Legislature(2019 - 2020)ADAMS 519
03/13/2020 01:30 PM 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 | |
| HB185 | |
| HB24 | |
| HJR15 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 300 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 306 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | HB 235 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 185 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
HOUSE BILL NO. 24
"An Act relating to instruction in a language other
than English; and relating to limited teacher
certificates."
1:43:00 PM
REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-TOMPKINS, SPONSOR, provided
a brief reintroduction of the bill. The bill would create
an immersion language certificate to help address the need
and documented problems in school districts around Alaska
in terms of getting fluent speakers of languages in
classrooms for immersion language programs.
Representative Josephson MOVED to ADOPT Amendment 1 (copy
on file):
Page 1, line I 1, following "English":
Insert "and the instruction is provided only to
students who are enrolled in a language immersion
program"
Representative Wool OBJECTED.
Representative Wool spoke to his objection. He had talked
with the bill sponsor, the amendment sponsor, and his local
school district. The bill sponsor just mentioned that one
of the purposes of the bill was to provide foreign language
teachers in immersion programs around Alaska. However, most
of the immersion programs were in Anchorage. There were
seven immersion programs in Anchorage, one in Wasilla, and
one in Bethel. There were no immersion programs in Juneau,
Ketchikan, Fairbanks, or Nome. He had talked to his school
district in the previous year when he first saw the bill,
which was in a different form than it was presently. In
discussions in the prior year and recently, school board
members supported the bill, as it was difficult to find
foreign language teachers. He noted his daughter was
currently in middle school which had no foreign language
classes. He also noted the difficulty the local high school
had in finding and retaining foreign language teachers. He
thought the bill provided a good opportunity to expand
foreign language beyond the immersion programs that existed
mainly in Southcentral Alaska. He opposed the amendment
because it was limited to immersion programs. Fairbanks was
the second or third largest community in Alaska and did not
currently have an immersion program. He did not want to
exclude his school district from the legislation.
1:45:53 PM
Representative Josephson explained the amendment. The bill
was essentially about immersion programs. There had been
concern expressed by several of the members of the
committee about the necessity and intent of the bill. He
found, through research and review, the bill was worthy.
However, the bill was about limited language immersion
programs. His amendment would clarify that holders of the
new limited language immersion teachers' certificate could
only teach in immersion programs. They would not be
allowed, for example, to teach in an immersion program in
the morning and teach standard foreign language classes or
English as a second language in the afternoon. The
amendment reflected the intent of the bill expressed in
testimony to the finance committee. His amendment was
intended to be friendly. It was his understanding that the
bill sponsor was neutral in his position on the amendment.
Representative Josephson continued that the goal of HB 24
was to address the need to hire native language speakers
and foreign citizens or recent immigrants to teach subject
matter classes in indigenous or foreign languages within
immersion programs. The teachers might have less formal
education than required of other classroom teachers but,
they were essential to the survival of immersion programs.
He accepted that waiving the standard classroom teacher
qualifications was necessary as he had described. However,
the legislation was not intended to allow regular foreign
language classes to be taught by individuals who did not
meet requirements for either a Type M limited certificate
or what used to be called a Type A certificate (It was
currently called something else). His amendment made the
distinction clear. He asked members for their support.
1:47:57 PM
Co-Chair Foster was attracted to the bill because of
language revitalization and how it could be applied in
rural Alaska. He saw the bill as an avenue for the further
expansion of teaching languages. He pondered whether the
bill would apply to a community without a language
immersion program. He wondered if the amendment would
detract from a communitys ability to do things.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins understood the amendment to
apply only to world languages. The amendment as it related
to indigenous languages would have no effect. However, the
representative was correct that presently, the passage of
HB 24 would not change the reality of native language
opportunities in certain communities. He reported that
there were a number of school districts around Alaska that
were looking at standing up immersion language programs. He
thought Representative Wool's comments were accurate. He
was aware of one school district that was about to launch
an immersion language program for the Inupiat language. He
was also aware of there being a significant amount of
interest in Southeast Alaska in immersion language programs
by multiple school districts.
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins addressed Representative
Fosters question regarding native language revitalization.
He remarked that there might be a number of school
districts that would benefit from the passage of the
legislation.
1:50:41 PM
Vice-Chair Ortiz clarified that the amendment would not
impact in any way the ability for communities to be able to
offer immersion language programs. The amendment only
related to foreign languages.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins and his staff were
considering the amendment language with the bill language.
1:51:27 PM
ERIN HARRINGTON, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-
TOMPKINS, believed the amendment would apply to all
immersion language programs. Therefore, it would be
inclusive of all immersion language programs for Alaska
Native languages. She suggested looking to the sponsor of
the amendment to provide further clarification.
1:51:56 PM
AT EASE
1:53:08 PM
RECONVENED
Representative Josephson explained that the amendment did
not change anything with the present system or with a
Type M certificate. He reiterated that his amendment spoke
to the new class of certificates which could not be used in
a regular school.
Representative Wool thought that he heard Representative
Josephson state that a Type M instructor could teach in a
regular school. However, he thought a Type M certificate
was only applicable to Alaska Native languages or some
other skill such as welding or military science. He
reiterated that in reference to foreign languages, a Type M
certificate would only apply to Alaska Native languages in
terms of teaching in a non-immersion school. He had asked
the bill sponsor if the bill would apply only to immersion
schools or whether it would apply to regular schools. The
bill sponsor had replied that it was a grey area. The
representative wanted to see students not in an immersion
school have the opportunity to take foreign language
classes. He did not want to see children denied if they
were not in an immersion school. He noted that there were
several charter schools in Fairbanks but argued that most
kids attended public school. He believed foreign language
was an important part of a childs education. He did not
want to see anyone excluded from an opportunity. He
supported the bill but not the amendment.
1:55:46 PM
Representative LeBon asserted it became complicated when
asking an immersion teacher to work within the regular
school structure. He thought there was a distinction.
Representative Wool was not trying to implement immersion
programs where they did not currently exist. He was
speaking to the fact that there was a shortage of regular
foreign language teachers. The school board had been in
support of measures that would make it easier to bring in
instructors. Instructors would have to be approved by a
school district board and have appropriate qualifications.
1:57:31 PM
Co-Chair Foster sensed that the amendment was narrowing
options rather than keeping the scope as broad as possible.
Co-Chair Johnston echoed the Co-Chair's thoughts. She spoke
of the Anchorage School District. Some immersion programs
had to be built to the level of immersion. She would not
support the amendment.
Vice-Chair Ortiz was unclear how the amendment would be
further narrowing scope.
Representative Wool referenced the amendment. He argued
that the Fairbanks School District did not have a language
immersion program but offered foreign language. He thought
the amendment would provide a vehicle to hire someone that
was qualified.
Vice-Chair Ortiz thought Representative Wool wanted
individuals qualified for the certification to be able to
use it to instruct foreign language. He thought the Type M
certification already applied.
Representative Wool was under the impression that the
Type M certification, as it related to foreign language,
only applied to Alaska Native languages.
2:00:58 PM
Representative Josephson noted that the amendment was
consistent with the bill which was about limited immersion
language certificates. He was offering the amendment to
simply keep the bill in line with its original purpose. He
did not believe the amendment did offence to the bill.
Co-Chair Johnston indicated there were testifiers online.
2:02:48 PM
Representative Wool understood Representative Josephson's
concern but trusted that school boards would be selective
in who they hired and yearly approval would be required. He
noted that there were already Type M teachers working in
public schools such as welding instructors who did not have
a 4-year degree. He provided other examples of exemptions.
The goal was to get teachers certified. He argued that
there was a shortage of teachers in the school system
including foreign language teachers. He suggested the
amendment would be more restrictive and indicated he could
not support the amendment.
Representative Wool MAINTAINED his objection.
A roll call vote was taken on the motion.
IN FAVOR: Knopp, LeBon, Ortiz, Sullivan-Leonard, Tilton,
Josephson
OPPOSED: Wool, Carpenter, Foster, Johnston, Merrick
The MOTION PASSED (6/5). Amendment 1 to HB 24 was ADOPTED.
2:05:36 PM
AT EASE
2:05:52 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Johnston invited Mr. Pearson to review the new
fiscal note.
ROBERT PEARSON, LOCAL GOVERNMENT SPECIALIST, DIVISION OF
COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL AFFAIRS, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE,
COMMUNITY, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference),
relayed that the department changed its fiscal note to zero
to reflect the reality that there was currently no travel
planned for the fiscal year for the Alaska Native Language
Commission. The department anticipated maintaining a zero
cost in the future.
HB 24 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
2:06:45 PM
AT EASE
2:07:04 PM
RECONVENNED
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 24 ver. K Amendment 1 3.13.2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/13/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 24 |
| HB 185 ver. K Amendment 1 3.13.2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/13/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HB 185 |
| HJR 15 public Testimony rec'd by 031320.pdf |
HFIN 3/13/2020 1:30:00 PM |
HJR 15 |