Legislature(1995 - 1996)
05/02/1995 02:04 PM House HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SB 88 - PILOT PROGRAM FOR CHARTER SCHOOLS Number 160 SENATOR BERT SHARP provided the sponsor statement for the bill. He said the issue of charter schools was discussed at length during the two years of the Eighteenth Alaska Legislature. Senator Sharp had the misfortune of having that bill on the Senate side during that time. It was just one small part of the Alaska 2000 propositions in the Senate. It was in two bills, SB 60 and SB 61. Those bills had companion bills in the House. SENATOR SHARP said those two bills, which in all aspects were omnibus education bills, tried to address diverse issues. Each bill was controversial in some way, and each issue tainted or detracted from the other one. This led to the fact that none of them passed. SENATOR SHARP has tried to craft SB 88 to be a single issue bill for charter schools. Charter schools were an item in SB 61 during the Eighteenth Alaska Legislature. This bill allows school districts, teachers and parents the space to be creative. It allows the charter schools to utilize existing school facilities, new facilities, and/or the option of leasing adequate facilities owned by private enterprises within the community. SENATOR SHARP said a geographical application has been done to assure fairness statewide in that one area does not come in and take up the total allocated 30. There are 30 suggested for the pilot program which lasts up to the year 2005. The sun sets at that time. The allocation is pretty straight forward on the second page of the bill. Number 289 SENATOR SHARP continued that all charter school proposals must be submitted to the local school board for consideration. Upon their approval by the school board, they then must be forwarded to the commissioner of the DOE for review and compliance to state law. All staffing of charter schools must be done on a volunteer basis, with the principal or administrator of that charter school having the right of final approval of all staff selection. SENATOR SHARP said Section 3 of the bill concerns the funding of charter schools. Section (a) of 3 reads that a local school board shall provide an approved charter school with an annual program budget. The budget shall be not less than the amount generated by the students enrolled in the charter school less administrative costs retained by the local school district, determined by applying the indirect cost rate approved by the DOE. SENATOR SHARP said the amount generated by students enrolled in charter schools is to be determined in the same manner as it would be for a student enrolled in any other school within the school district. No more or no less funding would be available to the school district. This is just an option that could be considered by the school board upon presentation of the proposal. Number 379 SENATOR SHARP said the exciting thing about charter schools is that they provide the opportunity to get children involved with teachers on something that may bring them together in an atmosphere that is more focused on education. There have been areas in other states, particularly in Wisconsin and New Jersey, that found it worked exceptionally well. Charter schools worked primarily in those areas in which the proposals were made for the existing school buildings within the district. Normally, the older buildings were used. SENATOR SHARP said the charter school concept was incorporated with the parents and the teachers who volunteer. The enthusiasm was therefore, a lot higher and more focused on the agenda of the charter school. Number 432 SENATOR SHARP found an interesting paragraph that reads, "This Administration will work to free local districts from regulations and mandates which restrict parents and educators from exploring innovation." That paragraph was from Governor Tony Knowles's State of the State address. SENATOR SHARP thought that was a good challenge. He noted his school district is the one that requested that SB 88 be pushed, and his community really feels that there are some opportunities present. There are also restrictions in the bill on what is allowed. The school board has total control. The school has to be non-secretarian in nature, and meet all other state laws as overseen by the commissioner of the DOE. Number 487 SENATOR SHARP also wanted to point out that the Fairbanks North Star Borough District wrote a letter of support. The DOE notes that the State Board of Education, at the last meeting, voted unanimously in support of the concept of SB 88. There are a few other letters of support in the bill packets. SENATOR SHARP stated there is a very small fiscal note from the DOE for $2,000 for taking care of sending information back and forth between the school districts if the activity is there, and to cover forms that the DOE may require processed. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY said she was very concerned that the schools are going down in value, teaching ability and other aspects. She has often said that she does not want to detract from those concerns by passing legislation such as this. That is her fear. If charter schools are implemented, motivated children, parents and teachers will work together. That is fine. But she fears that such schools are going to jeopardize the attention that should be given to the students the current school system is producing. Number 585 SENATOR SHARP understood that concern. But the opportunity to stimulate parents and teachers is prevalent. Most of the interest in Senator Sharp's community comes from the teachers who want to be involved in a school in which they can have more freedom, challenge the students and challenge themselves. They dislike the total regimentation that is applied school wide. The specs of the bill allows the school boards to relax some of the textbook requirements as long as state standards are met for education. SENATOR SHARP felt if some experimentation was not done in an attempt to find out what works, the system is eventually doomed. However, he conceded that there are different situations in different districts. His grandchildren go to very good schools. However, some of the teachers are very committed in that particular school. Many teachers would like to be challenged somewhere else as they advance in their careers. They would like a chance to experiment and see if something else will work better. This may be their opportunity. Number 658 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY noted that in Section 1 of the bill says that there will not be more than ten charter schools in the Anchorage area. She asked how many charter schools were in Anchorage at the moment, and if the bill was retroactively mandating the total number of charter schools in Anchorage or if those would be added schools. SENATOR SHARP said the only community that he is aware of that has pursued charter schools doggedly is in Anchorage. It seems to have worked well in different areas. SB 88 encourages other school districts to consider the options. There are many reservations, especially in the district in Senator Sharp's area. The people are unsure they will have the power to create their own school. Perhaps the bill will allow those people to relax concerning the standards and regimentation of the schools. SENATOR SHARP reiterated that he has heard good things about some of the efforts made in the Anchorage alternative schools. He thinks the bill is portioned out so one area could not take all the options from the bush area and begin four or five schools. Number 737 CO-CHAIR BUNDE noted that the schools in Anchorage are called "alternative schools," they are not charter schools. There is a polar school, and it is very loose. The students are allowed to vote on the academic focus, therefore, the focus for the month of January was cross-country skiing. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said that was the crux of his question to Senator Sharp. He wanted to know if Senator Sharp was aware of any charter schools in the state that meet the criteria he is establishing with the bill. SENATOR SHARP said he was not. But he does know there is excitement out there about the possibility of charter schools. The bill incorporates some fine tuning by everyone who testified in the other body. Those wishes were accommodated without making the bill too heavy on one side or the other. Number 830 CHRISTINE CASLER testified via teleconference that SB 88 is essential for districts to implement updated teacher practices supported by educational research, and to allow parents choices when their children do not learn well in traditional settings. The bill would also alleviate extensive waiting lists for alternative programs which now exist in some districts. Finally, the bill would begin to restore community confidence in education and bring about real change to the status quo which industry and community is demanding. MS. CASLER continued that SB 88 can bring about real hope and change in education for everyone. She urged HESS Committee members to pass SB 88 so education can get exciting for everyone. Number 895 KATHY FUNT testified via teleconference from Gustavus in support of the bill. The idea of site-based management is a fairly new one, and it will involve parents and community members. When those entities are involved in the schools, changes can be made. It is important to have parents and communities involved and accountable. Such involvement would also be very beneficial to the children. She would like to see SB 88 pass, so the communities can give it a try. CO-CHAIR BUNDE assumed there was only one school in Gustavus. MS. FUNT said yes, and that she and other community members were wondering what would happen in the case of a small, single-site community if a charter school is started. She was concerned about people who move to the community and do not like the idea. She wondered what kind of problems might arise. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said Ms. Funt had addressed his concerns exactly. If a charter school is begun where only one school exists, those who are not inclined to be part of that charter school do not have choices. Co-Chair Bunde said that is something to keep in mind. Number 979 ANNIE MACKOVJAK testified via teleconference from Gustavus that she believes SB 88 provides a welcome alternative to the now-existing public schools, but still is within the public school framework. It would allow a school to try innovating teaching techniques, or even to apply old techniques, such as Montessori methods. MS. MACKOVJAK said her husband is from Cleveland, Ohio. He went to a Cleveland Aviation high school. High schools in Cleveland could also focus on science, vocational skills, music or art. She cautioned, however, that charter schools should only be started for educational reasons. As Alaska grows, it should be leveraging educational opportunities. The existence of charter schools is one way to accomplish that. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked what Ms. Mackovjak thought about the possibility of a group of parents deciding they wanted an agricultural school in Gustavus, while the other parents wanted a fishing based school. He asked if majority would rule in that case. MS. MACKOVJAK said she did not have an answer to that question. She is supporting SB 88 statewide, not only for her area. She sees charter schools as a potential problem in small areas. Number 1069 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked Senator Sharp if there was a limit on the number of students a school would have to have. SENATOR SHARP answered that there was no limit on the number of students. The bill is fairly loosely structured to allow as much space as possible for the school board and the people who want to propose a charter school. The situation is that the school board should make sure the economics are there so two schools could function within a small school district. If not, Senator Sharp would assume that the school board would not approve of a charter school. SENATOR SHARP said if a proposed charter school has a good proposal in an large area, that would probably not harm the economics because the schools would be operating in separate little towns or villages. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked Senator Sharp what happens if there is a small student body, and one group of parents wants to establish a charter school. If new parents move to town, they will not have options. Co-Chair Bunde noted that the minimum in state law for establishing a school now is eight students. The former commissioner of education was trying to raise that number to ten. CO-CHAIR BUNDE foresaw that someday the legislature will study small schools to see if they should stay open at all. If a student body consists of 16 students, and those students are divided into two schools, are those schools then subject to closure? SENATOR SHARP assumed that the economics of having instructors in both schools would not allow the school board to even allow a charter school. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that was assuming the school board would make good, economic decisions. Number 1176 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY noted that the bill has a ten year trial time. SENATOR SHARP stated that assuming it takes two years for anyone to even get a proposal together and considered, and the maximum contract can only be for five years with a possible extension to ten years, the sunset date on the bill is still in ten years. This is strictly a limited project. Number 1203 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG addressed page 4, Section 5. That section refers to teachers' employment agreements. He asked if there was any requirements for certified teachers, or if teachers were to be recruited within the district. He asked from where teachers were being recruited. CO-CHAIR BUNDE believed that all the same regulations that apply to other public schools apply to this bill. Charter schools are simply a facet of the public schools. There must be certified teachers. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG noted that the bill provides for an exemption. SENATOR SHARP said if the school board has a collective bargaining agreement, it must abide by the existing structure of that agreement. SB 88 would not allow the school board to circumvent any agreements that are currently in place. However, the proposal put forward to the school board for a charter school will, in all likelihood, nominate a principal to be in charge of that school. That person has the right, upon selection, to select the staff of that school. No teacher can be forced against their will, it has to be voluntary. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said he was more concerned about "Aunt Gertrude" having a position created for her in the school. He was also concerned that there could be a mix between exempt and non- exempt teachers. SENATOR SHARP did not think there would be any exempt teachers. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG stated the bill says exempt teachers can be hired if there is an agreement between the district and the bargaining unit. Therefore, there can be exempt teachers. He again asked if there would then be exempt and non-exempt teachers. SENATOR SHARP conceded that there could be both exempt and non- exempt teachers if there is an agreement. REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG said therefore, that Aunt Gertrude could be hired as long as she is certified. SENATOR SHARP said that was right. The teacher has to be certified according to state regulations. Number 1341 LYNN JENSEN testified via teleconference from Gustavus. She asked what recourse applicants would have if they were denied the opportunity to become a charter school. She asked if there would be a recourse, or if the denial would be the final word. SENATOR SHARP answered that at the present time, it was the consensus of the Senate committees that the school board should have total responsibility to avoid any problems of fragmenting the community and the school system as such. The school board is elected and responsible for all schools in that district. The bill does not seek to isolate charter schools from responsibility. Number 1380 DAVID CORNBERG testified via teleconference from Fairbanks that he is an independent education consultant involved in education reform. Charter schools is yet another attempt to do better with what is available. He wanted to make three points in support of the bill. First, there are no hard and fast predictive models that show if a program is implemented today, school systems will be better in 2005. In addition, there are no models that show what will not work. MR. CORNBERG felt the important thing about SB 88 from the standpoint of reform is that it be given a chance. He strongly urged just giving charter schools a try, and in the course of doing so, refining Senator Sharp's bill. MR. CORNBERG said his second point refers to the federal charter schools initiative. That initiative comes under the Improving America's Schools Act. That initiative is currently funded at $6 million. He spoke with a Washington, D.C., contact that day and the contact said the President has requested $20 million for next year for that initiative. Number 1452 MR. CORNBERG continued that no school in a state that has no charter school legislation can apply. So, as long as Alaska has no charter school legislation on the books, it cannot apply for that federal initiative. Therefore, Mr. Cornberg strongly urged that the bill be passed at all levels and be put on the books to get the state into a position to apply next fall for some of that money. That money will help fund the charter school initiatives in the state. Number 1473 MR. CORNBERG said his third point regards the concerns with dividing the community. Mr. Cornberg has lived in some very small communities. Apart from the financial concerns, 16 students dividing into two schools will put everyone out of business. The fact is that society is a democracy. In a city with 500 residents, there is only one mayor. People have to look at that. If a democratic constituency decided for a charter school, the people would have to live with that. Small communities are democracies, and democracy applies to education also. MR. CORNBERG strongly urged HESS Committee members to pass SB 88. Number 1505 CATHERINE PORTLOCK testified via teleconference from Anchorage. She asked for the support of HESS Committee members for SB 88. She said charter schools can provide models for improved education at no additional cost. There is overwhelming evidence that children have diverse learning styles and educational needs. When a program is well suited for the child or allows for student differences, students attend more and learn more. MS. PORTLOCK said when parents are given choices for their children, they become more involved in their children's education, which leads to greater academic success and satisfaction with the system. Rather than bleeding resources from other programs, charter school programs have breathed new life and new ideas into public schools across the country. MS. PORTLOCK added parents are with their children, rather than leaving education to the schools or taking their children out of the public schools and trying to home-school. MS. PORTLOCK added that teachers' needs are not often considered, but certainly charter schools can work with differences in teaching philosophies. When teachers feel they are valued and appropriately placed, they will be more effective and more committed. Number 1560 MS. PORTLOCK said public support of the school system is eroding at the same time that funding is becoming scarce. Parents and teachers are demanding proof of improvement in school performance, but are resistant to change. Schools need to be provided for those changes, for parents, children and teachers to feel that the school system is there for them. Number 1599 CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB), said the AASB is on record in support of SB 88. Much of the testimony that has already been given substantiates the need for charter schools. The AASB sees, in SB 88, opportunities for communities to become involved. The criteria is set forth. Communities will be empowered to address areas of need. If criteria is satisfied, communities can put together a proposal and bring it before the local board. A local determination is made, economics are examined, and compliance with laws and regulations are satisfied. MR. ROSE said if an opportunity exists, perhaps the school district does not see it. But if a community member does identify and can create that kind of support in a program and proposal, it would be very encouraging. What is contained in the bill meets all the concerns of the AASB. The AASB sees tremendous opportunity for creativity and enthusiasm, and empowerment of communities. Number 1662 LINDA SHARP testified that she has lived in Alaska since 1971. She is the parent of two children. One is in her third year of public schooling in Anchorage, and one who will be eligible for public school next year. She suggested that charter schools are exactly what exist in Anchorage as alternative schools. The alternative schools began in 1972, with Chugach, and went onto Stellar, the ABC Program, the Montessori, and then the expansion of the Chugach concept. Language immersion programs also grew out of the alternative school system. MS. SHARP said there are 13 alternative schools at the elementary level currently operating in Anchorage. Ms. Sharp said the desks, kids, teachers and the money are all included in any school district. Charter schools are not going to take any money or other resources out of the district. Charter schools will not bring in any more children. Charter schools are merely an innovation with what is currently in the district. MS. SHARP said charter schools let parents, teachers and communities propose innovations. Ms. Sharp presented handouts to HESS Committee members concerning education. She also had met a member of the Hispanic community that had been lobbying for charter schools. He believes charter schools will help the 20 to 30 schools in Anchorage that score very low on education tests. Number 1752 MS. SHARP presented a list of Anchorage School District (ASD) elementary schools and their scores. The 30 lowest scoring schools are schools that have no alternative program in them at all. They contain the traditional programs that are defined. All the alternative schools are well into the upper one-half of the scores. MS. SHARP presented some information from "Educational Digest." Many articles, but not all, suggested that charter schools are the best solutions. Vouchers and other ways of solving challenges for schools are not as good. MS. SHARP said her child was accepted, through the lottery system, to an alternative school this year. In Anchorage, the alternative schools are so popular that there are long waiting lists. Over 2,000 children are waiting for access into those schools. Most parents have to be fairly resourceful, because those schools are not located in enough places yet around Anchorage. Therefore, parents must drive twice a day to drop off and pick up their children. Number 1800 MS. SHARP said the alternative school her child is attending used to be the lowest scorer. It also had the highest incidence of violence, the highest teacher turnover, and the greatest dissatisfaction. Two years ago, an alternative program was introduced to the school. Now, about 150 parents are taking their children to that school. Not all the children are in the alternative program, but the $15,000 raised by the PTA has gone to every teacher in the school in equal amounts. Every child has benefit from that money. MS. SHARP said the PTA meetings have 30 to 40 parents attending. One parent is from the regular program. The rest of the parents are from the alternative program. Those parents, according to Ms. Sharp, stand ready to serve any teacher in the building. Resources are not limited to those in the alternative program. Parents of students in the alternative program will help teachers in the "regular" program. MS. SHARP concluded that the program benefits all the teachers and all the students at Anchorage's most needy school. Number 1840 MS. SHARP presented an article out of the December 2, 1991, "Newsweek" magazine entitled, "The Ten Best Schools in the World." Schools were identified that unified around a theme such as math, science or art. When teachers choose where they want to go because of interests and common themes, and when parents choose where to send their child, the parents and teachers are unified and supportive. MS. SHARP felt that charter schools were needed now. The indicators are going down. New schools and wings are opening this year and next year in Anchorage. This is a perfect time to move those willing to a different end of the school and not feel that they are ousting other people. Number 1894 MS. SHARP addressed the opposition to SB 88. She knows people in Anchorage who plan to lobby against this bill. Those people like the voucher idea. Those people are tired of the system and want the system to topple and fail. They are tired of what is going on, and they want vouchers. MS. SHARP said other people are worried that the best and the brightest will leave the public schools and attend charter schools although charter schools are still public schools. She suggested that the best and brightest of the teachers are about 80 to 90 percent of the teachers. There are not that many bad public school teachers. In addition, teachers who choose to teach in a certain program feel that program is bringing out their own particular talents. MS. SHARP also noted that caucasians are the minority in alternative schooling programs. The vast majority of children in her child's new alternative school are not white-European. These children also come from widely varying socioeconomic classes. Number 1960 MS. SHARP said SB 88 meekly challenges the status quo. Charter schools do not entail a huge risk. SB 88 only entails a small step. There is a five year sunset provision, and the school boards are in charge. The AASB is going to oversee the program. No radical changes are taking place. MS. SHARP said the teacher of the year from Kodiak was just honored because she formed partnerships with the community. Charter schools are asking for the chance for partnerships. When parents are asked to be a permanent part of the table, where curriculum and staffing issues are made, the parents are going to help solve the problems that arise. MS. SHARP noted Governor Knowles has sent his children for eight years to Anchorage's public alternative schools. Dr. Halloway, Commissioner of the DOE, wrote Ms. Sharp a letter saying the State Board of Education unanimously endorses the program. Ms. Sharp added the Anchorage branch of the National Education Association (NEA) is not opposed to charter schools. MS. SHARP asked HESS Committee members to "reward the innovations and reward the risk takers, and give people that have new ideas a chance." Number 2032 REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS wondered why SB 88 was necessary if there are already 13 alternative schools in Anchorage and charter schools and alternative schools were the same, as Ms. Sharp indicated. MS. SHARP said SB 88 is a very small step in the right direction. There is no money or major incentives given. SB 88 merely gives the school boards a notice to pay attention and look through the proposals in an up-front way. Whenever there is a superintendent in Anchorage that favors partnerships and choices, a new one is selected every few years. At other times Anchorage has a superintendent and a school board that are afraid. They don't want to be perceived as spending money in this time of cutbacks. MS. SHARP stated that a Russian immersion program was voted down at Bear Valley. The parents were asked two years ago, by the school board, to raise $15,000 with the community for start up costs. The parents and community did this. Sixty-seven percent of the parents at the school said they wanted this program. The superintendent and the school board said "no." Ms. Sharp asked the school board why the program was not implemented. School board members told her that they were warned by the legislature that they should not be asking for more money. The district did not want to look like it was spending more money on programs. MS. SHARP said SB 88 gives school districts permission to investigate these programs. Number 2097 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked if Ms. Sharp was asserting that alternative schools were the same as charter schools. MS. SHARP said there is essentially very little if any difference between the programs currently existing in Anchorage and charter schools. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY noted if there are 13 charter schools in Anchorage, then Anchorage is three above its allotment according to the bill. MS. SHARP understood that there would be no more than ten new programs implemented. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY noted the bill said the "State Board of Education may not approve more than 30 charter schools to operate in the state at any one time. It shall approve charter schools in a geographically bound manner as follows: Not more than ten schools in Anchorage, not more than five in Fairbanks...." MS. SHARP said that was not the intent of the bill. She has been in contact with the authors of the bill, and their intent is 30 new charter schools. Ms. Sharp was certain it was not the intent to take away three of Anchorage's current schools. Number 2162 SHEILA PETERSON, Special Assistant to Commissioner Halloway, DOE, said that as Ms. Sharp indicated charter schools are very similar to alternative schools. However, there are distinct differences. The charter school will set up a mechanism to formally approach a local school board with a charter between parents, teachers and the local school board. The charter will stipulate the educational objectives and how those objectives will be accomplished. MS. PETERSON explained that the charter schools will also be more autonomous than alternative schools. A charter school will maintain its own financial operations and will have its own principal who will oversee the charter school's teachers. MS. PETERSON added that alternative schools currently in existence are not charter schools, and therefore, would not fall under the number that is outlined in the legislation. When Commissioner Halloway looked at this legislation, she applied her test, "Is this good for kids?" She came up with a definite "yes." Charter schools are a good concept for children. It will encourage parents, teachers and communities to work together as an academic policy committee to form a charter school. TAPE 95-47, SIDE A Number 000 MS. PETERSON noted that after the proposal for a charter school is approved by the local school board, the State Board of Education must also approve it. She concluded that the DOE does strongly support this legislation. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS stated that there may be a school that has four or five children. That is not even a unit. Therefore, he asked if there was going to be a proration which would be calculated on a per student basis. There is going to be no new money from within the school district. If the district receives so many units, then Representative Davis understands that funding would be prorated on a per student basis. MS. PETERSON asked if Representative Davis was assuming that the local school board would approve a program of four students for a charter school, and asked how much money would be appropriated to those four students. She answered that at the minimum, it would be four times what an average child would be generating in that school. The local school board would have to make that decision, and whether or not it felt that was in the best interest of the school district. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said "plus an approved indirect cost rate." MS. PETERSON said he was correct. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said that as there are schools in Alaska with four students as the total population, it is possible that there would be charter schools composed of four, six or eight students. MS. PETERSON stated if that was the choice of the local school board and the State Board of Education, that could be so. With the State Board of Education overseeing the charter schools program and making the approval, it will be looked at on a statewide perspective. If, in the wisdom of the board, it was felt that having a charter school for six children was in the best interest of the state, it would be approved. However, the board could also not approve such a school if it was not in the best interest of the state. Number 149 CO-CHAIR TOOHEY could not believe that a charter school would be allowed to operate with four students. There is a great demand for these schools, at any rate. Therefore, Co-Chair Toohey relies on the wisdom of the State Board of Education and the school board. CO-CHAIR BUNDE noted that the school boards approve of 21 schools in the state that have 12 or fewer students. Number 207 ROBERT GOTTSTIEN, Member, State Board of Education (SBE), testified in support of charter schools. He noted that the state is trying to do more with less. The same struggle is taking place in education. Charter schools are a chance to do more with less. In a sense, if the education community is not given opportunities to experiment, succeed and fail, the foundation formula would need to be raised even more. MR. GOTTSTIEN said schools need to innovate, and learn how to produce better results. If the education community is denied by the legislature the opportunity to figure out how to do things better, then the legislature has a responsibility to figure out how to give children the opportunities they are not be allowed to receive from the schools. MR. GOTTSTIEN believes that charter schools help children in critical ways. It is very important to get more parental involvement in education. Charter schools are the way to do just that. More value can be retrieved from education if parents are brought into the process. Charter schools are different than alternative schools. More power and authority is given to charter schools. Top-down decision making did not work in the Soviet Union, and it does not work in education. MR. GOTTSTIEN said it must be recognized that the failures of the USSR are the same factors that public education is being criticized for. The USSR did not care about the individual. It was concerned about the general public. Public education is in that situation. Alternative schools are trying to get away from that, but public schools have never attempted to try and deal with the discrete problem of every child. Number 370 MR. GOTTSTIEN said the best way to solve the discrete problem of every child is to help bring the parent into the process and to give each teacher freedom to identify and deal with those problems. Hopefully, the parents will be involved as well. MR. GOTTSTIEN concluded that there are two choices. One is to continue business as usual, and expect less result for more money. Charter schools and education reform seek to do better and to create a better value and results. Charter schools can do those things more economically. Parents can do what they think is more important for their children. They do not have to decide on what is good for everyone, and how to solve everyone's problems. MR. GOTTSTIEN said parents can focus on solving the problems of their own children with the resources that are available. If HESS Committee members are as conscientious as they appear to be in dealing with the fiscal gap, charter schools are right in line. If HESS Committee members want to continue business as usual, then charter schools and choices will not be supported, and HESS Committee members will have to accept an escalating cost in education that otherwise would not be necessary. Number 485 CO-CHAIR BUNDE closed public testimony and opened up committee discussion. REPRESENTATIVE BRICE felt comfortable with the bill. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS thought the testimony of Mr. Gottstien was right on target. Alternatives need to be offered, and local school districts need flexibility so problems can be addressed in more unconventional ways. Latitude needs to be offered and parents need involvement. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS said one can walk into a classroom and see that there is a niche for some of those that do not belong and do not want to be in the organized, structured classroom. There are alternatives and options, and those need to be provided. Most districts are offering options to some degree already. SB 88 is imposing requirements for more parental and cohesive involvement from a community standpoint. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS fully supports SB 88. When the Education 2000 omnibus package came before the legislature, this is one of the first things that jumped out at him. He can identify with charter schools because of the Kenai alternative schools. Representative Davis has toured that school, and he knows the people there. He appreciates them and understands the value of that program in the district. SB 88 is an extension of the alternative programs, is more detailed and community based. Number 635 REPRESENTATIVE ROBINSON associated herself with the remarks of Representative Davis. She felt SB 88 was an excellent bill. A few years back, Representative Bettye Davis came forward with such an idea and it was not well received. At that point, people were not really open to the ideas. More parental involvement is needed, and Representative Robinson is very glad that this bill is before the legislature. She made a motion to move CSSB 88(FIN) out of the House Hess Committee with individual recommendations and accompanying fiscal notes. CO-CHAIR TOOHEY asked to comment first. She was fearful that the best and the brightest were going to be put in charter schools. She did not want the state to forget that the school system is failing. But with any luck, the whole system will go to charter schools if they become as good as everyone says they are. Co-Chair Toohey, therefore, appreciates that possibility and she supports SB 88. Number 707 REPRESENTATIVE ROKEBERG was concerned about children with disabilities and their involvement with charter schools. MS. SHARP said she has visited the 13 alternative schools in Anchorage, and those schools welcome children with special needs the same as other children are welcomed. Those children's names go into the lottery and their names are drawn. Nothing on the lottery indicates that those children have special needs. It is the desire of the parents that put them into the lottery for the school. Those children are dealt with the same as they would ever be. They still have an individual education plan as mandated by federal law, and those children are served by special educators. Number 780 MARILYN WILSON, Legislative Assistant to Senator Sharp, said SB 88 does not intend to discriminate whatsoever. REPRESENTATIVE DAVIS directed Representative Rokeberg to the statement in the bill that read, "The charter school will comply with all state and federal requirements for the use of public funds." Representative Davis thought the federal requirements that go along with the title programs would be applicable to charter schools. Number 814 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said everyone is shaped by their own personal experiences, even though we all try to understand other points of view. Co-Chair Bunde has worked in public schools and has had family and friends in the schools for 27 years. He has seen education fads come and go. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said where he grew up, 50 years ago they consolidated schools because it was too expensive to have what were, in essence, charter schools. Each little community had its own school. The non consolidated schools could not offer the broad program that the bigger school could. Therefore, Co-Chair Bunde questions, if not in this year, then in five or ten years, what the costs of charter schools will be. Number 869 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said when he first went to work in the Anchorage public schools, the latest fad was to build elementary schools without walls. That was going to solve the problems of the educational community. Last year, funding was given to put in the final wall for those wall-less schools because they did not work. CO-CHAIR BUNDE noted that Bear Valley Elementary School was mentioned by Linda Sharp, and that school is in Co-Chair Bunde's district. Co-Chair Bunde's perception of what went on while trying to establish that immersion program is very different. There was incredible anger among the parents. Some felt the program was being crammed down their throats, and others felt they were being thwarted. CO-CHAIR BUNDE recalled that parents were reduced to yelling at each other at the school bus stop. This type of program does not build community. Number 914 CO-CHAIR BUNDE said one could look at East St. Louis for the success of magnet schools. Federal courts demanded that "a ton" of money be put into magnet schools, and those schools failed miserably. America is a melting pot and there are two great facilities for encouraging a melting pot. One is the draft. People of all stripes went to the military and learned from each other. The draft is gone, and now the last remaining facet of the melting pot is the educational system. Charter schools is going to now fractionalize that. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asserted that at a time when people yell about diversity, charter schools look to taking "all the math people and putting them over here, and all the art people over here." Co- Chair Bunde has a problem with SB 88 in Alaska, because of the mobile population of this state. The average Alaskan has been in Alaska five years. A group of parents get a charter school going, and in a few years, their kids are out of it, or they are out of Alaska. CO-CHAIR BUNDE said meanwhile, the people who live in that neighborhood have no choice, they are stuck dealing with the inertia of undoing a charter school. Number 996 CO-CHAIR BUNDE agrees that the biggest problem facing schools today is parental involvement. Therefore, charter schools take the most active parents, those who are most interested and most concerned, and pull them out of the public schools and put them into their own special little world. This is the wrong way to go. CO-CHAIR BUNDE asked about student leaders. Leaders need followers and followers need leaders. Therefore, when all the best and the brightest are pulled out, there will be an imbalance. The area that cannot get the parents together to form a charter school becomes a dumping ground. The dullest and the least abled will be placed there. Number 1038 CO-CHAIR BUNDE stated that of course teachers like charter schools. Who would not want to teach highly motivated kids. Parents like charter schools, but what keeps them from getting involved in their current school. There is incredible inertia out there. Recently, an alternative school, the incredibly popular Polar School in Anchorage had a huge lottery. A group decision determined that the focus of the school for the month of January was cross-country skiing. Now parents are wondering what monster they have created. CO-CHAIR BUNDE previously stated he is willing to be proven wrong on certain topics. He does not support charter schools, and he will not vote for it. However, he will not hold the bill in committee because obviously, the committee likes the bill. CO-CHAIR BUNDE called for a roll call vote. Voting "yes" on CSSB 88(FIN) were Co-Chair Toohey, Representative Vezey, Representative Rokeberg, Representative Robinson, Representative Brice, and Representative Davis. Voting "no" was Co-Chair Bunde. CSSB 88(FIN) passed out of the House HESS Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|