:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON opened and closed public testimony.
8:26:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON moved Conceptual Amendment 1, labeled
26-LS1309\C.2, Mischel, 3/25/10, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
Page 4, following line 1:
Insert a new paragraph to read:
"(7) determine the availability of
broadband and Internet capabilities and the effect of
the use of electronic, Internet, and virtual
instruction on student learning and success in schools
located in regional educational attendance areas;"
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON moved Amendment 1, to Conceptual
Amendment 1, deleting the language "regional educational
attendance," and inserting "rural,".
8:27:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
8:27:45 AM
CHAIR SEATON removed his objection.
8:27:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON objected, and questioned the consequences
of confining the language to rural.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said the intention is to ensure
broadband availability, and to exclude the rail belt hubs.
8:29:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked about the language "determine the
availability", and asked whether it should be "review the
availability". He said if the intent is to receive a report
regarding what is available in the state, the context may be
lost if all areas are not reported on, including the rail belt
communities.
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged that if a report and assessment of
broadband capabilities is the goal, there is an argument for
including urban areas.
8:30:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON withdrew Amendment 1, to Conceptual
Amendment 1.
8:31:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON offered Amendment 2, to Conceptual
Amendment 1, deleting the language "located in regional
educational attendance areas," and inserting "." following
"schools".
8:31:49 AM
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Amendment 2, to Conceptual Amendment 1, was adopted.
8:32:56 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER offered Amendment 3, to Conceptual
Amendment 1, and asked for consideration of an alternate to the
word "determine".
[No objection was heard but a brief, informal, discussion
ensured about altering the term.]
8:34:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER withdrew Amendment 3 to Conceptual
Amendment 1.
8:34:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON withdrew his objection to Conceptual Amendment 1,
and hearing no further objection, announced that Conceptual
Amendment 1 was adopted.
8:34:52 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered Amendment 2, labeled 26-LS1309\C.5,
Mischel, 12/29/10, which read [original punctuation provided]:
Page 4, line 11:
Delete "March 1, 2011"
Insert "April 1, 2011"
8:35:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON objected for discussion.
8:35:18 AM
CHAIR SEATON said the amendment is responding to previously
discussed concerns regarding the window of time being allowed
for a comprehensive task force report.
MR. LAMPKIN said the sponsor supports the amendment.
8:36:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON noted that the House Education Standing
Committee staff would be responsible for compiling the report,
and expressed concern about the practicality of having that
occur during the confines of the 2011 legislative session,
whether the deadline is March 1, or April 1.
MR. LAMPKIN responded that an extra month makes a difference,
and perhaps May 1 should be considered, if staff
responsibilities are the concern. However, the likely hood is
that the task force findings may result in legislation, which
may not be addressed until the 2012 session under either time
frame. Given that scenario bill drafting, and vetting, would
occur during the interim.
8:38:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH stated support for the amendment, and said
the report should be received by the in-session legislature,
which could not happen with a date of May 1.
MR. LAMPKIN stated confidence that either date could work, but
is less burdensome if the date is amended to May 1.
8:39:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON recalled that the dates have been
previously discussed, and the pros and cons considered for April
and May deadlines.
8:39:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON opined that the original date of
February 1 would be the most beneficial. Staff responsibilities
would be alleviated, for the bulk of the session, and
legislation could then be considered in a timely manner by the
legislative members.
8:41:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON removed his objection.
8:41:31 AM
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Amendment 2 was adopted.
8:41:37 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved Conceptual Amendment 3, labeled 26-
LS1309\C.4, Mischel, 12/29/10, which read [original punctuation
provided]:
Page 3, lines 6 - 10:
Delete "The chair of the house committee having
jurisdiction over education shall call the first
meeting of the task force not later than 30 days after
the effective date of this Act and shall serve as
chair of the first meeting. The members of the task
force shall elect a chair from among the members of
the task force and other officers as needed to conduct
the business of the task force."
Insert "The chair of the house committee having
jurisdiction over education and the chair of the
senate committee having jurisdiction over education
shall serve as co-chairs of the task force. The co-
chairs shall call the first meeting of the task force
not later than 30 days after the effective date of
this Act. The members of the task force shall elect
other officers as needed to conduct the business of
the task force."
8:42:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ objected for discussion.
8:43:40 AM
MR. LAMPKIN stated sponsor support for Conceptual Amendment 3.
However, he pointed out that currently there are three standing
co-chairs for education, in the two legislative bodies.
Further, he pointed out that it is an election year, and the
sitting chairs may not retain the positions held. He suggested
that the Speaker of the House and the Senate President be
authorized to specifically appoint co-chairs from each body.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that Conceptual Amendment 3, merely
serves to designate who will call the first task force meeting
to order.
8:46:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON offered that perhaps a designee of the
committee chairmen would be appropriate.
8:47:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON said the bill establishes that the committee staff
will serve as the staff for the task force. He opined that it
would not be appropriate to appoint other legislators to direct
the committee staff, and suggested that a conceptual amendment
could be considered to include language addressing a situation
where someone is unable to serve.
8:48:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH directed attention to Conceptual Amendment
3, and offered that the language of the final sentence addresses
the concern.
CHAIR SEATON stated his belief that the language "other officers
as needed" does not serve as a replacement for having a
legislator serve as co-chair.
8:50:04 AM
MR. LAMPKIN directed attention to CSHB 221, page 3, line 3, and
read:
The staff of the legislative members of the task force
shall serve as task for the task force.
MR. LAMPKIN said if there is replacement of the legislator,
there will also be replacement of the staff. He stated his
belief that there is no founded concern that a legislator might
be directing the staff of another member. Regarding the
language change referring to the duties of officers, he said,
given the size of the task force, administrative duties may be
delegated, such as travel arrangements, and printing projects.
The amendment specifies "shall" and he suggested that the term
be reconsidered.
CHAIR SEATON said it is a good suggestion.
8:52:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH offered that the language provides the
appropriate leniency, and opined that the directive will not be
changed significantly whether it is stated as "shall" or "may."
However, referring to Representative Edgmon's point regarding
appropriate chairmanship, he recommended building in flexible
language to accommodate that concern.
CHAIR SEATON indicated that a determination has been made,
through the legislative process, to have the education committee
chairmen serve as the chairmen of the task force.
8:55:06 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered Amendment 1, to Conceptual Amendment 3, to
read:
If the chair of either committee of jurisdiction is
unable to serve, the presiding officer of the relevant
body may appoint another legislative member to serve
as the co-chair.
8:55:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for discussion, and said it
appears that the final sentence, of Conceptual Amendment 3
incorporates adequate language, and read, "The members of the
task force shall elect other officers as needed ...".
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that the task force will be comprised
of committee staff members, who may elect a co-chair who is not
a member of the legislature, which would present a problem.
8:56:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON stated support for the amendment to the
amendment.
8:57:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection.
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Amendment 1, to Conceptual Amendment 3, was adopted.
8:57:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ noted the intention to have the task force
to seat two co-chairs. The senate education committee currently
has two chairs, and she suggested inserting appropriate
language, to Conceptual Amendment 3, to avoid having three co-
chairs.
MR. LAMPKIN offered that the sponsor would like to have it
indicated that the presiding officer of each body will appoint
two people, and one of those designees will serve as a co-chair
of the task force. If there is vacancy in either one of those
positions it would be reappointed by the presiding officer. He
said it is assumed that one of those members would be a member
of the respective education committee, possibly the chair or co-
chair.
8:59:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ withdrew her objection to Conceptual
Amendment 3.
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Conceptual Amendment 3 was adopted, as amended.
9:00:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved Amendment 4, labeled 26-LS1309\C.3, Mischel,
12/29/10, which read [original punctuation provided]:
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "18"
Insert "20"
Page 2, following line 19:
Insert new paragraphs to read:
"(13) one member of the house of
representatives, appointed by the speaker of the
house;
(14) one member of the senate, appointed by
the president of the senate;"
Renumber the following paragraphs accordingly.
9:01:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected for discussion, and suggested
moving it as a conceptual amendment.
CHAIR SEATON agreed, and renamed the document conceptual
Amendment 4. The amendment is to ensure that two members of
each legislative body are appointed, rather than the three
chairs resolving to act as co-chairs.
9:02:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection.
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Conceptual Amendment 4 was adopted.
9:02:35 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved Conceptual Amendment 5, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
Conceptual amendment to specify that the chair of the
Education committees at the time of the effective date
of the bill may retain their seats on the Task Force
through the term of the Task Force.
9:03:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER objected for discussion, and asked what
would transpire if the committee chair is not re-elected.
CHAIR SEATON said appropriate action it will be obvious, if a
legislator is not re-elected to office.
9:03:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER removed her objection.
9:03:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON objected, and asked for further
clarification of leadership appointment to the task force.
CHAIR SEATON said the language is intended to be permissive,
allowing flexibility to adjust leadership responsibility
appropriately. The amendment gives the members permission to
act.
9:05:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON removed her objection.
9:06:25 AM
MR. LAMPKIN stated sponsor support for the amendment.
9:06:43 AM
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced that
Conceptual Amendment 5 was adopted.
9:08:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved Conceptual Amendment 6, paraphrasing
from a prepared statement, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided, with verbal changes]:
Page 4, Line 7
Insert: (9)review completion rates for career skill
certification programs disaggregated by program and
postsecondary campus.
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
9:09:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said that considering the various
requirements to complete an associate's degree, and due to the
number of campuses and programs, the completion rate data may
become skewed. The amendment is to require the task force to
consider the completion rates in a specific manner. He directed
attention to the committee handout titled, "Educators debate
aligning standards; Unique Population: Alaska's schools
compared with lower 48," by Megan Holland, and read [original
punctuation provided]:
Opponents say Alaska's kids and schools, especially
those in the Bush are different. The state's dropout
rate is double the national average, and the state
rates last in the number of ninth graders who will
likely have a bachelor's degree in 10 years, according
to the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER opined that Alaska does represent a
different situation, than the rest of the nation, and indicated
his belief that the rural Alaskan student can do as well as any
other student. The skill certification programs may be an
indicator of what is occurring in the UA system, and he said it
could be helpful for the task force to investigate the
information for appropriate comparison on a national basis.
9:11:31 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to page 4, line 5, and asked for
differentiation between the bill language and the proposed
amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER indicated that the concept described may
get lost in the existing language, without the additional
paragraph. Completion of a technical degrees may not involve a
college degree, or graduation.
9:13:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER suggested that in lieu of Conceptual
Amendment 6, the committee consider insertion of language to
page 4, paragraph (9) to read:
(9) prepare for the legislature a set of written
recommendations to improve remediation, retention, and
graduation rates at colleges, universities, and
completion of postsecondary vocational or technical
training programs in the state.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER agreed that inserting "completion of"
would be satisfactory, but requested that the data be broken
down by campus.
9:14:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER theorized that a student might begin
studies at UAS (University of Alaska Southeast), transfers to
UAA (University of Alaska Anchorage), and complete/not complete
the program, and asked which institution would be dinged or
credited.
9:15:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER suggested that the institution where a
student graduates from, and receives credits, would be used for
data recording purposes.
9:15:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH reported that union apprenticeship programs
matriculate students, and credits are received for application
to a degree received from a college. In addition to completion
information, he said it would be interesting to have a report on
the actual success of students, and whether gainful work is
entered, following exit of a program.
9:17:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER pointed out that if the request is too
inclusive it may be daunting for the task force to undertake.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH acknowledged that the information requested
in Conceptual Amendment 6 is expansive, and expensive.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER maintained the importance of having the
information gathered and a report filed.
9:18:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ stated support for the for the amendment.
She agreed with Representative Gardener's suggestion to insert
the language "completion of," but stated her belief that it is
distinctly different from the intent of Conceptual Amendment 6.
9:19:31 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked whether the solution might be to insert
language on page 4 paragraph (8), to read:
(8) review graduation rates of colleges, universities,
and postsecondary vocational or technical training and
certification programs ...
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stressed the importance of identifying
each program.
CHAIR SEATON said completing a program, which results in a
certificate, or a degree, would be included in the report.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH noted that the Department of Labor &
Workforce Development requires an institute to provide a
certificate, and he stated support for Conceptual Amendment 6.
CHAIR SEATON indicated that the amendment will also cover
apprenticeships.
9:22:45 AM
MR. LAMPKIN said Conceptual Amendment 6 is agreeable
particularly because it provides focus to the task force.
Further, the task force members will find direction through
familiarity with the committee discussions/issues.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER acknowledged that what has been put on the
record will provide fodder for the task force.
9:23:51 AM
CHAIR SEATON removed his objection, and hearing no further
objection, announced that Conceptual Amendment 6 was adopted.
9:24:07 AM
CHAIR SEATON said it is important to provide focus in the bill,
give direction, and clarify what career readiness represents.
Further, it should be identified whether career readiness
applies to high schools only, or includes a broader look at the
education system. The GPS focused solely on high school
students, but a number of non-traditional students may need to
be addressed. Referring to page 1, line 7, he read:
An advisory task force on higher education and career
readiness is established in the legislative branch of
state government for the purpose of compiling data and
advising the legislature on matters pertaining to
college and career readiness of students who graduate
from public secondary schools in the state.
CHAIR SEATON indicated interest in ensuring that this is the
purpose to be assigned to the task force. The description, he
opined, is fairly narrow, and pondered whether it should be so
restrictive, considering the prevalence of non-traditional
students in this state. He interpreted the language to be
confined to high school graduates only, and asked whether the
committee intends to have this be the focus of the task force on
higher education. He theorized that many students who pursue
certificated programs, may be non-traditional students, and may
not have graduated from a public secondary school. Many
conversations have been brought to the committee regarding
students who enter the technical field, without necessarily
graduating from, or possibly attending, a public high school.
The task force will be limited to consider students who graduate
from public secondary schools in the state. Coordinating the
goals and purposes is, and he asked how the committee would like
to direct the task force.
9:29:00 AM
MR. LAMPKIN said this is the tip of the iceberg for what the
task force will be grappling with, and definition of terms such
as career readiness is one of them. The overall view of the
task force should be kept in mind. He cited the book CROSSING
THE FINISH LINE, as the inspiration for Senator Stevens drafting
of this legislation, in which he discovered that only 52 percent
of college attendees graduate. The K-12 and college systems
have a disconnect, which results in first year college students
requiring remedial classes. The sponsor would like to find the
answer as to why this occurs at such a high level, as well as
why students drop out of college. Career readiness was included
by the senate to expand the scope of the task force from
focusing on college statistics. He said the goal would be to
improve the ability, and readiness, of a high school student to
enter technical or college programs without remediation, or to
enter the work force in a productive manner.
9:32:12 AM
CHAIR SEATON stated his interest in having the task force
receive a legislatively mandated mission. He directed attention
to page 3, line 24, and paraphrased the language, which read
[original punctuation provided]:
(4) identify the contributing causes of a lack of
college and career readiness of students who graduate
from public secondary schools in the state and the
course topics taken in college or postsecondary
vocational or technical training programs for which
students require remediation;
CHAIR SEATON said perhaps that is the intended focus of the task
force, and will not include non-traditional students. Including
non-traditional students may, or may not, be the intent of the
sponsor, however, that is what the committee has to consider.
9:34:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH stated his belief that the non-traditional
students will be included, and the task force goals appear to be
comprehensive.
9:34:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON stated confidence in the guidance and
direction the committee is providing the task force. On behalf
of Representative Gardener, in absentia, he read the following
comment:
I don't really see anything this task force will do,
ask, or learn, that could not be done by the Education
Committee(s) jointly or individually. What will the
task force do that we shouldn't do ourselves?
9:36:38 AM
MR. LAMPKIN responded that the task force will assemble key
stakeholders that otherwise may not be brought together for this
purpose.
9:37:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ opined that non-traditional students should
be included in the purpose statement, and observed that the
language focuses on high school students. She stressed the
importance of providing opportunities for all students,
including those who are returning to school in later years, and
stated support for a task force with this scope.
9:38:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON said expanding the scope may redirect the
task force.
9:38:26 AM
MR. LAMPKIN indicated that the sponsor is concerned about the
high level of non-traditional students. He said:
Part of this task force also includes a component of
retention, ... to improve retention in the college
system and to seek ways to take a snapshot of what we
have, and look at why students are dropping out and
becoming non-traditional students; because
understandably, they do come back. But if we do find
a way to ... decrease remediation, increase retention,
then ultimately there will be fewer non-traditional
students. People drop-out for perfectly legitimate
reasons and there's always going to be a component of
drop-out and or [a] component of non-traditional
[students], and they will presumably come back. ...
With the new programs that the new task force
hopefully recommends, and we implement, those non-
traditional [students], vis-a-vis those new counseling
programs, or improved access to financial aid, or
other things that help them come back and stay in
college, or technical training programs, there will be
a reduced amount of non-traditional [students].
9:39:48 AM
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged that there is a high population of
non-traditional students. He asked if it is the sponsor's
intent to scrutinize that population, or to examine the career
readiness of students who are graduating from public secondary
schools in the state.
MR. LAMPKIN clarified that the ultimate goal of the task force
is to reduce remediation, increase retention, and increase
graduation rates in the states post secondary institutions. He
said:
That includes both the K-12 system, so they're ready
to enter the college, or career training, that they do
not need remediation once they're in postsecondary
[education], and that they remain in school and finish
the program. So we're effectively reducing the
existence of non-traditional [students].
9:41:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON drew attention to the committee packet,
and the letter from Elizabeth Downing suggesting a K-12
representative be seated on the task force, and stated her
support for including such a seat.
CHAIR SEATON referred to page 2, line 12, which lists the
conformation of the task force. The letter from Ms. Downing
suggests counselors from placement services be seated, as well.
9:43:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ suggested removing language from page 1,
line 10, and ending the sentence following the word "students."
She relayed her discomfort for having the task force focus on
students who are state institution graduates, and not broadening
the view to be more encompassing.
CHAIR SEATON questioned whether that would be inclusive and
suggested adding language to page 1, line 10.
9:44:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON objected to making further amendments. He
cautioned losing the sponsor's intent.
9:44:53 AM
CHAIR SEATON recalled the sponsor making argument, at one time,
regarding non-traditional students.
9:45:40 AM
MR. LAMPKIN offered no objection to inserting language to
include non-traditional students.
9:45:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered Amendment 7, to read:
Page 1, line 10;
Following: "state"
Delete: "."
Insert: ", and non-traditional students."
9:46:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON removed his objection.
CHAIR SEATON, hearing no further objection, announced Amendment
7 adopted.
9:48:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ moved to report CSSB 221, 226-LS1309\C, as
amended, out of committee, with individual recommendations and
the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, HCSSB
221(EDC) was reported from the House Education Standing
Committee.
9:49:01 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced the schedule for the next meeting.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB221_Sectional[1].pdf |
HEDC 3/26/2010 8:00:00 AM SFIN 3/8/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 221 |
| SB221_SponsorStatement[1].pdf |
HEDC 3/26/2010 8:00:00 AM SFIN 3/8/2010 9:00:00 AM |
SB 221 |
| HB 367 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 3/10/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/12/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/22/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/26/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 367 |
| CS HB 367 Version P.pdf |
HEDC 3/26/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 367 |