Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
04/15/2009 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB206 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 206 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
April 15, 2009
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Vice Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 206
"An Act establishing a career assessment requirement in public
schools; and relating to postsecondary courses for secondary
school students."
-HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 206
SHORT TITLE: HIGH SCHOOL ASSESSM'T/POSTSECONDARY CLASS
SPONSOR(s): EDUCATION
03/25/09 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/25/09 (H) EDC, FIN
03/27/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/27/09 (H) Heard & Held
03/27/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/03/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/03/09 (H) Heard & Held
04/03/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/15/09 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
DIANNE BARRANS, Executive Director
Post Secondary Education Commission
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered advice during the hearing on HB
206.
EDDY JEANS, Director
School Finance and Facilities Section
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
206.
MARSHA OLSON
Teaching/Learning Support (TSL)
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions during the hearing on HB
206.
DAVID ARP, Business Manager
Sitka School District
Sitka, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 206.
SAICHI OBA, Assistant Vice President
of Student Services & Enrollment Management
University of Alaska (UA)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 206.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:59 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. Representatives Seaton, Buch,
Gardner, Edgmon, and Keller were present at the call to order.
Representatives Munoz and Wilson arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
8:03:25 AM
HB 206-HIGH SCHOOL ASSESSM'T/POSTSECONDARY CLASS
CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 206, "An Act establishing a career assessment
requirement in public schools; and relating to postsecondary
courses for secondary school students."
8:03:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 206, Version 26-LS0765\E, Mischel,
4/10/09, as a working document. There being no objection,
Version E was before the committee.
8:03:48 AM
CHAIR SEATON described the changes made in Version E. The
first, in Section 1, subsection (b), changed language so that
the school district in which the student is enrolled in
secondary school shall "make arrangement for the fees for the
appropriate postsecondary courses in which the student enrolls"
[under AS 14.03.074], rather than "pay the course fees". Chair
Seaton explained that some people interpreted the original
language as saying the school districts would have to pay full
tuitions and could not make other arrangements. The other
change, he noted, was the addition of Section 2, which is
related to the intent of HB 215 to provide incentives for
schools to keep students from dropping out of school.
8:05:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER opined that "shall make arrangements for
the fees" is ambiguous and that a school district may not
understand its obligations.
8:07:53 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ said she received feedback from the school
district in her constituency that it wanted to "have more
involvement."
8:08:00 AM
CHAIR SEATON directed attention to the committee packet and the
e-mails received since the last hearing. He said he thinks the
question regarding fees will be a good one to address with the
State Board of Education & Early Development during an interim
meeting.
8:09:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER stated that she supports the idea of
having career preparedness assessments; however, she suggested
that an exchange versus the addition of more assessments would
be prudent.
CHAIR SEATON agreed. He explained that this assessment has been
indicated as a means to provide direction for vocational
education. He said an e-mail forwarded from Representative
Munoz, in the committee packet, indicates that Alaska needs to
decide between the High School Graduation Qualifying Exam
(HSGQE) or the WorkKeys Assessment System "WorkKeys."
8:11:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked if the results of the WorkKeys test
are primarily to help students decide their course or whether it
is for another purpose. He recommended consideration be given
to creating an incentive for taking the test, such as making it
a requirement toward receiving a scholarship.
CHAIR SEATON noted that approximately 70 percent of students do
not attend postsecondary education. The idea has been to use
WorkKeys as a tool to assist students in assessing their own
path. The other aspect would be whether to use it as an
attachment to the high school diploma. The HSGQE also plays a
part in this picture. WorkKeys can also be applied to
postsecondary entry situations; it appears to have multiple
uses. At the base of the issue is a non-effective HSGQE that
has stimulated interest in an alternate assessment approach.
Enmeshing WorkKeys may be the best way to address the interest
of all students, he proffered. In response to a question from
Representative Munoz, he said WorkKeys was going to be given to
eleventh-graders, but its administration has been postponed a
year because of assessment tool difficulties. WorkKeys can be
given to students at various times, he said; a student's highest
score would go on his/her transcript. He said a combination
test, such as the Prairie State Achievement Test, may be better.
The intent is to continue the discovery of what will best work
for the goals established by the committee.
8:19:19 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in response to Representative Munoz, cited
language on page 1, lines 9-10, of Version E, which read:
The commissioner shall select for use in the
state an assessment designed to measure a student's
level of preparedness to make the transition to work
or college.
CHAIR SEATON said it is not specified that the assessment must
be WorkKeys. In response to a follow-up question, he said
Version E would require that the assessment would be on the
transcript. He said he thinks the intent of the bill is to
"bring vocational education direction down through the school
career." The attempt is to implement an appropriately
stratified assessment test, and also provide exit information.
8:23:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON suggested the discussion surrounding this
concept is just beginning.
CHAIR SEATON responded that he expects to have ideas generated
from what is on the table as a template.
8:23:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt [Conceptual Amendment 1],
to insert language on page 2, following line 7, which would:
"provide the Alaska Post-Secondary Commission with a report that
is useful in determining eligibility for scholarships".
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said since there may be competition among
districts, it seems like the issue needs to be a statewide
responsibility. In response to Chair Seaton, he said he thinks
that language would be different from the language on page 2,
lines 8-10, which read:
(3) provide a report to each student on the
results of the student's assessment, based on
nationally recognized criteria for evaluating a
student's preparedness to make the transition to work
or college.
8:28:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response to Representative Buch,
explained that he anticipates a merit-type scholarship program
that will also be needs based. He said he sees the benefit of
utilizing the data from the exit testing. He said the details
could be worked out but the concept is that the WorkKeys test
might reveal when a student is not be able to pass one aspect of
the test, but excels in another, thereby providing quantitative
information that could be used to help that student.
8:29:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH said he is contemplating where all these
assessments should begin. He reviewed the idea that the
assessments can be used to follow the career of each student.
CHAIR SEATON said he presumes that if the department plans to
provide each student an assessment, it would submit that
information to the postsecondary officials.
8:32:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said he would like the results of the test
to be used as a "scholarship carrot for kids that excel in
particular areas."
8:34:33 AM
DIANNE BARRANS, Executive Director, Post Secondary Education
Commission, Department of Education and Early Development,
suggested including test results on a student's transcript,
because a transcript is a standard document. She relayed that a
separate application is not needed for the AlaskAdvantage
Education Grant - a needs-based grant. Every student is
encouraged to complete the federal application for federal aid,
to ensure they receive the full array of aide available to them.
The name of each Alaskan student who completes that form is
added to a pool of names of eligible students. Students who
attend an Alaskan institution "cue up for that." Secondary
institutions identify those students who meet the current
criteria for academic excellence through Scholastic Achievement
Test (SAT) or American College Testing (ACT) scores. A WorkKeys
score above a certain level also "flips that switch to academic
excellence." Ms. Barrans said these records are kept
electronically, and she encouraged the committee to "adopt
practices that would just leverage the efficiency of that
existing system."
8:36:56 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if Ms. Barrans would recommend additional
language to ensure clarity in the bill.
MS. BARRANS said she is not certain what additional language, if
any, is needed. She said the department is working on creating
a database that would allow information sharing of student data;
however, she said that may be a few years away.
8:38:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON said he thinks Representative Keller's idea is to
make data available to the department.
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER confirmed that is correct. He said he
thinks the idea to have the information on the student's
transcript is great.
MS. BARRANS suggested language could be added so that
information is conveyed to the Post Secondary Commission for the
purposes of determining eligibility "as needed."
8:39:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER suggested that the department may need to
know an aggregate number if, for example, there were a program
that selected the top 10 percent of students.
MS. BARRANS responded that the commission would not need to know
the aggregate; it would just need to know "the score above which
the top 10 percent sit." She said she thinks the commission
would be able to "develop an interface with the department" in
order to access that information.
8:40:03 AM
CHAIR SEATON proffered that conceptually it would be useful to
have language that would provide, as needed, information to the
Alaska Commission on Post-Secondary Education that would be
useful for scholarship determination.
MS. BARRANS said yes.
8:40:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON noted that Conceptual Amendment 1 would add a new
subsection.
8:40:53 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there was any objection to Conceptual
Amendment 1 to Version E. There being none, it was so ordered.
8:41:54 AM
CHAIR SEATON directed attention to the language on page 2, lines
11-12, which read as follows:
(d) The results of a student's career
preparedness assessment shall be displayed in summary
form on the student's high school diploma.
CHAIR SEATON questioned whether the language "and transcript"
needs to be added to ensure that the results are noted on a
student's transcript.
8:42:31 AM
EDDY JEANS, Director, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Department of Education and Early Development (DEED),
recommended that the words "and on the transcripts" be added
now, if that is the intent of the committee, so that the State
Board of Education can consider those words when it meets during
the upcoming interim to speak about and formalize an official
position on this particular issue.
8:43:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER moved to adopt [Conceptual Amendment 2],
as follows:
On page 2, line 12, after "high school":
Delete "diploma"
Insert "transcript"
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER opined that it is more important to have
the information noted in a transcript than on a diploma, since
the transcript is more readily available and used.
8:44:27 AM
CHAIR SEATON objected to Conceptual Amendment 2. He explained
that the focus of the committee is to encourage students to
graduate, and if the language simply states "transcript", the
results will be listed whether or not the student graduates. He
said he does not think it would detract from the intent to list
both "diploma" and "transcript".
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER suggested that a diploma is a document
that people frame and put on the wall, and therefore they may
not want their test scores posted on it. Nevertheless, she
indicated that the committee is in the early stages of
discussing the issue.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ and [AN UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER] concurred.
8:45:31 AM
CHAIR SEATON sought the will of the committee.
8:45:46 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER stated support in having the information
listed on both the diploma and the transcript.
CHAIR SEATON reiterated that [having the information listed on
both the diploma and the transcript] is germane to addressing
the drop-out issue.
8:46:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said she understands that the committee
is ultimately working on drop-out prevention However, she
stated that the testing is an assessment, not a pass/fail test,
which provides information to students, parents, and the school
district, regarding a student's strengths and weaknesses. She
remarked, "The diploma is something else again."
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON agreed that a diploma is a commemorative
document.
CHAIR SEATON reiterated that a diploma represents graduation.
8:48:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ expressed her preference that the scores be
recorded only on the transcript and not on the diploma, which
she agreed is more of a commemorative document.
8:49:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON indicated that it would be more
appropriate to require the information be put on the student's
transcript, since there is other information on the transcript
that may be of interest.
8:50:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH noted that currently school districts have
two commemorative documents: a diploma and a certificate of
attendance. The latter is given to a student who does not
graduate, in appreciation of the time he/she spent in school.
He opined that records should be kept in a usable form, on a
document that provides information appropriately through
electronic searches. He questioned how much information should
be added to a diploma. He said it seems the committee is
attempting to acknowledge the assessment process, and he
questioned how that would be denoted on a diploma. He concurred
with those committee members who acknowledged the diploma as a
commemorative document.
8:52:07 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if there was any objection to Conceptual
Amendment 2.
[AN UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER] objected.
8:52:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER noted that this issue has been debated
nationally.
8:52:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER said [placing a student's assessment
results on his/her transcript] would be like printing a
legislator's election results on the commemorative document,
which the lieutenant governor signs, following a legislator's
swearing in oath.
8:53:29 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Buch, Gardner,
Munoz, Wilson, Edgmon voted in favor of Conceptual Amendment 2.
Representatives Keller and Seaton voted against it. Therefore,
Conceptual Amendment 2 was adopted by a vote of 5-2.
8:54:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON directed attention to the language on page
1, lines 6-8, of Version E, which read as follows:
Sec. 14.03.073. Secondary student career
assessment. (a) Each school district in the state
shall require students in grade 12 to complete a
career preparedness assessment as described in (b) of
this section.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON questioned whether it would be helpful to
add the language "after graduation from high school" following
"assessment" if the intent is to assess the students after they
graduate.
8:56:06 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON suggested that it may be difficult to get
students to return for a test once they have graduated.
8:56:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON then directed attention to language on
page 2, lines 8-10, which read:
(3) provide a report to each student on the
results of the student's assessment, based on
nationally recognized criteria for evaluating a
student's preparedness to make the transition to work
or college.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON suggested adding the language "after
graduation from high school" to the word "college".
8:57:04 AM
MR. JEANS told Representative Edgmon that the definition of
graduation from high school is "meeting the course requirements
plus passing the high school qualifying exam." A student that
meets all the course requirements gets a certificate of
attendance. He said he does not think Representative Edgmon
intends to limit the work-ready assessment to only those who
graduate; every student should take the assessment. He added,
"And, based on your previous amendment, you want it reflected on
all their transcripts."
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON responded, "That's fine, thanks."
8:58:23 AM
MR. JEANS, in response to Chair Seaton, stated that currently
districts are required to provide the WorkKeys assessment to
students in the eleventh grade. He said that makes sense,
because that gives children an idea of where they are going to
score. He said if it were up to him, he would administer the
assessment to students twice - once in eleventh grade and once
in twelfth - and then take the higher of the two scores. He
offered his understanding that the range of scores is three to
seven in three categories.
9:00:06 AM
MARSHA OLSON, Teaching/Learning Support (TSL), Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED), told the committee that
she works in the current technical education units in the
department and has been working with WorkKeys for a couple
years. In response to Chair Seaton, she stated that according
to regulations, a student must take [the assessment] in the
eleventh grade and may take it one more time at the state's
expense. Currently, that expense is $5.00 per test per student,
which is $15.00 for the group of tests. Following exit of the
school system, if a student wants to retake the WorkKeys test,
he/she would have to do so at a job center or another testing
center, which may include additional fees.
9:01:55 AM
MS. OLSON, in response to Chair Seaton, said ACT is the official
keeper of scores; however, she said she does not know whether
ACT keeps a student's highest score or his/her latest score.
She offered to check with the company. In response to a follow-
up comment from Chair Seaton, she said the department owns the
data pertaining to test scores and, thus, has immediate access
to it.
9:03:53 AM
MR. JEANS said current regulation requires eleventh graders to
be administered the test, with an option for them to retake it.
He offered his understanding that when the student can retake
the test is not in regulation, and he suggested that that may be
a better time frame then requiring them to take it in the
twelfth grade. The eleventh-grade assessment could be used as
baseline information listed on transcripts.
9:05:03 AM
MS. OLSON, in response to Representative Wilson, said
regulations do not specify at which point in eleventh grade a
student has to take the assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON suggested that if the assessment is not
administered early in the eleventh grade, then some children
might not have enough time to amend their course of study. She
opined that the tenth grade might be a better level at which to
give students the test.
9:06:18 AM
MR. JEANS said there is another assessment, the Worldwide
Interactive Network (WIN), which is aligned with WorkKeys, and
he indicated that it must be given to students in sixth and
eighth grades. Because of that, he said, he does not think the
timing of the test given in eleventh grade is an issue.
9:07:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON questioned why, if the one test is given
in sixth and eighth grades, the other is not given in tenth
grade, with the option for the student to take it again in the
twelfth grade.
MS. OLSON offered her understanding that tenth graders take the
HSQE and other standards-based assessments, and the State Board
of Education & Early Development did not want to overload tenth
graders with yet another mandated test.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON then said she hopes schools consider
administering the assessment within the first month of eleventh
grade.
9:08:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON reminded the committee that the proposed bill does
not specify WorkKeys, it would simply require an assessment
regarding applied mathematics, reading for information, and
information finding. Therefore, if another means is discovered,
the commissioner will have the latitude to decide what test will
be implemented.
9:09:34 AM]
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH indicated that in terms of the assessment,
he supports not including exclusionary language.
9:10:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ stated her understanding that the ultimate
intent is to provide vocational opportunities to students headed
in that direction. She said students are given the assessment
when in the eleventh grade, in order for skills to be identified
and fostered, but questioned how the repetition of the
assessment in the twelfth grade would "tie in with the
availability of those courses."
9:10:47 AM
CHAIR SEATON spoke of the effort to get students actively
involved in achievement and to prevent students from dropping
out of school anytime after taking the HSGQE in eleventh grade.
He said people have related through past testimony that if
"everything's measured in eleventh grade," then senior year does
not mean anything to some students.
9:13:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ opined that the assessment should be
provided in eleventh grade so that students can be aligned with
vocational learning opportunities while they are still in high
school.
9:14:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH pointed out that on page 2, line 10, the
language includes "college". He said the committee is
acknowledging that the current system has not been working and
is attempting to make it more responsive to what the state's
requirements should be. He questioned why students are dropping
out of school and what kind of a product the state has as a
result of allowing students to advance from high school [when
they are not prepared to do so]. He said he agrees with Chair
Seaton that a credible assessment is not currently available,
and he said the legislature is responsible for the system.
9:17:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER stated that the committee is putting
forth an effort to reconstruct a system that is not currently
working for some students. Testing eleventh-graders can provide
assessment scores to alter the direction they are headed and
help keep them engaged. She stated that college-bound students
already know their path by eleventh grade, and the assessment
may highlight their strengths and weaknesses and point them
toward a suitable field of study. She questioned what the
assessments can do for those students who don't even make it to
eleventh grade, because "we've already missed them by eleventh
grade."
9:19:03 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in response to Representative Wilson, clarified
what the adopted Conceptual Amendment would do, and he stated
his intent to hold the bill through the interim.
9:20:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER requested that the bill be divided into
two separate bills with the issue of drop-outs and how the
students are doing in one, and the matter of computations in
another.
9:20:59 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON stated support of that idea, and indicated
that one of the bills may not have a fiscal note, while the
other would.
9:21:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered his understanding that if the question was
divided, Sections 2 and 3 would be included in a separate bill.
Section 1 would become a bill solely addressing the issue of the
prevention of student drop-outs. He indicated that having all
the sections together in one bill acts as a "dollar incentive
for districts to maintain their membership and not have drop-
outs."
9:24:12 AM
MR. JEANS, in response to a question from Representative Edgmon,
stated that if the bill was divided, there would be two fiscal
notes: one from Assessment and Accountability and one from the
School Finance and Facilities Section.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON asked if there would be a fiscal note for
"the assessment portion of the bill."
MR. JEANS replied that he does not think so, because districts
are currently required to administer the assessment to students
in eleventh grade. He said he thinks if legislation passed that
required the assessment for twelfth graders, then the department
would amend its regulations to reflect that change. However,
the department currently intends for all districts to provide
for the assessment in the eleventh grade, with the opportunity
for students to retake it. In response to a follow-up question,
Mr. Jeans said any fiscal note pertaining to [Sections 2 and 3
of HB 206] would be minimal, because he offered his
understanding that there would not be a requirement for
additional resources for the department.
9:26:31 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in response to Representative Wilson, outlined the
three disparate portions of the bill: page 1, line 5, through
page 2, line 12, regarding career assessment; page 2, lines 13-
24, regarding enrolling in postsecondary institutions; and page
2, beginning on line 25, providing an incentive for schools to
keep students in class past an October count date. All three
portions address different tangents related to graduation.
9:27:45 AM
MR. JEANS reiterated that there would be two fiscal notes from
two separate sections of the department.
9:28:10 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER moved to adopt Amendment 3, to divide the
bill into two parts "as per the semi-colon in the title."
9:28:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER objected. She said she understands the
second aspect of the bill is also an effort to improve
graduation rates. Although that portion of the bill deals with
the funding process, the focus is still the same.
9:29:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER responded that the spirit is different.
Regarding "the second half of the bill," he said, "You have to
start with the premise that the school districts are pushing
kids out," which he said "doesn't fit." He stated, "It may be
true, but ... I'd like us to go forward with a positive bill,
where we're looking at getting involved with the kids and
helping them out, ... rather than being a police action in the
school district."
9:29:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER responded that she appreciates
Representative Keller's concern and does not want anyone to
think she does not think teachers are doing what they can to
keep children in school. She described part of the bill as a
means to "build ... into the system an additional little piece
of incentive for them to focus on retention."
9:30:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON remarked that HB 206 is on its way to
becoming an omnibus bill on education, with one portion
addressing assessments and the other addressing student counts.
He opined that those points merit two separate discussions going
forward. He said he thinks at this point he supports
Representative Keller's statement that both issues are
important, but for different reasons.
9:31:04 AM
CHAIR SEATON reiterated that the bill actually addresses three
points. Furthermore, he reiterated that the intent of bringing
the bill forward is primarily for discussion and to create a
template. He stated that [HB 206] should be considered an
omnibus bill. In response to Representative Edgmon, he
confirmed that there is not necessarily any intention to keep
the bill as "one package."
9:33:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER withdrew Amendment 3. He asked about the
possibility of making submissions to the omnibus bill.
9:34:01 AM
CHAIR SEATON said that would be appropriate. He offered his
understanding that there would be a conference held in the fall,
and he expressed his hope that the committee members would
attend.
9:34:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if it is the intent of the committee
that there not be a career assessment in high school until the
twelfth grade, because that is the current language in Version
E.
9:35:35 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered his understanding that current regulation
requires the assessment to be given to eleventh graders, while
Version E would require it be given to twelfth graders. He
reiterated that the crux of that portion of the proposed
legislation is to figure out how to keep students engaged
through their senior year. He opined that the HSQE is obsolete,
and said that topic will come under further discussion with the
State Board of Education & Early Development.
9:37:55 AM
MR. JEANS, in response to a question from Representative Wilson,
said there are between 6,000-8,000 students who graduate each
year in Alaska.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON remarked that if [the career assessment]
is required more than once in high school, that would increase
the fiscal note.
9:38:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON stated that concern about the fiscal note is
premature, and policy should be the focus. Nevertheless, he
pointed out that the HSQE costs money, and another test could be
substituted for it.
9:38:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER said although there are problems with the
HSQE, he would not abandon it without a lot of discussion. The
state has spent a lot of money on it, and it provides data to
the state regarding performance.
9:40:04 AM
DAVID ARP, Business Manager, Sitka School District, stated that
he was surprised to hear that the bill was structured as a
strategy to prevent drop-outs, because he was under the
impression that the intent was to come up with tools for the
school district to use to "smooth out" its budgeting process.
Therefore, Mr. Arp said his only testimony at this point is to
ask the committee to allow the school district to stay involved
in the process.
9:41:03 AM
CHAIR SEATON invited Mr. Arp to provide any subsequent input via
e-mail.
9:42:12 AM
SAICHI OBA, Assistant Vice President of Student Services &
Enrollment Management, University of Alaska, concurred with Ms.
Barran's recommendation that the [career assessment] score be
included on the transcript. He stated that the University of
Alaska should receive test scores so that it can help students
who want to pursue a post-secondary education. In response to
Chair Seaton, he clarified that currently students who take
standardized tests in Alaska, including the Preliminary
Scholastic Achievement Test (PSAT) and SAT, typically have those
scores sent to the institutions that they are considering
attending after high school. Mr. Oba related that the
University of Alaska has not worked with WorkKeys yet. He
continued:
If the student elects to send those on, then that
would work. However, if the scores aren't sent on by
the individual, then what I'm suggesting is that the
school or the district, or [DEED] themselves, be
prepared to share the scores with the university, so
that we can help students who might show some
deficiency in college preparedness in an area of math
or writing for example. ... If we get that early
enough in their high school career, then we can offer
some type of guidance. If we only see it on their
final transcript as a senior, when they apply for
admission, ... it's too late.
MR. OBA, in response to Chair Seaton, said students indicate to
which schools they would like the PSAT or SAT scores sent when
they fill out the actual registration for the exam.
9:46:15 AM
MS. OLSON, in response to Chair Seaton, offered her
understanding that the same option does not appear on the
WorkKeys score sheet as is on the PSAT and SAT.
9:46:27 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked Ms. Olson if a student has to send on his/her
WorkKeys score to an institution, or if the institution can
contact the Department of Education that it has received an
application from someone and ask for that person's score.
MS. OLSON indicated that she needs to look into federal privacy
issues to be able to answer that question.
CHAIR SEATON said these questions will be highlighted for
further discussion.
9:47:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH questioned how exceptional students are
addressed. He said the system should not be an impediment to
anyone.
MR. JEANS said he would look into that issue and respond at a
later date.
9:49:18 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON provided a personal story of an
exceptional student at her district's local school.
9:51:26 AM
CHAIR SEATON summarized the achievements of the meeting.
[HB 206 was held.]
9:52:13 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:52 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| ACPENeeds Merit Components 3 19 09.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Additional training resources (2).pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| UA Final Need Based Report.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Needs based scholarship letter from ACPE.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Ak education data.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
Early Childhood |
| HB 94 Materials.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 94 |
| HB 94 letter from University of AK president.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 94 |
| HB 206 material.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/5/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |
| HB 206 cs workdraft.pdf |
HEDC 4/15/2009 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |