04/24/2002 08:05 AM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
April 24, 2002
8:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Con Bunde, Chair
Representative Brian Porter
Representative Joe Green
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Gary Stevens
Representative Reggie Joule
Representative Gretchen Guess
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 293
"An Act relating to the teachers' housing loan program in the
Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 293(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 464
"An Act relating to statewide school district correspondence
study programs."
- MOVED CSHB 464(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 293
SHORT TITLE:AHFC LOANS TO TEACHERS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)ROKEBERG
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
01/14/02 1951 (H) PREFILE RELEASED 1/4/02
01/14/02 1951 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
01/14/02 1951 (H) EDU, FIN
04/10/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
04/10/02 (H) <Bill Postponed>
04/17/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
04/17/02 (H) Heard & Held
04/17/02 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
04/24/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
BILL: HB 464
SHORT TITLE:CORRESPONDENCE STUDY PROGRAMS
SPONSOR(S): REPRESENTATIVE(S)JAMES
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
02/19/02 2313 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
02/19/02 2313 (H) EDU, HES
02/22/02 2370 (H) COSPONSOR(S): DYSON
02/27/02 2416 (H) REFERRALS CHANGED TO HES, EDU
03/07/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/07/02 (H) Heard & Held
03/07/02 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/13/02 2530 (H) COSPONSOR(S): COGHILL,
KOHRING, GREEN,
03/13/02 2530 (H) FOSTER
03/14/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/14/02 (H) Heard & Held
03/14/02 (H) MINUTE(HES)
03/19/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/19/02 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
03/21/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/21/02 (H) -- Meeting Canceled --
03/22/02 2655 (H) COSPONSOR(S): FATE
03/26/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
03/26/02 (H) Heard & Held
03/26/02 (H) MINUTE(HES)
04/02/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/02/02 (H) <Bill Canceled>
04/11/02 (H) HES AT 3:00 PM CAPITOL 106
04/11/02 (H) Moved CSHB 464(HES) Out of
Committee
04/11/02 (H) MINUTE(HES)
04/15/02 2924 (H) HES RPT CS(HES) NT 5DP
04/15/02 2924 (H) DP: COGHILL, KOHRING, WILSON,
04/15/02 2924 (H) STEVENS, DYSON
04/15/02 2924 (H) FN1: ZERO(H.HES/EED)
04/17/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
04/17/02 (H) Heard & Held
04/17/02 (H) MINUTE(EDU)
04/24/02 3117 (H) COSPONSOR(S): WILSON
04/24/02 (H) EDU AT 8:00 AM HOUSE FINANCE
519
WITNESS REGISTER
JANET SEITZ, Staff
to Representative Norman Rokeberg
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke on behalf of the sponsor of HB 488.
RICHARD SCHMITZ, Staff
to Representative Jeannette James
Alaska State Legislature
State Capitol Building
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Spoke on behalf of the sponsor of HB 464.
ED McLAIN, Ed.D., Deputy Commissioner of Education
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development
801 W 10th Street, Suite 320
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
POSITION STATEMENT: Answered questions regarding HB 464.
KEN EGGLESTON, Superintendent
Nenana City Schools
PO Box 10
Nenana, Alaska 99760-0010
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on HB 464.
SHARYLEE ZACHARY
PO Box 1531
Petersburg, Alaska 99833
POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed the need to pass HB 464.
TAMMY ILLGUTH
PO Box 56403
North Pole, Alaska 99705
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 464, expressed
concerns with having a certified teacher grade all work.
ART GRISWOLD
HC 60 Box 4493
Delta Junction, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 464, related
problems with having a certified teacher grade all work.
KATHLEEN VANDERZWAAG
HC 60 Box 3280
Delta Junction, Alaska 99737
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 464, inquired as
to review of religious materials by certified public school
teachers.
PAUL VERHAGEN
PO Box 563
Nenana, Alaska 99760
POSITION STATEMENT: During discussion of HB 464, recommended
the legislature deal with generalities that accomplish only the
things necessary to keep the program alive and in very broad
general boundaries and leave the specifics to the school
district.
JOAN D'ANGELI
PO Box 34711
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Characterized HB 464 as allowing what is
already allowed.
KEITH SIMILA
3492 Meander Way
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: With regard to the proposed CSHB 464, he
characterized Version R a significant improvement, but related
concerns.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 02-18, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CON BUNDE called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 8:05 a.m. Representatives Bunde, Green,
Wilson, Stevens, Joule, and Guess were present at the call to
order. Representative Porter arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
HB 293-AHFC LOANS TO TEACHERS
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 293, "An Act relating to the teachers' housing
loan program in the Alaska Housing Finance Corporation; and
providing for an effective date."
CHAIR BUNDE reminded the committee that there have been some
concerns from the Teachers' Retirement System (TRS) which has
said that there is no way it would invest in anything other than
secure investments. Therefore, Chair Bunde moved that the
committee adopt Amendment 1, which reads as follows:
Page 1, lines 2-4:
Delete "authorizing the Alaska State Pension
Investment Board to invest money of the Teachers'
Retirement System of Alaska in certain notes and bonds
issued to provide for teachers' housing loans;"
Page 1, lines 6-10:
Delete all material.
Page 1, line 11:
Delete "*Sec. 2."
Insert "*Section 1."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS asked if this legislation is to help people
with the purchase of their first home.
Number 0348
REPRESENTATIVE GREEN moved to adopt Version 22-LS1165\L, Cook,
4/19/02, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version L was before the committee.
CHAIR BUNDE noted Amendment 1 amended Version L.
Number 450
JANET SEITZ, Staff to Representative Norman Rokeberg, Alaska
State Legislature, answered Representative Guess's question by
explaining that the current language of the legislation would
refer to any loan as long as the home is owner-occupied and the
resident who is employed as a certificated teacher in Alaska's
public school system.
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE directed attention to page 2, lines 6-7,
and asked if Bethel would meet the population requirement.
MS. SEITZ replied yes and related that the Department of
Community & Economic Development's last census shows Bethel's
population to be 5,471 [which is below the population limit of
6,000 specified in the legislation].
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS remarked that [this legislation] is
exactly what's necessary because there are many teachers who
move from small community to small community.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS explained that her question was addressing
the First-time Homebuyer Program, which helps one obtain their
first house so that there is equity to obtain future houses.
However, under this legislation one would obtain his/her first
house and build equity and later on could receive the no down
payment benefit of this legislation on the next house.
Representative Guess inquired as to whether someone who moves to
a new home would have to sell the previous home [purchased under
this legislation] or could it be rented. She noted that under
the First-time Homebuyer Program there are restrictions in that
one must own the home for a certain number of years before it
can be rented.
MS. SEITZ answered, "No, that would be fine as long as the home
that was purchased with this loan program is the home that
they're occupying." She explained that the goal is to retain
teachers in communities, and thereby grow with the community and
invest in the community. In further response to Representative
Guess, Ms. Seitz said that when the homeowner moves to another
home, the homeowner would be required to sell the home
[purchased with this loan program] due to the owner-occupied
provision. However, if the loan was paid off, it would be the
homeowner's house.
CHAIR BUNDE, upon determining there was no further discussion,
closed public testimony.
Number 0823
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report CSHB 293, Version 22-
LS1165\L, Cook, 4/19/02, as amended out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying zero fiscal
note. There being no objection, CSHB 293(EDU) was reported from
the House Special Committee on Education.
HB 464-CORRESPONDENCE STUDY PROGRAMS
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 464, "An Act relating to statewide school
district correspondence study programs." [Pending from the
April 17, 2002, meeting was a motion to adopt an amendment, but
it was never addressed.]
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS moved to adopt Version 22-LS1494\R, Ford,
4/23/02, as the working document. There being no objection,
Version R was before the committee.
Number 1035
RICHARD SCHMITZ, Staff to Representative Jeannette James, Alaska
State Legislature, spoke on behalf of the sponsor of HB 464,
Representative James. He explained that Version R includes two
substantive changes from the prior version before the committee.
In Section 1 there is language saying, "Nothing in this section
precludes a correspondence study student, or the parent or
guardian of a correspondence study student, from privately
obtaining or using textbooks or curriculum material not provided
by the school district." This language was also added into the
regulations during a recent change to the regulations. He
specified that the word "using" was included in Version R in
order to be clear that materials purchased for use at home can
be used. The language in the prior version, CSHB 464(HES), only
referred to "purchasing" the materials. Mr. Schmitz clarified
that this language refers to materials that are purchased with
the parent's money not with state money. This language change
is also found in Sections 3 and 4.
MR. SCHMITZ informed the committee that the other substantive
change, the language on page 2, beginning on line 6, was made at
the department's request. There was concern that requiring a
certified teacher to monitor correspondence students at all
stages would be costly. Therefore, the department wanted the
certified teacher to have an overall review, but the routine
review, such as grading papers and tests, could be handled by
trained staff. The new language specifies that a certified
teacher would be responsible for a quarterly grade. He noted
that the proposed committee substitute (CS) includes language
referring to federal and state legislation dealing with special
education students who would fall under an education plan that
would require grading more frequently than quarterly. In
response to Chair Bunde, Mr. Schmitz confirmed that Version R
doesn't preclude a student under an individual education program
(IEP) which requires a different monitoring schedule.
Number 1511
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS posed a situation in which a parent wants
to use material that he/she has obtained without purchasing it.
MR. SCHMITZ agreed that such a clarification could be made. He
indicated that the language could be changed to refer to
material not purchased with state funds.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that it's important to include
such language because homeschool parents often trade and share
materials.
CHAIR BUNDE clarified that this legislation addresses
correspondence schools not homeschools.
Number 1703
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE asked if the same standards for quality
schools apply under this provision.
CHAIR BUNDE explained that there is an approved menu from which
correspondence parents can choose materials. If they wish to
augment that with privately purchased materials, that would be
acceptable just as it is for the parents of students in public
school.
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER suggested the following:
Page 2, line 25:
Delete "and"
Insert "or"
Page 2, line 26:
Delete ";"
Insert "not provided by the state"
MR. SCHMITZ indicated that would be acceptable.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked if the word "purchasing" should be
replaced with "obtaining".
MR. SCHMITZ said the language change was a good choice of words.
Number 2042
REPRESENTATIVE moved that the committee adopt [Amendment 1], as
follows:
Page 2, line 25:
Delete "purchasing and"
Insert "obtaining or"
Page 2, line 26:
Delete ";"
Insert "not provided by the state"
CHAIR BUNDE specified that the drafters would need to make the
above change throughout the legislation in order to be
conforming.
ED McLAIN, Ed.D., Deputy Commissioner of Education, Office of
the Commissioner, Department of Education and Early Development,
remarked that the last insertion the amendment makes should read
"not provided by the school district".
REPRESENTATIVE PORTER said that he would accept Dr. McLain's
suggestion as a friendly amendment to his amendment.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS turned to page 1, line 14 through page 2,
line 1 and said it's confusing because charter schools fall
under school districts. She pointed out that the above
amendment changes the language to refer to material "not
provided by the school district" rather than "by the state."
CHAIR BUNDE pointed out that Alyeska Central School (ACS) is
actually a school district.
DR. McLAIN specified that for purposes of these statutes and
regulations, ACS is considered a school district.
CHAIR BUNDE, upon determining there was no further discussion of
the amendment, asked if there was any objection to the amendment
as amended. There being no objection, Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 2448
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE directed attention to page 2, line 7, and
inquired as to the meaning of "appropriately trained personnel
employed by".
DR. McLAIN said that the department wants to ensure that regular
monitoring is occurring, which documents that a program is
occurring. Some of the monitoring was going to merely be
monthly checks. The department envisioned that students
experiencing academic difficulties would be more appropriately
monitored by a [certified] teacher. However, if the monitoring
is merely checking in and the student is doing fine, then such
could be handled by "appropriately trained personnel".
Number 2717
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS noted that throughout the legislation there
is mention of statewide correspondence. She asked if [the
legislation] isn't going to speak to districtwide
correspondence.
DR. McLAIN pointed out that there are differences between
district-based and statewide correspondence. He mentioned that
many of these would be standard practice in the district-based
correspondence. In Alaska it has always been the case to leave
a variety of these up to the district. He highlighted that
there is already statute in place that specifies that districts
have a legal responsibility to educate those students who are
residents in their region.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS turned to the use of the term
"correspondence study student" and suggested that the term
should probably be defined.
CHAIR BUNDE said that the term has been defined by defining what
a "correspondence study student" is not.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS returned to the language beginning on page
1, line 14 through page 2, line 1. She characterized that
language as "clunky" because it elevates charter schools, which
normally fall under the state or a school district.
Representative Guess suggested eliminating the reference to ACS
and merely refer to the state.
MR. SCHMITZ explained that the language conforms to existing
statute.
DR. McLAIN explained that the intent of the language is to
clarify that regardless of what entity is running a statewide
correspondence study program, these rules would apply. He noted
that most charter schools don't run statewide correspondence.
He also noted that ACS is a state correspondence school that is
established in a separate statute.
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS remarked that she still believes the
language should be reviewed. She then turned to page 2, line
17, and requested some discussion with regard to approving and
disapproving home-designed courses.
MR. SCHMITZ explained that one of the goals of statewide
correspondence study programs is to allow parents at home a lot
of flexibility. Therefore, there is the opportunity to have
home-designed courses such as one on tidal pool biology designed
by a parent who is a biologist. The term home-designed course
would apply to music lessons or gym.
Number 3354
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS directed attention to page 3, line 3, and
pointed out that the same wording has been used that was used in
Amendment 1 and thus it would need to conform.
CHAIR BUNDE announced that the drafters would work on the
legislation to make sure the language is consistent.
DR. McLAIN returned to the issue of home-designed courses and
informed the committee that districts have always had the
authority and duty to approve courses for their students.
However, he expressed the need to ensure that courses comply
with district standards, which is covered in other areas.
CHAIR BUNDE related that the basic intent is to not hold
correspondence school students or their parents to a higher or
lower standard than public school students.
Number 3635
DR. KEN EGGLESTON, Superintendent, Nenana City Schools, remarked
that after reviewing the legislation and the amendments, nothing
seems to preclude the operation of their [correspondence school]
program. This seems to have stemmed from an audit of Nenana's
program, he remarked. He informed the committee that all of the
audit concerns have been addressed and the program has received
approval of its application for next year. He mentioned that
the committee should have a letter from Nenana City Schools. He
offered to answer any questions.
CHAIR BUNDE asked if Dr. Eggleston would concur with his earlier
statement that the intent of this legislation is to hold
correspondence school students to the same standard as public
school students.
DR. EGGLESTON replied yes. He related his belief that Nenana is
on the cutting edge of statewide correspondence homeschool
programs in the state. There need to be changes along the way
and this process is proper, he said. In further response to
Chair Bunde, Dr. Eggleston agreed that correspondence school
students are subject to the High School Qualifying Exam like
other public school students. He informed the committee that
department data specifies that Nenana's correspondence program
students scored as high or higher than the state average in six
of the nine test areas. However, he acknowledged that there are
areas in which the correspondence school needs to work on.
There has been a tremendous effort to improve the number of
students who are taking the test [the High School Qualifying
Exam] such that Nenana's program has spent over $90,000 of its
revenue to ensure that its students are brought into [testing]
centers by qualified teachers to administer the test.
Number 4200
SHARYLEE ZACHARY testified via teleconference. She thanked all
those keeping this legislation moving forward and expressed the
need to pass this legislation in order to avoid struggles in the
future. Ms. Zachary related that her family has greatly
benefited from the Interior Distance Education of Alaska (IDEA)
program. Keeping these programs alive enhances the ability to
educate children and develop good Alaskan citizens, she said.
Number 4430
TAMMY ILLGUTH, testifying via teleconference, began by informing
the committee that she has been home schooling for 15 years.
With regard to earlier comments that correspondence programs are
different than home school programs, Ms. Illguth specified that
these new programs have allowed her to obtain the curriculum
that her children needed. She mentioned the need to develop a
new name in order to eliminate any confusion between homeschools
and correspondence schools. For example, these programs were
first referred to as homeschool assistance programs, which she
liked.
MS. ILLGUTH indicated that she had felt [removed] by the
department as well as scared with regard to the regulations.
She turned attention to page 2, line 8, which specifies that
students' work needs to be graded. She said she believes it's
important for the teachers to review the work and ensure that
the correct grade has been assigned, however, to have the
teachers actually grade the work would be a large challenge.
MS. ILLGUTH informed the committee that parents place their
children in these programs because they do fit specific needs.
Without the program, it's difficult for the parents to obtain
what is necessary for their children.
CHAIR BUNDE, in response to Ms. Illguth's concern with the
language on page 2, line 8, related his understanding that it
refers to a quarterly review.
TAPE 02-18, SIDE B
CHAIR BUNDE likened the quarterly review to the parent-teacher
conference held in traditional schools.
Number 4623
DR. McLAIN said that there are no regulations that specifically
speak to how a teacher does grading, and thus he suspected that
there's a lot of variety. He related his belief that the intent
with this is for a certificated teacher to sign-off that the
grade is actually what was given. The aforementioned is
important for validity and offers the parent the ability to
confer with a classroom specialist.
MR. SCHMITZ related that the intent of the sponsor is to allow
the districts running the programs to have the greatest possible
freedom. It isn't the intent to have a certified teacher sign-
off on every grade of every paper or test because that would be
a burden on the program. However, there is the need to have
some accountability in the final analysis. He assumed that it
would be left to the districts and parents to develop what works
well.
Number 4400
ART GRISWOLD, testifying via teleconference, informed the
committee that he is a parent who has used the traditional
public school and the homeschool systems. The homeschool system
has offered a wider [educational] latitude for his children. He
related the problems with having a certified teacher grade all
work, which is the case with ACS and that has caused delays of
four to six weeks. However, under the CyberLynx program the
parent does the primary grading, which is forwarded to the
CyberLynx staff to be verified on a quarterly basis. Mr.
Griswold inquired as to which board, the local school district
board or the State Board of Education, the language on page 1,
line 13, refers.
MR. SCHMITZ answered that it refers to the State Board of
Education.
MR. GRISWOLD expressed concern with [that reference to the State
Board of Education] because sometimes the state regulations
don't mesh with what the local district actually has to deal
with. In fact, the aforementioned is what caused this
legislation. Therefore, he requested that there be some
requirement that before there is a regulatory change, the public
must [be notified/polled].
MR. GRISWOLD turned to the CyberLynx program and stressed that
he is very impressed with it. Although he uses the text that
CyberLynx provides, he said he believes the text choice should
be left to the parents.
Number 4018
KATHLEEN VANDERZWAAG, testifying via teleconference, noted that
she works with the CyberLynx program. She returned to the issue
of certified teachers reviewing and evaluating student work.
For those parents using religious material across the board,
will the certified teacher be able to look at that material
since that material won't be approved by the district.
MR. SCHMITZ answered that the sponsor's intent is to be clear
that parents working at home have the right to use privately
purchased material. Therefore, the grading would only be
related to the actual [subject] not the religious content.
CHAIR BUNDE posed a situation in which a student in a
traditional brick-and-mortar school writes a history paper using
biblical references. The teacher would grade that paper on
sentence structure. Therefore, he assumed such would be legal
in correspondence schools.
DR. McLAIN agreed. In current policy and practice, many
districts have ways of reviewing work and accepting for credit
work that is done from a variety of venues. This statute
wouldn't limit that. With regard to religious material, the
certified public school teacher wouldn't be allowed to be
involved with the promotion of a religious doctrine and thus
that would be an area in which the teacher wouldn't delve.
However, the teacher would be expected and encouraged to become
involved with the curriculum related to the subject.
Number 3618
REPRESENTATIVE JOULE inquired as to where the standards come
into play.
DR. McLAIN reiterated that there are numerous ways in which
courses are developed and taught. If one were to take Algebra I
from IDEA, there's a very detailed course outline that the
parent would receive regardless of the material the parent
chooses to use. That outline would guide the district-employed
certified teacher as he/she works with the student, in terms of
instruction. The aforementioned isn't very different from what
might happen in any kind of brick-and-mortar school once the
student goes home. Dr. McLain said that [the department] is
trying hard not to [interfere] with the education occurring
between the parent and the student at home.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS asked if the certificated teacher has
access to the materials that the student is using or is the
teacher merely reviewing the work.
DR. McLAIN stated that the district and the certified teacher
have a responsibility not to violate the statutes speaking to
promotion of a religious doctrine. "There isn't anything that I
can think of that would speak to what they might make reference
to, in terms of the instruction," he said. He said that he
didn't believe that the [intent] is to use public funds to
purchase a copy of religious-based material. He reiterated that
the statute specifies that a teacher can't promote religion.
CHAIR BUNDE related his belief that the discussion is about the
student's work not the source of it.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS pointed out that a certified teacher just
asked this question and thus if certified teachers are confused
perhaps the legislature [should review it].
Number 3035
DR. McLAIN said he believes that in this state and across the
nation there will always be questions regarding the separation
of [church and state]. He noted that the state doesn't approve
a list of textbooks; it comes down to how the book is used. He
reiterated that the public school teacher can't promote
religious doctrine.
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS related his understanding that the
teacher reviewing the student's work would only receive the
students work, such as a printed quiz or paper.
DR. McLAIN answered, "As a practical matter, if I was a district
administrator and it was getting to be that ... questioning
where they could not say very clearly they're not promoting
religion ... I would then suggest that not be part of what that
... program course is all about." The best that can be done
with statute, which is fairly broad, is to lay out the general
direction. However, there will always be questions that are a
judgment call.
Number 2721
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON related her understanding that this
legislation allows the parent and student to use the curriculum
they desire with the district-level review of the work.
Furthermore, the benchmark exams are administered to these
children and thus those results can illustrate how the student
is proceeding, which is of concern.
DR. McLAIN agreed in general. He explained that the statute
clearly states that the curriculum, as distinct from the
materials, is approved by the distinct. Those curriculums would
be standards-based, which is the part that the certificated
public school teacher takes interest with. Dr. McLain pointed
out that often the terms curriculum and curriculum materials are
used synonymously, not to mention that the textbook often
becomes the course. However, there is a distinction between the
curriculum, the objectives, and the material being used.
Number 2450
PAUL VERHAGEN, testifying via teleconference, informed the
committee that after 13 years of homeschooling and being told by
the public school districts that his children couldn't
participate in them because the law wouldn't allow it, he
finally found a superintendent that recognized that the laws
didn't prevent or preclude what he proposed. Therefore, the
homeschooling program was created. On June 9, 1978, he recalled
standing at the podium and introduced the IDEA program to the
general public for the first time. After establishing the IDEA
program and realizing that many in education didn't understand
homeschooling, the program wasn't implemented in the form of its
original proposal. Therefore, he felt that the most important
thing to happen for homeschooling in Alaska would be competition
and thus he helped establish the CyberLynx program.
MR. VERHAGEN related his belief that this meeting consists of
well-meaning legislators who are trying to help the program.
However, with all the modifications to this legislation, Mr.
Verhagen said he believes the exact opposite will be
accomplished. Therefore, he respectfully requested that the
committee consider not implementing the modifications and
changes discussed today. If the legislature had passed laws
such as HB 464 before 1978, the 9,000 homeschoolers wouldn't be
allowed into the public school system. Mr. Verhagen recommended
the legislature deal with generalities that accomplish only the
things necessary to keep the program alive and in very broad,
general boundaries and leave the specifics to the school
district.
Number 2032
JOAN D'ANGELI informed the committee that she feels the same way
as Mr. Verhagen. These programs are successful because they
allow parental choice from a variety of curriculum. Ms.
D'Angeli questioned why [this meeting] is happening because the
programs have been doing well. She noted her appreciation for
the give-and-take occurring at this meeting because at a Board
of Education meeting she was only allowed three minutes and then
had to listen to several hours of negative comments about the
program. There was never an opportunity for the Board of
Education to hear how the program really works. Ms. D'Angeli
expressed concern with regard to the curriculum because one of
the members of the department, Dr. McLain, has consistently
characterized the Calvert School curriculum as being religious,
although Calvert School states that it isn't a religious
curriculum. The Calvert School curriculum is fully accredited
by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. She
noted that many parents use the Calvert School curriculum, and
therefore she inquired as to who would have the last say with
regard to whether a parent is in violation of AS 14.18.060.
This is of great concern because Calvert School curriculum is
one of the few full curriculum packages in the nation.
MS. D'ANGELI pointed out that she is here today because the
department wouldn't listen to her. However, the department was
making changes [in the regulations] to the program that would
effectively shut it down. Ms. D'Angeli said, "We're touching on
a number of things very closely that are coming very close to
running parents off. The benefit of this program is that it
does give parents guidance for benchmark exams." Finding this
program was one of the best things that ever happened to her,
she commented, because she was homeschooling on her own. She
said that the program has taught her so much that she is set for
12 years. "This is a great benefit to all children in this
state, and I'd like the discussions to remain children-based and
not state-needs based continually," she said. She related her
experience with her son who was told that he wouldn't rise
higher than a preschool level. After using this curriculum, her
son has passed one grade per year, including the full Calvert
curriculum, she related. To leave the district and find this
course has probably changed the course of her son's life
forever, she stated.
CHAIR BUNDE, in response to Ms. D'Angeli's question regarding
who will have the last say regarding curriculum, said that the
courts will have the last say.
Number 1516
REPRESENTATIVE STEVENS surmised that the materials available to
Ms. D'Angeli assist her in ensuring that her son meets the
state's benchmarks.
MS. D'ANGELI replied, "Absolutely." She explained that she took
her son out of public school on an emergency basis because she
wanted her son to go to college and not keep repeating grades.
She related that when she entered CyberLynx she constantly
expressed the need to keep her son on par in order to meet the
benchmarks. She noted that she checks in monthly.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON related her belief that the changes the
committee has made will allow Ms. D'Angeli to use the program
she wants.
MS. D'ANGELI pointed out, "That's part of why I wondered why
we're all here. We're already allowed to do that. So we've
gone through all this time and effort ... and we're back where
we started - we're going to get to do what we've always been
doing."
CHAIR BUNDE interjected that the legislature is responsible for
state money and if nothing else, what has happened has been an
education of the legislature that the money has been well spent
and spent appropriately and legally. Whenever one accepts state
money there will be some state oversight, he noted.
MS. D'ANGELI informed the committee that she entered into the
program with lots of rules; the program is very structured and
well managed.
Number 1157
KEITH SIMILA informed the committee that he and his wife are
homeschooling parents. Mr. Simila related that his children
have been quite successful with homeschooling. He noted that he
and his wife have homeschooled in four states, and have
appreciated the flexibility afforded in Alaska. However, he has
had serious concerns with the proposed regulations. With regard
to the proposed CS, Version R is a significant improvement.
MR. SIMILA emphasized that the flexibility for homeschoolers is
paramount. For example, his daughter is a spacial learner and
thus the rote techniques in the Saxon math curriculum didn't
work for her, but another math curriculum did. On the other
hand, his son, a concrete sequential learner, flourished with
the Saxon math curriculum. Therefore, the flexibility to tailor
the curriculum is very important. However, the initial
regulations left parents wondering whether they would have that
full range of flexibility.
MR. SIMILA echoed earlier comments that "we're here because the
Department of Education has not been very open ... in terms of
crafting those regulations." The department hasn't been very
responsive to the parents' concerns over these issues. Even in
crafting the second tier of proposed regulations, Mr. Simila
said that he continues to have serious concerns which he has
outlined in a letter. Mr. Simila also expressed concern with
obtaining school credit for textbooks that are procured at the
parent's expense. The allowance given through the program
doesn't cover everything he spends on school materials for his
children. Therefore, he wanted to be sure that his children
would get school credit for [lessons from materials he purchased
outside the allowance] so that the children don't have to take
duplicate classes. The proposed regulations leave him with
serious concerns regarding whether privately purchased
materials, religious or not, would be accepted and if not, he
questioned whether his children would proceed with the program.
Mr. Simila echoed earlier comments that competition is important
because it allows parents to find the best fit for their
children. He noted that he and his wife reviewed two to three
correspondence programs in the state and chose CyberLynx due to
its flexibility and parent-teacher interaction.
CHAIR BUNDE, upon determining no one else wished to testify,
closed public testimony.
Number 06600
REPRESENTATIVE GUESS moved to report CSHB 464, Version 22-
LS1494\R, Ford, 4/23/02, as amended out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHB 464(EDU) was reported from the
House Special Committee on Education.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 9:35
a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|