Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
03/13/2013 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB142 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 120 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| *+ | HB 142 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 13, 2013
8:04 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Lynn Gattis, Chair
Representative Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative Harriet Drummond
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 142
"An Act increasing the monthly stipend available for students
attending a statewide boarding school operated by a school
district; and providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 120
"An Act adjusting pupil transportation funding; and providing
for an effective date."
- SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 142
SHORT TITLE: STIPEND FOR STATEWIDE BOARDING SCHOOL
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GATTIS
02/25/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/25/13 (H) EDC, FIN
03/11/13 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/11/13 (H) <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 3/13/13>
03/13/13 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff
Representative Lynn Gattis
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented the proposed committee substitute
for HB 142, on behalf of the bill sponsor, Representative
Gattis.
ERIC GEBHART, Superintendent
Nenana City Public School District
Nenana, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 142.
CHRIS REITAN, Superintendent
Galena City School District
Galena, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions, during discussion
on HB 142.
DR. NORMAN ECK, Superintendent
Northwest Arctic Borough School District
Kotzebue, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions, during discussion
of HB 142.
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 142.
SCOTT BALLARD, Superintendent
Iditarod Area School District
McGrath, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during discussion of HB 142.
LISA RIEGER
Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 142.
DOREEN LORENZ, Chair
Friends of Jesse Lee Home
Seward, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 142.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:04:15 AM
CHAIR LYNN GATTIS called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:04 a.m. Representatives Gattis, P.
Wilson, Seaton, Reinbold, and LeDoux were present at the call to
order.
HB 142-STIPEND FOR STATEWIDE BOARDING SCHOOL
8:04:36 AM
CHAIR GATTIS announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 142, "An Act increasing the monthly stipend
available for students attending a statewide boarding school
operated by a school district; and providing for an effective
date."
8:05:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 142, labeled 28-LS0570\C, Mischel,
3/11/13.
8:05:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected for discussion.
8:05:28 AM
LINDA SYLVESTER, Staff, Representative Lynn Gattis, Alaska State
Legislature, said that proposed HB 142 focused on an increase to
the stipends for reimbursement to school districts which
operated state funded boarding schools.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON suggested that it would be preferable to
remove the objection before discussion of the proposed CS.
8:06:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD removed her objection, and there being
no further objection, Version C was adopted as the working
document.
8:06:45 AM
MS. SYLVESTER noted that the State of Alaska currently funded
and operated a boarding school, Mt. Edgecumbe High School, and
that, in 2005, school districts which operated residential
schools were also recognized. These were in Galena, Nenana, and
the Bethel Alternative boarding school. In 2005, legislation
had been passed for a modest stipend for reimbursement of
residential costs to these school districts. The reimbursed
costs included food, lodging, and full time supervision. She
directed attention to the increased funding in the proposed
committee substitute, and mentioned that the aforementioned
school districts were the only districts which qualified for
funding. She lauded the successful results from each of these
schools.
8:08:31 AM
MS. SYLVESTER presented a brief video of the Galena Interior
Learning Academy.
8:12:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if these were the only boarding
schools in the state.
MS. SYLVESTER replied that there were other boarding schools
operating, and that she would further explain.
8:13:04 AM
MS. SYLVESTER referred to the handout titled "Galena Interior
Learning Academy, Residence Life Revenues and Expenditures."
[Included in members' packets] She directed attention to the
second page, which listed the 26 school districts in 67
communities which were home for the 181 students. She moved on
to page 4, which listed the offered curriculum. She declared
that the Academy's appeal was as an alternative to very small
schools or home schooling.
8:14:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX directed attention to the bottom of page 2
and asked about the Anchorage notation.
MS. SYLVESTER offered her belief that a student could arrive at
the school from the Anchorage area, although they had community
ties to another school district. She deferred for further
clarification.
8:15:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for an explanation of the column
headers on page 2, "Community" and "District of Residence."
8:16:10 AM
MS. SYLVESTER opined that the "community" was in the school
"district of residence."
8:16:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON expressed her agreement.
8:17:30 AM
MS. SYLVESTER directed attention to page 1, line 4, of the
proposed committee substitute, Version C. She explained that
this would eliminate the original time restriction for stipends
to schools in operation prior to January 1, 2005. She declared
that, as the model had proved to be successful, the programs
were encouraged by the State of Alaska. She reported that the
Department of Education and Early Development (EED) had
presented a request for proposal (RFP) to qualify three
additional programs for reimbursement.
8:18:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked why there was not a 5 or 10 year
period for evaluation.
MS. SYLVESTER replied that there were tight checks and balances
built into the system. She explained that, as the schools which
were approved for the RFP would request funding from the Alaska
State Legislature in the future, it was possible for legislators
to approve continued funding. She detailed that, in 2005, the
original legislation had provided a small stipend, which had
remained in place until 2011, when it was doubled for a two year
period. She pointed out that this would expire on June 30,
2013, and, if no action was taken, the stipend would be halved
for the three participating schools and there would not be any
expansion for the program.
8:20:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON, recalling that financial support had
been doubled from its initial amount, asked to clarify that the
proposed committee substitute would triple the initial
reimbursement.
MS. SYLVESTER clarified that the proposed increase to
reimbursement would be 33.5 percent larger than the current
amount.
8:21:48 AM
CHAIR GATTIS responded to Representative Wilson's query and
indicated that further information would be presented, noting
that the intent of the original bill was for contributions to be
made by the participants and their communities.
8:22:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked how the student test results
compared with public schools.
MS. SYLVESTER deferred to testimony from other witnesses.
8:23:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked to clarify that the legislature
would have the option to fund individual schools.
MS. SYLVESTER directed attention to the proposed CS, Version C,
page 2, line 21, and she read: "a district under terms and
conditions required for licensing in the state and as specified
by the department in regulation." She elaborated that the EED
had regulations and conditions for school funding, some of which
were listed in Version C, page 1, lines 12 - 13.
8:25:33 AM
CHAIR GATTIS suggested posing the question to the EED
commissioner.
8:25:52 AM
MS. SYLVESTER explained that the proposed CS also included
schools with variable length, flexible programs, although the
school still had to be a 180-day public school.
8:27:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 1, line 10 of the
proposed CS and asked if Mt. Edgecombe High School was operated
by a district or the state.
MS. SYLVESTER replied that Mt. Edgecombe High School was not
included in the proposed bill, as it was state owned and was
funded through appropriations from the state operating and
capital budgets. She shared that the schools referenced in the
proposed CS were operated by school districts.
8:28:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked about the requirement for a
student dormitory on page 1, line 12, of the proposed CS. She
asked for clarification regarding the students who did not have
the need for a dormitory.
MS. SYLVESTER, in response, said that some students in Galena
lived at home, and these students did not receive a stipend.
She pointed out that Chugach School District had a similar
situation, applied for the aforementioned RFP, and had submitted
a letter of support for the proposed bill [Included in members'
packets].
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for more testimony regarding
students living in dormitories and living at home.
8:30:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if Galena Interior Learning Academy
was the only option for high school in Galena.
MS. SYLVESTER replied that it was the high school in Galena.
8:30:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to page 1, line 14 and
asked if average daily membership (ADM) and regular funding were
also applied for the variable term length programs.
MS. SYLVESTER replied that the students would qualify for the
base student allocation, and the school district could seek
reimbursement. She deferred to EED for further response.
8:32:56 AM
MS. SYLVESTER directed attention to page 2, lines 18 - 22, and
explained that this section allowed for a school district to
cooperate with a non-profit organization for the operation of a
boarding school on behalf of the school district. She pointed
out that page 2, line 23, repealed the "preclusion in statute
that a charter school may not have a boarding school component."
8:34:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked about the rationale for restricting
the ability to contract for the provision of room and board with
only Alaska Native or non-profit organizations, and did not
allow for a bid from for-profit organizations.
MS. SYLVESTER deferred.
CHAIR GATTIS replied that this had been a concern during the
drafting of the bill. She stated that, as the sponsor of the
proposed bill, she would welcome a further expansion for
inclusion of other organizations.
8:35:35 AM
MS. SYLVESTER directed attention to the fiscal note for the
proposed bill included in members' packets reflects a 33.5
percent increase to the current funding.
8:37:01 AM
ERIC GEBHART, Superintendent, Nenana City Public School
District, explained that the Nenana Student Living Center, where
students lived while attending the city school, was a part of
the Nenana City School District. He reported that the facility
had been in operation for 12 years. He stated his support for
the proposed CS for HB 142. He said that the actual costs for
food, housing, and student care were considered in formulating
the request for a stipend increase. He declared that commitment
from the community was significant, and that community resources
were drawn on to support the facility. He shared that, although
part of the student application required that grades and test
scores be submitted, the primary consideration was for retention
and success for an entire school year. He noted that the school
district had not attained Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) during
the last two years; however, the vast majority of students who
remained in the program for at least two years had become
successful and graduated. He noted that data indicated that
students who did not finish school in Nenana, but graduated from
high school in their home district, also had a higher level of
success. He described the opportunities that the program
offered students, which included college level math courses, an
excellent music program, a student leadership team, work
experiences, and local civic assistance.
8:43:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for quantification to the statement
that the community provided significant support.
MR. GEBHART replied that the City of Nenana provided the
financial support for the student housing, and that local
activities and engagement included the students.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked for a comparison of AYP test scores
at the Nenana High School to those at the schools which the
students had previously attended.
MR. GEBHART replied that the returning student scores indicated
that AYP was being achieved, noting that it took time to raise
the level of achievement.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX restated her question for a comparison of
scores from Nenana High School with the students' originating
schools.
MR. GEBHART offered to provide this information to the
committee.
8:47:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked what grades were served by the
Nenana boarding school.
MR. GEBHART replied that the school was for grades 9-12.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for the total number of students,
and how many were from the immediate area.
MR. GEBHART, in response, stated that there was an enrollment of
200 students, with 85 student residents at the living center.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked if this enrollment was for all
grade levels.
MR. GEBHART replied that the enrollment was for K - 12, and that
there were 10-12 students per grade.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON inquired about the application process.
MR. GEBHART explained that the parents and students completed an
application, which included a statement explaining why they
would like to attend.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for more information regarding
the retention rate.
MR. GEBHART reported that in July, 2008, when he first arrived,
the living center had 40 students and there were now 70
students.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked about the percentage of
retention.
MR. GEBHART reported that 70 students remained from an original
88 students, which approached the goal of 80 percent retention.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked about the number of graduating
students each year.
MR. GEBHART replied that, in 2013, there would be 11 graduates,
and, in 2012, there were about 22 graduates.
8:51:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, directing attention to the variable term
length proposed in the CS, asked how that would affect the
Nenana High School compared with the full school year option.
MR. GEBHART replied that Nenana had a full school year program
and would not participate in the variable length program. He
stated his support for the variable length program at other
schools as it provided additional choices for students.
8:53:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD reported that she was "worried about
long term sustainability and we wanna get a good rate of return
on our investment." She asked if Nenana City School District
anticipated an increase in its AYP.
MR. GEBHART replied that the school district endeavored annually
toward this end. He clarified that the priority was for
substantial growth by every student, but the level of increase
could be dependent on their educational background and their
work ethic.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD questioned the low graduation rate,
citing graduation of only 34 students out of 500 students. She
then asked about the cost per student, and whether the parents
contributed. She declared that "it just seems like where people
invest themselves, you tend to get, you know, more buy-in and a
commitment."
MR. GEBHART questioned the figures cited by Representative
Reinbold, pointing out that, although approximately 500 students
had attended the Nenana Student Living Center and 134 students
had graduated, virtually all of them had graduated from high
school somewhere. He emphasized that there was a very high
graduation rate of students who had attended the center.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated that the Anchorage School
District had a 70 percent graduation rate. She repeated her
question regarding parental contributions.
MR. GEBHART explained that the stipend provided for room and
board at the living center, while the students paid for personal
entertainment and needs. He reported that the State of Alaska
reimbursed the school district for student travel to the school
at the beginning of the school year, and then return travel at
the end of the school year. He pointed out that any additional
travel was the responsibility of the family. He noted that some
students could not afford to return after the Christmas holiday.
He reported that activity fees, including travel for sports,
music events, or similar, were the responsibility of the
student.
8:59:18 AM
CHRIS REITAN, Superintendent, Galena City School District,
explained that, although Galena and Nenana had similar
operational nuances, each had a different focus and program
offering, which allowed for student choices to best fit their
needs. He addressed the question for "skin in the game," and
pointed out the difficulty for parents to not have their
children at home. He lauded this selfless commitment to offer
the best opportunity to their child. Regarding the financial
aspect for "skin in the game," he reported that there was a
student activity fee of $150.00 each per semester. He reported
that occasionally local students in Galena had applied and lived
in the dormitory for specific personal reasons. He said that
the school district was not funded for these students, but that
it was "best for the family and best for that particular
student." Directing attention to the aforementioned handout
titled "Galena Interior Learning Academy, Residence Life
Revenues and Expenditures," he noted the difference between
"District of Residence" and "Community" and explained that the
data reflected the District from which the student had
previously attended school, but the Community could be the
result of a family move after acceptance into the residential
program, and was the current home of the family. He reported
that the graduation data and the AYP were considered
independently, noting that there was 100 percent graduation by
any student who had arrived into the boarding school program as
a freshman. He pointed out that, when students arrived, the AYP
may not indicate proficiency, but by the senior year, if the
student was retained, graduation would occur. He explained that
the application for Galena was completed entirely online, and
then an interview was conducted with the parent and the student.
Galena had a focus on career and technical education, and that
should be reflected in the application. He said there was not
extensive screening of academic background. He shared that
Galena also had a local high school, but would accept a local
student based on interest and need.
9:07:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked if the application process,
specifically the interview aspect, had changed over time to give
a better feel for the student. She asked whether students were
allowed to solely focus on the vocational education classes, or
were required to also take other course work.
MR. REITAN replied that the previous paper application process
had been streamlined from the back and forth telephone calls to
the current online application with a telephone interview. He
repeated that it was most important to ensure that students
would be a good fit in the residence hall. He shared that
students would leave for interpersonal reasons but not because
of the academic classes. In response to Representative P.
Wilson, he said that full high school requirements were in place
for students to complete the high school graduation requirement
exam. He said that it was impossible for a student to complete
the required hours for a technical certificate, such as the
requirements for cosmetology, and still meet the other
graduation requirements. He said that many students would
return for a semester as a postsecondary student, or transition
into another program, in order to complete the necessary hours
to qualify for the state boards. He reported that most students
took at least two career technical education (CTE) course
programs.
9:12:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked if the students were allowed a
stipend for postsecondary work.
MR. REITAN replied that postsecondary students paid 100 percent
of the costs.
9:13:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, pointing to the variable length program
proposed in the CS for HB 142, asked how that would impact
school districts, specifically for the ADM funding.
9:15:02 AM
MR. REITAN replied that the proposed variable length program
would not impact the Galena City School District, as all of the
CTE programs were long term.
9:15:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked to clarify whether students were
present for the entire school year, or for the calendar year.
MR. REITAN stated that the school year began in August and was
completed in May.
9:16:13 AM
DR. NORMAN ECK, Superintendent, Northwest Arctic Borough School
District, declared support for the proposed bill, sharing that
the Northwest Arctic Borough School District would apply to
become a boarding school district. He stated that, although the
school district planned to primarily offer a full year program,
the variable length program could also be offered for semester
length courses such as Process Technology, which prepared
students for trades work in the mines, the pipeline, and the oil
fields. He declared that a goal was to be a magnet school
district in order to attract students, and would specialize in
Process Technology, Education, Culinary Arts, and Health Care
training. He declared that the Northwest Arctic Borough School
District was the only school district in Alaska with a post-
secondary technical center, and, after renovation, would serve
both high school and adult students. He pointed out that the
current kitchen and cafeteria were being remodeled into a
teaching kitchen for the culinary arts, which would allow high
school students to graduate with a certificate in Culinary Arts
and be ready for a job. He announced that these variable length
programs were important for specific certifications. He
declared his support for the increase to reimbursement costs, as
the current amount was not sufficient. He stated that rural
Alaska students needed programs which provided the skills
necessary to be job and career ready. He reported that, as his
school district had five schools with fewer than 3 teaching
positions, it was difficult for these schools to have the
variety of curriculum to offer students the necessary options.
He stated that "the time for boarding facilities for Rural
Alaska has come again."
9:23:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX, referring to the aforementioned "Galena
Interior Learning Academy, Residence Life Revenues and
Expenditures," pointed out that 18 of the 181 students attending
Galena were from the Northwest Arctic Borough School District,
and she asked for further clarification.
DR. ECK explained that his district did not yet have the
residential program, but it was applying. He declared that this
was about choice and options for students, and that Galena
offered many excellent programs. He stated that Anchorage and
Matanuska-Susitna students were some of the only ones in the
state that had viable options close to home.
9:26:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked to clarify that currently there was
not a residential program in the Northwest Arctic Borough School
District.
DR. ECK explained that the district application for residential
schooling was currently being considered.
9:27:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked how the ADM funding would work for
the variable courses at the proposed magnet school. As students
would only be in attendance for a shorter period, this needed to
be fair to all the schools.
9:28:47 AM
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner, Department of Education and Early
Development (EED), pointed out that, as the Alaska Board Of
Education & Early Development had recently adopted a regulation
to recognize variable term programs, a student would not be
funded for a full year, if attending a variable term program.
He stated that the regulation only allowed for a boarding
stipend, while the basic student allocation (BSA) remained with
the student's home district.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked to clarify that it would only be
stipend funding for the variable term program.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY expressed his agreement, pointing out that
it was the home school districts which had brought this question
forward.
9:30:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked about program opportunities for
urban students, similar to those provided in Galena.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY offered his belief that these programs were
not available "to the extent that Galena does," but that
components were available in many other districts.
9:31:38 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY, in response to Representative P. Wilson,
explained that these were monthly stipends for student room and
board. He noted that a one day student count would be performed
for the variable term programs in October and based on
enrollment this would be the annual average. This regulation
would also allow for the average number during a full school
year.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked if the State of Alaska would pay
for a student to attend any school of choice.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY replied that there were currently statewide
programs which were open to any students. He stated that the
proposed bill would also allow programs that were less than a
full year.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON, observing that students from a rural
area could go to any school, questioned if the same would be
true for urban students, with the State of Alaska paying for
room and board, when it was possible for similar programs in
their home area.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY replied that this opportunity was currently
allowed, and that the proposed bill did not change that option.
He pointed out that it was unusual for a student to apply from
an urban area.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON countered that the proposed bill did
change that, as the state would now pay $1,230.00 for each
student, which was a substantial increase. She asked if any
school would consider this to be a money making venture. She
suggested that an unintended consequence of the proposed bill
could be a greater expense for education to the state.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that this reimbursement was up to
$1,230.00 of the actual cost, and was not changed with the
proposed bill. He offered his belief that the intent was to
provide equity between full year and variable term programs. He
pointed out that the travel component allowed for one round trip
per student count, based on the average cost for transporting
students to residential boarding schools. He clarified that, as
the funding was received by the school, the district would
determine how to distribute the fund to maintain equity between
the variable term and the full year programs.
9:38:55 AM
MS. SYLVESTER directed attention to an earlier question
regarding the expansion of the RFP and the programs. She
explained that the RFP process allowed for a response in
cooperation with the department, an acceptance, and then an
approval for funding by the legislature, which would control the
growth of the program. She asked that the commissioner speak to
this mechanism.
9:40:02 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that the student counts in the
boarding programs were considered for additional needs prior to
the approval of new facilities. After approval, EED would work
with the Governor to include these schools in the Governor's
budget. He declared that there was an obligation for funding,
if a school was approved. He pointed out that the success and
quality of the school was always open for review.
9:41:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX shared her concern for a large expansion,
which had been previously expressed by Representative Wilson.
She pointed out that 37 students from urban areas attended
Galena which was 20 percent of the total enrollment of 181
students.
9:42:40 AM
CHAIR GATTIS explained that, although there was a large influx
of people moving into the Matanuska-Susitna area from Rural
Alaska, many students chose to stay in the villages to finish
school.
9:43:47 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON offered his belief that not very many
institutions would provide a variable length program, as the
cost to the district was not supportable. He requested more
information, if this was the intent of the proposed bill;
however, if this bill did not accomplish this, he questioned why
the bill was being introduced.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said that the school districts had "skin in
the game," as the state was not building these schools, and the
school districts would not make money. He clarified that the
proposed bill allowed for some basic measures: a funding
increase to recognize program costs; a variable term program;
and, district-wide programs.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if EED anticipated that the variable
term programs would be provided on a district-wide basis, as the
BSA had already been allocated to the district for cost
coverage.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY directed attention to the Chugach model,
"The Voyage to Excellence," which had an Anchorage-based
program, and brought students for variable term programs after
contracts to support the students had been established on
district levels.
DR. ECK added that, although his school district had an overall
54 percent graduation rate, students who had taken two or more
CTE classes in a career pathway had an 83 percent graduation
rate.
9:49:42 AM
SCOTT BALLARD, Superintendent, Iditarod Area School District,
said that the school district would like to offer an in-district
residential learning center, which would support the small
school sites and expand the curriculum by offering more choices
to students, especially in preparation for qualification for the
Alaska Performance Scholarship.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked how many schools were in the
district for the residential learning center to draw students.
MR. BALLARD replied that there were seven schools, in a district
comparable in size to the State of Ohio, with about 200 students
district wide. He declared that four of the seven schools had
less than 30 students.
9:51:32 AM
LISA RIEGER, Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC), stated that the
Alaska Native organizations were working in cooperation with
school districts to provide residential components. She
declared support for the proposed CS for HB 142 by CITC and the
Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN) as there was general
consensus that more partnerships would lead to greater success
for students. She briefly described the CITC program, which was
a public-private partnership with the Anchorage School District.
She reported that CITC supplied the room, board, and residential
components, while the Anchorage School District provided the
academic and extra-curricular programs. She explained that the
residential program was designed to be an Alaska Native culture-
based leadership program with social and academic support, but
the program was not a therapeutic environment for drug, alcohol,
or emotional issues. She said that 43 percent of the students
arriving in Anchorage were not accompanied by parents, sharing
that students could be homeless, or have home disruptions, and
"just need a stable place to live and go to school." She
pointed out that the Alaska Native graduation rate was 50
percent, compared to the Anchorage School District general
population rate of 70 percent. She mentioned that the stipend
increase did not cover the entire cost of room and board, and
CITC would be leveraging other monies to provide this
opportunity and support.
9:57:28 AM
DOREEN LORENZ, Chair, Friends of Jesse Lee Home, said that the
school was very different than any school in Alaska and would
begin a variable term program in 2014. She described that the
education was hands-on, esteem based, and would allow students
to experience different types of vocations, in order to better
determine what direction they would like to pursue. She listed
the opportunities for learning in the Seward area. She said
that this approach would be similar to the Chugach model,
although unique to all other institutions.
9:59:54 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked to clarify that the model would not
require a base student allocation through the school, but that
the funding would be through contracts with school districts.
MS. LORENZ expressed her agreement.
10:00:36 AM
CHAIR GATTIS said that HB 142 bill would be held over.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:00 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 00 HB 142 Bill Text.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 01 CS HB 142 Version C.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 02 HB 142 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 03 HB 142 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 04 HB 142 Fiscal Note - EED.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 05 HB 142 Background Data - Residence Life Costs FY 11 - FY 13.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 06 HB 142 Background Data - Communities Spring 2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 07 HB 142 Background Data - Offerings Spring 2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 08 HB 142 Background Data - Graduating Classes.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 09 HB 142 Background Data - White Paper 3-3-13.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 10 HB 142 Letter Support - Cook Inlet Tribal Council.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 11 HB 142 Letter Support - Nenana School.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 11.1 HB 142 Letter Support - Chugach School Dist.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 11.2 HB 142 Letter Support - Galena City School Dist.PDF |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 11.3 HB 142 Letter Support - North Slope Leadership Team.PDF |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/15/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 142 |
| 12 HB 120 Bill Text.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 13 HB 120 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 14 HB 120 Fiscal Note - EED-K12.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 15 HB 120 Fiscal Note - EED-PEF.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 16 HB 120 Backup - Leg Research History of Transportation of Pupils 2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 17 HB 120 Letter Support - Anchorage School District 2-28-2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 18 HB 120 Letter Support - Saddler 2-27-2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 19 HB 120 Letter Support - Kenai Peninsula Borough School Dist.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 20 HB 120 Letter Support - North Slope Borough 2-18-2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 21 HB 120 Letter support - Fairbanks 2-22-2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |
| 22 HB 120 Letter Support - MatSu 2-19-2013.PDF |
HEDC 3/13/2013 8:00:00 AM |
HB 120 |