Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
02/15/2013 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB21 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 21 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 87 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 21-FOUR-DAY SCHOOL WEEK
8:03:54 AM
CHAIR GATTIS announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 21, "An Act relating to the length of a school
week; and providing for an effective date."
8:04:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON introduced HB 21, paraphrasing from the
sponsor statement, which read [original punctuation provided]:
HB 21 would allow a pilot program for one rural school
district to implement a 4 day school week.
There is continued concern of poor student performance
in our schools. We should be actively seeking
alternative solutions that may improve district
results. There are over 22 states in the US that have
implemented a 4 day week in rural districts.
For most schools this has been a positive achievement
- increased morale for students and teachers, reduced
absenteeism and allowing teachers and students to have
more direct contact time which then leads to better
understanding of educational materials.
Provisions in HB 21 require the district to show that
the majority of the community, students and teachers
support the implementation of this program.
Additionally, the district will have to prove that the
students are receiving the equivalent of a 5 day
school week. They will also be required to file
quarterly reports to the Department of Education on
student and teacher performance and the effect of the
program. Specifically an annual report will be
required to be submitted to the legislative education
committee on the progress and performance ratings from
the school district. This report will be due no later
than January 15th and must include a comparison of the
performance ratings before and after implementation of
the 4 day week.
This bill is specific for a 3 year pilot program; at
the end of that time period, the State Board of
Education will evaluate the program and determine if
it is beneficial to the district.
8:09:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed caution for designing a system
focusing on cost saving and convenience versus school
achievement.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON agreed, and said that an annual report
will be required for submission to this committee, the
commissioner of Department of Education and Early Development
(EED), as well as to the State Board of Education and Early
Development, ensuring student progress and school performance.
She suggested that if a school adopts a four-day week and
indicates an improvement of performance, it would be important
information for other schools considering a similar schedule.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON suggested specific requirements be
stipulated to ensure that the quality of education is reflected
in the reports that will be filed, and he stated support for the
bill.
8:11:47 AM
CHAIR GATTIS asked how the equivalency of a five-day week will
be accomplished in four-days; possibly implementing on-line
courses, working from home, or longer school days.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said a longer school day would be
scheduled, to ensure that the same number of teacher:student
hours are maintained, and deferred further details for response
by the school superintendent.
8:12:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER queried whether teachers are supportive
and if contract issues have been considered.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said the teacher agreements will not be
changed, as the expectation is for educators to work a five-day
week. To a follow-up question, regarding student response and
achievement when attending modified school days, she directed
attention to the committee packet and several reports based on
data from states with public schools that offer a four-day
school week. She said the information is thorough regarding
scholastic achievement; however, information on attendance may
not be as available.
8:14:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the fiscal note, which
stipulates 153 teaching days, and said it may be in conflict
with statute that requires 172 days, despite the length of the
day. He pointed out that the bill does not contain a provision
temporarily suspending the day count requirement to accommodate
the proposed pilot program.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON reiterated that the teachers are
supportive of the schedule, and have the expectation to work
five-days in accordance with current contracts. The law allows
schools to request departmental waivers, an option which some
districts may choose to exercise.
8:16:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking
as a joint prime sponsor, said statute currently allows schools
to request a four-day school week through the Office of the
Commissioner, EED; however, the bill provides autonomy and
flexibility to districts based on community interest and
involvement. The four-day week has worked well in other states,
as indicated in the reports contained in the committee packet,
and she said, attendance is shown to improve and stress levels
are lowered. She reported how the three-day weekend provides
exciting options, and said many of the programs operate best in
small communities. Further, she stressed how this bill
represents local control and provides cost saving measures. The
amount of savings to a district would depend on a number of
factors, which include: fuel, food, and utilities. Another
benefit is having longer blocks of class time available, during
the extended day. Reports indicate that students respond
positively to these lengthened study periods. There may be a
downside also, as changing a traditional schedule always
presents a challenge. A district with several schools would not
be required to have every school on a four-day week, and she
underscored that the bill is not a one size fits all mandate.
She reiterated the flexibility that HB 21 allows parents, and
reminded the committee that parental involvement is known as a
key factor for school improvement. In order for a district to
consider a four-day week, a high level of parental involvement
is required. As a three year pilot program, HB 21 will return
to the committee for review. Finally, she said the district
will handle financial concerns and budgetary adjustments, hence
the zero fiscal note attached to the bill.
8:23:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that HB 21 allows some schools
in a district to not implement the four-day week and asked if
there is language in the bill stipulating that option.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON confirmed the members understanding and
said language is not included, as the decision occurs at the
local level, through community meetings.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER noted that the bill specifies "district,"
and he maintained the necessity for language stipulating that a
"school" could request permission to continue a five-day
program.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON said that schools are already allowed
the five-day week, and HB 21 provides an option for a four-day
program.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER drew attention to page 1, line 13, and
paraphrased the language which states "demonstrates majority
community support ...", to ask what method of measurement will
determine the level of support.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON answered that community public hearings
would be held, and common sense may need to prevail in
determining the level of community support; a percent for
required agreement is not stipulated. She stressed that the
best laid plan will not work in a community that does not
embrace the concept. Additionally, a district could implement a
four-day week for one year, and if it doesn't prove successful,
without extensive effort return to the five-day program the
following year.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER noted that it would be the call of the
local school board, whether there was cause to change to a four-
day week and conjectured that the recourse for the community
would be to overturn the school board at the next available
election.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON stressed the importance for local
control of schools, and HB 21 provides another tool for a
district to tailor a program to meet specific needs, as well as
to implement cost saving measures.
8:27:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON stated his understanding that the option
will be available to all districts, but a district must apply
within 30 days of the effective date of the act; it is not an
ongoing pilot program with start-up allowed any time.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON said HB 21 is specific to allow one
district to participate in a pilot program for three years. She
said the sponsors may be open to an amendment to allow other
districts to participate. However, the intent is that the pilot
program will report data to ensure that this approach works for
Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON added that the timeframe was stipulated
to enable the district requesting the action to implement the
program in the coming school year [2013-14].
8:29:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER noted that the program appears successful
in several states, and suggested that it be made available to
other districts without delay.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON responded that EED has expressed
concern, as implementation necessitates appropriate planning.
Additionally, the limit ensures that districts will approach the
option with caution and by exercising due diligence.
8:30:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON confirmed that HB 21 doesn't override the
commissioner's ability to grant flexible schedules through the
statute already available; the bill is outside of that authority
without cancelling it.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON clarified that HB 21 does override the
authority intentionally, as the requesting district has made
application to the department and been denied. However,
providing the opportunity for the district to make the decision
through community involvement is important, and the bill
establishes that option.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON added that the focus is not only on
finances; however, in some areas a school bus ride may be in
excess of an hour every day, which represents a significant time
commitment for the student as well as cost to the district. She
expressed hope that other districts will see this as an option
for implementation.
8:33:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETE HIGGINS characterized the proposal as a good
idea. However, he opined that it would be an injustice for the
district that brought this forward because this [legislation]
makes it open to all districts. He further opined that it could
be an issue if the department awarded this pilot project to
another district [besides the district that brought it forward].
Therefore, he related his belief that the proposal should be
available for all districts that meet the criteria because then
the pilot programs could be compared to determine how well the
program is working.
8:34:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON said that the requesting district may
have gained approval via the commissioner's office if they had
been able to provide required information, which is now on hand.
She said it would not be objectionable amend HB 21 for the
purpose of allowing additional participation.
8:36:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER directed attention to page 1, line 6 and
read, "the board shall approve, at the request of the governing
body of a school district," and asked if the board being
referred to is the State Board of Education and Early
Development or the local school board. He pointed out that the
governing body would be the local school board, and suggested
that there may be a conflict in the language as drafted.
REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON clarified that the initial reference to
"board" is intended to be the local school board, and agreed
that the language may need to be clarified/amended.
8:37:40 AM
DR. DONALD GATZKE, Teacher, stated support for HB 21 and said
how a child fulfills required school attendance should be left
to the discretion of the parents speaking through the local
school board, and should not be an issue of state authority.
The important point is not the configuration of days, but the
seat time required. If the parents are supportive and allowed
to have their child attend a four-day week, he conjectured, it
may be a stimulus for them to ensure that the student attend as
required. He said some students miss over 100 days per year,
and there is a direct correlation between attendance and
performance. Whatever can be done to assist parents in getting
their child to school should be a focus. Therefore, if parents
wanted year-a-round school with time between quarters, such a
schedule should also be supported. Emphasis for attendance
versus stipulating when attendance will occur is important, he
stressed. Also, a case could be made for the benefit to the
student in having a longer school day, and teachers would
appreciate having extended time to cover lesson plans. The
teacher contract is negotiable with the local union bargaining
unit he finished, and urged passage of the bill.
8:40:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked about the correlation between
attendance and performance and asked for the outside limits;
when might effectiveness begin to fade.
DR. GATZKE offered that a six-day school week provides a higher
performance even with a shortened school year.
8:41:33 AM
LAUREN BURCH, Superintendent, Southeast Island School District,
said the Southeast Island School District requested a four-day
school week for the last school year, as a grassroots initiative
from the nine school communities in the area. Over ninety
percent of the community members are behind taking this
approach, and the teachers are also supportive. He suggested
that amending the bill to add language stating "or board
approved alternative schedule" would address the concern for
minimum days relating to teacher retirement. Considering the
sports and other activities, he projected that attendance could
be improved by 20 percent, as many Friday or Monday dates are
used for students to travel for either school or private
reasons. The district request was turned down by EED due to
lack of information regarding how a four-day week could work in
a small rural area. He pointed out that the district's proposal
includes professional development time for teacher's to be
scheduled for Fridays, and is a radical improvement. Having
nine schools that are separated by large distances, it is
difficult to bring staff together and this would help that
effort immensely. The district is considered successful by any
standard, he reported, and stressed that there are a dozen ways
for students to attain an education. The current structure
results in students missing too many school days.
8:47:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON noted that not all schools will go to
the four-day school week, and asked for clarification.
MR. BURCH responded that a number of school calendars are
proposed and chosen by majority rule. Many of the schools only
have 10 students with a variety of specific needs and if one
chose to stay with a five-day program, it would be important to
take that under consideration.
8:50:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked what would constitute an expression
of compelling support to approve a pilot four-day week at either
an individual school or district wide.
MR. BURCH said majority vote has been the rule, and the Advisory
School Council (ASC) community meetings are highly attended;
voting includes students. He said that the district wide ASC
vote was over 80 percent last year and the voting can be
reported by site. The ASC wields a heavy influence over school
operations, he added.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER queried whether the district would be
locked into a three year compliance period, or could it return
to a five-day status on demand.
MR. BURCH responded that the ASC would expect to be able to
request an immediate change if the program were not
satisfactory.
8:54:48 AM
BING SANTAMOUR, stated support for HB 21, and said it should be
available to other districts as well. The existing [statute]
allowing a district to apply for a four-day school week may be
all that is necessary, if it is broadened, she suggested, and
urged support of the bill.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:57 a.m. to 9:56 a.m.
9:56:57 AM
CHAIR GATTIS apologized for the extended at-ease and announced
that HB 21 would be held over.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 87 Sponsors Statement.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 87A.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB087CS.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 87 AEBSD Supporting SESA.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 87_SESA Powerpoint_Policy.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 87_SESA_LegAudit_Report.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 87_SESA_position paper.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |
| HB 21 Fiscal Note Administration.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB0021A.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB21 Montana 2011.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB21 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB21 SREB 4 Day.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB21 Univ Maine Research.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB21 UnivGA & Maine.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB 21 Fiscal Note Education.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 21 |
| HB 87 Fiscal Note DEED.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 87 |