Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
02/01/2016 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB157 | |
| HB102 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HB 157 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 1, 2016
8:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Wes Keller, Chair
Representative Liz Vazquez, Vice Chair
Representative Jim Colver
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative David Talerico
Representative Harriet Drummond
Representative Jonathan Kreiss-Tomkins
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 157
"An Act relating to language immersion charter schools; relating
to teacher certification; and relating to standards-based
assessments in language immersion charter schools and language
immersion programs."
- HEARD & HELD
HOUSE BILL NO. 102
"An Act providing for funding of educational services for
students in residential psychiatric treatment centers."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 157
SHORT TITLE: LANG. IMMERSION SCHOOLS/TEACHER CERTS.
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) KREISS-TOMKINS
03/20/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/20/15 (H) EDC, FIN
02/01/16 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
BILL: HB 102
SHORT TITLE: RESIDENTIAL PSYCH CTR; EDUC. STDRS/FUNDS
SPONSOR(s): EDUCATION
02/11/15 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
02/11/15 (H) EDC, FIN
03/20/15 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/20/15 (H) Heard & Held
03/20/15 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/08/15 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/08/15 (H) <Bill Hearing Rescheduled to 4/10/15>
04/10/15 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/10/15 (H) Heard & Held
04/10/15 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
04/13/15 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/13/15 (H) Scheduled but Not Heard
04/15/15 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
04/15/15 (H) Heard & Held
04/15/15 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
02/01/16 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
WITNESS REGISTER
REID MAGDANZ, Staff
Representative Kreiss-Tomkins
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Assisted in the presentation of HB 157, and
responded to questions.
SUSAN SCHMIDT, Executive Director
Staffing and Operations
Anchorage School District (ASD)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 157.
BRANDON LOCKE, Director
World Languages
Anchorage School District (ASD)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 157.
KATHERINE GARDNER, Executive Director
Human Resources
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 157.
JENNIFER HUTCHINS, Principal
Fronteras Charter School
Spanish American Immersion School
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 157.
JANET OGAN, Staff
Representative Wes Keller
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented HB 102 on behalf of the House
Education Standing Committee, sponsor by request, chaired by
Representative Keller.
MICHAEL LYONS, Vice President of Specialty Education
Universal Health Services
North Star Behavioral Health Systems
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 102.
EVELYN ALSUP, Director of Education
North Star Behavioral Health Center
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 102.
MIKE GRAHAM, Chief Academic Officer
Anchorage School District (ASD)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified with concern on HB 102.
LINDA CARLSON, Assistant Superintendent
Culturally Responsive Education
Anchorage School District (ASD)
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the hearing on HB 102, and
responded to questions.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:01:13 AM
CHAIR WES KELLER called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:01 a.m. Representatives Seaton, Drummond,
Kreiss-Tomkins, Talerico, and Keller were present at the call to
order. Representatives Vazquez and Colver arrived as the
meeting was in progress.
HB 157-LANG. IMMERSION SCHOOLS/TEACHER CERTS.
8:01:30 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 157, "An Act relating to language immersion
charter schools; relating to teacher certification; and relating
to standards-based assessments in language immersion charter
schools and language immersion programs."
8:02:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS, as sponsor of HB 157, stated that
the overall goal of the legislation is to make immersion
language charter schools an easier reality in Alaska, for new
and existing facilities. He paraphrased from the sponsor
statement, which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Language immersion education is an increasingly
popular educational model, especially in today's
rapidly globalizing world. Language immersion
education also produces impressive educational
outcomes. Decades of experience from around the world
have shown that language immersion education can
create second-language fluency while also contributing
to academic success in other subjects.
Alaska already has a variety of successful and popular
immersion programs. Fronteras in the Mat-Su (Spanish)
and Rilke Schule in Anchorage (German) are both
planning moves to new facilities as interest grows.
Anchorage School District's world languages immersion
program teaches three languages - Japanese, Russian,
and Spanish - and is in the process of adding French
and Chinese. In rural Alaska, interest is growing in
immersion as a way to teach endangered Native
languages, Ayaprun Elitnaurvik in Bethel leading the
way.
HB 157 creates a charter school designation with the
specific mission of delivering a curriculum in a
foreign or Native language, and holds these schools to
a strict immersion standard. It requires fully
certified teachers in these charter schools to have
the specialized skills necessary to successfully teach
in an immersion setting, and it includes provisions
that will put in the classroom language speakers who
know how to teach but may not be able to get the
necessary formal qualifications to become fully
certified. HB 157 also allows teachers in immersion
charter schools that teach an Alaska Native language
to be certified through processes developed by local
communities.
Immersion education broadens students' knowledge of
the world, gives them skills to help them succeed in
their future careers, and often improves their
academic performance not just in language classes, but
in all subjects.
8:04:25 AM
CHAIR KELLER asked for a description regarding the academic
approach of an immersion school.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS explained that an immersion school
caters to a target language other than English, as predominant
in the classroom, although not necessarily exclusive; often a
blend. Children who learn a second language in school,
particularly at an early age, often become fluent in both.
8:05:34 AM
REID MAGDANZ, Staff, Representative Kreiss-Tomkins, Alaska State
Legislature, emphasized that immersion schooling goes beyond
teaching a language to include instruction of academic subjects,
such as social studies and math, in the immersion language,
while other topics may be provided in English.
8:06:21 AM
MR. MAGDANZ provided a sectional analysis, stating that Sec. 1
and Sec. 2, work in unison for the establishment of a language
immersion charter school. Section 2 further provides the
subsections (a)-(f) to establish the specific requirements for
immersion language facilities that are outside of the standard
charter school standards. The major difference is that an
immersion school provides half of the instructional hours, at
each grade level, in the target language. Additionally, the
teachers, instructing in the target language, the language other
than English, must have mastery of that language and some
training in immersion education. Section 3 creates a language
endorsement, received via application to the Department of
Education and Early Development (EED), to satisfy verification
of an immersion teacher's training. Sections 4, 5, and 6 deal
with the state's Type M, limited teacher certificate program.
Current law validates these certificates for teachers of
vocational education, Alaska Native language and culture, or
military science courses. The Alaska Native language portion
has been extracted and addressed specifically, creating Sec. 6,
to encompass all languages. The bill proposes some minor
changes, regarding teacher qualifications. Additionally the
limited certificates are probationary, initially valid for one
year, and subject to revalidation by the school administrator;
currently the certificate is valid for five years. Finally,
Sec. 6 removes the authority of the board of education to
require additional academic training as a prerequisite for
certification renewal. He explained that many qualified
professionals, or Native elders, may not hold a baccalaureate
degree but are able to provide essential knowledge. Section 7
deals with certifications made by local tribal government. The
premise is that rural community members are best suited to
determine who in their village has the ability to speak the
Native language, as well as further the culture. The
certificate is only automatically valid in a language immersion
school; beyond that scope, the local school board would need to
provide permission for use of the certificate within the
district. The last section, Sec. 8, covers the requirements for
testing, and is modeled after an example originating in Hawaii,
he said. It stipulates that students may take standardized
tests in the target language, in so far as federal regulation
allows.
8:12:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER expressed support for HB 157 and opined
that legislation addressing this situation is overdue. He asked
about the application of the Type M certification, as it appears
in the bill.
MR. MAGDANZ said the references are found in Sec. 5, subsection
(b), and Sec. 6, subsection (d). He directed attention to Sec.
5, page 4, lines 24-29, and read:
Sec. 5. AS 14.20.025 is amended by adding new
subsections to read:
(b) A limited certificate issued under this section
is initially valid for one year. The department may
extend a limited certificate issued under this section
for an additional four years if the school board of
the district or regional educational attendance area
that requested the issuance of the limited certificate
requests that the certificate be extended and
certifies that the person has demonstrated skills in
classroom instruction, curriculum development, and
student assessment.
8:13:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER asked whether it is the intent that every
certificate will have a probationary period, as mentioned.
MR. MAGDANZ responded yes.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER noted that Sec. 5 provides the authority
to the local school boards to extend the certificate, however,
other sections address department policy. He suggested that a
school board may not agree with a charter school and questioned
the approval process.
MR. MAGDANZ pointed out that the bill allows language immersion
charter schools, and only those schools, the ability to request
a limited language certificate. The academic policy committee
of the immersion school would request the certificate, without
having to approach the local school board. Currently school
boards are the authorizing entity and make the request on behalf
of the school.
8:16:32 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the ability to extend the
certification for five years and asked about the purpose of the
limitation.
MR. MAGDANZ responded that a one year probationary period would
apply, with the opportunity to be continued for four years.
8:18:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND noted that language immersion programs
have existed in the Anchorage public schools for several
decades, and asked how teacher selection and program performance
compares to what is being proposed. Additionally she queried
whether the certificate could impact programs that are not
operated in charter schools.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS acknowledged ASD's history of
language programs and said the district was contacted, during
the crafting of the bill.
MR. MAGDANZ added that the limited certificates, being proposed,
would be valid in any of the Anchorage public school immersion
programs.
8:20:34 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ directed attention to the bill and said
the proposed deletion of the language on page 4, lines 19-22,
regarding the requirement for academic training, suggests the
need to also delete similar language on page 5, lines 1-2.
MR. MAGDANZ offered his understanding of the drafter's intent.
8:23:16 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON read from page 5, lines 28-31, which
states:
(c) A person who possesses a limited teacher
certificate issued under this section may teach a
subject other than the language in which the person
demonstrates proficiency under (b)(4) of this section
if the person completes a course or program of study
in language immersion education.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed concern that the certificate M
holder would be allowed to teach classes other than the target
language course, despite the possibility that they may lack
qualifications in those subjects. He stated support for the
intent of allowing competent speakers access to instruct, but
opined that the certificate should not allow indiscriminate
teaching, without adequate qualification considerations.
8:25:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER turned to page 6, line 10, and read:
(e) The board may not require, as a condition for
extending or renewing a limited certificate under (d)
of this section, that a person complete additional
academic training.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER asked if, in order to implement this
provision, it will be necessary for EED to promulgate new
regulation.
MR. MAGDANZ responded yes.
8:26:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON recalled the Old Russian Village schools,
hosted in his district, which practice 100 percent immersion for
specific years. He asked for assurance that the bill does not
invoke limitations on language immersion programs at facilities
that are not charter schools.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS stated that the bill does not
impinge on existing programs being operated within a district,
nor it require that the immersion program be provided by a
charter school.
8:28:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO supported Representative Seaton's
concern and referred to Sec. 2, page 2, lines 21-23, which read:
Except as provided in (d) of this section, a language
immersion charter school shall provide at least 50
percent of the school's instructional hours for each
grade level in an indigenous or foreign language.
REPRESENTATIVE TALERICO asked about the 50 percent requirement
in each grade level, and how it was derived.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS acknowledged the concern and said
a number of sources were considered, in proposing the 50 percent
level.
MR. MAGDANZ confirmed the variety of methods used, around the
world, with a general consensus that 50/50 is an effective
approach.
8:30:24 AM
CHAIR KELLER noted that the official language of the United
States is English and asked whether there is a reason to clarify
and acknowledge that fact within the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said there are implicit
assumptions in the bill which could be made explicit through
further verbiage.
8:32:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ directed attention to page 7, lines 11-
15, which read:
(c) The department may not recognize a teacher
certificate issued by an Alaska Native tribe if the
person who possesses the teacher certificate has been
convicted of a crime, or an attempt, solicitation, or
conspiracy to commit a crime involving a minor under
AS 11.41.410 - 11.41.460 or a law or ordinance in
another jurisdiction with elements similar to an
offense described in this subsection.
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ cited specific state statute not listed
which, she opined, might allow someone with serious crime
violations to teach. She suggested that the Department of Law
(DOL) be asked for an opinion.
8:35:12 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER turned to Sec. 7, page 6, lines 19-20,
which read:
(1) the Alaska Native tribe submits a description of
the Alaska Native tribe's certification procedures to
the department;
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER asked how the academic back-up will be
fulfilled in creating an Alaska Native language and culture
certificate, and whether EED would need to write new regulation.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS said the intent is to acknowledge
that a fluent Native language speaker, identified by a
community, would not be required to undergo a proficiency test.
Some states, such as Kansas, may require Native American
language teachers to take a battery of tests.
MR. MAGDANZ acknowledged that the bill, as written, does not
well define Alaska's situation, and it is expected to be crafted
further to better address the proposed program.
8:37:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER pointed out the testing requirement
proposed in Sec. 8, and asked whether the statewide standards-
based assessments in the target languages exist or need to be
created. The proposed section reads:
Sec. 8. AS 14.30 is amended by adding a new section to
article 9 to read:
Sec. 14.30.430. Testing in language immersion
educational programs. The department shall, to the
extent permitted by federal law, allow students
enrolled in language immersion charter schools
established under AS 14.03.257 or other language
immersion programs to take statewide standards-based
assessments in the language of instruction of the
language immersion charter school or language
immersion program.
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS responded that other immersion
programs, across the country, may have a similar requirement,
and any pertinent tests that could be implemented will be
identified. Following a recent meeting with EED, the section
may be eliminated, he reported.
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER said the intent of an immersion program is
to work, teach, and learn, in a foreign language, and he
acknowledged the variables involved. A bottom-up approach may
need to be taken to resolve the best means for testing, he
opined.
8:40:15 AM
CHAIR KELLER pointed out a series of "may" and "shall"
declarations, page 4, line 25, page 5, line 12, and page 6,
lines 4 and 17, which suggest incongruous applications, which he
asked to have scrutinized.
MR. MAGDANZ agreed.
8:43:05 AM
CHAIR KELLER opened public testimony.
8:43:34 AM
SUSAN SCHMIDT, Executive Director, Staffing and Operations,
Anchorage School District (ASD), stated support for HB 157, and
stressed the difficulty in finding teachers for Alaska Native
languages. She said, despite its sizeable population, it isn't
easy to fill Native language positions in Anchorage, and added
that it must be even more difficult in smaller districts. As a
12 year immersion school principal, she reported students are
fluent by the fourth grade in English, as well as the target
language. Alaska is on the cutting edge of offering language
immersion programs, she opined, and it appears to help the
children excel in other subjects; as shown via testing that is
administered in English. Immersion language programs are
beneficial to students who will take their place in a global
economy.
8:46:12 AM
BRANDON LOCKE, Director, World Languages, Anchorage School
District (ASD), stated support for HB 157, and described the ASD
immersion program, which has approximately 2,500 students
enrolled in levels K-12. The Japanese program is celebrating
its 26th year and other languages served include: Spanish,
Russian, German and Mandarin Chinese. The programs in the
district follow the 50/50 model, which he detailed and said a
full immersion model doesn't exist in Anchorage. He noted that
many of the teachers arrive from other fields, with backgrounds
in areas such as engineering or medicine. Hires are made based
on an individual's ability to speak the target language
fluently. These teachers are well educated, but may not be
proficient enough in English to pass the basic competency tests
to receive a teaching credential; the tests are administered in
English. Alaska is nationally recognized as a best practices
model for language immersion.
8:50:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for clarification regarding the
validity of the provisional certificates and any restrictions
for use in certain physical areas or regions.
MR. MAGDANZ responded that the limited certificate is valid only
in the district that made the request.
8:52:57 AM
KATHERINE GARDNER, Executive Director, Human Resources,
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District, stated support
for HB 157, paraphrasing from a prepared statement, which
read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
I am speaking to you today to express my support for
House Bill 157, specifically those amendments and
additions which pertain to the requirements of
certification for teachers of immersion programs.
The Mat-Su School District supports education choice
as a fundamental part of our school system. We are
proud that Fronteras Spanish Immersion Charter School
is one of the many successful options available to
families in our Borough. I can speak from experience
in supporting the hiring at Fronteras Spanish
Immersion Charter School, however, that adequately
staffing an immersion school is a challenging task
under the current regulatory landscape in Alaska.
Skilled language and culture teachers are not readily
found in the typical labor market and many times
individuals who possess the requisite knowledge of the
language or culture are not licensed teachers. The
flexibility proposed in HB 157 recognizes these
realities, and supports alternative methods to teacher
certification, similarly to how we would other non-
traditional teacher experts.
I would ask the committee to give adequate
consideration to an extended effective date for those
provisions which impact current programs and teachers.
Though some of the stated requirements for operation
of a charter school will be easy to demonstrate some
may require time to show compliance. For example -
the addition of the language immersion endorsement for
all existing language immersion teachers, teaching in
the schools designated language. I want to also
express my support for a deeper look into the
certification process for language immersion teachers,
as raised by some of the questions which have [been]
asked today which speak to the rigor of the
certification renewal process - though I support
additional flexibility for our district and the
language immersion school we have - we are interested
in hiring the best teachers and as you've recognized
immersion teachers are teaching traditional subjects
in the immersion language not simply the language
itself so to have little to no requirements of these
individuals to pursue certificate renewal would be
inconsistent with other practitioners.
8:55:43 AM
JENNIFER HUTCHINS, Principal, Fronteras Charter School,
Spanish American Immersion School, stated support for HB
157 and stressed the difficulty involved in hiring
certified teachers who are fluent in target languages.
Testing a candidate in a language other than their native
tongue is a barrier. The teachers are solid, but it is
difficult for them to gain the appropriate certification to
remain in the classroom. She offered that widespread
support exists for this bill. Native speakers are
available, and would like to assist in the classroom
setting, thus removing barriers will be helpful in
fulfilling the need for teachers.
9:00:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON acknowledged the multiple articles
included in the packet and asked whether data is available
to support the claims. If statistics are available
charting success of comparable programs, he asked to have
the documents added to the packet.
CHAIR KELLER said public testimony would remain open, and
announced HB 157 as held.
HB 102-RESIDENTIAL PSYCH CTR; EDUC. STDRS/FUNDS
9:01:37 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced that the final order of business
would be HOUSE BILL NO. 102, "An Act providing for funding
of educational services for students in residential
psychiatric treatment centers."
[Before the committee was proposed CSHB 102, labeled 29-
LS0519\P, Glover, 4/7/15, adopted as the working draft on
4/10/15.]
9:01:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ moved to adopt the proposed
committee substitute (CS) for HB 102, labeled 29-LS0519\W,
Glover, 3/16/15, as the working draft. [Version W had been
previously adopted as a working draft and amended, on
3/20/15, and then replaced by working draft Version P, on
4/10/15.]
The committee took an at-ease from 9:02 a.m. to 9:03 a.m.
9:03:03 AM
CHAIR KELLER announced there being no objection, Version W
was before the committee as the working document.
9:04:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER asked for clarification regarding the
version of the working draft under consideration. He noted
that the committee packet also contained Version I.
The committee took an at-ease from 9:04 a.m. to 9:05 a.m.
9:05:55 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER moved to rescind the committee's
previous action in adopting Version W. [There being no
objection, it was so ordered.]
9:06:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE COLVER moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute [CS] for HB 102, labeled 29-LS0519\I, Glover,
1/29/16, as the working draft. There being no objection,
Version I was before the committee.
9:06:27 AM
JANET OGAN, Staff, Representative Wes Keller, Alaska State
Legislature, stated that the goal of HB 102 is to ensure an
equitable education is being provided to special needs
students who require residential psychiatric treatment.
9:07:40 AM
MICHAEL LYONS, Vice President, Specialty Education,
Universal Health Services, North Star Behavioral Health
Systems, stated support for HB 102, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
Thank you for the opportunity to update the
Committee regarding the proposed amendment to HB
102 and our efforts since last April 15th when
Chairman Keller appointed a subcommittee
consisting of Representatives Drummond, Talerico
and Vasquez. The subcommittee Chaired by
Representative Vazquez was asked by Chairman
Keller to further study issues related to
educational services in residential psychiatric
treatment centers (RPTC). We would like to take
this moment to thank Representatives Vazquez,
Drummond and Talerico for their time, research and
visit to North Star this past year.
We firmly believe that education is the civil
rights issue of our time and that every child,
including children with mental illness deserves an
equal opportunity to succeed in school. State and
federal law is clear - that no matter where
children live, ALL children are entitled to a free
and appropriate public education that is
comparable, equitable and adequate. For the past
six years, my colleagues and I have dedicated
ourselves to bring awareness of how some of the
State's most vulnerable children have been
receiving substandard educational services while
seeking in some cases life-saving mental health
treatment. In addition to bringing awareness, we
continue to put forth solutions that will
dramatically improve the educational services for
a class of children who so desperately need a
voice.
In order to give you a broader understanding of
why we believe this year's Committee Substitute to
HB 102 is a needed solution, I would like to share
with you some of the most recent events since last
April and our efforts to work collaboratively with
the Anchorage School District (ASD).
In April of 2015, representatives from North Star
and ASD began meeting to discuss program needs,
best practices, measurable outcomes, service
delivery and ways to work more collaboratively
with one another. The first two meetings were
attended by the Commissioner of Education who
helped set the framework for future discussions.
Meeting participants from ASD included several
high level district administrators and Mr. Jerry
Koetje who was appointed Acting Principal of
Special Schools in July. Sadly and unexpectedly,
Mr. Koetje passed away in December. Mr. Koetje
was a lifelong educator who helped hundreds if not
thousands of children throughout his tenure and he
hit the ground running upon coming to North Star.
Mr. Koetje will be dearly missed by so many and we
truly appreciated all of his efforts while working
for the children at North Star.
The spirit of the meetings between ASD and North
Star has been very collegial with a strong focus
on program enhancement, accountability and
communication. Both organizations recognize that
communication and collaboration is critical to
addressing issues and the overall success of the
program. As of January, 2016 there have been over
twenty meetings between the two organizations.
In addition to the ongoing operational meetings
between North Star and ASD, Representatives from
the Education Subcommittee including
Representatives Vazquez, Talerico and Drummond,
visited the facility on September 16, 2015; the
ASD School Board President, visited on December 4,
2015; and the Commissioner of Education visited on
January 12, 2016. We sincerely thank everyone for
taking the time to visit and see the program first
hand. There is no doubt that touring the facility
humanizes the hard work of our professional teams
as well as the resiliency, courage, strength and
determination of our patients and students.
To give you a context of our student population,
each fall, ASD counts the number of students in
each school setting across the District. Students
at North Star fall currently under the Whaley
Center (the District's Special Education Center)
and according to ASD, there was a total of 113
students counted of which over 50% are classified
as receiving Special Education Services. I will
speak a bit more about special education services
later but when a special education student is
admitted to North Star, the current ASD practice
is to amend the student's Individualized Education
Plan (IEP) to reflect "consultative services".
Under this practice, we do not believe that
special education students are receiving the
appropriate level of special education services as
prescribed by previous IEP teams and this needs to
be addressed immediately.
Going back to our initial meetings and in
preparation for our second meeting on April 28,
2015, North Star asked if ASD could bring the
District's plan for addressing the following
areas:
1. A Communication Plan that will outline
strategies for strengthening the collaboration and
information sharing between ASD, North Star,
parents, students, resident school districts and
other stakeholders
2. The 2015-2016 Staffing Plan including teacher
certification areas
3. The Curriculum Model including a Master
Schedule reflecting the amount of time for direct
instruction and on-line instruction
4. The Administrative Supervision Plan with a
schedule for providing on-site management and
communication with families, treatment team,
resident school districts and students
5. Policies and Procedures for admissions,
Individualized Education Plans (IEP) and
transitions
6. A list of Outcome Measures that will be
tracked to be shared with stakeholders through the
School Improvement Plan (SIP)
7. A program Budget including allocations for
materials, resources and equipment
All of these areas are usually considered standard
operating items that all schools should have in
place and served a good starting point for ASD and
North Star to evaluate the current operating
system and steer our future conversations.
Recognizing that the school's Master Schedule,
Staffing Plan and Curriculum Model needed intense
focus and would require the District to assign
additional resources, North Star knew it was
critical to get further clarification on how the
district was going to address each of these areas
last April. Throughout our discussions heading
into the late spring and early summer, we never
received concrete information to the requests just
mentioned. We strongly believed that without the
above items in place, it was going to be very
challenging to start the new school year and the
students' education was going to be compromised.
As the 2015-2016 school year evolved, it was
important to us to recognize where progress was
being made. We have been very complimentary and
grateful to ASD for areas that have been improved
upon. However, with that said and although well
intended, ASD's most recent efforts have not been
proactively implemented without constant prodding
and follow up from North Star. I would like to
take this opportunity to share with you some of
the areas of progress emerging from the
collaboration to date:
• ASD hired an Acting Principal separate from
the Whaley Center to oversee the District's
Special Schools. Mr. Jerry Koetje transitioned to
this position in late July. Due to the passing of
Mr. Koetje, ASD is currently recruiting to fill
this open position
• The Transition Counselor position was filled
as of September 11th. As you may recall, we
learned about this position being allocated to
North Star last year through a FOIA request but
the allocated position previously never served the
students of North Star
• Four new teachers hired, two new teacher
assistants hired
• A new Individualized Learning Plan (ILP) was
authored by ASD to set the course of each
patient's educational experience
• 95 new laptop computers were ordered and the
internet bandwidth was increased to accommodate
the on-line learning platform
• Instructional hours were increased through the
expanded Master Schedule
Throughout the first semester, we also shared with
ASD our continued list of ongoing concerns that
should have been addressed prior to the school
year beginning and still need immediate attention:
• Establishing the level of onsite services
provided by the Acting Principal assigned to all
Special Purpose Schools and the access for
parents, students, teachers and stakeholders
• Student course schedules listing the actual
courses students are registered in
• Full student registration to the on-line APEX
course system
• Completion of each student's ILP
• Further technology assessment and plan
• Identification of Outcome Measures
• Curriculum assessment and plan
• Streamlining of Enrollment Process
• Intake, Course Registration and Transition
Policies and Procedures
• AIMS Web Testing
The goal has always been and will continue to be
to serve every student with excellence as the
standard; education is a universal right and a
student's education should never be compromised.
Although progress has been made in some areas,
many students did not receive an appropriate,
comparable and adequate educational experience the
first semester. In fact, it was disheartening
that this class of children did not have the
resources they should have in a timely manner.
Specifically, from the onset North Star described
the lack of technology that was not available to
students in order to participate in the District's
Apex On-line Learning Program. During the
Education Subcommittee's tour of North Star on
September 16, 2015, they heard first hand from a
District IT representative that the infrastructure
was inadequate and there were less than 20
functioning computers. However, after the tour
everyone was encouraged at the working lunch when
Acting Principal, Mr. Koetje reported that he was
given the authority for 64 computers and a
temporary bandwidth solution. By this time, one
month of school had already passed and not only
did students not have access, they didn't have
course schedules nor were any of the
Individualized Learning Plans (ILPs) completed.
In the spirit of collaboration, both organizations
continued to move forward in hopes that the
situation would be rectified immediately.
The problem grew worse over the next two months
and on November 6, 2015, North Star reported to
ASD its frustration that the promised computers
were still not delivered, bandwidth was not
increased and students still did not have access
to the on-line APEX system that they were supposed
to be taking classes in. When questioned, the
Acting Principal stated that the District had
"tabled the plan". Sensing North Star's shock and
disappointment, ASD delivered 60 computers that
same afternoon and commissioned the IT Department
to begin upgrading the bandwidth in order to allow
students to participate in their classes on-line.
Sadly, this class of children did not receive
appropriate, equitable and adequate educational
services the first semester. North Star
respectfully raised concerns regarding students
not having course schedules and that their
transcripts were not reviewed nor aligned to their
previous placement. Furthermore, North Star
sought help in understanding why only 5 ILPs were
completed to date and the District's procedure to
move all special education IEPs to a
"consultative" model. These concerns and Priority
Needs were shared in full transparency with ASD's
Board Chairman, the Commissioner of Education and
ASD Administration. ASD chose not to respond in
writing to these concerns; however, North Star did
review the list in a meeting with ASD as to be
open with the reflection and reassessment process.
The question we have to ask is if this happened in
any other school, wouldn't there be outrage for a
failure to provide an adequate education let alone
to this vulnerable class of children?
Members of the House Educational Committee,
providing educational services for students
residing in an RPTC is a specialty service that
must integrate a variety of different disciplines
including medical, educational, clinical,
behavioral, recreational and transitional
services. Because the needs of the students are
so complex and require such individualization, it
is more appropriate in some instances to give
RPTC's the option to serve as an Educational
Services Provider and contract with the local
school district. North Star presented a draft
contract for ASD's review and ASD stated that they
were not interested in contracting with North Star
to provide the educational services.
After reviewing the course of events the past
several years, it appears to be a logical next
step to allow a three year pilot project for RPTCs
to become an Educational Service Provider. This
proposal was presented to the Commissioner of
Education for his review and input. Under this
legislation, a participating RPTC would be
required to comply with over eighteen
accountability standards including a comprehensive
financial audit. The RPTC would also be required
to report back to the Legislature its Outcome
Measures each school year and we think this will
dramatically improve services to children and
increase academic accountability.
Current law permits school districts to contract
with educational service providers approved and
accredited by the DEED as found within existing
Alaska Statute 14.03.083. The amendment to AS
14.03.083 would authorize school districts to
contract with RPTCs to provide educational
services for children confined to the facility by
court or physician's order for treatment of a
diagnosed mental illness.
There are a total of 12 RPTCs statewide which
could qualify treating approximately 250-300
students. We expect only a few of the larger
facilities will consider to act on the legislation
thus affecting a very small number of students.
Fairbanks School District already has such a
contract with the Boys and Girls Home of Alaska
which is working well for its 24 patients.
Under the bill, the process would entail an RPTC
(who desired to provide education within its
facility) present a proposed contract to the
District. If the District and the RPTC couldn't
reach agreement within 30 days, the RPTC could
present the proposed contract top the Commissioner
of Education similar to the Charter School appeal
process.
Another big reason this legislation is so
important is that we recently asked ASD where we
could find the preliminary budget allocations for
North Star being presented to the school board at
its first hearing February 1st for the 2016-2017
school year and we were told that we would not be
able to see where and what was being presented to
the Board for serving students at North Star next
year. In the spirit of transparency, we find this
very troubling and again it shows that this class
of children is not being appropriately addressed.
Unless we stay vigilant and vocal, this class of
children will continue to be treated unfairly and
inadequately. We have often pondered what the
Office of Civil Rights would think regarding how
children with mental illness continues to be
served but we know the solution rests here with
our local officials.
9:25:34 AM
EVELYN ALSUP, Director of Education, North Star Behavioral
Health Center, testified on HB 102, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement, which read as follows [original
punctuation provided]:
I appreciate the opportunity to be able to come
and update this committee on the progress of the
educational services provided in our facility.
Leaders from North Star and ASD began meeting in
April to discuss the educational program needs,
service delivery, and identifiable outcomes for
the program. The commissioner of education
attended the first couple of meetings to help set
the guidelines and framework for further
discussions. The meetings were attended by Mike
Graham and Linda Carlson from the ASD and Evelyn
Alsup and Mike Lyons from North Star. As the
meetings progressed, the district brought in Mike
Henry (secondary director of education) and Mr.
Jerry Koetje acting principal for special schools.
Sadly, Mr. Jerry Koetje passed away in December.
His passing was unexpected and he will be sorely
missed as his enthusiasm for education was
contagious. During the onset of the meetings,
both parties recognized that communication and
collaboration was vital to improving the
educational service for this population and for
the continued success of the educational program.
As of January, there have been over 20 meetings
between the two organizations.
Representatives from the Education Subcommittee
visited the North Star facilities on September 16,
2015; Kameron Perez-Verdia the ASD School Board
President, visited on December 4, 2015; and the
Commissioner of Education visited on January 12,
2016.
From the onset of our discussions, North Star has
come to each meeting with an agenda (that was
previously e-mailed to ASD for their input) so
each organization could be productive and
collaborative in the time allotted for the
discussion.
My colleague, Mike Lyons, outlined the successes
of this school year so far, and for those we are
truly thankful. Students are receiving more
instructional time and the increase in teachers
has allowed this to be successful.
Sadly, I must report that we are still struggling
to clearly identify how if at all student's
transcripts are being aligned with sending
schools. This alignment is important to the
student being able to matriculate toward
graduation with his/her like peers. We are
continuing to wait on all students having course
schedules. A clear course schedule is important
to ensure all classes are congruent with resident
schools; as placing students in courses they do
not need or that are not required for graduation
becomes a source of frustration for the student
and family and can lead to added stress and
ultimately not having the credits to graduate with
peers. To date we are unsure how or if outcomes
are tracked and recorded. The use of outcomes
linked with curriculum design are important to the
success of the educational program as they allow
administrators and teachers to identify the areas
of growth and those needing added structure and
alignment. In each meeting with ASD, we have
asked for a program budget; sadly, we still do not
have a budget for this program. Having the budget
clearly outlined would allow for a complete master
schedule and development of curriculum plan for
the program. The process for transitions of
students returning to sending school programs is
not defined; these transitions allow students to
be successful in their return to the resident
school and community. The district developed an
Individual Learning Plan or ILP that would be
implemented for each student upon admission it is
not being utilized. This ILP would benefit
parents and sending schools upon a child's
transition back to the resident school. AIMS web
testing to assess the areas of strength and need
in the elementary school population is not
occurring like it does in other programs
throughout the district. We are lacking a clear
curriculum assessment and plan, assessing the
curriculum and developing a curriculum plan are
standard operating procedures for schools. These
assessment tools allow evaluation of academic
programs so schools can meet the expectations of
accrediting educational agencies, and state and
local stakeholders. The addition of the principal
and transition counselor was greeted with great
anticipation as we eagerly looked forward to the
added administrative oversight to the program.
However, we have no administrative plan that
outlines the functions or schedules of the added
administrators in which to share with families,
therapists, and resident school districts. This
is needed to provide communication and
understanding of processes within the program.
Each of the above areas of continuing need, are
all ordinary operational procedures for schools.
Although improvement was made in certain parts of
the educational program, we are still far from
resolving the educational inequity of this
population. Still today students receiving mental
health treatment in North Star are not being given
the opportunity to achieve the same educational
progress as their like peers in public schools.
9:31:33 AM
MIKE GRAHAM, Chief Academic Officer, Anchorage School
District (ASD), reported the progress and limitations that
have occurred regarding the collaboration between the
Anchorage School District (ASD) and North Star, during the
last year. A positive working relationship has been
formed, he opined, and acknowledged that many of the
educational concerns, brought forward by North Star, hold
merit. He said the district has stepped forward, in a good
faith effort, to establish an educational program that
allows students to continue academic learning, while
receiving residential treatment; on par with what all
students receive. He reviewed a number of the improvements
made in the last year, which include: transition plans for
students returning to their home schools; individualized
learning plans for all but the acute care students; on-line
curriculum supported by 92 new computers; creation of a
fulltime principal - the appointment being imminent;
increasing the counselor position to fulltime; expanding
six teacher positions to ten; establishment of a special
schools office; and regular meetings scheduled between ASD
and North Star on a weekly, monthly, and quarterly basis.
A cooperative agreement has been proposed by North Star,
which presents some concerns for the district, he said, and
paraphrased a series of points, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
1. Provide a direct line administrator
responsible for technical assistance including
applicable district training. Curriculum design,
and program implementation. This staff
administrator will also ensure compliance with
Department of Education (DOE) rules and
regulations pertaining to alternative education
programs; and
2. Disseminate information about and assist in
the development and adoption of promising
educational practices for students in mental
health facilities or State supported facilities;
and
3. Coordinate activities for the identification,
location, and evaluation of all children served in
educational programs in mental health facility
settings; and
4. Serve as the fiscal intermediary in collecting
state and federal per pupil education funds
5. Remit ninety five percent (95%) of the full
time equivalency (FTE) funding including a portion
of federal funding from the School District to
North Star. Reimbursement due to North Star shall
be paid in monthly installments, beginning on or
about July 30, 2016; and
6. Provide up to 10 days of mainframe student
information system training to North Star
employees at no cost; and
7. Serve as the Local Education Agency and
provide general supervision of educational
services through:
a. A review of the special education
procedures for providing education programs to
determine compliance with provisions of the
Agreement and applicable State and School District
educational rules.
9:37:02 AM
MR. GRAHAM opined that passage of HB 102 could result in
litigation, which may prove counterproductive. He disputed
some of the claims made by North Star against ASD including
the lack of meetings and an indifference to student needs.
He said the collaboration has been extensive, students are
receiving a full day of instruction, and incursions from
the past have been rectified.
9:40:13 AM
LINDA CARLSON, Assistant Superintendent Culturally
Responsive Education, Anchorage School District (ASD),
stated that Anchorage serves not only the long term care
students, at North Star Behavioral Health Center, but
students from across the state who are in acute care. In
the last year, she reported, 90 out-of-district individual
educational plans (IEPs) were addressed. These 90 IEPs
were all for acute care students, who averaged 17-20 days
of care in Anchorage. The district's attorney has advised
that rewriting every student's IEP is not necessary, if
what the student arrives with is sufficient. The district
works on the goals of the IEP with the parents. She
addressed concerns, regarding HB 102, paraphrasing from a
prepared statement, which read as follows:
The Anchorage School District is responsible and
is held accountable as the local education agency
(LEA) under IDEA and AS 14.30.186, which states,
'Special Education and related services shall be
provided by the city school district in which a
treatment facility is located for a child with a
disability placed at a facility.' Furthermore, 'A
school district shall develop an individual
Education program for special education and
related services for each eligible child with a
disability.' This is mandatory language under AS
14.30.278.
MS. CARLSON said the bottom line is that ASD cannot be
hands-off, with regard to the educational program, nor is
that the intent. Legal and policy obligations exist, and
ASD expects to meet those requirements.
9:45:23 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON noted the legal concerns expressed by
ASD and asked to have written comments provided to the
committee regarding consequences of inadequate instruction,
as well as contracted services. A legal impairment may
occur, he conjectured, and it is important to have an
understanding of the responsibility/liability.
9:46:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KREISS-TOMKINS asked about federal funding
available for students who hold an IEP.
MS. CARLSON responded that, for a student who is considered
level three acute, approximately $78,000 is received in
federal funds. Students identified at lower levels receive
less depending on the complexity of their needs and the
related services required.
9:48:02 AM
CHAIR KELLER inquired about the responsibilities and
parameters of the counselor requirements, including the
daily/weekly hours worked, as well as student contact and
access.
MR. GRAHAM explained that these counselors don't perform
the same duties as are expected from their counterparts in
the mainstream schools. These specialty counselors provide
transitional assistance for students, review needs, and
ensure cooperation between case management, the home
school, and related activities; acting as in intermediary
to meet the student's needs. He said the counselor, for
North Star, is at the facility twice weekly.
CHAIR KELLER queried how a student is tracked, when they
leave a facility.
MR. GRAHAM explained that any contact would be via the home
school; however, continued treatment isn't tracked by North
Star. In response to a member's request, Mr. Graham agreed
to provide the committee with a copy of the contract
submitted to ASD in December, 2015.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that the packet includes
a number of comments submitted during previous hearings on
the bill and asked to have current comments solicited from
the contributors.
9:52:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ shared personal observations from
her visit to the North Star facility, which upheld the
points previously cited regarding limited internet access.
Instruction was primarily via computer, lasting for three
to four hours per day. She expressed shock at the
conditions the at-risk students faced. Further,
information requested by her office, was not made readily
available. She said, "It was painstaking to get
information, frankly, from the school district, of the type
of information that should have been more readily
available." Her letters of request will be provided to the
committee.
9:55:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON cited recent education commission
reports of the national averages for on-line/virtual class
graduation rates. Apparently it is only about 20 percent,
and he expressed hesitation to incorporate this as a
primary methodology for instruction.
9:57:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DRUMMOND pointed out that North Star
operates on a national level, and asked to see results from
the other schools with which it is affiliated. She stated
her understanding that ASD has made this request, for
comparison information, as well as for program success
rates, without response. Additionally, she expressed
concerns for the responsibility regarding computer access
in a hospital setting. The hospital and housing is owned
by North Star, she pointed out, and asked why the school
district is responsible for installation of broadband
services and computer equipment.
CHAIR KELLER announced HB 120 as held.
9:58:51 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:59 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB157 Hearing Request.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Sectional Analysis.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Fiscal note.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Support Fronteras.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Supporting Documents-Article Indian Country Today 9-1-2014.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 Supporting Documents-Article Salt Lake Tribune 8-4-2012.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| 8 HB157 SB84 Support.docx |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 SB 84 |
| HB157 Supporting Documents-Website Utah Dual Language Immersion Program.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| HB157 ver S.PDF |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM HEDC 2/8/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 157 |
| 1 HB102 Sponsor.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 2 HB102.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 3 CSHB102.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 4 CSHB102 Changes from version W to P.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 5 CSHB102 draft version P.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| HB102 Fiscal note.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 6 HB102 Fiscal Note EED-SS 3-13-15.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 8HB102 Support KANA.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 9 HB102 Support IDEA.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 10 HB102 Support JYS.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 11HB102 Support Mike Lyons.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 12 HB102 Support North Star 1.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 13 HB102 North Star 2.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 14 HB102 NorthStar Response to Committee Questions.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 15 HB102 Comparison of Services ASD NSBH.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 16 HB 102 SupportTestmony David Nees.msg |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 17 HB102 Support Providence-Kodiak Counseling Center.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 18 HB102 Oppose ASD Letter.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 20 HB102 Oppose Testimony Hope.msg |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 21 HB102_Oppose KPBSD_Clayton Holland 2015.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 22HB 102 Oppostion Wassman.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |
| 23 CSHB102 Work Draft I Jan.29 2016.pdf |
HEDC 2/1/2016 8:00:00 AM |
HB 102 |