Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/13/2003 11:05 AM House EDU
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
March 13, 2003
11:05 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative John Coghill
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Kelly Wolf
Representative Les Gara
Representative Mary Kapsner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
HOUSE BILL NO. 154
"An Act relating to admission to and advancement in public
schools of children under school age; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED CSHB 154(EDU) OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 165
"An Act relating to community schools; and providing for an
effective date."
- MOVED HB 165 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 171
"An Act repealing the charter school grant program; and
providing for an effective date."
- MOVED HB 171 OUT OF COMMITTEE
HOUSE BILL NO. 174
"An Act relating to the state centralized correspondence study
program, to funding for educational programs that occur
primarily outside school facilities, and to the duties of school
boards of borough and city school districts and regional
educational attendance areas; and providing for an effective
date."
- HEARD AND HELD
PREVIOUS ACTION
BILL: HB 154
SHORT TITLE:UNDER SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/05/03 0421 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/05/03 0421 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
03/05/03 0422 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/05/03 0422 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/11/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/11/03 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(EDU)
03/13/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 165
SHORT TITLE:COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/05/03 0437 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/05/03 0437 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
03/05/03 0437 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/05/03 0437 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/11/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/11/03 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(EDU)
03/13/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 171
SHORT TITLE:REPEAL CHARTER SCHOOL GRANTS
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/05/03 0445 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/05/03 0445 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
03/05/03 0445 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/05/03 0445 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/11/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/11/03 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(EDU)
03/13/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
BILL: HB 174
SHORT TITLE: CORRESPONDENCE STUDY
SPONSOR(S): RLS BY REQUEST OF THE GOVERNOR
Jrn-Date Jrn-Page Action
03/05/03 0449 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME -
REFERRALS
03/05/03 0449 (H) EDU, HES, FIN
03/05/03 0449 (H) FN1: (EED)
03/05/03 0449 (H) GOVERNOR'S TRANSMITTAL LETTER
03/10/03 0496 (H) FN2: (EED)
03/11/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
03/11/03 (H) Heard & Held
MINUTE(EDU)
03/13/03 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
DEE HUBBARD
Sterling, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference on HB 154 and
HB 165, and asked questions from the committee.
EDDY JEANS, Manager
School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in support of HB 154, HB 165, HB
171, and HB 174, and responded to questions from the committee.
KATHLEEN FLEMIN, Community Schools Monitor
Matanuska-Susitna School District
Talkeetna, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 165.
JACK CADIGAN
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174, offered
suggestions, and answered questions from the committee.
LAURELL CLOUGH
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174 and
answered questions from the committee.
RICK CURRIER, School Counselor;
English and Elective Teacher
Alyeska Central School
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174.
JEANNE FOY
Alyeska Central School Education Association
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174.
MICHAEL I. JEFFERY, Presiding Judge
Alaska Superior Court
Barrow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference as a parent in
opposition to HB 174.
RICH KRONBERG, President
NEA-Alaska
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174 and
offered suggestions to the committee.
ALEXANDER DOLITSKY, Ph.D., Social Studies Teacher
Alyeska Central School
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174.
JON PADEN, Ph.D., Counselor
Alyeska Central School;
Representative, Alyeska Central School Association
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 174.
VICTORIA MARTIN
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 174.
JOYCE JONES
Karluk, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 174.
SHEILA SYMONS
Central, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 174.
JESSIE GIYER
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 174.
NANCY RICHAR
Trapper Creek, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified via teleconference in opposition
to HB 174.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 03-11, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CARL GATTO called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 11:05 a.m. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Wilson, Wolf, Gara, and Kapsner were present at the call to
order. Representative Coghill joined the committee as the
meeting was in progress.
HB 154-UNDER SCHOOL AGE STUDENTS
CHAIR GATTO announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 154, "An Act relating to admission to and
advancement in public schools of children under school age; and
providing for an effective date."
Number 0280
DEE HUBBARD testified via teleconference. She asked the
committee about the meaning of the language in HB 154,
specifically, starting on page 1, line 9, and going through line
10, saying "a district's educational program must prescribe".
She asked if this mean that even if a child is not ready to
advance to the next grade, he/she must advance; or does this
mean that the program itself has to prescribe that stepping-
stone capability. Ms. Hubbard commented that this appears to be
another unfunded mandate for school districts. She told the
committee she really appreciates the fact that districts can get
children into school early. She has been seeing no money coming
with all of these bills that have made dramatic requests of
school districts over the past few years. School district money
is drying up. She told the committee she thinks there should
have been a fiscal note to tell the school districts what they
will have to pay if a bill like this passes.
Number 0435
CHAIR GATTO read [lines 9 through 11], which said, "A district's
educational program must prescribe that under school-age
students advance through the curriculum or grade level by the
following school year."
MS. HUBBARD asked if that means the student must advance, even
if he/she is not ready, or whether this is about the district's
prescribing stepping stones for advancement.
CHAIR GATTO stated that this language refers to children under
school age.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said the intent in the language is to
address schools that have two-year kindergarten programs. If a
child comes to kindergarten and is capable and ready to go to
first grade, the school district must put that child in first
grade rather than through a second year of kindergarten.
Representative Wilson told Ms. Hubbard that districts get
funding through the foundation formula for every child that is
in the school system.
MS. HUBBARD responded that while the district does get funding
for children in the school system, there are still many unfunded
mandates. She repeated her question by asking if the bill means
that a child may remain in kindergarten or advance to first
grade when he/she is ready. She asked if her interpretation is
correct.
Number 0648
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked Mr. Jeans if the department is
saying the funding for a second year would not be in place.
What would be the penalty for an individual student? He asked
if what the plan is for the entire program.
Number 0670
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section,
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, responded to the committee's questions on HB 154.
He told the committee the intent of this piece of legislation is
to address the current policy of some school districts that are
claiming all four-year-olds for kindergarten funding in a two-
year kindergarten program. This bill will eliminate the
districts' ability to do that. It does not block a district's
ability to enroll a four-year-old that is ready for kindergarten
and expects to move on to first grade in the following year.
MS. HUBBARD responded that she does understand what he is
saying. She said she still has questions, but will take those
questions to the next committee of referral.
CHAIR GATTO commented that what he understands this to say is
that if an under school-aged child is admitted to kindergarten,
it is expected that that child will go on to first grade. If
that expectation is not there, the child should never have been
admitted into kindergarten in the first place. Chair Gatto
pointed out that putting this language in statute [that these
students are expected to move on to the next grade] eliminates
the possibility of districts' trying to work around the system.
MS. HUBBARD responded that is exactly what her problem is with
this bill. If statute states that a child can only remain in
that grade for one year, it is pushing a child on to the next
grade even if he/she is not ready. She asked what good that
would do.
CHAIR GATTO replied that the whole point of putting an under
school-age child in kindergarten at four years old is that the
child is ready. This legislation is intended to prevent
underage children who are not ready from being admitted into
kindergarten. This bill would also eliminate a two-year
kindergarten program that some districts have implemented
through a loophole in the statutes.
Number 0908
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked Mr. Jeans how many four-year-olds will
lose funding statewide.
MR. JEANS responded that he does not know because he does not
know how liberally school districts have been applying this
provision. He stated that this bill and fiscal note are based
on the number of all four-year-olds the department funded this
year. He said he believes that the number of true four-year-
olds that are the exceptional children who will be ready for
kindergarten will be a minimal number.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he needs to know how many four-year-
olds the department is talking about before the committee passes
this bill.
MR. JEANS said he can provide the committee with the actual
number of students that were claimed this year and which the
department used to generate the fiscal note. Mr. Jeans pointed
out that those four-year-olds that were claimed this year will
not be losing anything, since they will be in kindergarten next
year. The department will be providing funding for them as
five-year-olds in kindergarten. What this bill does is prevent
those districts that are enrolling all four-year-olds in their
communities from doing it next year.
Number 1057
CHAIR GATTO told the committee there are two amendments to HB
154.
Number 1100
REPRESENTATIVE GARA moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 23-
GH1123\a.1, Ford, 3/10/03, which read:.
Page 1, line 1:
Delete "admission to and"
Page 1, lines 11 -13:
Delete "A child under school age may be admitted
to first grade or higher if the child meets the
minimum standards prescribed by the board under this
subsection."
Number 1150
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected to Amendment 1.
CHAIR GATTO commented that he agrees completely with Amendment 1
because it is simply redundant language that appears earlier in
the bill. This amendment simply cleans up an error that someone
missed when drafting the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL asked if there is another reason for the
language, and said he would like to hear what the department's
position is on Amendment 1.
Number 1207
MR. JEANS responded that the Department of Education and Early
Development supports this amendment. He noted that the original
draft of HB 154 starting on line 2 says "may be admitted to
first grade or higher that meets the minimum standards". If
that language were to remain in the bill, the department could
not allow a child that is four years old to enter kindergarten
so the rest of that referring to the standards prescribed is
covered in line 6 through 9. It was not the department's intent
to block the district's ability to enroll a bright four-year-old
in kindergarten.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL responded that he remembers testimony
that the original intent was to allow those that could advance
to advance, but not create a two-year kindergarten system.
Number 1295
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL removed his objection.
CHAIR GATTO asked if there were any other objections. Hearing
none, he announced that Amendment 1 was adopted.
Number 1302
REPRESENTATIVE GARA began discussion of Amendment 2, 23-
GH1123\A.2, Findley/Ford, 3/13/03, which read:
Page 1, following line 3:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Section 1. The uncodified law of the State of Alaska is
amended by adding a new section to read:
LEGISLATIVE INTENT. It is the intent of the legislature
that public school funding that will be saved due to the
amendment made by sec. 2 of this Act shall be redirected to head
start preschool programs in areas of the state where the
programs are needed. The current program of state aid to public
schools is used to provide early education for children who are
four years old in a manner that is unequal among school
districts. This inequality, and the possibility that school
districts might qualify for an additional $50,000,000 or more in
public school funding by taking advantage of the current
statutory language, necessitates the amendment made by sec. 2 of
this Act. However, the legislature supports the goal of
providing learning opportunities for preschool and pre-
kindergarten children. This goal can better be accomplished
through increased funding to the state's head start programs.
Thus, any money saved by the amendment made by sec. 2 of this
Act shall be redirected to state head start programs."
Page 1, line 4:
Delete "Section 1"
Insert "Sec. 2"
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said the testimony from the Department of
Education and Early Development was not necessarily that the
department wanted to save the $3.9 million that is currently
being spent on educating four-year-olds, but that the intent was
to prevent a future problem. The future problem that is feared
is that if all school districts start utilizing this two-year
kindergarten program within the foundation formula, it might
turn out to be a $60 million fiscal note in a matter of years.
Representative Gara said he is sympathetic to the
administration's concerns of the program's mushrooming to a $60
million fiscal note, but not sympathetic to the idea of removing
the existing program without providing something to take its
place. He compared the bill to restructuring a house by taking
out all the beams, and letting the house collapse because
nothing is being constructed to take its place. He said right
now the state is educating four-year-olds; that is not a bad
thing. It is being done in a discriminatory manner, and that is
a bad thing. The state is only allowing four-year-olds to be
educated in those school districts that are taking advantage of
a loophole in the law, and it is not benefiting four-year-olds
in school districts that are not.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA told the committee the earlier education of
children, the better children do in school. If the state is
going to withdraw this program, that benefits an untold number
of four-year-olds; he said he has a problem voting on this bill
without knowing how many children this will affect. He asked
what will be put in its place. Representative Gara pointed out
that this may not be a good program, but the department has only
answered half the question. The question is what the state
should be doing.
Number 1429
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said Amendment 2 addresses the question
about what should be done for early childhood learning. He said
early childhood learning works, and the state's Head Start
Program is underfunded. The Head Start Program is available for
preschool children from families who cannot afford other
preschool programs. It is underfunded to the tune of about 77
percent. He said the last estimate he saw was that the state
funds Head Start at about 23 percent of the need.
Representative Gara said he does not have any problem with
taking the $3.9 million or whatever savings are achieved by
enacting this bill and redirecting those funds to the Head Start
Program. He said he heard from the school districts that the
actual savings will be about $3.5 million. Representative Gara
said he has no problem withdrawing these educational services if
the state puts something better in their place for the same
amount of money. Amendment 2 would state that it is the intent
of the legislature to redirect the savings achieved by
eradicating this program for four-year-olds so that it shall be
used more efficiently by funding the Head Start Program.
CHAIR GATTO commented that what the amendment says is that
whatever funds are saved in this bill would be shifted to the
Head Start Program around the state.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA explained that if the governor could not
efficiently use the $3.5 million this year, then the funds would
not have to be spent. The amendment would leave it to the
discretion of the governor to efficiently use these funds up to
the $3.5 million.
Number 1542
Representative Gara moved to adopt Amendment 2 [text provided
previously].
Number 1559
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL objected to Amendment 2. He pointed out
that the program districts have been utilizing was not intended
as the policy states in statute. If the legislature eradicates
a program, that issue is up for debate. Representative Coghill
said he believes the letter of intent [this amendment] is
circumventing that whole policy discussion, which he believes
the committee should not do. He said he believes the policy
discussion before the committee is cleaning up that point in
statute that says what the state will supply for educating those
younger children who are capable of going on. That is a totally
appropriate policy call. Representative Coghill told the
committee the intent of the bill is to clean up the language so
it will reflect the intent of the statute.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that he agrees with the
principle of getting more money into the Head Start Program.
However, he believes there should be a bill on the Head Start
Program to do that. He said he is uncomfortable doing that
through a method of taking funds that were used in the K-12
system and routing it this way. The federal government is not
fully funding Head Start now, so he does not believe state funds
would have federal matching funds. Representative Seaton said
he still does not have a full determination on that issue.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON told the committee one other issue to
consider in this amendment is that this reduction is part of the
governor's package of reductions. The budget presented by the
governor includes this money being eliminated from this program;
to have this money being redirected to Head Start would mean the
legislature would have to find that $3.5 million or $3.9 million
in the budget to fund this section. Although conceptually he
supports early childhood education, he said he would have to
oppose the amendment.
Number 1746
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER told the committee that she is supportive
of the amendment and agrees that it is a policy decision;
however, in the absence of that discussion, she believes this is
a good amendment to the bill. She said she supports Head Start
not just because there are parents who cannot afford other
preschool programs, but because there is the issue of poverty of
access. There are so many communities in Alaska that do not
have any alternative. She said in the absence of a preschool or
Head Start Program, there is nothing that can be done for the
children who come to school lacking oral skills or who do not
have a print-rich environment. She told the committee she is in
favor of the amendment.
Number 1787
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he would work with Representative
Seaton to find a way to fund the Head Start Program in a more
appropriate manner. He still maintains his support of the
amendment because the bill the committee is looking at is a non-
comprehensive approach to how the state is going to educate
young children. It takes away schooling from four-year-olds and
does not give anything back. If the governor would propose an
efficiency measure that would better educate four-year-olds, he
said he would be happy to support it. Representative Gara told
the committee that he does not feel that it is his role to
support the exact budget number the governor has proposed. He
said he supports budget reductions but not to the point that
they withdraw educational opportunities from children.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gara and Kapsner
voted in favor of Amendment 2 to HB 154. Representatives Gatto,
Seaton, Coghill, Wilson, and Wolf voted against it. Therefore,
Amendment 2 failed to be adopted by a vote of 2-5.
REPRESENTATIVE COGHILL moved to report HB 154, as amended, out
of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
Number 1897
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER objected, saying that a lot of the
discussion is based on the fiscal implications of the bill. She
said that many Representatives have said they wish to let the
House Finance Committee deal with the fiscal implications. She
told the committee that she believes the members are all on the
House Special Committee on Education because they share a firm
commitment to further education to Alaska's children to the best
of their abilities. She said she does not think this bill
furthers education to the best of the members' abilities.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA agreed with Representative Kapsner that it
is the members' job to find a way to educate Alaska's children
better, not to find a way to educate Alaska's children worse.
This bill, by not taking a comprehensive approach, educates
Alaska's children worse.
Number 2001
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Coghill, Wilson, and Wolf voted in favor of reporting HB 154, as
amended, from committee. Representatives Gara and Kapsner voted
against it. Therefore, HB 154(HES) was reported out of the
House Special Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.
HB 165-COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
Number 2050
CHAIR GATTO announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 165, "An Act relating to community schools; and
providing for an effective date."
Number 2113
KATHLEEN FLEMIN, Community Schools Monitor for Talkeetna,
Matanuska-Susitna School District, testified via teleconference
in opposition to HB 165. She told the committee that Talkeetna
has about 350 residents, with an additional 500 on the road
system. The town has very dedicated community school
participants. She told the committee she keeps yearly
statistics for both the fall and spring semesters. These number
may reflect people who participate more than once. Last year
community schools had 44 volunteers who gave a total of 890
hours to the program, and 43 activities were offered, with 432
people, both kids and adults, enrolled. She told the committee
that all that was accomplished and she is just a half-time
employee. She told the members they were getting a lot of bang
for the buck for Talkeetna community schools. Talkeetna is only
one of two schools in the Matanuska-Susitna area with a monitor
and an active community schools program. Matanuska-Susitna used
to have eight community schools programs, and the program is
already at a bare-bones level. A lot of people feel that they
are paying for the schools with property taxes, although many do
not have children in the schools, but by being able to use the
facilities they develop a much more positive sense of their role
in education.
MS. FLEMIN said the school in a small town becomes the center of
the community. It has the town's only gym, classrooms, and
meeting space. It is a safe, wholesome place to learn, have
fun, network with other families, and make new friends. If the
committee needs proof of Talkeetna's support of community
schools, she could get 50 letters of support to members' offices
within a week, she said.
Number 2239
MS. FLEMIN gave a brief summary of the programs offered. They
are after-school programs for kids, including roller-skating,
art, and singing, which are provided by all-volunteer leaders.
Other programs include many health and safety classes such as
babysitting, first aid, cardiopulmonary resuscitation,
nutrition, and cooking. Some classes are taught by local health
professionals. Ms. Flemin said with the long winters the crafts
and gym activities help people to have fun with their neighbors
and expand their circle of friends, and even develop new
moneymaking skills. Community schools offer do-it-yourself
classes such as woodworking and auto maintenance. Tapping some
of the very well-educated local folks, she said she has been
able to work with the University of Alaska system to offer
classes with optional college credit, since the nearest campus
is 75 miles away. The computer classes have been very popular
with the school's wonderful computer lab, and the school staff
agrees this resource should be made available to the public.
MS. FLEMIN said local individuals and businesses have directly
benefited by these low-cost local classes. The theme of
lifelong learning is alive and well, thanks to the community
schools program. With a small, extra expenditure, the
legislature makes it possible for kids and adults to have the
opportunities to utilize the buildings after the K-12 program is
over. She said it provides a very good message to students that
adults are coming into their school to take classes voluntarily.
This is a win-win situation.
Number 2304
CHAIR GATTO asked if Talkeetna community school is part of the
Matanuska-Susitna School District. He told Ms. Flemin that the
funding for Matanuska-Susitna community schools would be reduced
25 percent, and while it does not eliminate community schools,
it does reduce the funding. Representative Gatto told her he
believes that Matanuska-Susitna will be able to keep community
schools but must find funds to make up the difference in the
reduction. He commented that in some areas of the state the
funds were reduced 100 percent, because the state was handling
100 percent of the community schools' costs.
MS. FLEMIN asked if Chair Gatto believed that school districts
would increase their budgets to cover community schools, when
everyone seems to be cutting budgets.
CHAIR GATTO responded that is why there are school board
meetings. It is certainly something that she could ask for.
MS. FLEMIN said that she fears the program will be lost.
Number 2363
DEE HUBBARD, a resident of Sterling, testified via
teleconference on HB 165. She asked the committee not to cut
funding to community schools programming. She said when she
lived in Anchorage her entire family participated in community
schools, and she even taught classes. Previous years'
discussions have highlighted that this small amount of money
affects so many people. A lot of people cannot afford to take
classes if the fees go up. She said she sees this as another
cut in educational programming.
CHAIR GATTO commented that the state and school districts supply
the building, heat, lights, and snow removal. He pointed out
that there is a fairly large investment from the districts and
the state already. He said the state is asking community
schools to pick up a little more in the cost of running the
program. He suggested going to school board meetings to see
what else could be done to help keep community school programs
operating.
Number 2466
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON moved to report HB 165 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER objected. She said that she has already
commented on her objection at previous meetings.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he believes it is poor public policy
and sloppy educational policy to take away educational
opportunities on the grounds that it is an efficiency measure,
and then put nothing in its place. The efficiencies need to be
thoughtful. Representative Gara said there is no analysis from
the administration on what impact this will have on community
schools. The committee does not know how many community schools
will close as a result of this bill. He noted that the chart
the Department of Education and Early Development provided the
committee shows that 15 to 20 schools rely completely on grant
funding received from the state. Eradicating this program will
have a big impact. He pointed out that in some communities the
only programs for at risk-kids and GED [general equivalency
diploma] programs are run by community schools.
Number 2582
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, testified on HB 165. Mr. Jeans told the committee
that the schedule provided to the committee shows the community
schools grant allocations and what has been reported in the
school districts' financial statement. He said that as
Representative Gara pointed out, the committee may note that in
some districts there is 100 percent in a number of these
districts, but what that represents is that the districts have
to account for that in a special revenue fund outside the school
operating fund. In many of these cases, districts are providing
funding for community schools after hours that exceed what is
reflected. The district just is not showing that expenditure
over in the community schools grant side. It is just showing up
in its operating budget to keep the school open, heated, and
lit.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA pointed out that this does not show the
expenses of the school that is there, and therefore the amount
of money allocated and provided for community schools. He said,
for example, if 100 percent of Alaska Gateway Schools comes from
the state grant program, then that means that 100 percent of the
staffing comes from the state grant program. He asked if that
is correct.
MR. JEANS responded that what he is saying is that a number of
the communities have head teachers who live right in the
community and go over and open up the gym to have the gym open
for after-hours basketball under the community school
allocation. It is simply a function of that person's job that
is showing up in the school's operating budget.
CHAIR GATTO said the issue is pretty clear as to whether or not
the committee wants to vote to eliminate the $500,000 from
community schools. He said this debate can be very extended,
with the same issues being revisited. Chair Gatto commented
that he knows Representative Gara wants to spend the money some
other way and the governor wants to save the money. The issue
is not that complicated. Chair Gatto told the committee he
would entertain new questions.
Number 2733
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked how many community schools will be
closed because the state is withdrawing the grant money. He
told the committee that the grant money is used to go out into
the community and find more grant money. He asked Mr. Jeans if
he knows how great a ripple effect this will have on community
schools. How much will community schools lose in leveraging
these funds to obtain more funds?
CHAIR GATTO responded that he does not believe Mr. Jeans will be
able to answer how many community schools will close until the
event occurs and does not believe it is a fair question. Chair
Gatto said the question about a ripple effect through community
schools on leveraging funds is questionable, since the state
does not even know if there is a ripple effect or a savings. He
told Representative Gara that no one there is equipped to answer
these questions because they are theoretical questions.
Number 2854
REPRESENTATIVE GARA told the committee that if the members do
not know the answers to these questions, this bill should not
pass out of the committee because he believes it is bad public
policy.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Coghill, Wilson, and Wolf voted in favor of reporting HB 165
from committee. Representatives Gara and Kapsner voted against
it. Therefore, HB 165 was reported out of the House Special
Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.
HB 171-REPEAL CHARTER SCHOOL GRANTS
Number 2865
CHAIR GATTO announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 171, "An Act repealing the charter school grant
program; and providing for an effective date."
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked what the definition is of a charter
school. How does it differ from a public school or a private
school?
Number 2954
EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance and Facilities Section
Education Support Services, Department of Education and Early
Development, testified in support of HB 171. He explained that
a charter school is actually a public school where there is a
contract between the parent advisory group, the people that set
up the charter school, and the local district.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked if charter schools have a certain
mission that they are trying to obtain. How is it different
than just a regular public school?
MR. JEANS replied that charter schools are allowed to develop
innovative educational programs that the school district may not
be employing at the time. Typically, charter schools are
developed through a grassroots movement by parents that want to
be very involved in their children's education.
TAPE 03-11, SIDE B
Number 2998
CHAIR GATTO agreed with Mr. Jeans that the parents are very
involved in their children's education. They do painting, fix
the heater, and volunteer in the classrooms. At Academy Charter
School they might have 100 students enrolled, and they have
another 100 who are trying to enroll. Midnight Sun and now
Horizon are also trying to do a different take on how to educate
children by getting parental input to a large degree. He said
he believes this is something all the members wish would happen.
He said often the schools are in substandard buildings, but
fewer students are in the classroom. He told of one friend who
is a pilot for FedEx and was busy painting six buildings. These
schools do have good community involvement. Chair Gatto said he
believes that charter schools may actually get more money than
traditional schools because of startup funds that are available.
Number 2933
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked what the administration's premise is
behind the bill. He asked Mr. Jeans if the reason behind
removing startup funding for charter schools is based on federal
funding to take its place.
MR. JEANS replied that is correct.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if the federal funding will be
adequate for startup of charter schools.
MR. JEANS responded that adequate funding is in the eye of the
beholder. The amount of money that is being proposed to be
allocated through federal startup grants is more than what
charter schools are currently receiving under the combined total
of the federal and state grant funding. Charter schools will
get more money.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked if the federal grant has been enacted
yet or is still under discussion in Congress.
MR. JEANS said that there is actually an application process
that the state must go through. The state charter school
administrator has already been in contact with the director of
charter schools at the U.S. Department of Education. He has
indicated that he is supportive of this proposal.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked whether there is a 100 percent
certainty that the state will receive this money.
MR. JEANS replied that it is not 100 percent sure, but he has a
letter supporting this proposal from the director of charter
schools, who knows [the state's] application is coming and who
has given every indication that he will approve [the state's]
request.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA said he is concerned with enacting this bill
in the event that there might be problems with the approval by
the U.S. Department of Education. The state needs to be sure
not to make the mistake of eliminating the funding only to find
out the federal funding is not coming through.
MR. JEANS responded that the bill has a one-year delay in
effective date as it is. If the grant does not come from the
federal government, the legislature could readdress this.
Number 2805
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report HB 171 out of committee
with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal
notes.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA objected to the motion. He told the
committee he would support the bill when the state knows it will
receive federal funding. He said he cannot support this bill
based on the administration's representation that it believes it
will receive this funding.
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Coghill, Wilson, and Wolf voted in favor of reporting HB 171
from committee. Representatives Gara and Kapsner voted against
it. Therefore, HB 171 was reported out of the House Special
Committee on Education by a vote of 5-2.
CHAIR GATTO announced that the committee would take a brief at-
ease at 11:58 a.m. The committee reconvened at 12:06 p.m.
HB 174- CORRESPONDENCE STUDY
Number 2751
CHAIR GATTO announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 174, "An Act relating to the state centralized
correspondence study program, to funding for educational
programs that occur primarily outside school facilities, and to
the duties of school boards of borough and city school districts
and regional educational attendance areas; and providing for an
effective date."
Number 2700
JACK CADIGAN told the committee he is a retired U.S. Coast Guard
captain, retired teacher, and physics professor at the
University of Alaska, and taught physics, mathematics, and
physical science at the Alyeska Central School (ACS) for
thirteen years. He told the committee he sees four issues with
the bill. First is the savings to the state in closing ACS,
which is shown in the fiscal notes. Fiscal note 1 includes a
projection for savings in fiscal year 2004 (FY 04) of [$5.5]
million from the foundation fund to operate the K-12 portion of
Alyeska Central School. In addition, it cites $500,000 in
receipt services from 33 other Alaska school districts.
MR.CADIGAN said in fiscal note 2, the department notes a savings
of [$1.17] million from the secession of the summer school
program as an option for Alaska's students. He pointed out that
Mr. Jeans acknowledged the fact that the only actual savings to
the state would be the closing of the summer school program.
This is because the remainder would simply be redistributed to
the various districts absorbing ACS's students. To summarize
what Mr. Jeans said, Mr. Cadigan noted that closing Alyeska
Central School Summer School Program saves the state [$1.17]
million, and closing the Alyeska Central School entirely still
only saves the state [$1.17] million. Mr. Cadigan told the
committee this fact was alluded to by Mr. Jeans in his
testimony, so fiscal note 1 would seem irrelevant if there is
neither savings to be realized nor superior educational
environments to be provided. Thus the question pertains to the
quality of education provided by Alyeska Central School
District. Please note that the school is fully accredited, he
told members. Numbered among its graduates are students who
have distinguished themselves at numerous prestigious
universities.
Number 2625
MR. CADIGAN said there seem to be 11 other districts authorized
to operate distance education for the next fiscal year.
Research on the Department of Education and Early Development
and school district web sites reveals that three of these define
themselves as charter schools, four define themselves as
providing homeschool support through provisions of computers,
and an allotment varies from $1,400 to $1,500 to $1,800 per
student. Another provides an undefined level of home support,
and three provide no web site information at all. Five of these
districts currently purchase some services from ACS simply
because they do not themselves provide similar service. Thus
the students being evicted from Alyeska Central School do not
have an available similar alternative, as only ACS offers an in-
state, fully-accredited-instruction correspondence school
program.
Number 2570
MR. CADIGAN told the committee that savings in closing Alyeska
Central School Summer School Program should be the only item in
this bill, as it is the only portion that can actually reduce
the foundation fund expenditures. He said he supports the
objectives and successes of the summer school program for the
past 15 years, but he recognizes the committee must balance the
value of that unique program against the cost involved, and as
such must be a subject of judgment by the committee.
MR. CADIGAN spoke about the economic impact this closure would
cause. Placing 44 persons on the unemployment rolls in Juneau
might be considered a wash if the foundation money being
redirected would create jobs in other districts within Alaska.
However, as noted before, this is not the case. All districts
listed on the web providing distance education do so by either
purchasing service by ACS or by purchasing from homeschool
support companies or from correspondence schools in the Lower 48
states. As a practical matter, closing Alyeska would simply
move more state money out of state.
MR. CADIGAN provided a solution to the dilemma by suggesting the
department combine Alyeska Central School with Mount Edgecumbe
High School. The advantage would be that the state would have a
single superintendent who oversees both districts. The
department would actually save one-half person in staff salaries
and benefits. At the same time, it would save the $5 million
that the governor is trying to do. He told the committee that
is his favorite option.
CHAIR GATTO asked if his second favorite option is as good as
his first.
MR. CADIGAN replied that it is almost as good as the first. The
second favorite option would be to keep Alyeska Central School
as a separate school district and remove it organizationally
from the [Department of Education and Early Development](DEED).
It would do the same thing - remove those funds out of [DEED's]
budget - and it is better situation for the superintendent of
Mount Edgecumbe High School.
Number 2388
LAURELL CLOUGH told the committee that she is a lifelong
Alaskan, is a retired public school teacher of 24 years, and
currently has two sons taking classes at Alyeska Central School.
She said her family tried the school district's correspondence
school first, and based on their recommendation and poor
materials that she received, she went to Alyeska Central School.
She told the committee that she called all 11 schools on the
list provided that currently offer correspondence education and
those that plan to next year. She found that none of the
schools will take her sons because she wants to keep them
enrolled part-time in their own schools here in Juneau because
she thinks [the combination] is the best education they can get.
MS. CLOUGH said the part-time issue is important for both of her
boys, who will be in high school next year. One will be a
junior and other one will be a freshman. The problem is that to
receive part-time funding, a student can only enroll in two
classes at a regular high school and two classes in
correspondence. At that rate, it would take her sons six years
to complete high school, which she considers unacceptable. She
said she is doing part-time enrollment in public school not by
choice, but by necessity. No parent chooses to homeschool his
or her kids because it is easier. It is much easier to put them
on the bus and be done with it. She said she chose to
homeschool her kids because they were failing in the regular
system. After 24 years as a public school teacher, she really
supports public schools. She told the committee she is
currently on the site council at Dzantik'i Heeni Middle School
in Juneau. She explained that when her son was making Ds,
hating school, and threatening suicide, she realized that she
had to look at alternatives. Alyeska Central School was there.
Within a month, he was getting "A"s, he was happy, and he was
removed part-time from what was a very stressful social
situation. He continues to be an A student with ACS and is very
happy. He would like to continue this kind of education through
high school. A lot of kids like to do this because they are
pursuing things that the schools cannot offer.
MS. CLOUGH said she had her daughter out of school part-time
because there were no violin lessons during the after-school
period that she could do. There are many reasons why people
have done this, and providing nothing that offers part-time
education, is a disservice to the approximately 440 students
statewide. She said other kids may find it easier to go back to
their own school. Her oldest son has autism, and has been
homeschooled. He came out of school in January as a desperate
measure. He was there one day and out the next, because it was
such a failure for him. She told the committee they tried
correspondence and part-time. He is in high school part-time
now, and is making it in his high school work and ACS work for
about three periods a day, which is about all he can handle at
Juneau-Douglas High School, with about 1,700 students in a
building that was designed for about 1,300. She said she feels
she is in a place where there is no place left to send her
children. She said she talked to wonderful people who told her
that they could not hope to do what ACS does. Accreditation is
an issue also. Five of these schools are currently seeking
accreditation; however, it is a process that they go through.
She pointed out that ACS is currently accredited. It is sort of
scary to put a high school kid's education in the hands of
someone who is seeking accreditation that might be denied when
that student is a senior, she told members.
Number 2194
MS. CLOUGH pointed out that none of these schools are mandated
by law to exist. She said she could put her kids with a school
and [the school] may decide to fold its hand and leave the next
year. Then she would be hunting again to find a place to put
her sons. She said the other schools are all clearinghouses for
a wide variety of services. Some of these are great services,
but having a teacher on the other end of the phone and having
that teacher know and understand what it is like to live in
Alaska is important. She said ACS's curriculum is written for
Alaskans. It uses images that make sense to the students who
live in rural areas. For example, there is none of this
"football field lengths" for a kid who has never seen a football
field. Alyeska Central School has years in the business, and
while these other schools may be good, she does not think they
come close to ACS, and these schools will not take her children.
Number 2145
REPRESENTATIVE GARA asked Ms. Clough about the summer program
and asked if any of her children utilize that program.
MS. CLOUGH responded that she has used the summer program
because it took over one calendar year to do an algebra class.
Her son just started a geometry class in January, and if her
family loses this program, she will have to start a new textbook
and new system next year.
Number 2105
RICK CURRIER, School Counselor; English and Elective Teacher,
Alyeska Central School, spoke on the proposed changes to Alaska
Statute 14.07. He said to the committee that ACS delivers
courses, enrolls students all year, graduates students, promotes
students, and is not broken. As mentioned before, a majority of
its funding comes from its enrolled full-time students. If
those students go into Anchorage classrooms, it will cost the
state 20 percent more in FTE [full-time equivalent]. Alyeska
Central School currently has students in Barrow, Lake Iliamna,
and other rural areas. If these students go into rural
classrooms, how much more is it going to cost the state to fund
their education? He told the committee they get a lot of bang
for the buck at Alyeska Central School. The other issue that
has been described is that ACS is a duplicate service. He said
he hopes every school in the state does duplicate services by
presenting content that meets educational standards and accesses
students to make sure they meet those standards. Alyeska
Central School does that.
Number 2046
MR. CURRIER used an analogy to retail stores, saying that Wal-
Mart, Home Depot and Nordstrom all have display space, staff,
and products to purchase; everyone knows they all target
different clientele, have different products, and sell products
differently. He told the committee Alyeska Central School is
unique. To his knowledge, no other distance-learning program in
Alaska has the faculty, the Alaska-directed, and Alaska-
generated curriculum that the staff has written, and 60 years of
established infrastructure.
MR. CURRIER told the members that the school is expanding and
updating the curriculum constantly. Right now, 19 of the 29
courses that the Alaska on-line consortiums of school districts
has were written by ACS teachers in partnership with the on-line
consortium. He said the school does not have the capacity to
provide elective courses for students. He said ACS purchases
courses from places like North Dakota, Division of Independent
Study; the University of Nebraska; and the American School in
Chicago. However, there is a difference. A majority of those
classes ACS teaches itself. [The program] purchases the
materials, but the teaching is done here in Alaska. Mr. Currier
said he asked a student the other day how much response has been
received from teachers in Nebraska and North Dakota. The
response was that the student never got answers from those
teachers. Time-difference problems for students is an issue,
especially for students who are taking classes from schools
further east.
Number 1910
MR. CURRIER summarized his comments by saying that the
curriculum and faculty are the points that make Alyeska Central
School unique. He commented that the summer school is done at
the direction of the legislature. If the legislature wants to
save [$1.17] million, he suggested cutting summer school, but
knowing that it is a lifeline for over 3,400 students statewide.
He said the summer school is not run just in the summer. For
instance, graduating seniors may start a class in March because
they are a half credit short. He told the committee he often
gets calls from parents and counselors asking if it is possible
to get a student into a course right away because the student
wants to graduate in June.
Number 1853
JEANNE FOY, Alyeska Central School Education Association,
testified in opposition to HB 174. She said that she is an
English teacher at Alyeska Central School (ACS) and was
surprised at the governor's proposal to close the school because
she thought parental choice was one of the key components of
educational reform. She told members ACS has a long track
record of being committed to providing high-quality courses and
instruction to students in a variety of situations. The
[federal] No Child Left Behind Act requires that students have
highly qualified teachers. She said ACS already has teachers
certified in the specific subject areas and grade levels they
teach. Families want teachers in Alaska who can be reached by a
toll-free phone number or e-mail. Students who take courses
from out-of-state correspondence programs often have difficulty
reaching those teachers. Parents also want to talk to teachers
who know the courses their children are taking. Parents
appreciate the analysis ACS teachers provide of their students'
work. They want an accredited program to ensure that the
classes students take with ACS are on par with classes students
take at a regular or brick-and-mortar school. Parents choose
ACS because they recognize the value of what is offered.
Number 1755
MS. FOY said that on Tuesday, Eddy Jeans said that other
statewide programs have called the department stating that they
could develop and offer a similar program to ACS's. The ability
and expertise to develop and teach distance-delivery courses
cannot be developed quickly. It requires a long-term
commitment. Right now, state law mandates that the Department
of Education and Early Childhood Development operate this
school. That means that this alternative method of delivering a
public school education will always be available to students,
available, that is, as long as the law is not changed. The list
of districts offering statewide programs for the next school
year is not the same as this year's list. Districts can choose
to discontinue to offer statewide programs at any time.
MS. FOY told the committee one good thing about this proposed
closure is that ACS has been inundated with calls, letters, and
e-mails from past students and families, as well as current
families expressing how much they value the school. That has
been encouraging. These families also ask why the governor
wants to remove this educational choice from Alaskan families.
To that question, she said she does not have an answer. Ms. Foy
provided the committee with samples of assessments of the
students' work.
Number 1657
MICHAEL I. JEFFERY, Presiding Judge, Alaska Superior Court,
Testified via teleconference as a parent in opposition to HB
174. He told the committee he was testifying as a parent of
children enrolled in Alyeska Central School. He said he has
been listening to testimony on ACS and could not agree more with
what has been said. About five years ago his family started
using ACS for his daughter, who is now graduating from ACS this
year. While his family has opted for a course or two in local
schools, the heavy academics have been done through ACS. In a
rural location, the teachers are doing the best job they can,
but the fact is that ACS has a terrific track record with scores
on tests and admissions to colleges, and his family has the
assurance that their children are getting the level of education
that anyone is getting in any city anywhere in the country.
JUDGE JEFFERY noted that ACS kids are going on to Stanford
[University] and other top universities. He said he has three
students in ACS right now, and his oldest daughter is applying
to colleges. One thing that he has been very grateful for is
that ACS has this great track record. He commented that ACS has
been there since 1939. College admissions offices know this
program, and know that teachers are there that the student is
relating to. This is not just a "cafeteria" of Internet
courses. Judge Jeffery said considering the fine record that
his daughter has built up, ACS has a quality program. Sometimes
classes will be listed in ACS's catalog and will refer students
to other schools. In these cases, [his family] has not been
happy with the courses from these more distant places. The
classes just do not seem to be set up as well. [His family] has
a lot of interchange with the teachers. Judge Jeffery
summarized his comments by saying it is a quality program that
he hopes will continue for a very long time.
Number 1436
RICH KRONBERG, President, NEA-Alaska, told the committee it is
much easier to maintain than to replace a program. The
committee has heard that ACS has a proven track record, but the
same cannot be said of any of the other schools that offer
correspondence or homeschool support in this state. He pointed
out that the monetary savings are doubtful at best. With the No
Child Left Behind Act, parents and students need to have
choices. He said ACS is certainly a preferable choice. He told
the committee there will soon be many tests available to the
state for which the students' test results are going to be very
public. The difference is that the data is going to be
disaggregated. Until the state knows what the data is going to
look like, the state cannot say with any certainty that these
other schools with supposedly equivalent correspondence programs
are the equal of Alyeska Central School.
MR. KRONBERG offered a suggestion to the committee that a better
way to deal with this issue is to phase in or allow for a
transition period. If it turns out that this is a program that
is superior to others, there are minimal cost savings, if any,
and parental choice does mean something; the state will not have
to start all over again. Mr. Kronberg said the startup costs
will be big and it will be a waste of precious state resources.
It is much better to keep the program in place, and build in a
transition period so that if, in fact, it is not doing the
things the legislature needs it to do, it can be eliminated or
cut back, but right now the legislature does not know that. In
fact, there is overwhelming testimony that ACS is doing the
right thing and it is doing it better than other places. He
reiterated his suggestion that the committee build in a
transition period and not lose this quality program until the
members are sure there is something that can replace it.
Number 1246
ALEXANDER DOLITSKY, Ph.D., Social Studies Teacher, Alyeska
Central School, offered a brief statement about HB 174. The
format of Alyeska Central School is exactly what the legislature
and the state wants to see in statewide education. He said ACS
does not have a physical district like other districts.
Students come to ACS for a certain purpose or for the quality of
education. The teachers and administrators of ACS are on their
toes every day or the school loses students. If students and
parents are not satisfied with ACS's program, it would not be
necessary to have HB 174; it would end by itself because of lack
of enrollment. He said ACS does not give students free
computers or $1,000 for their supplies. He told the committee
that parents have heard about the quality of the ACS program.
He told the committee when he hears the term "duplication," he
knows it is not a relevant term because as educators all 52
school districts in Alaska duplicate each other. They teach
students to read, write, and do math. The hospitals in the
world duplicate each other by treating patients. He suggested
that this is not a relevant term. It is not properly used in
ACS's case. In fact, ACS is open year-round, which is a great
difference from other schools, not only correspondence schools.
Furthermore, ACS enrolls students in the middle of the academic
year. It provides academic, and student services, and programs
like Close Up, the Academic Decathlon, and other programs.
Number 1079
DR. DOLITSKY said the summer school is a separate entity from a
traditional school. The legislature asked ACS to perform this
service. He told the committee he has been with the school for
15 years; he started as a summer school teacher. He recalled
that under the Hickel Administration the summer school program
was closed to save money. Then it was reinstated the next year
and grew to the level that it currently holds. To cut the
summer school does not require this bill; the legislature can
just cut the funds to operate the summer school. Please do not
confuse the traditional program with the summer school, he
asked. The traditional program costs 20 percent less than
conventional education and will cost as much as any other
correspondence school, but there is no guarantee that 1,100
students enrolled in ACS will go to a correspondence school.
The committee has heard that ACS is what the parents want; if
these families cannot have ACS, the students may go back to the
traditional schools where they live, and it can cost $28,000 to
educate a child in Barrow or other rural schools, or $15,000 to
educate a child at Mount Edgecumbe. He noted that ACS has over
50 students that live in are rural areas.
DR. DOLITSKY summarized his comments by saying that, first, ACS
is not a duplicative institution and, second, there will be no
budgetary savings in eliminating ACS.
Number 0912
JON PADEN, Counselor, Alyeska Central School; Representative,
Alyeska Central School Association, testified in opposition to
HB 174. He told the committee, first, ACS funding follows the
kids wherever the students go. Second, the [$1.17] million from
summer school is really for kids in the districts around the
state, not really the kids in ACS, and only as a secondary
benefit to them. Third, what makes ACS unique has been said by
other people, but to summarize the thought, it is a year-round
school. A student's semester begins when that student receives
textbooks and materials, and the semester ends for that student
when four to six months have passed. He emphasized that ACS
offers Alaskan-teacher-mediated and developed instruction, and a
parent advisory council that takes in parents from all over the
state. He said the department testified the day before
yesterday that district are willing to develop similar programs
and said his take on that is that there are folks who are
willing to duplicate in the future what at present they do not
have.
Number 0710
VICTORIA MARTIN told the committee she is a homeschoolteacher to
two students. There are six courses that ACS has developed in
Alaska history and Alaska science. She said she has success
stories with her students that were falling through the cracks
at Anchorage public schools. Yesterday her granddaughter was
asked by the committee what options were available to her. Ms.
Martin told the committee she called and found that Iditarod
School District has correspondence courses available; however,
there is only one English teacher, one elementary teacher, one
special education teacher, one office person, and four people
who work there. CyberLynk has not returned her call. Raven
Correspondence is district-only. PACE [Personal Alternative
Choices in Education], which is part of Craig City Schools, does
not offer dual enrollment, and students get "school in a box."
The parent does all the work without support, whereas ACS has
teachers available to help parents and students. The IDEA
[Interior Distance Education of Alaska] program has parents
grading the work, and there is one correspondence school through
Delta Junction that is not adequate. Ms. Martin said one of her
students has taken driver's education through North Dakota, and
there was no way to call to ask questions. She pointed out that
ACS offers many other programs including a Lego robotic team and
academic decathlon. She said she has a gifted youngster who
went to the gifted programs here and fell through the cracks.
He was deliberately getting bad grades because he was being
bullied because he is bright. She said he is now an A and B
student. He is becoming well adjusted. Ms. Martin said ACS is
a great program and asked the committee to please not eliminate
it.
Number 0456
CHAIR GATTO told the committee he has a number of questions from
the department. Specifically, if the money follows the
students, aside from the summer school, is there some way the
state realizes a large savings if it is paying out the money for
the students anyway.
Number 0431
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said if the state is funding this
correspondence study at 80 percent, and if even 20 percent of
these students go into regular public schools in rural areas, it
does not save money, other than the summer school. Where is the
savings in this bill?
Number 0389
MR. JEANS responded that Representative Seaton is correct that
if the students go back and enroll in their community's schools,
they are going to be funded at a higher level. [The department]
has not crafted the actual savings in the long term as the
result of closing Alyeska Central Schools. He told the
committee he would produce that information for the committee so
everyone can see the long-term savings. Right now the fiscal
note only shows a savings from the closure of the summer school
program. However, [the department] does believe there will be
other savings with facility leases.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON replied that he would like to see that
information before going forward.
Number 0287
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that there are two parts to the
bill. One is getting rid of the Alyeska Central School, and the
second, is getting rid of the summer school. Closing the summer
school is the only part that saves the state money. He said it
is likely that a number of the students who leave ACS who
currently receive 80 percent funding will then enroll in schools
where they will receive 100 percent funding. Some of those
students go to schools that have a high ADM [average daily
membership], for example, in Goodnews Bay, where it will be even
more expensive to fund their education.
Number 0199
MR. JEANS restated that if those students enroll in their
community's school, there will be an increased cost to educate
those students. The department has been very clear about that.
CHAIR GATTO suggested that the likelihood of a student at ACS
going back to the public school instead of into an alternative
program is low. He said he thinks students that are involved in
these programs are there because they are successful, enjoy it,
and would probably get first crack at one of the other
correspondence schools.
REPRESENTATIVE GARA commented that he disagrees with Chair
Gatto's point. He asked Mr. Jeans to give the committee a
comparative dollar cost of sending one child to ACS versus one
of the more expensive schools in the Bush. He said he would
like to have a comparative number so that the committee can
consider what it would cost to have a child leave ACS and go to
the foundation formula.
Number 0046
MR. JEANS replied that the allocation to a correspondence
program, whether Alyeska Central School or any other
correspondence program is 80 percent of the base student
allocation, which equals about $3,800.
TAPE 03-12, SIDE A
Number 0001
MR. JEANS said the cost to operate a rural school with 20 to 25
kids is a cost of $15,000 per student. He reminded the
committee that the department has heard from teachers that ACS
has about 45 to 50 students living in rural areas. However,
many of the students that ACS is serving live right in
Anchorage, Juneau, and other larger communities, so the
comparison of $3,800 to $15,000 is the extreme, and not many of
ACS's students fall into that category.
Number 0104
JOYCE JONES testified via teleconference that she currently has
eight students enrolled in the ACS correspondence program. She
told the committee that it is an option to go through a
correspondence program in the local district; however, she tried
that but it did not work out because the district was
overwhelmed with the number of students already enrolled. She
told the committee she used to live in Kodiak and had her two
boys enrolled in Kodiak public schools. The school was just too
overcrowded and she did not approve of the education they were
receiving. Ms. Jones said her family moved back to Karluk, her
hometown, where they thought about getting their school open,
but it is a very small community. This year the community was
not able to get the department to open Karluk School because of
the low head count.
MS. JONES told the committee that the ACS program is very well
laid out. The older students that are in sixth and ninth grades
are pretty independent. Day-to-day classes and day-to-day
lesson plans are provided. Her students started a month late
and the kids are doing very well in the program and are right
were they should be even, though they started late. The kids
have contact with their own teachers, there is quick turnaround
on the work that is being sent in, and the kids are getting good
grades. Ms. Jones told the committee education is very
important in the small rural areas. She asked, if this is taken
away, what her family will do.
Number 0389
SHEILA SYMONS testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
174. She told the committee she lives in Central, a rural
community, and homeschools three of her four children. Her
husband graduated from ACS and she has been homeschooling for
eight years. She told the committee ACS is not a duplication of
services. The teachers are fantastic. They support the
parents, know the courses, and always have the answers. They
have helped her be a better teacher by offering suggestions in
presenting material in a different way if something is not
getting through. They speak to her kids and have great bond.
Ms. Symons told the committee they have a different schedule and
frequently do not start school until November, but it does not
matter if the school year does not end until August. She told
the committee there is no Internet access where she lives, but
ACS offers an excellent library service and a fantastic
education to her children. For those who are getting started in
homeschooling, ACS gives a daily lesson plan, and that is not
available from other programs.
CHAIR GATTO commended Ms. Symons on her many years of work as a
professional homeschooler. He wanted her to know that he and
the other members of the committee appreciate and recognize
those who are willing and capable of homeschooling.
Number 0697
JESSIE GIYER testified via teleconference and told the committee
that she and her husband have been teaching their son through
ACS for six years now. She said ACS is the best option because
it provides a wide variety courses, and a high level of
education, and is there to assist the parents. If the teacher
is unavailable, they leave voice mail and ACS gets right back to
them. She said they live in Palmer and are in the Matanuska-
Susitna School District, and while the Matanuska-Susitna study
program is available to them, they feel ACS is the better of the
two programs. She summarized her comments by saying it would be
a shame to lose this program.
CHAIR GATTO thanked everyone who has waited so long to testify
on HB 174. He announced that even though the committee allotted
the entire time for testimony, not everyone will have an
opportunity to speak.
Number 0873
NANCY RICHAR testified via teleconference in opposition to HB
174. She told the committee that her son attended ACS from
Kindergarten through 12th grade and graduated in January, when
he entered the University of Alaska Southeast (UAS), School of
Fisheries, on five scholarships. She expressed concern for the
students who will not graduate until July or September. She
asked what will happen to them. Ms. Richar said ACS has
survived and thrived since 1939 because they have a unique
background, skill, and knowledge to adapt to each student's
individual needs. The program has given the students the tools
and skills to succeed in college. The teachers write their own
courses supplemented by textbooks because there are no textbooks
written for math, especially for correspondence. They have
received awards for the courses they have written. She told the
committee her son was very interested in marine life and the
teachers wrote a course of study for him from Kindergarten
through 6th grade. One course became a permanent course of
study. Ms. Richar told the committee that this past summer he
was admitted into the UAF [University of Alaska Fairbanks]
Honors Institute, where he completed a full semester of three
regular courses in six weeks, and earned eight college credits
with a 3.25 GPA [grade point average]. She said he learned
these skills at ACS. He is currently a straight-A student at
UAS and has been allowed to take a postgraduate course in marine
research as a freshman. She summarized by saying that her son
is not unusual. There are many students who are doing an
outstanding job and earning honors.
CHAIR GATTO announced that he will be holding the bill over
until more information is provided from the Department of
Education and Early Development.
ADJOURNMENT
Number 1194
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Special Committee on Education meeting was adjourned at 1:03
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|