Legislature(2019 - 2020)ADAMS 519
03/10/2020 09:00 AM House FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB24 | |
| HB155 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 155 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 181 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 24
"An Act relating to instruction in a language other
than English; and relating to limited teacher
certificates."
10:11:10 AM
Co-Chair Johnston indicated the bill sponsor was not yet
available.
10:11:20 AM
AT EASE
10:12:15 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Johnston indicated Vice-Chair Ortiz had joined the
meeting.
REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-TOMPKINS, SPONSOR, indicated
the bill was related to immersion language. He referenced
HB 102 from the previous session that died on the floor.
The bill related to the growing trend of immersion
languages in the country. There was a problem getting
immersion language teachers. He explained there were 2
problems related to immersion languages. He mentioned
Anchorage's immersion language programs.
10:15:08 AM
ERIN HARRINGTON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-
TOMPKINS, introduced herself. She stated that the
certificate was very limited. She remarked that the
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) would
have the criteria and the bill created a narrow path to
ensure that the certificates were properly used for
immersion language instruction.
Representative Sullivan-Leonard asked what the state had
available for those teachers already in place.
Ms. Harrington broadly spoke that there were a number of
certificates available for instructors. She stated that
they presented some limitations, but for those teachers
that could check all boxes, they could make it into the
classroom.
Co-Chair Johnston indicated a testifier online.
Representative Sullivan-Leonard was happy to hear from Ms.
Meredith.
10:18:52 AM
SONDRA MEREDITH, TEACHER CERTIFICATION ADMINISTRATOR,
DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT (via
teleconference), explained the different certificates.
Representative Josephson asked about a dearth of applicants
when there was an opening and vacancy.
Ms. Harrington understood that depending on the language
they could run into specific challenges. She deferred to
Mr. Locke to address the specifics.
Representative Josephson wondered whether there was
anticipation for the districts to treat the certified
people as a Type A certificate for salary and benefit
purposes.
Ms. Harrington responded that it would be treated on a
district basis, because bargaining agreements occurred on a
district basis. She noted that it was a concern about
ensuring that these people not be treated as lesser
instructors, so there was conversation with the Anchorage
School District on that issue. She noted that there was a
note in the packet from the Anchorage School District that
assured that the instructors be treated the same as any
other teacher as it relates to salary, retirement, and
benefits.
Representative Josephson was concerned because he had
worked hard to get a master's degree in order to teach. He
reference Version E of the bill on the top of page 2. It
ensured that the person was competence as a teacher. He
thought there were 2 aspects to competence: Competence as a
teacher and of the subject matter.
Ms. Harrington referred to Section B. The Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) would have to write
regulations that the instruction would have to ensure that
the correct regulations and requirements were in place for
hiring. She also indicated a school district would have to
be nominated by the school district. Mr. Locke could speak
to the process of recruiting teachers from other countries.
10:26:29 AM
Representative Tilton referred to the sponsor statement
which mentioned outcomes. She asked if the sponsor had any
metrics.
Ms. Harrington responded that in general, it was found that
students that were instructed in immersion programs were
productive in general and in results in English. She
provided an example of elementary students and the positive
results that came with learning an additional language.
Vice-Chair Ortiz thought the definition allowed the
teaching of everything. He was confused about how the
subject area would be limited.
Ms. Harrington responded that in the K-6 environment, the
goal was to have 60 percent of the day be the student's
language of regular use. It was best to have a subject
matter taught in the language they use regularly. She
indicated Mr. Locke could make additional comments. At no
point did the bill sponsor believe that a child be learning
solely in another language.
10:31:14 AM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked if an instructor specializing in
immersion language would be the only teacher in the room.
Ms. Harrington responded in the negative, and stated that
there would be 2 teachers for every child.
Vice-Chair Ortiz thought Ms. Harrington had spoken as if
there were already "Certificate M" in place. He wondered
what would be added to what was offered through Certificate
M.
Ms. Harrington replied that the immersion setting, the full
wrap-around aspect, was what helped a child to acquire a
language.
Co-Chair Johnston indicated Representative Wool had joined
the meeting.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins added that Type M
certificate was too narrow.
10:35:01 AM
Co-Chair Foster noted that some colleges required a year or
two of language prior to college. He wondered if the
instruction from an immersion program would qualify for
that requirement.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins thought that it would be
determined by the school district. He provided an example
of a Native immersion language program.
Representative LeBon shared a personal experience. His
daughter began in an immersion program learning Japanese.
He provided further detail of the program and its benefits
for his daughter. He recalled that the Japanese instructor
remained with the regular instructor in the classroom.
Representative Josephson noted the value of a real
immersion program. He stressed that an elementary teacher
had a real skill set. He was concerned that the level of
schooling for immersion instructors was much less than for
real teachers.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins answered that there were
many safeguards in place, such as the school board had to
vote on the certification of the teacher. Finally, the
person had to get support by the State Board of Education.
The certificate was designed for professionals. He thought
the program was designed with rigor in mind. He shared the
concerns of Representative Josephson.
Co-Chair Johnston asked to move to the fiscal note and the
sectional. She directed Ms. Harrington to review the
sectional.
10:44:21 AM
Ms. Harrington reviewed the sectional analysis:
Sectional Analysis | CSHB 24 (L and C) Limited Language
Immersion Teacher Certificates
Section 1. Amends 14.20 with a new section, 14.20.023,
Limited language immersion teacher certificates.
Page 1, Lines 1 to 4
Title change to reflect new structure of the bill.
Page 1, Line 7 to 11: 14.20.023(a)
Gives the Department of Education the ability to issue
a limited language immersion teacher certificate.
Page 1, Line 12 to Page 2, Line 5: 14.20.023(b)
A person may only receive a limited language immersion
teacher certificate if they demonstrate "instructional
skills and subject matter expertise sufficient to
assure the public that the person is competent as a
teacher." This language is used in current law, and
like in current law, the state board of education is
empowered to write regulations interpreting it.
The state board of education's regulations may require
that a limited certificate holder undertake additional
academic training.
Page 2, Lines 6 to 13: 14.20.023(c)
Limited language immersion teacher certificates can
only be issued to a person if the school board of the
district in which the person will teach has requested
a limited certificate for that specific person. The
limited certificate is valid only in the district that
makes the request.
Page 2, Lines 14 to 17: 14.20.023(d)
Gives the state board of education authority to write
regulations implementing AS 14.20.025. Provides that
the regulations cannot require a certificate applicant
to achieve a minimum score on an exam unless that exam
is given in the instructional language the March 2,
2020 certificate will be valid for (e.g. a teacher who
will be teaching only in German or Inupiaq cannot be
required to pass an exam given in English).
Page 2, Lines 18 to 24: 14.20.023(e)
Limited certificates are initially valid for one year.
Terms and lengths of extension and renewal shall be
set by the state board of education. In order for a
limited certificate to be extended or renewed, the
school board that initially requested the certificate
must certify that the certificate holder has
demonstrated skills in classroom instruction and
student assessment.
Page 2, Lines 25 to 31: 14.20.023(f)
Section (f) differentiates between teachers of Alaska
Native languages and world languages for the purposes
of certificate renewal. World language teachers
(described as those teaching a language that is not an
Alaska Native language) are limited to five years of
licensure under the limited teacher certificate
offered in AS 14.20.023. Teachers of Alaska Native
languages may hold these certificates for longer than
five years.
Section 2. Amends AS 44.33.520(a)
This section changes the name of the Alaska Native
Language and Preservation Council to the Council for
Alaska Native Languages.
Section 3. Amends AS 44.33.520(c)
This section increases the number of seats on the
Council for Alaska Native Languages (formerly ANLPAC)
from five to seven members.
Section 4. Revisor's Instructions
This section provides direction to the Revisor of
Statutes to make corresponding changes in statutes
that reference the renamed Council of Alaska Native
Languages.
Ms. Meredith reviewed the fiscal note by the Department of
Education and Early Development.
Co-Chair Johnston wondered whether the $6000 was funds for
the Department of Law.
Ms. Meredith responded in the affirmative. She stated that
the money was intended to support the processes to draft
and work with the Department of Law to prepare the
regulations for the regulatory process.
Representative Carpenter wondered why there was an increase
to the number of seats to the Council on Native Languages.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded that it was in
response to a request, and it did not have any fiscal
impact.
10:50:26 AM
Representative Carpenter asked about exclusions for members
of the legislature to be able to serve on the board.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded that there were
advisory members of the council, but that there were 5 core
positions appointed by the governor
Representative Carpenter responded in the negative. He was
referencing the limitation of the people in the legislature
being able to serve on the board.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins replied that the language
was already in statute.
10:52:41 AM
Co-Chair Johnston invited Mr. Locke to limit his testimony
to 4 minutes.
BRANDON LOCKE, WORLD LANGUAGES AND IMMERSION PROGRAMS,
ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT (via teleconference), reported
that the school district had about 3,000 students involved
in immersion programs in the school district. He explained
the different programs, and languages that were offered.
10:57:20 AM
Representative Josephson was good friend with Mr. Cooley
and Mr. Dirson in his district. He asked how many teacher
would be available to take his place.
Mr. Locke responded that the school district had several
more applicants for non-immersion position rather than an
immersion position.
Representative Josephson asked if there just were not many
applicants.
Mr. Locke responded that there were very few.
11:00:30 AM
Representative Wool noted that teachers who had a first
language other than English, were better speakers in that
first language. He wondered how long the program had been
around, and the number of applicants.
Mr. Locke commented that the programs were new, so district
did not have any applicants.
Representative Wool talked about successes in the standard
public school. He wondered if success was based on the
number of teachers.
Mr. Locke replied that DEED had a variety of
certifications, and there were some emergency certificates.
He remarked that of the elementary immersion teachers,
there were also a variety that were sponsored on a Visa
through the federal government for a minimum of three
years.
Co-Chair Johnston wanted to finish invited testimony.
11:05:06 AM
CORDELIA KELLIE, ALASKA NATIVE LANGUAGE REVITALIZATION
COMMUNITY, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference), spoke in support
of HB 24. She stressed that her time was spent attempting
to revitalize the Native languages in the state. She
understood that there were barriers to grow immersion in
schools. She stressed that there was a hope to build those
Alaska Native language immersion programs in schools in
real time.
Co-Chair Johnston OPENED public testimony.
11:11:18 AM
MARGIE DASHEVSKY, SELF, ANCHORAGE (via teleconference),
spoke in support of the bill. She indicated there was a
great need in Alaska for language immersion programs.
Co-Chair Johnston CLOSED public testimony.
Co-Chair Johnston indicated the committee would hold off
hearing HB 181.
Representative Wool asked about whether a school district
could hire a teacher using the certificate, or whether it
was only for immersion school.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded that it was not
the intent of the legislation, so effectively that could
not occur.
Representative Wool referred to the type M certification.
He asked if it was insufficient, so that was the reason for
the legislation.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded that the current
type M certificate was not sufficient for immersion
language teaching.
Representative Wool wondered about a typical applicant who
might be from another country.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins suspected the regulations
would be established to ensure proper qualifications.
11:15:28 AM
Representative Josephson asked why there was a limitation
on world languages of four years.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded the teachers would
ultimately receive fully traditionally certification, so
the immersion certificate would be considered a
"steppingstone."
Representative Wool asked about the 5-year limitation. He
wondered if tenure applied to the program participants.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins agreed to provide that
information.
HB 24 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.