Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
03/11/2009 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB126 | |
| HB172 | |
| Overview(s): Drop-out Prevention | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | HB 126 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 11, 2009
8:06 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Vice Chair
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Peggy Wilson
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 126
"An Act relating to continuing the secondary public education of
a homeless student; relating to the purpose of certain laws as
they relate to children; relating to tuition waivers, loans, and
medical assistance for a child placed in out-of-home care by the
state; relating to foster care; relating to children in need of
aid; relating to foster care transition to independent living;
and relating to juvenile programs and institutions."
- MOVED CSHB 126(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 172
"An Act relating to an investment in the education loan fund;
relating to authority for the commissioner of revenue to enter
into a bond purchase agreement and letter of credit with the
Alaska Student Loan Corporation; and providing for an effective
date."
- WAIVED OUT OF COMMITTEE
OVERVIEW(S): DROP-OUT PREVENTION
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 126
SHORT TITLE: FOSTER CARE/CINA/EDUCATION OF HOMELESS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) GARA
02/11/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/09 (H) EDC, HSS, FIN
02/25/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/25/09 (H) Heard & Held
02/25/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/02/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/02/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/02/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/09/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/09/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/09/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/11/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
ERIK MCCORMICK, Director
Assessment & Accountability
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Participated in the discussion on drop-out
prevention.
CARL ROSE, Executive Director
Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Participated in the discussion on drop-out
prevention.
KAREN MARTINSEN
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Speaking as a parent, teacher, and student,
provided comments during the roundtable discussion.
BRAD FLUETSCH, President
Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB)Grand Camp 70
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Participated in the discussion on drop-out
prevention.
TOM MORGAN, State Director
Communities In Schools (CIS) of Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Participated in the discussion on drop-out
prevention.
MR. SOBOLEFF, Representative
Central Council
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Participated in the discussion on drop-out
prevention.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:06:38 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:06 a.m. Representatives Seaton, Gardner,
Buch, and Keller were present at the call to order.
Representative Munoz arrived as the meeting was in progress.
Representative Wilson was excused.
HB 126-FOSTER CARE/CINA/EDUCATION OF HOMELESS
8:07:12 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 126, "An Act relating to continuing the secondary
public education of a homeless student; relating to the purpose
of certain laws as they relate to children; relating to tuition
waivers, loans, and medical assistance for a child placed in
out-of-home care by the state; relating to foster care; relating
to children in need of aid; relating to foster care transition
to independent living; and relating to juvenile programs and
institutions."
8:08:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to adopt CSHB 126, Version
LS0309\P, Mischel, 3/9/09, as the working document.
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
8:08:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER related that he spoke with the sponsor at
length and although all his questions weren't totally resolved,
the sponsor pledged to work on the matters in the next committee
of referral.
[Chair Seaton's objection to the adoption of Version P was
treated as withdrawn.]
8:09:03 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to report CSHB 126, Version
LS0309\P, Mischel, 3/9/09, out of committee with individual
recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being
no objection, CSHB 126(EDC) was reported from the House
Education Standing Committee.
HB 172-STATE INVESTMENT IN EDUCATION FUND
8:09:29 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 172, "An Act relating to an investment in the
education loan fund; relating to authority for the commissioner
of revenue to enter into a bond purchase agreement and letter of
credit with the Alaska Student Loan Corporation; and providing
for an effective date."
CHAIR SEATON noted that HB 172 is a companion to HB 109, which
the committee has already reported out of the committee. This
legislation is a interim measure to allow for student loans to
be made this year, and he characterized it as temporary. He
requested that the committee waive HB 172 from committee and
asked if any member held objection.
8:10:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired as to the strategy behind
waiving HB 172 from committee.
CHAIR SEATON explained that HB 172 allows for funds, on a
temporary basis, to be borrowed from the state for loans. The
companion bill, HB 109, addresses the long-term program as it
changes the credit rating in order to sell bonds. The long-term
process addressed by HB 109 is one in which loan applications
wouldn't be taken until the bonds have been sold and the money
has been received.
8:11:10 AM
No objection was stated for waiving HB 172 from committee; so
ordered.
^OVERVIEW(S): DROP-OUT PREVENTION
8:11:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the final order of business would be
a roundtable discussion on high school drop-out prevention. He
reviewed the contents of the committee packet.
8:16:08 AM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 8:16 a.m.
CHAIR SEATON introduced the presenters. He then asked for EED's
definition of graduation, specifically how the standards are
set.
8:18:32 AM
ERIK MCCORMICK, Director, Assessment & Accountability,
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), explained
that the High School Graduation Qualifying Exam (HSGQE) is a
requirement for graduation. The HSGQE measures proficiency in
reading, writing, and mathematics. There is also a statewide
requirement of 21 units, which requires four years of English,
three years of social studies, two years of math, two years of
science, and Alaskan history. The aforementioned is the minimum
requirement for districts, and therefore some districts require
more than 21 units. In further response to Chair Seaton, Mr.
McCormick explained that a unit is traditionally known as a
Carnegie unit/credit for completion of course work. Typically,
a unit is a full year whereas a half credit is a semester.
8:19:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH inquired as to how an exceptional student is
able to be in college by age 13/14.
MR. MCCORMICK assured the committee that most of the advanced
students are meeting the minimum requirements and supplementing
their public education with statewide correspondence or with
additional courses through the district. He offered to find out
more information regarding substitutions for credit
requirements.
8:21:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON expressed his desire to address what is expected
and valued of students. He related his observation that
competency level, which is only measured minimally, is one
expectation while the other is seat time or endurance.
Therefore, he surmised that graduation is almost entirely based
on minimal competency and endurance of class time, without
engagement. He expressed the need to help students graduate and
also make it meaningful.
8:25:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER related his understanding that the credit
requirement is a regulation. He asked how legislators would
address the credit requirement.
MR. MCCORMICK offered to provide the specific regulation in
which the credit requirements are located.
8:29:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER recalled that either the Galena Interior
Learning Academy or Mt. Edgecumbe require additional science
credits. She asked if there has been any discussion regarding
broadly increasing the science requirement.
MR. MCCORMICK answered that at this point he isn't aware of any
such conversations. However, he noted that he has been asked to
research the requirements of other states. He offered to share
that information with the committee.
8:30:10 AM
CARL ROSE, Executive Director, directed attention to AASB's
statement on drop-out prevention, included in the committee
packet. He related his belief that the most difficult class is
the one in which students try to earn a passing grade. If the
information is introduced in a manner that requires mastery of
content, then the grades will come, he opined. "Kids lose
interest because they're not pursuing mastery," he remarked.
Mr. Rose opined that Alaska's education system is a fairly good
system, if the students are prepared to take advantage of it.
He then explained that the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB)
identifies the following four sub-groups: those students who
aren't English language proficient; ethnicity; disability; and
socially and economically challenged children. Although those
groups have been identified, the system hasn't been allowed to
devise a means to help those students. Schools are funded for
regular instruction and the state is mandated by federal law to
provide services to those who are disabled. After the federal
and state mandates are addressed, the remaining funds are what
are used to address the aforementioned four sub-groups. He
pointed out that class differential is dramatic and the data
supports that assertion. For instance, there could be a
variance of 2-3 million [recognizable] words and characters
between students from poverty-stricken families who may not
value education and use cryptic directional verbiage - do this,
don't do that, interactions with their children, versus students
from middle class families in which there are real conversations
and a value is placed on education. By Third grade, the
deficiencies that determine whether the child will gain
advantage through the education system or require a remedial
system can be professionally identified. Unfortunately, if
there is a gap, it continues throughout their education since
the unprepared child is trying to catch up while the others
advance in their education. Mr. Rose opined that there are
societal issues that parallel the preparation for quality
education. Still, schools need to be engineered to be more
interesting and engaging. He reported that many will say that
schools can't do this alone and point to parents and communities
as part of the solution. Mr. Rose noted that he has submitted
testimony, to the committee, which he provided to U.S. Senator
Lisa Murkowski. Regarding the topic specifically, he said that
students drop-out for various reasons. He then pointed out that
schools are being labeled as good or bad in terms of achievement
on their adequate yearly progress (AYP) reports, and opined:
If what you're measuring and your measurement is off,
what does that have to do with how well your schools
are? ... Before you start to look at sanctions and
start to categorize schools, we should take a look at
what we're measuring and what we're trying to
accomplish.
MR. ROSE noted that the National School Board Association is
trying to tackle the aforementioned and there are some efforts
to rewrite NCLB.
8:38:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised that Mr. Rose is speaking to the
adequacy of education and that the tools and mandate the [US]
Department of Education uses, to address the aforementioned,
misses the pieces identified as the four sub-groups. Although
the DOE is not mandated to focus on those [sub-groups], it is
incumbent on the state.
8:39:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER inquired as to what Mr. Rose would suggest
the legislature do to address this issue in the most expedient
manner.
MR. ROSE answered that the most expedient manner to address
education is to prepare children for success. He noted that
there is much discussion regarding early childhood development,
which comes in many forms. "The point I'm trying to make here
is that if kids cannot get what they need ... [through] their
families or at home, and the data shows us this, how do we go
about [providing support] without creating another bureaucracy
that consumes an awful lot of the resource that some kids
already have," he said. He pointed out the disparity that
arises when funds are spread across the spectrum of students.
This benefits some, such as special needs students, and causes a
deficit for others. Mr. Rose related that it is important to
review the needs along with the programs and initiatives that
could be placed in communities to help children [in the early
years]. He cautioned against structuring a program that is
limiting, and recommended providing more options for families.
8:42:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER opined that the best thing that could be
done is to support the parents to be loving and caring,
otherwise the child struggles.
8:43:06 AM
CHAIR SEATON, referring to the subgroups that were mentioned
earlier, highlighted that there are different cultural
perspectives, including valuing observation and visual learning.
He inquired as to whether a child that comes from a home that
values observation and visual learning would be placed in a
difficult position in regard to meeting a third grade benchmark
in an auditory learning system.
MR. ROSE related that as a young boy he was in all four of the
earlier mentioned subgroups. He informed the committee that he
is Hawaiian, dyslexic, spoke Pigeon English [as a child], and
was from an economically challenged home. "The option of having
an education gave me a chance to learn to conform, if you will,
and get an education that would help me for the rest of my
life," he said. He opined that the aforementioned is something
owed to all young people. He further opined that [the education
system] needs to observe and be culturally responsive to young
people some of which come from many generations of rich culture.
The goal, he related, should be to provide children with the
opportunity to be successful within the capitalist economy.
Still, everyone comes from different cultures from which others
can learn. Mr. Rose stated that America's educational system is
rich, but much of it is drained down with a six-hour school day
for 180 days. He questioned whether ways can be found to help
those who are challenged to maneuver through the barriers in the
existing education system. Across America there are success
stories, he said. However, when a child's immediate challenges
are ignored, they become problems, obstacles, and reasons why
students leave. Mr. Rose opined that a culturally relevant
education is what should be offered to all pupils.
8:48:59 AM
CHAIR SEATON turned the committee's attention to EED's
presentation.
8:49:14 AM
MR. MCCORMICK, in response to Representative Keller's earlier
question, specified that the regulation for the HSGQE is 4 AAC
06.075. He then directed attention to the Department of
Education and Early Development's Drop-out materials included in
the committee packet. He informed the committee that on
February 19 and 20, staff was brought together by the
commissioner of EED for a dropout prevention meeting, which
included representatives from Communities In Schools of Alaska
(CIS), school districts, state board members, and Anchorage
Promise. The focus of the meeting was to identify reasons why
Alaskan students are leaving the public school system.
Commissioner LeDoux began the meeting by discussing the three
R's of education: rigor, relevance, and relationships. As the
brainstorming activities took place, participants were asked to
assign the factors into one of the following four categories:
student, school, family, community. The one topic that was
repeated throughout the meeting was relationships and the need
for students to connect with an individual for an activity. Mr.
McCormick recalled Mr. Rose expressing the need at the end of
the school day for children to be motivated and want to come
back to school the next day. Mr. McCormick then mentioned the
"Golden T" in the classroom, which is the front row and straight
down the middle. Classrooms need to connect with every student
in the classroom because once a student is credit deficient in
high school it becomes very difficult to make it back. The hope
with this meeting was to develop steps/strategies for how to
recover and retain these children. He noted that this group
plans to meet again in conjunction with the dropout symposium by
the Alaska Staff Development Network (ASDN) group in April.
8:52:40 AM
MR. MCCORMICK then reviewed the various topical handouts
provided by EED to the committee. He related that the documents
related to the average daily membership and statewide enrollment
were included in order to provide perspective. Mr. McCormick
turned the committee's attention to the document entitled
"Dropout Rates in Alaska Fact Sheet." He explained that a child
who completes the school year and receives a certificate of
attendance isn't considered a dropout in the system. However,
in the graduation rate such an individual is weighted in the
denominator the same as a student who dropped out. In Alaska,
grades 7-12 are measured for the dropout rates. Generally, for
grades 9-12 the drop-out rate is about 2 percent more than the
grades 7-12 drop-out rate. He pointed out that for grades 7-12
in 2005 the drop-out rate was about 3,800, which decreased to
about 3,200 in 2008. "We are making gains, as far as limiting
our drop-out numbers," he remarked. He noted that the
aforementioned document also relates the Alaska Native/American
Indian drop-out count as well. Mr. McCormick then directed
attention to the document entitled "Graduation Rates in Alaska
Fact Sheet," which indicate an increase in the number of
graduate counts. The point, he related, is that in a time in
which there is declining and stagnate enrollment, the number of
graduates being issued a diploma is increasing. The
aforementioned he attributed to actively retaining students.
8:55:27 AM
MR. MCCORMICK, in response to Representative Gardner, explained
that the reason the graduation rate percentage has remained flat
is because the denominator is growing faster than the numerator
in the calculation.
8:56:29 AM
KAREN MARTINSEN, pointed out that the EED information relates a
graduation rate of around 62 percent and a drop-out rate of
around 6 percent. Therefore, she inquired as to the category of
the remaining 32 percent of students.
MR. MCCORMICK explained that the drop-out rate is an event drop-
out rate of a single year. Specifically, it's the number of
students identified who drop-out during the school year divided
by the entire population for that group. The graduation rate is
a measure over four years and relates that 63 percent of the
students are [graduating] in four years. He noted that the
grades 9-12 drop-out rate is about 8 percent, which makes the
total close to 100 percent. The statistics are collected
separately and recorded separately. The four-year graduation
rate doesn't account for those students who graduate in their
fifth or sixth year.
8:58:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH inquired as to whether the structure has
changed in regard to how the data is being gathered.
MR. MCCORMICK replied yes, and explained that in 2011 the new
federal Title I regulations [require] a graduation rate that is
comparable across the 50 states. In further response to
Representative Buch, Mr. McCormick confirmed that in a sense the
[percentages] are comparing apples to oranges. When the
graduation rate before the committee today was first
established, there was no access to student level data and thus
duplicates were possible. However, now the data provides the
ability to identify individual students such that if a student
were to drop-out multiple times, or graduate late, that student
would only be counted once in the denominator. The focus on the
graduation rate presented today was on the seniors and working
backwards, which is difficult. The new graduation rate will
identify the first year freshman and move forward, which will be
easier in terms of collection and reporting of data.
9:00:27 AM
BRAD FLUETSCH, President, Alaska Native Brotherhood (ANB), Grand
Camp 70, informed the committee that he is a [member of a group]
that is a joint effort between Tlingit & Haida Central Council
and the Juneau School District addressing a Drop-out Early
Warning System (DEWS). Mr. Fluetsch emphasized that many
resources are being expended discussing the numerators and
denominators of the formula. If those resources were actually
applied to educating children as opposed to debating formulas,
"we would be infinitely better off," he charged. Therefore, he
requested that the committee determine how much of the state's
resources are spent on non-education. He suggested that the
committee would be floored to learn how much is being spent to
fly staff to meetings to discuss which students should be in the
numerator and which should be in the denominator.
9:02:11 AM
MR. MCCORMICK returned to the graduation rate, and explained
th
that the 12 grade students who are continuing could either
represent a student who receives a certificate, that is a
student who hasn't passed the HSGQE but has met the district's
requirements, or a student who hasn't met either of the
aforementioned but is expected to continue. He related that 69
percent, more than two-thirds, of those students who aren't
making it through in their fourth year but are expected to
continue passed all three parts of the HSGQE. In response to
Chair Seaton, Mr. McCormick confirmed that the aforementioned
students have passed the HSGQE but don't have the required
number of credits.
9:03:21 AM
th
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that many 10 graders pass the
HSGQE, and then inquired as to the value of the HSGQE to the
state.
MR. MCCORMICK said that the HSGQE is a standard specifying the
minimum level at which students should achieve. The results of
the Kristine Moore, et al vs. State of Alaska case are being
reviewed in order to determine whether the HSGQE is a rigorous
enough test. The HSGQE is of value because it means that the
student's diploma represents something more than just a piece of
paper for seat time.
9:04:25 AM
CHAIR SEATON opined that if the HSGQE represents something that
a student passed in the sophomore year, then the following two
years are devalued. That establishes the wrong message for
students who must then endure seat time to receive a diploma.
He asked if there are any data from students regarding juniors
who have already qualified and are ready to leave high school.
MR. MCCORMICK answered that the department doesn't have such
data, but remarked that such would be a good topic for the April
drop-out prevention meeting.
CHAIR SEATON further opined that the HSGQE was established to
make the diploma meaningful. Therefore, he suggested the need
to question whether the diploma is meaningful when students home
th
passed the HSGQE in 10 grade. He then questioned how employers
are viewing students who passed the HSGQE. He requested data
regarding the view of students and employers for diplomas with
the HSGQE exam attached to it.
9:07:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER mentioned that when the HSGQE was
established he was legislative staff to Senator Dyson. He
recalled being fascinated that the department originally
recommended higher standards than what was ultimately
established for the HSGQE. He further recalled the pressure the
legislature was under for keeping the standards at a level at
which everyone could pass. Therefore, he characterized it as
ironic that now the HSGQE has become the standard for
graduation. Still, Representative Keller expressed the need for
the diploma to have a value so that it's worth something when
seeking a job, which he recalled as the original intent.
CHAIR SEATON opined that the question is whether the HSGQE, a
minimal test, provides useful information to an employer or
whether the graduation diploma should specify competency
evaluations or criteria testing.
9:09:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH remarked that the student has to place some
value on graduation as well, and that achieving that goal is of
value.
9:10:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER commented that it appears little would be
gained by retaining a second series of testing, considering what
is required by NCLB Furthermore, she opined that a disincentive
appears to have inadvertently been created when students are
asked to continue in school, if they have already passed the
three tests. Additionally, she asked:
When we talk about the satisfaction and the sense of
competency and having past this test in tenth grade, I
don't understand how that would supplant the
satisfaction and competence of having passed four
years of high school English classes. And I would
say, and posit, that if any student who passes four
years of English classes and can't pass, can't be
assumed to have been capable of passing the test in
tenth grade. We have a real disconnect here, there's
something completely wrong with the system. But the
question that comes to me is, do we have any idea how
many kids in this state can meet all their high school
graduation requirements except passage of the HSGQE
and all its parts.
CHAIR SEATON stated that the department will be able to supply
that statistic for the committee.
9:11:38 AM
TOM MORGAN, Sate Director, Communities In Schools (CIS) of
Alaska, paraphrased from a prepared statement, which read as
follows [original punctuation provided]:
I am truly pleased to be here today to represent
Communities In Schools (CIS) of Alaska and our role in
making a positive difference in the drop-out epidemic.
National research has shown that students who do not
finish high school earn less, pay less tax, rely more
on public health, are more involved in the justice
system, and are more likely to use the welfare system.
I know that you all share the concern about the drop-
out crisis, a topic that touches all Alaskans,
particularly Alaska Native students at a
disproportionally higher rate.
CIS of Alaska strives to work closely with school
districts around the state. We offer an integrated
student support delivery system; providing schools
with prevention services and individual students with
case management and intervention services. Like glue,
we mobilize and connect resources with schools, better
enabling students to "stick with it" and stay in
school. As a statewide network in dropout prevention,
we are committed to success through collaboration.
How do we know that we are helping kids learn, stay in
school, and prepare for life? We evaluate our efforts
by tracking indicators of student success like:
attendance and stay-in-school rates, improved academic
performance and improved behavior. Since our
inception, we have worked with thousands of students
at risk to dropping out; the majority of those
students have stayed in school and improved their
attendance, behavior and academic achievement.
Preliminary results from the Communities In Schools
National Evaluation initiative (an independent, third-
party evaluation) indicated that the CIS model does
make a positive difference in:
Decreasing the dropout rate
Increasing the graduation rate
Improving student achievement
These results are based on an in-depth analysis of
1,766 CIS schools and comparative analysis of outcomes
for more than 1,200 CIS and non-CIS comparison schools
over a three-year period.
We are not another social service agency. We broker
and mobilize in an effective and coordinated way,
EXISTING community services through the schools,
saving valuable dollars while improving efficiencies
of delivery of services to children and youth. During
the 2007/2008 year, in just five affiliates,
Anchorage, Bethel, Juneau, Mat-Su and Nome, our
minimum leveraged services and resources were
estimated at $1.5 million dollars. In-kind
contributions in revenue from other sources (last
year) were approximately $882,000. The amount of
dollars for support is very small when compared to the
successful outcomes it provides and the resources we
are able to leverage! Through school-based affiliate
programs and statewide initiatives, CIS of Alaska is
crating a network of social services, businesses,
community resources and volunteers that work together
to break down barriers to ensure even the most
vulnerable of our children have access to these basics
and core needs.
Our statewide initiatives, Career Exploration
Opportunities (CEO), an interactive distance learning
career exploration program targeted at rural youth and
the Imagination Library, an early literacy program for
children birth to five, are being well received.
Our dream, our call to action, is to formulate support
to implement the CIS model and provide a CIS
coordinator/graduation coach in every school in
Alaska; whereas, children's needs can be met to help
keep them in school and teachers are free to teach.
We believe youth do not drop-out of school necessarily
because of the school. We believe, and research
supports; youth drop-out due to pressures outside of
school. Educators cannot and should not be expected
to have knowledge of the many resources available to
help them and help their students stay in school.
That is where CIS comes in. As one principal told me
- You allow me and my teachers to teach. We need to
clone the CIS coordinator. As stated earlier, like
glue, we mobilize and connect resources with schools,
better enabling students to "stick with it" and stay
in school.
Support by the federal (and state) government will
allow us to expand our existing sites and offer the
opportunity for many more communities, especially
rural communities, the ability to experience the
positive outcomes we can provide for youth.
We have a program that has proven success in
preventing dropouts. For every dollar invested,
through building collaboration, brokering services and
leveraging community assets, CIS of Alaska adds value
to build return on investment.
Dollar for dollar, CIS of Alaska offers the right
investment in our children's future. We look forward
to partnering with you, doing what we do best;
connecting the dots, coordinating and leveraging
existing resources to keep youth in school and prepare
them to succeed in life.
9:15:36 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for a specific example of how the agency
works with individual students, interfaces with existing
services, and the facilitation involved.
MR. MORGAN responded that the first step is to query the school
to identify specific needs that are not being met. If a student
cannot concentrate because their teeth hurt, a dentist will be
engaged to provide pro-bono work. Students who are routinely
hungry are identified and provided with food, including a
backpack of meals for the weekend. Various local organizations
and individuals are coordinated via the agency to provide these
services. The coordination also minimizes, or eliminates,
duplication of effort among service providers.
9:18:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER acknowledged that, as resource managers,
the agency appears to be helpful and commendable. He inquired
how the high school graduation coaches are paid.
MR. MORGAN answered that payments are via a combination of state
or federal funding. The initial seed money is provided through
the school district, exploring the model. Once the district
adopts the program, it is integrated into the school budget. As
a non-profit organization ad hoc funding may also be available.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER noted the similarities between this
agencies work and what Mr. Rose described: discovering the
assets of an individual student and cultivating their strength
via whatever/whoever is available in the community.
MR. MORGAN reported that the entities tend to be approachable on
a personal level, when asked to help.
9:20:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to the graduation coaches and
asked why the school counselor would not be handling this
aspect. The bailiwick of the schools counselor would be to
assist students with social issues, personal issues, daily
concerns, academic scheduling, and include providing snacks or
food.
MR. MORGAN stated that the agency expands on the role of the
school counselor does a step further by taking the need outside
of the school and engaging community resources. It serves not
only the student but relieves the school administrator of some
of their daily challenges.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER suggested that perhaps counselors need
smaller case loads.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that many schools do not have
counselors.
9:22:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH recognized the need for statewide
coordination of services, and asked how that could be
accomplished.
MR. MORGAN offered that having an agency person in each school
would be helpful.
9:23:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH recognized the speaker's allegiance to the
agency he represents, and asked if a school employee were given
this task, what would their position be and at what level would
the position be integrated.
MR. MORGAN provided an example from a school in Richmond
[Washington], serving a diverse demographic including socio-
economic depressed areas. The school had a community action
group which coordinated 82 entities to work in the school. He
reported that the school had a 97 percent attendance record.
The entities included the local radio station disc jockey who
provided pizza for the social gatherings, and a grandparent who
was a daily fixture to hold a caring presence in the hallway.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH summed up to say that in Richmond it was a
community building requirement.
MR. MORGAN added that the social workers paid by the city, were
re-positioned to work within the school, where the most good
could be done.
9:26:17 AM
MR. FLUETSCH said that the public schools are charged with
educating the students who walk through the doors. It is not
appropriate for the district to blame academic failure on the
parents or students. He directed attention to the committee
packet and the responses he has received when polling students
and other community members regarding the drop-out situation.
Many of them are from drop-outs, who have never been asked why
they left. It is not necessarily because they are not
intelligent or incapable of learning. It may be because a
student has a bad interaction with a bad teacher. How to
identify bad teachers and how to deal with them should be the
focus of the department of education, versus blaming parents and
students. Incentive and compensation for teachers might be a
consideration. Additionally, teachers require focus and support
to improve strategies for helping students to graduate. He
opined that the school districts tolerate failure.
Approximately 3,500 students per year do not complete the
education system, within the guidelines that have been designed.
These young people may add to the negative cost of society, but
it is also 3,500 people per year not contributing $50,000 of
economic activity. Over $14,000 per year, per student, is spent
in the Juneau district alone, to help a student graduate; and
they aren't graduating. Bullying is one of the paramount
reasons for a student to leave school, in combination with other
issues. Transportation can be an issue, but all of these are
system problems. He stressed the importance of sitting down
with the students to ask them directly about their issues.
9:33:57 AM
CHAIR SEATON stated that this is another perspective to help
complete the picture.
9:34:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER paraphrased from a Native member of the
legislature who has presented the question of why Native parents
allow their children to drop-out, or not attend school
regularly. She asked if that is contrary to what the speaker
has presented.
MR. FLUETSCH pointed out that the focus of his argument is how
the district is failing to perform for families, not what the
parents are failing to do for themselves and the benefit of
their children.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER pointed out that being a responsible
parent is being an educator. The expectation cannot be that a
student can attend school every day and come out twelve years
later educated, she opined, without the support of their
parents, the community, and educational professionals involved.
She stressed that not one agency, facility, or individual is
solely responsible.
9:37:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ said her understanding that failure in 9th
grade Physical education (PE) class could be an indicator for
future drop-out/push-out candidates. Directing her question to
Mr. Soboleff, as a past high school administrator, she asked if
PE success represents a tangible benchmark, and whether there is
data to substantiate the statement.
9:38:34 AM
MR. SOBOLEFF, Representative, commented that one of the key
indicators of student success is whether or not they are able to
survive the system. Physical education class is one of the
determining facets for a student's ability to be successful.
Usually, given the physical changes that the adolescent body
experiences, along with the social context, standing up to the
social, and physical, rigor imposed in the locker room and in
the PE class presents a major hurdle. Even more startling, he
continued, is the general acceptance, at the high school level,
particularly held by the Native student, that graduation can be
attained by passing three credits as a freshman and three as a
sophomore. If that is not attained then the opportunity for
graduation is lost. This is known as the rule of thumb for
graduation. Over 60 percent of the minorities in Alaskan
schools fail this accomplishment. The PE class becomes an
indicator because of the challenge it presents, particularly to
the minority student. One method utilized by some districts is
to provide summer PE courses, offering students an optional
means of achieving the credit requirement outside of the regular
school year. The PE classes typically range from 25-80
students. Statistics on the effects of PE classes are available
to support this statement, he advised.
9:41:29 AM
CHAIR SEATON noted that the PE indicator does not appear as a
factor in the department's report that prioritizes why students
drop-out. It is relevant and requires flagging as a topic to be
included for future discussions.
9:42:52 AM
MR. ROSE pointed out that all humans gravitate towards their
strengths and excel in areas where they have confidence in their
competency. Students may be ostracized when they cannot perform
in a certain way. When students are required to stand and read
aloud, in an elementary classroom, it becomes quickly evident
which students have dyslexia and he stressed how uncomfortable
it is for them to participate in this exercise. Entering an
institution, where a young person may or may not be able to
exhibit their strengths, creates an uncomfortable situation
resulting in self protection. He challenged that the
educational system need look no further than the inability of
young people to cope with their lack of success in a host of
areas and how this is addressed in a school setting. A first
step might be to assist the adolescent in becoming
conversational with adults. Feeling comfortable, visible,
known, and understood in the school setting directly ties into
the success factor for every student, he opined.
CHAIR SEATON noted that some of these factors relate to
competitive measurements versus individual achievements for a
student. The school system represents a "box system," and it
may not be easy to alter this structure.
9:45:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER directed attention to Mr. Fluetsch's
compilation of comments, in the committee packet, and read
suggestions submitted by the signatory Jill:
I just retired from working with Alaskan Native
students in a high school. [I suggest:] tribally-
funded social workers in the schools, ... tribally-
funded social workers available to families, ...
tribally or federally funded counselors who mentor,
encourage and advocate, ... tribal truancy officers,
... [and there are] tribes who link payouts to
academic performance.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER explained that the contributor describes
how tribes in other states encourage students to graduate by
providing monetary incentives. The tribal funded approach is
interesting, and she asked for comment.
9:47:02 AM
MR. FLUETSCH indicated that tribally funded describes money
provided by the federal government. The Alaska Native
Brotherhood Grand Camp and other local Native camps and
corporation's value education, provide scholarships, fund school
efforts, and participate in assisting students to graduate. He
named several Native supported endeavors.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER surmised that the monetary support for
Native programs is from the federal government because that is
where funds were available, not because there is a different
value held by the federal authorities versus state.
MR. FLUETSCH assured the committee that no separate value is
attached to the federal funding.
9:49:09 AM
MR. SOBOLEFF returned to the question of the Carnegie unit to
clarify that one credit equates to 120 hours of seat time. This
is what the nation's educational system is based upon. He
provided a brief biography including his struggles in the Juneau
school system, followed by college attendance and various
degrees attained Outside. To understand the Native student of
today, he explained it is necessary to review history. When
education was introduced to the Native people in Southeast, it
arrived via the Russian Orthodox priests. The priests
infiltrated villages, established churches, converted Native
constituents, and set up the first schools. These schools were
successful because, not only had the Russian priests translated
their bible/teachings to the Native language, they empowered the
students and their parents in the process of education. In
1885, Sheldon Jackson established the first formal schools in
Alaska and became the first Commissioner of Education.
Commissioner Jackson declared that the Alaskan schools would be
administered in English, causing the Native's to collectively
exclaim, "What?". This is why his address to the committee
today is in English, he pointed out. It represents a cultural
imprint that no Native carries, but it is a learning that has
been imposed upon them; English is not the indigenous language
of Alaska. The records reflect that many Alaska Natives have
figured out the [Western] system with resultant success.
However, thousands of Natives have not figured out how to
navigate this system that requires setting their cultural skill
sets aside to pursue and adopt another. He opined, that this is
the problem which creates the issue of high drop-out levels
among Native students. In learning, a skill card is employed by
the student. A certain skill set must be attained in order to
be successful: remaining in school for the required length of
time, graduating, or achieving a GED. Generally, he said, the
skill set applies to surviving the system. Native learners
bring a different learning structure, to the educational
setting, through their culture that is deeper than the language
itself. Basically, when speaking or writing in English, nouns
come first, followed by verbs and adjectives. In the Native
culture, a reverse pattern occurs: the action word comes first,
followed by the descriptive words, and finally the nouns. The
difference of the thought pattern is the crux of the problem.
He reported how through his efforts to graduate from Juneau
Douglas High School, with minimal grades, and seek a college
education, wrought with remedial classes, a clear understanding
of the skill set deficit manifested for him. The primary, and
sometimes the only, skill card that a Native student
[inherently/culturally] brings to the school setting is the
ability to observe and listen. Unfortunately, this significant
card set is omitted in the [Western] educational setting.
Natives are imprinted with a culture established through oral
history. Every Native child can learn whatever is required,
through visual and hearing techniques, he underscored, and
challenged the state to develop a pedagogy to address this
critical deficit in today's classroom. Through the state's
efforts to understand what creates a successful student and why
some fail, what has been excluded, and not understood, is the
need to cultivate the Native skill sets. Further, he
paraphrased E. E. Cummings, stating, "History will show you that
the most significant impact that they can have to change a
system is to empower the student and their parent." These
students are here to learn, he declared and challenged that it
is the responsibility of Alaskan educators to discover a method
to work on whatever meaningful level, and from any perspective,
that will prove effective. Additionally, the battle for
creating success on the secondary level is not at the secondary
level, but lies in the primary second and third grade classroom.
It is at this age that the active, practitioner mind enters to
set the stage for the rest of the student's life, he opined.
The ability of the teacher to engage an impressionable primary
school child is the key to the success of every student.
Learning should, and can, be an exciting process. Finally, he
stressed that it is not acceptable to enter into a school system
with the predisposition that by receiving six high school
credits by the sophomore year, graduation will be attained.
When a student understands that they are not the problem, they
become engaged and interested. He finished by underscoring the
importance to not dismiss, but rather capitalize, on the Native
skill sets.
10:04:13 AM
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged that this is an important perspective
and it may assist the schools to more adequately address how to
meet Alaskan student needs. He stated agreement, that it is not
the student that is the problem, but the box that they are being
put into by the establishment.
10:05:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH noted that the retrospective effort to
assist drop-outs is fairly thriving with a variety of options,
but that is after the fact. Considering birth to death as the
educational span, he asked what process should be started to
assure the second or third grader will be on a track for
success.
MR. SOBOLEFF responded, referring to a nationally recognized
educational research institute, which indicates that at the
heart of the decision making process for a successful school is
parental and student involvement. The current system evolved
because of the industrial revolution, with little change over
time. Today it is important to capitalize on individual skills,
he stressed. The process must encompass parents into the
learning process, not just for parent teacher conferences. The
time when a parent delivered a child to the school door, and
left the rest up to the establishment, is gone, and doesn't
work. The inclusion of the parents, and family, sends a strong
involvement/interest message to the student. Finally, he
suggested that the repeated failure of the system, demonstrated
by the Native student, demands a complete paradigm shift of
"what we're doing in terms of learning, and teaching."
10:10:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked for a comment on the compulsory
attendance age; would raising it have a positive effect on the
Native student graduation rate.
MR. SOBOLEFF invoked the cultural age imprint and how it may not
fit the parameters. The Native cultural imprint allows that
between the ages of birth and 7 lives the child, from 8 to 24
arrives the young person, from 25 to 30 develops the young
adult, from 45-60 you become a learned member of the community
who people may consult with, and above age 70 you may choose to
speak anytime and will be listened to intently, as an elder.
The Western setting sees the young child below age 7, and at age
21 status in society is allowed. This chronological difference
should not stop the ability to meet each age educationally,
however, a teacher should be mindful of the variance. He
reported that some GED students have not been in a school class
setting for ten or more years, when they arrive at his program.
10:15:27 AM
MS. MARTINSEN said she has worked in the educational field for
30 years, primarily working with youth at risk. The term "at
risk" could be changed to "disempowered" or "not embraced," she
suggested, to be more accurate. Two issues are apparent: the
need for a systemic reform to prevent drop-out; and immediate
response to stem the crisis of having 4,000 drop-outs annually;
candidates for public assistance or jail. An estimated 57,000
people in Alaska do not have a GED or diploma, and who are not
productive citizens. She advocated that an emergency response
needs to occur specific for those who have already dropped out.
She expressed concern for additional compulsory years of school
attendance. The model for schools is based on a threatening
approach, she said, "Learn or I will hurt you." She speculated
that this threat is not working. Perhaps an option for all
young people up to age 21 may be helpful. It would increase the
school formula funding, and Alaska would join the states that
have already implemented this change. Another important need is
to provide alternative paths for young students. Every school
assignment should allow at least five means for accomplishment.
She noted that many models are being implemented around the
nation, and the world, based on K-16 classes, or lowering the
credit requirements for graduation. Another approach is to loan
credits to provide future options. Imposing more compulsory
requirements is probably not a direction that will be helpful.
For the drop-out student, the capacity to be absorbed into a
productive program is limited, and not part of our state
educational system. She underscored the immediacy of addressing
this crisis as well as formulating a plan for the future.
10:22:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged the multiple drop-out issues brought
before the committee. He reviewed the various considerations
that have come to the table, including creating kindergarten
classes for four year olds, family and early learning options,
graduation requirement/augmentation, and various educational
assessment measurements being reviewed, en route to the
committee establishing a revised policy. The conversation will
continue, he declared.
10:27:04 AM
MR. SOBOLEFF offered final words, stating:
One of the things that is really imperative, is to
make sure that as you plan the changes that you're
going to do, [is] to look at it in its setting. ...
We need to take advantage of the things that have
preceded us in the world of education and learning.
... We just need to make sure that we're mindful of
the participants in [a] learning situation, and that's
really what it's all about. ... It's that student, in
that classroom, interacting with the teacher and the
peers, ... that are really at the heart of what Alaska
should be doing for its students. [It] doesn't make
any difference what color you are, or whether you're
rural or whether you're urban, it's that interaction
of classroom-student-teacher relationship, ... that
should be the crown jewel of [the] learning process.
10:29:18 AM
CHAIR SEATON invited addition input be submitted, or personally
addressed to the committee.
10:29:49 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee on meeting was adjourned at 10:30
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| Drop-out discussion materials.pdf |
HEDC 3/11/2009 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/16/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| CSHB 126 EDU workdraft.pdf |
HEDC 3/11/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 126 |