03/01/2010 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB360 | |
| HB297 | |
| HB206 | |
| Adjourn |
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 360 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 297 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 206 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 1, 2010
8:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Vice Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Wes Keller
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 360
"An Act relating to the provision of information regarding a
student by a school district to the Department of Military and
Veterans' Affairs, Alaska Challenge Youth Academy."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 297
"An Act establishing the governor's performance scholarship
program and relating to the program; establishing the governor's
performance scholarship fund and relating to the fund; relating
to student records; making conforming amendments; and providing
for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
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 360
SHORT TITLE: YOUTH ACADEMY: STUDENT RECORDS
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) DAHLSTROM
02/19/10 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/19/10 (H) EDC
03/01/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 297
SHORT TITLE: POSTSECONDARY SCHOLARSHIPS
SPONSOR(s): RULES BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
01/19/10 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
01/19/10 (H) EDC, FIN
02/03/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM BARNES 124
02/03/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/03/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/12/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/12/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/12/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/15/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/15/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/15/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/17/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/17/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/17/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/19/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/19/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/19/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/22/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/22/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/22/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/26/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/26/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/26/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/01/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
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
04/15/09 (H) Heard & Held
04/15/09 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
01/20/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
01/20/10 (H) Heard & Held
01/20/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/01/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/01/10 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/05/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/05/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/05/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/10/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/10/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/10/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/12/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/12/10 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
02/15/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/15/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/15/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/19/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/19/10 (H) Heard & Held
02/19/10 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/22/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
02/22/10 (H) Scheduled But Not Heard
03/01/10 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE NANCY DAHLSTROM
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Introduced HB 360 and responded to
questions, as prime sponsor.
SUSAN WALLEN, Staff
Representative Nancy Dahlstrom
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 360, on behalf of
Representative Dahlstrom, prime sponsor.
MCHUGH PIERRE, Deputy Commissioner
Chief of Staff
Office of the Commissioner/Adjutant General
Department of Military & Veterans' Affairs (DMVA)
Ft. Richardson, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 360.
LES MORSE, Deputy Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 360.
JEAN MISCHEL, Attorney
Legislative Legal Counsel
Legislative Legal and Research Services
Legislative Affairs Agency
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during the hearing
on HB 360.
LARRY LEDOUX, Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during the hearing
on HB 297.
STEWART MCDONALD, Superintendent
Kodiak Island Borough School District
Kodiak, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 206.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:03:45 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. Representatives Seaton, Edgmon,
Buch, Gardner, Munoz, and P. Wilson, were present at the call to
order.
8:03:55 AM
HB 360-YOUTH ACADEMY: STUDENT RECORDS
8:04:18 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 360, "An Act relating to the provision of
information regarding a student by a school district to the
Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs, Alaska Challenge
Youth Academy."
8:04:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE NANCY DAHLSTROM, Alaska State Legislature,
Introduced HB 360, said it is the intent of the sponsor to
provide HB 360 as a means for addressing the high drop-out rate
in Alaska's high schools. The Alaska Challenge Youth Academy,
or Alaska Military Youth Academy (AMYA), [hereafter referred to
as AMYA] is a viable option to help these students, she opined.
8:06:10 AM
SUSAN WALLEN, Staff, Representative Nancy Dahlstrom, Alaska
State Legislature, presented HB 360, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement, which read [original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 360 simply requires school districts to
provide the names, addresses, and attendance dates of
students who have dropped out of high school to the
Director of the Alaska Challenge Youth Academy,
operated by the Department of Military and Veterans'
Affairs.
The school districts would be required to provide this
thth
information biannually: January 15 and July 15 as
this will allow ample opportunity for the Academy
staff to reach out to potential students.
The students whose information is to be provided must
meet the following requirements:
They must be between the ages of 15 and 19
They must have been previously enrolled in a school
district
Their plans to transfer or graduate were not provided
to the school
They have not earned a diploma or GED
The second part of the bill requires the school to
send notification in writing to the parent or
guardian, or student if they are 18 years old, before
the information is released to the Academy. The
parent or student has 10 days to object. If there is
objection, the district may not release the
information.
The Academy will provide in writing to the school
district that the information will not be disclosed to
any other party except as necessary to recruit and
retain students.
8:08:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked at what point a school district
categorizes a student as a drop out.
MS. WALLEN said the standard will be provided to the committee.
8:08:44 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON expressed concern for the ten day written
notification requirement, indicating that it may be a problem
for some communities with limited or remote access.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM offered that the ten working day
requirement could be amended, but opined that it should not be
changed to an excessive period of time.
8:10:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON paraphrased the pertinent language
included in the bill, which read:
If an objection is provided in writing within 10
business days after the notice is mailed, the district
may not provide the information.
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON stated his understanding that a parent, or
student, would first receive a notification, and then have 10
business days to respond, and maintained his concern for remote
communities being able to comply.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM deferred to the department.
8:11:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER recalled that the use of student surveys
has been debated, and the use of passive permission versus an
opt-in action. She queried whether an opt-in possibility had
been considered. Additionally, she asked why parental objection
could not be in the form of a phone call to the district
requesting that the information not be released.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM reported that the Department of
Education and Early Development (EED) student data base has the
capacity to include a field for this purpose. When students
enter school there is a questionnaire filled out that could
include a line to the effect that should your student not
graduate, or not be participating, would the parent allow
information to be sent. She stated her interest in having such
a question included, for the sole purpose of providing a student
with AMYA specific information.
8:12:28 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM, regarding the question of allowing a
parent to respond via oral means versus a written response,
deferred.
8:13:23 AM
CHAIR SEATON noted the January 15 and July 15 dates, and asked
if these are significant dates to the districts.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM responded that the dates are
significant because they coincide with AMYA session dates;
commencing within 30-45 days. Further, she said the school
districts currently required attendance records should prove
adequate for the purposes of this bill, thus no new record
keeping procedures would need to be implemented.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON recalled that the academy uses January
and July 15th as the dates for determining enrollees for the
upcoming sessions, and suggested inserting January 1 and July 1,
in the bill.
8:15:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM welcomed the proposal of an amendment
should alternative dates prove to be beneficial.
8:15:22 AM
CHAIR SEATON recalled opening remarks and the statement "if the
student hadn't provided plans," and asked what plans are being
referenced, and where this aspect resides in the bill.
MS. WALLEN directed attention to page 1, line 14, and
paraphrased from the language, which read:
[(3)] has not provided school transfer or graduation
information to a school in the district;
MS. WALLEN said the assumption would be that a student has no
further plans to attend school.
8:16:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked whether this refers to a written plan, or
other method of contacting the district.
MS. WALLEN clarified that a student planning to transfer, would
usually inform school with written or oral notification, and
there would be a communication between the two schools.
8:17:15 AM
CHAIR SEATON noted that the language of the bill indicates a
student's "enrollment" versus "attendance.". He referred to the
10 day provision, which requires a district to drop a student
from enrollment if contact has been severed, and asked if the
intent of the bill is to align with that rule.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM said yes.
8:18:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER queried the manner in which the AMYA
plans to contact a student. She suggested the process may be
simplified by having the AMYA information packets available for
the school districts to send directly to student's verses
providing names and addresses to the academy.
REPRESENTATIVE DAHLSTROM suggested that EED could provide
further insight, and deferred.
8:19:34 AM
MCHUGH PIERRE, Deputy Commissioner, Chief of Staff, Office of
the Commissioner/Adjutant General, Department of Military &
Veterans' Affairs (DMVA), explained that if a school district
discloses the drop-out information it will support the AMYA in
efforts to target students who may benefit from the program, get
back on track, and possibly return to school. He confirmed that
the dates correspond with the sessions at the academy. Students
will receive a pamphlet with a postcard attached, and they
merely return the postcard for further action.
8:22:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked for the session dates.
MR. PIERRE replied that one begins on the first of April, and
one on the first of October.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON noted that the proposed dates work.
MR. PIERRE replied yes, with adequate time allowed for
recruitment, and continuity for the students who choose to
return to high school following a 22 week residency.
8:24:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked for the percentage of students
accepted into the academy.
MR. PIERRE indicated that it is generally a high percentage of
the applicants. The incoming April class received in excess of
350 applications, and the capacity is for 220 cadets.
8:25:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ noted the three pre-challenge phases, and
inquired about the retention rate through the phases.
MR. PIERRE said the first two weeks may see a drop of 10-20
percent. Applicants are dismissed for a variety of reasons
including negative social interactions, as well as health
concerns.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked if there is a cost to the applicant,
associated with dismissal.
MR. PIERRE replied no, save airfare home, if withdrawal occurs
in the first four weeks.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ opined that the response time of ten days
may need amending.
MR. PIERRE said it was set based the legal minimum, but the
department has no objection to having the timeline amended. He
briefly explained how the timeline was derived.
8:30:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON reviewed the four levels of communications
proposed: 1) the school district sends a letter to the parent,
guardian, or student, if the student is 18 years old; 2) the
school district discloses information to the AMYA; 3) the AMYA
mails a brochure to the student; and 4) the student communicates
interest to the AMYA. From a practical standpoint, the actual
respondent rate may become narrow, given the level of
communication involved, he opined.
MR. PIERRE underscored that the key to the success of the
program, is that the students who respond possess an interest a
desire to make a life change. The current methods of contact
are broad, and often random, including word of mouth, and the
internet applications of Facebook, and MySpace, which, he opined
all may be more inefficient than the proposed legislation.
8:32:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON pondered whether there could be a better
means to communicate the AMYA option to at-risk students.
8:33:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked why the passive permission,
versus the active permission approach was chosen, speculating it
may be due to the student not being under parental supervision.
8:33:56 AM
MR. PIERRE concurred and said that the commissioner agrees, that
it is the best approach for allowing an AMYA flier to be sent to
a student.
8:35:42 AM
CHAIR SEATON recalled that three districts have been cooperating
with the academy, and asked about the response received from
other districts contacted.
MR. PIERRE stated that some districts reported not having
information on drop-out students. He said that is erroneous as
the information is required to be reported to EED every July.
Other districts were supportive, but there was no follow
through, and, finally, some districts declined to cooperate
without cause.
8:37:06 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for specific reasons offered by the districts
who reported not having information available on drop-outs.
MR. PIERRE replied:
It wasn't that specific ... just: We understand what
you're looking for, we don't keep those numbers, we
couldn't tell you who dropped out, so we're not going
to be able to pass on the information.
CHAIR SEATON recalled that the committee experienced difficulty
when requesting age specific information for drop-outs from the
districts, because the data is set up according to grade level.
The method used by districts to maintain records could be the
problem. Passage of HB 360 will impose specific requirements on
the part of the districts, and he asked where legal liability
will fall for non-compliance.
MR. PIERRE said there is no intention of punishing districts for
non-compliance, because the expectation is that districts will
want to support the effort, and see the academy as another means
to engage drop-outs.
CHAIR SEATON agreed that the support may exist, but maintained
that it is important to know the liability repercussions.
8:41:08 AM
LES MORSE, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Education and
Early Development (EED), stated that the department has not
taken an official position on HB 360. Referring to a previous
question, clarified that July 15 as the due date for every
submit its annual enrollment status report to the department.
The district report includes who was enrolled, at any time
during the year, and, if they withdrew, the reason for the
departure. He recalled another question regarding how a drop-
out is determined and said there are several factors. A student
may state that they are leaving, or a district may exhaust ten
days of contact effort, and not received a records request from
another district; in either case the student will be coded as a
drop-out. Should transfer papers eventually be requested,
perhaps from another state, the district is able to convert the
drop-out code to a transfer status. He reported that as many as
30 percent of students initially coded as drop-outs, eventually
re-enroll. The January 15 date, in the bill, may be a
challenging time for some schools to generate a report, and he
deferred to the districts for a response on the viability of
that date.
8:44:18 AM
MR. MORSE, regarding information distribution, said the
department assumed AMYA brochures would be included in the
notice provided to parents at the beginning of every school
year. At the inception of the school year, every parent
receives a notice, which states that the department will
disclose information about you, for students 18 years of age, or
your child, to specific groups. A family or the student can
sign to say that they deny the disclosure of the information.
The information is generally directory oriented, and some
families do object. A recent addition to the disclosure list
has been for schools to release directory information to
military entities. In order for AMYA to be included on the
existing form, language would need to be added specific to the
academy.
8:46:03 AM
CHAIR SEATON surmised that adding the appropriate language to
the annual notice would take care of the concern for AMYA
information distribution.
MR. MORSE said, with the HB 360 provision in place, the district
would be compelled to include language similar to what is
included in the bill on page 1, lines 12-14, and page 2, lines
1-3.
8:47:25 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked whether a request for consent, in the school
registration packet, would preclude the need to provide a
written notice later, thus triggering the ten business day
response clause.
MR. MORSE indicated that further information would be provided
to the committee as to whether the consent, made at the
beginning of the school year, adequately covers the written
notification provision of the bill.
8:48:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired whether the department expects
to take an official position on HB 360. Further, she asked if
the July 15 reports are enrollment totals, or do the reports
include names and addresses of students no longer enrolled.
MR. MORSE offered to confer with the commissioner regarding a
forthcoming position. Additionally, he responded that the July
15 report does include identification information, which is run
against other district information to determine transfer
student.
8:50:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER questioned why the department could not
make the information directly available to the academy, from the
July reports.
MR. MORSE explained that both federal and state disclosure law,
requires student consent, which the state does not have a means
to collect, passive or active, in all 53 districts; creating a
legal concern.
8:51:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON noted that not every parent enrolls
their student in person, requiring forms to be sent to their
home, and asked what percentage are received in return mail.
MR. MORSE declined to speculate on the percentage received.
CHAIR SEATON asked whether the district report is provided to
the department by grade level or age of student.
MR. MORSE answered that it is by grade and includes date of
birth. It may not be easy for a district to pull certain data
from their system, but the departmental report includes the
student's state [identification], name, and birth date. A birth
date, however, is not always accurate. He pointed out that the
report in the committee packed is from the Anchorage district,
and differs from what is sent to the department. The department
report does not include all of the reasons for drop-out.
CHAIR SEATON concluded that there is not a unified district
system in place, and each district compiles information
independently.
MR. MORSE said that is correct, because the information is
collected into different systems using a variety of methods.
8:55:21 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked about the anticipated liability for
noncompliance by a district or superintendent.
JEAN MISCHEL, Attorney, Legislative Legal Counsel, Legislative
Legal and Research Services, Legislative Affairs Agency, said
the liability is unspecified in HB 360, but the overall
enforceability of any education law requires state funding be
reduced.
CHAIR SEATON inquired whether enforcement is automatic or on a
case by case basis.
MS. MISCHEL said it is case by case, as reviewed by the
commissioner. The department may allow time for compliance
prior to taking action.
8:58:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON commented how deliberations on the
topic have continually indicated that every drop-out student is
unique. It is apparent that there are no silver bullet
solutions, and AMYA is one option for drop-outs to consider.
She stated support for the bill and for retaining the passive
permission language.
CHAIR SEATON indicated that if the school districts are able to
implement current data systems, the contact issue will be
resolved and not represent a burden.
9:00:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked the bill sponsor to provide the
committee with feedback from the districts regarding the costs,
and difficulties associated with supplying AMYA information.
Additionally, there are other programs and high school
completion options, and she asked whether information for these
options are also presented to the students; suggesting that
school counselors might be an efficient means for distribution
of materials. Finally, she asked for information regarding the
penalty for inappropriate disclosure.
9:01:17 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that HB 360 would be held for further
consideration.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:01 a.m. to 9:07 a.m.
HB 297-POSTSECONDARY SCHOLARSHIPS
9:07:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 297, "An Act establishing the governor's
performance scholarship program and relating to the program;
establishing the governor's performance scholarship fund and
relating to the fund; relating to student records; making
conforming amendments; and providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER opined that, with the dual track
approach, a student considering a career technical vocation, is
being given no incentive to achieve beyond a C+ grade point
average (GPA). She argued that award will be $3,0000, classes
are easier than the academic track, and earning an A, or a B GPA
does not alter the amount of the scholarship. She asked whether
this is an accurate summation.
CHAIR SEATON stated no, and pointed out that there is a
difference in classes required for a student earning a high
school diploma versus the rigorous curriculum required to
achieve a GPS award.
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER acknowledged that her concern was
addressed with the adoption of Amendment 3, and withdrew her
statement. She then turned to Amendment 9, and expressed
concern for a student being held liable for repayment of an
erroneously awarded scholarship.
9:10:10 AM
CHAIR SEATON read Amendment 9, as adopted by the committee
[2/26/10]:
Page 10, line 1, following "error":
Insert "less any scholarship award payments
previously expended if the error in the award of the
scholarship was not due to any fault of the student"
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER indicated general concern for the dual
track approach of the program.
9:11:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH moved to take from the table Amendment 11,
labeled 26-GH2771\A.18, Mischel, 2/18/10, tabled at the 2/19/10
meeting, which read [original punctuation provided]:
Page 5, lines 22 - 27:
Delete all material and insert:
"(1) the four-year core academic curriculum that
the student must have completed in high school; the core
academic curriculum must include one of the following:
(A) a combination of
(i) four years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) four years of science; and
(iv) four years of social studies, one year of
which may include a foreign language, Alaska Native
language, fine arts, or cultural heritage; or
(B) a combination of
(i) three years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) three years of science;
(iv) four years of social studies; and
(v) two years of a foreign language, Alaska
Native language, fine arts, or cultural heritage;"
Page 6, lines 17 - 22:
Delete all material and insert:
"(1) the four-year core academic curriculum that
the student must have completed in high school; the core
academic curriculum must include one of the following:
(A) a combination of
(i) four years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) four years of science; and
(iv) four years of social studies, one year of
which may include a foreign language, Alaska Native
language, fine arts, or cultural heritage; or
(B) a combination of
(i) three years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) three years of science;
(iv) four years of social studies; and
(v) two years of a foreign language, Alaska
Native language, fine arts, or cultural heritage;"
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
9:12:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH said that Amendment 11, aligns the core
academic curriculum for both tracks, and provides two options,
as indicated in paragraphs (A) and (B). He offered Amendment 1
to Amendment 11, to delete subparagraph (B) throughout Amendment
11.
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
9:14:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH directed attention to pages 5 and 6 of the
bill, and paraphrased the curriculum requirements beginning on
line 22, which read [original punctuation provided]:
(1) the four-year core academic curriculum
that the student must have completed in high school;
the core academic curriculum must include
(A) four years of mathematics;
(B) four years of language arts;
(C) four years of science; and
(D) three years of social studies;
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH explained that Amendment 11 maintains the
requirements for math, language arts, and science, but
stipulates an additional year of social studies with curriculum
directives, as well as a two-year foreign language requirement
in sub-subparagraph (v) [page 1, line 18, and page 1, line 15].
Amendment 1 to Amendment 11 maintains the additional social
studies year, but deletes the two-year foreign language
requirement.
9:16:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH, upon discussion of further changes to
Amendment 11, restated his motion to adopt Conceptual Amendment
1 to Amendment 11. Amendment 11, as amended, then read:
Page 5, lines 22 - 27:
Delete all material and insert:
"(1) the four-year core academic curriculum that
the student must have completed in high school; the core
academic curriculum must include:
(A) a combination of
(i) four years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) four years of science; and
(iv) four years of social studies, one year of
which may include a foreign language, Alaska Native
language, fine arts, or cultural heritage.
Page 6, lines 17 - 22:
Delete all material and insert:
"(1) the four-year core academic curriculum that
the student must have completed in high school; the core
academic curriculum must include:
(A) a combination of
(i) four years of mathematics;
(ii) four years of language arts;
(iii) four years of science; and
(iv) four years of social studies, one year of
which may include a foreign language, Alaska Native
language, fine arts, or cultural heritage.
CHAIR SEATON removed his objection to Conceptual Amendment 1 to
Amendment 11.
There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1, to Amendment
11, was adopted.
9:18:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH, at the chairman's request, restated his
motion. He moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 11 [as amended].
CHAIR SEATON maintained his objection to Conceptual Amendment 11
[as amended].
9:18:22 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH reported that school districts have placed
importance on offering four years of social studies, and that
within the structure, which the department is creating,
opportunities exist for elective classes to be offered in
conjunction with the GPS.
9:18:56 AM
CHAIR SEATON said the action broadens social study requirements,
and includes electives that are currently available to students.
Although he does not oppose the possibility of requiring a
fourth year of socials studies, he opined that it narrows
options for students taking electives in other areas, and
maintained his objection.
9:20:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ agreed that it does appear to narrow
student options in the fourth year, and stated opposition to the
amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH argued that it expands the opportunities for
a liberal arts student to take a class that is not a standard
business acumen; providing additional curriculum options.
9:23:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked what courses are included in the
study of Fine Arts.
9:24:08 AM
CHAIR SEATON referred to the core requirements listed on page 5,
lines 24-27, and compared the proposed changes of Amendment 11.
He asked EED whether the listed courses [page 1, lines 11 and
12] are considered social studies.
LARRY LEDOUX, Commissioner, Department of Education and Early
Development (EED), replied no, and returned to Representative
Wilson's question, stating that the field of Fine Arts includes
the visual and performing arts, including: art, ceramics,
sculpture, band, music, choir, and theater. Social studies
comprise the social sciences, which are: sociology, psychology,
history, and economics. Fine Arts and social studies are
separate disciplines of study with two different sets of
curriculum attached.
9:25:34 AM
CHAIR SEATON questioned how a requirement to take an additional
year of social studies might affect students desiring to take
electives in other areas of interest, such as Fine Arts or
cultural heritage.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX explained that whenever the legislature or
State Board of Education imposes a require course, it displaces
a student's option for an elective. The GPS is a voluntary
program that encourages students to pursue a program of
excellence. There are many courses in the social sciences that
would meet that pursuit. However, a career tech, and college
tech program, particularly in regards to the social sciences are
both critical. A state mandated requirement would reduce
electives for a high school student, at a time when it is
important for them to be able to make choices. The data
indicates that all ethnic and gender groups are positively
influenced by taking math and science for four years versus
three, but not significantly reportable regarding social
sciences.
CHAIR SEATON noted that the amendment allows the substitution of
one year of Fine Arts for social studies, as an additional
requirement.
9:28:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON pointed out that the amendment includes
foreign language as a class option, and asked whether foreign
language is included in the Fine Arts curriculum.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX said usually not, as English, literature,
speech, writing, and debate constitute language arts.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON queried what category foreign language
falls under.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX indicated that foreign language is a
critical aspect of college preparation, and often a requirement
for college entrance.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether an Alaska Native language
could be considered a foreign language.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX pointed out that it is an indigenous
language, which could not be considered foreign. He stated his
belief that it may be accepted at some universities.
9:30:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH reviewed the amendment, and opined that it
cleans up the bill. He asked Commissioner LeDoux whether the
proposed action would swerve to eliminate or enhances a
student's opportunities.
9:31:29 AM
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX underscored how research indicates that four
years each, of math and science, are significant indicators for
graduation from college. The change to allow a foreign language
as an alternative, and the possible effects, poses a question,
which may not be statistically supported.
9:32:26 AM
CHAIR SEATON clarified that the amendment before the committee
is strictly to include an additional year of social studies;
from 3 to 4. It adds one more requirement to the core
curriculum for both the academic and career technical
scholarships.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX indicated that it would be important to
specify what courses would meet the fourth year requirement in
social studies in order to ensure that a district could confirm.
The classes listed in the amendment are from a variety of
disciplines.
9:33:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked if curriculum varies between school
districts.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX replied yes. In a freshman level art
appreciation or theater class, the department would need to
determine the standards and qualify the classes offered.
9:34:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH expressed interest for allowing local
discrimination by school districts to work within the
requirements of the amendment, and asked whether the language
would allow current curriculum to be utilized.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX concurred, but said it would be difficult to
determine the rigor of the course, which is the basis for the
scholarship program.
9:35:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked about impacts of the amendment within
the department.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX explained that the department would need to
establish standards and guidelines to ensure rigor in the
diversity of classes comprising the Fine Arts discipline.
Standards for Fine Arts are more difficult to define, but it can
certainly be accomplished.
9:36:45 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ queried what the current social studies
requirement is for graduation.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX stated that it is three years, of which one
year is U.S. History, and one semester must be Alaska studies or
the standards for Alaska studies must be integrated into another
course.
9:37:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked if the category includes courses
named in the amendment [page 1, lines 11 and 12].
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX replied no, but a class could be designed,
particularly in Alaska Native Studies that includes language and
culture to meet the social studies requirement. Ordinarily a
language course would not meet the social studies requirement.
9:37:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked whether Commissioner LeDoux would
deem it beneficial to add a fourth year required course to the
GPS program.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX opined that the requirements of HB 297 are
adequate to provide a rigorous curriculum.
9:38:24 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON questioned whether the set of requirements
[in the amendment] might disenfranchise a student pursuing a
performing arts avocation, or degree.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX explained that every added class requirement
for graduation or scholarship eligibility removes the ability
for a student to participate in an elective class out of
personal interest. He opined that the amendment should not
prove stressful for a student pursuing a college or technical
school career.
9:39:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON opined that the amendment does not
change the options available for students.
9:40:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH maintained that a fourth year of social
studies should be a mandate, to include one year of other
disciplines as listed.
9:40:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON cited that the fourth year disciplines
are not social studies, and could be viewed as electives, which
negates the need for an amendment.
9:41:25 AM
CHAIR SEATON agreed, and said that is the reason for sustaining
his objection. The amendment could restrict the options of some
students.
9:42:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked the commissioner for his opinion.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX described what a student's schedule might
entail for each year of high school, should they choose to focus
on qualifying for the GPS. A freshman's year will have six
periods comprised of math, science, history, English, physical
education (PE), and one elective. A sophomore will have the
same requirements of math, science, history, and English. The
Sophomore year is when a foreign language is usually taken up,
which would be the fifth hour, and one elective remains, however
many districts require a half year of PE and health, leaving one
semester for an elective course. The junior year will also be
dictated by required math, science, history, and English
courses, and the second year of foreign language takes up one
elective, leaving one free choice elective. As a senior it will
be the final requirement year for math, science, and English.
Many students may need to take an additional math class, to
double-up, depending on their interests. He pointed out that it
leaves little space for other interests to enter in particularly
if a final year of history/social studies is also required. He
stated his belief that students will fill their elective hours
in a meaningful way, given the opportunity, and expressed
concern for creating a situation that does not allow a student
to exercise their own interests.
9:45:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH stated that the amendment is an effort to
expand opportunities for students in all areas of the state, and
enhance what exists.
9:47:33 AM
CHAIR SEATON maintained his objection to Conceptual Amendment
11, as amended.
[The objection by Representative Wilson at the 2/19/10 hearing
was treated as withdrawn.]
A roll call vote was taken. Representative Buch voted in favor
of Conceptual Amendment 11, as amended. Representatives Edgmon,
Gardner, Munoz, Wilson, Seaton, voted against it. Therefore,
Conceptual Amendment 11, as amended, failed by a vote of 1-5.
9:48:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that the bill envisions the use of
qualified postsecondary institutions, and asked what facilities
are included. She reported that she queried DLWD and only
AVTECH was named.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX said DLWD will be the approving department
for eligibility of programs. Using AVTEC as an example, he
indicated that the highest priced tuition is $5,000 to earn a
nursing certificate; many programs are less than $3,000.
However, a student entering diesel mechanics must purchase tools
to enter the program, the cost of which exceeds the tuition.
The needs component of the GPS allows awards to defray
reasonable costs such as room and board, or equipment. It is
not the intent of the department to set a gold standard in the
development of new training programs throughout the state, i.e.
institutions establishing tuitions reflecting scholarship award
amounts. He stated the department's opinion that $3,000 is an
adequate starting figure.
9:51:30 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER referred to tuition costs listed in the
AVTECH catalogue, and noted that program lengths vary upwards
from as few as 38 training days. She reflected on the flat
$3,000 award for the career technical training versus the tiered
award system for the academic element, and opined that this may
inadvertently diminish incentive for a student who is pursuing a
career track to achieve beyond a C+ GPA.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX stated his belief that the dual tracks
established, and the standards required for qualification, will
better prepare every student for whatever postsecondary program
they choose.
9:53:09 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ asked whether the department considered
allowing advanced foreign language classes to satisfy part of
the four year language arts requirement.
COMMISSIONER LEDOUX replied no, explaining that the recognition
of the language arts requirement is a long established standard.
To a follow-up question he said that the current requirement is
four years of language arts.
9:54:21 AM
CHAIR SEATON stated that HB 297 would be held over.
HB 206-HIGH SCHOOL ASSESSM'T/POSTSECONDARY CLASS
9:54:56 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the final 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."
9:55:39 AM
CHAIR SEATON moved to take from the table Amendment 1, labeled
16-LS0765\P.1, Mischel, 2/16/10, tabled at the 2/19/10 meeting,
which read [original punctuation provided]:
Page 3, line 18:
Delete "The"
Insert "Except as provided in AS 14.17.610(d) and
(e), the"
Page 3, line 23, following "(d)":
Insert "and (e)"
Page 4, line 2:
Delete "a new subsection"
Insert "new subsections"
Page 4, line 8, following "AS 14.17.500.":
Insert "A recomputation under this subsection
shall take into account the supplement received by a
district under (e) of this section and include the
remaining balance owed in state aid for the increase
in the current year student count that was the basis
for the supplement if, at the end of the 80-day count
period, the increase in the current year student count
is the same or higher for the entire count period."
Page 4, following line 10:
Insert a new subsection to read:
"(e) Before a recomputation is made under (d) of
this section, a district may request supplemental
state aid by providing satisfactory proof on a form
provided by the department that the student count
conducted in the first 20 days of the 80-day student
count period in the current fiscal year is more than
10 percent above the count made in the 80-day student
count period for the preceding fiscal year. The
department shall provide an eligible district
supplemental state aid before the recomputation period
in an amount that is equal to 80 percent of the state
aid owed for the difference in the student counts.
Nothing in this subsection requires a district to seek
supplemental state aid before a recomputation is made
under (d) of this section."
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON renewed her objection, from the 2/19/10
meeting.
9:56:35 AM
CHAIR SEATON said Amendment 1 deals with the proposed 80 day
count period, which has been indicated as problematic by some
districts. He directed attention to Amendment 1, page 1, line
23, to explain how the 80 day count would affect the
recomputation, and fund distribution, for a district with an
enrollment count variance above 10 percent.
9:58:14 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ opined that the 80 day count period is a
huge demand, particularly on smaller districts, and it may not
be an appropriate time period to implement.
CHAIR SEATON pointed out that the amendment is to provide a 20
day bump-up. He explained how the bill has evolved from
stipulating two count periods, and said the 80 day count period
was suggested by the commissioner. The amendment is to address
any large variance in student populations, a problem that has
been anticipated.
9:59:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ moved Conceptual Amendment 1, to Amendment
1, to read:
Page 1, lines 16 and 23
Delete: 80
Insert: 40
and
Page 2, line 2
Delete: 80
Insert: 40
10:00:13 AM
CHAIR SEATON objected for discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ speculated that this would have a lower
financial impact and provide easier implementation.
CHAIR SEATON opined that 40 days may not accomplish the intent
of an expanded count period. Expanding the count to span two
semesters of the year is an effort to provide a financial
incentive for districts to retain students throughout the year.
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ cited the lack of district support for an
80 day count, as well as the opposition voiced during public
testimony.
10:02:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH agreed that the 40 day count eliminates the
opportunity for an effective, longer count period.
10:02:30 AM
CHAIR SEATON, in deference a teleconference witness, tabled
Conceptual Amendment 1, to Amendment 1, and opened public
testimony.
10:02:56 AM
STEWART MCDONALD, Superintendent, Kodiak Island Borough School
District (KIBSD), said HB 206 has been a focus of discussion in
Kodiak, and local questions have arisen regarding the dual
credit offering, which occurs in the district. Kodiak offers 20
approved classes, which count as dual postsecondary credits;
beginning in the 9th grade. Students taking these courses may
not have passed all three sections of the high school graduation
qualifying exam (HSGQE). He explained how this works as part of
the schools drop-out prevention program, effectively keeping a
student purposefully connected to the high school. It continues
to be a hook, even after a student passes the HSGQE.
CHAIR SEATON assured the superintendent that it is not the
intention of the committee to preclude this class/credit option
in Kodiak.
10:06:34 AM
MR. MCDONALD explained that the Kodiak College vets the
participating high school teachers, as well as the class
syllabus, and charges only $25.00 per credit hour. The extra
time that is required by the teachers, primarily on-line with
the college, is done on a voluntary basis, with no additional
cost to the district. A concern has arisen that if a provision
is included to require dual credit offerings, it may remove the
ability for the voluntary action to occur, based on teacher
union restrictions. The voluntary status does mean that not all
schools have this option. He asked if it will be a problem
under HB 206.
10:09:12 AM
CHAIR SEATON said that legislative legal staff will be contacted
to determine whether there is an issue, including the teacher
union concerns. Additionally, he said the National Education
Association (NEA) will be invited to comment.
10:09:58 AM
MR. MCDONALD pointed out that the drop-out rate in Kodiak is at
3.5 percent, or 28 students, and reported that these 28 students
withdrew for various reasons. Only eight of these drop-outs did
not return to attain a diploma. He attributed this success in
part to the dual credit program. Addressing the count change
issue, he reported the district's response, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement, which read [original punctuation provided]:
KIBSD is not in favor of expanding the twenty-day
student enrollment count to eighty days.
KIBSD researched its student enrollment records for
the past five years focusing on the time frame of
October through February and averaged a decline of
1.5%. The decline was not a consistent trend as each
year indicated unique circumstances as follows:
2004-2005 minus 50 - Enrollment declined between
October to February due to early graduation at
semester, some students enrolled in drug and alcohol
rehabilitation programs; and some students transferred
to other schools.
2005-2006 plus 52 - Enrollment increased between
October to February due to more students enrolling
than withdrawing - early graduation at semester; some
students enrolled in drug and alcohol rehabilitation
programs; and some students transferred to other
schools.
2006-2007 minus 74 - Enrollment declined between
October to February due to excessive attendance
expulsions (misused policy - policy has since been
revised) - early graduation at semester; some students
enrolled in drug and alcohol rehabilitation programs;
and some students transferred to other schools.
Nearly all the 74 students were brought back into the
system by the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year.
20007-2008 minus 30 - Enrollment declined between
October to February mostly due to early graduation at
semester; some students enrolled in drug and alcohol
rehabilitation programs; and some students transferred
to other schools.
2008-2009 minus 3 - Enrollment declined between
October to February mostly due to early graduation but
was balanced by increased enrollment - early
graduation at semester; some students enrolled in drug
and alcohol rehabilitation programs; and some students
transferred to other schools.
MR. MCDONALD added that the 2008-2009 year may also have low
numbers due to increased efforts for personal contact with at
risk students, and alternative pathway offerings. Taking a
personal, and flexible, approach is the reason that the district
has a high student retention/return rate, and the count period
is not an influence. The four year graduation rate is 77.25
percent; 58.06 percent for Native students, and 65.63 percent
for students with disabilities. The district is pursuing the
expansion of course offerings, and implementing the KeyTrain and
WorkKeys assessments. Elaborating on the district's use of
these materials, he continued paraphrasing from the prepared
statement, which read [original punctuation provided]:
KIBSD is not in favor of a requirement that would make
Work Keys a high-stakes assessment.
Our District utilizes Work Keys, in addition to a
variety of other assessments, by allowing students to
take multiple assessments throughout a school year to
compile the vital information needed to study their
own learning. Students become more meaningfully
engaged in instruction and ultimately more connected
to their life goals by studying their own learning.
KIBSD also reaches into elementary grade levels with
this low-stakes formative assessment methodology
through Key Train. KIBSD intends to apply the
knowledge gained through low-stakes formative
assessments such as Key Train and Work Keys to a
student's five-year career plan; hence, laying the
foundation for career choices and the pursuit of high
school dual credit courses. Any legislation to
increase the formality of the Work Keys test would
disrupt our low-stakes formative assessment process
and hinder our ability to study student learning with
students at their speed of learning. This combination
of assessments, formative assessments, and student
options for dual credit helps to keep students engaged
in school, graduate on time, and address drop-out
issues.
MR. MCDONALD relayed the surprising fact that the majority of
the 28 reported drop-outs had already passed their HSGQE,
indicating that they were students on track to graduate. He
finished, indicating that an extended count would prove costly,
as well as represent an additional requirement for staff.
10:20:28 AM
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged the efforts at KIBSD as a viable
district, which implements the basics of economy, mastery, and
purpose. He assured the superintendent that the purpose for
having WorkKeys identified in the bill is to provide a
continuous improvement model, not to create a high-stakes
assessment. Additionally, a WorkKeys certified score would be
placed on a diploma to provide information regarding a student's
performance. He requested any written data referenced, during
testimony, be provided to the committee.
10:22:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked whether the superintendent planned
to testify on HB 360.
10:23:09 AM
MR. MCDONALD expressed interest, but said he has not yet
reviewed the bill.
10:23:17 AM
CHAIR SEATON solicited input from the district on HB 360 and
announced that HB 206 would be held for further consideration.
10:23:57 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:24 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 297 Amendment #1.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| HB 297 Amendment #2.pdf |
HEDC 2/15/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| Amendments 3 through 7.pdf |
HEDC 2/17/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| Amendments 8 through 11.pdf |
HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| Amendments 12 and 13.pdf |
HEDC 2/26/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| HB 297 GPS Materials.pdf |
HEDC 2/3/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/12/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 297 |
| HB 206 Version P February 4, 2010.pdf |
HEDC 2/5/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/10/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/12/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/19/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/8/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/17/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |
| HB 206 version P Sponsor Statement February 4, 2010.docx |
HEDC 2/5/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/10/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/12/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/19/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/8/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/17/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |
| HB 206 Version P Amendment.pdf |
HEDC 2/19/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/8/2010 8:00:00 AM HEDC 3/17/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |
| Scan001.PDF |
HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 360 Sponsor Statement and Background |
| count date brief - final.doc |
HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 206 |
| HB 360 DMVA Support Letter.pdf |
HEDC 3/1/2010 8:00:00 AM |
HB 360 |