Legislature(2003 - 2004)
03/23/2004 11:01 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 23, 2004
11:01 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Carl Gatto, Chair
Representative Paul Seaton, Vice Chair
Representative Dan Ogg
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Kelly Wolf
Representative Mary Kapsner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Les Gara
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SB 179 SENATE BILL NO. 179
"An Act allowing teacher certification for certain persons based
on a criminal history background check without fingerprints."
- MOVED CSSB 179(FIN) OUT OF COMMITTEE
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: SB 179
SHORT TITLE: CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS/TEACHERS
SPONSOR(S): SENATOR(S) THERRIAULT
04/08/03 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/08/03 (S) HES, FIN
04/16/03 (S) HES AT 1:30 PM BUTROVICH 205
04/16/03 (S) Moved CSSB 179(HES) Out of Committee
04/16/03 (S) MINUTE(HES)
05/10/03 (S) HES RPT CS 2DP 1NR NEW TITLE
05/10/03 (S) DP: DYSON, WILKEN; NR: DAVIS
05/13/03 (H) FIN AT 8:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
05/13/03 (S) <Above Item Removed from Agenda>
05/13/03 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/08/04 (S) FIN RPT CS 5DP 2NR NEW TITLE
03/08/04 (S) DP: GREEN, WILKEN, DYSON, BUNDE,
03/08/04 (S) STEVENS B; NR: HOFFMAN, OLSON
03/08/04 (S) FIN AT 9:00 AM SENATE FINANCE 532
03/08/04 (S) Moved CSSB 179(FIN) Out of Committee
03/08/04 (S) MINUTE(FIN)
03/15/04 (S) TRANSMITTED TO (H)
03/15/04 (S) VERSION: CSSB 179(FIN)
03/16/04 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/16/04 (H) EDU, HES, JUD
03/23/04 (H) EDU AT 11:00 AM CAPITOL 124
WITNESS REGISTER
ZACK WARWICK, Staff
to Senator Gene Therriault
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on behalf of Senator Therriault,
sponsor of SB 179 and answered questions from the members.
KATHRYN MONFREDA, Chief
Criminal Records and Identification Bureau
Division of Statewide Service
Department of Public Safety
Anchorage, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 179 and answered questions
from the members.
CYNTHIA CURRAN, Administrator
Teacher Education and Certification
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified on SB 179 and answered questions
from the members.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 04-17, SIDE A
Number 0001
CHAIR CARL GATTO called the House Special Committee on Education
meeting to order at 11:01 a.m. Representatives Gatto, Seaton,
Wilson, and Wolf were present at the call to order.
Representatives Ogg and Kapsner arrived as the meeting was in
progress.
SB 179-CRIMINAL BACKGROUND CHECKS/TEACHERS
Number 0050
CHAIR GATTO announced that the only order of business would be
SENATE BILL NO. 179, "An Act allowing teacher certification for
certain persons based on a criminal history background check
without fingerprints."
NUMBER 0080
ZACK WARWICK, Staff to Senator Gene Therriault, Alaska State
Legislature, testified on behalf of Senator Therriault, sponsor
of SB 179 and answered questions from the members. He told the
members that SB 179 addresses a problem with fingerprint checks.
One problem is that those in the teaching field have [the ridges
in on their fingertips] wear out to the point that fingerprints
are not readable and which makes background checks virtually
impossible to get. Mr. Warwick explained that this bill creates
an alternative process. He commented that the staff from the
Department of Education could speak to that point. Some of the
teachers are getting reprinted every three months, receiving a
yellow card, and authorization to teach for another three months
because their prints are not readable, he said. As a result of
this problem the school districts were not receiving a full
background check, he summarized.
MR. WARWICK explained that this legislation would change that
process. After fingerprints were rolled twice and rejected, the
Department of Public Safety (DPS) would make a determination
that the fingerprints were not rejected because the person
rolling the prints was incompetent, but that the prints were
unreadable.
Number 0264
MR. WARWICK commented that during the Senate Health, Education
and Social Services meeting it was discovered that DPS has a
long list of occupations where background checks are required at
the federal level. For example, some occupations such as
members of the Alaska Bar Association or liquor license holders
are required to be fingerprinted. The legislature was given
broad based authority in statute to get background checks, but
it did not say fingerprint background checks, just background
checks, he said. The U.S. Department of Justice reviewed the
State of Alaska's statutes and found that the state is close to
falling out of compliance with federal laws. It was suggested
that there be corrective changes to statute. Those suggested
changes were made in the Senate Health, Education and Social
Services Standing Committee and clarified in the Senate Finance
Committee.
Number 0321
REPRESENTATIVE GATTO noted the bill has grown.
MR. WARWICK agreed with Representative Gatto's comment. He
explained that the reason it has grown is that for every section
of statute where authority was created to do background checks
it was necessary to cross-reference and state that these were
fingerprint-based background checks. It was also necessary to
include the fee section, he added. Mr. Warwick told the members
that it was during this process that Chairman Gatto also brought
to the Senator Therriault's attention a problem that exists in
the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District. Teachers were
not getting their fingerprint background checks back within the
three-month period. When language was inserted into the bill to
address this problem there was concern that it violated the
single subject rule so the language was changed by Legislative
Legal and Research Services to ensure this change is compatible
with that rule, he explained.
MR. WARWICK told the members that this bill would authorize the
Department of Education and Early Development to extend the time
period for teacher's temporary certificate from a three-month
period to a five-month period. This change would relieve
teachers from having to resubmit paperwork every three months
while waiting for the fingerprint background checks to come back
to the department. He emphasized that this extension is only
applicable when the background checks do not come back within
three months through no fault of the teacher applicant. He
commented that post 9/11 [the terrorist attacks of September 11,
2001] the Department of Justice had a tremendous backlog in
fingerprint checks.
Number 0479
CHAIR GATTO asked what has changed about unreadable fingerprint
checks.
MR. WARWICK responded that there will be an alternate system put
in place if a teacher applicant submits fingerprints twice and
the Department of Public Safety (DPS) makes the determination
that the fingerprints are not readable. At that point the DPS
would do a name-based background check.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF asked for clarification on the statement
that fingerprints of teachers wear off. He commented that he
can understand welders burning thumbs, but sees little way a
teacher's fingerprints could wear off.
MR. WARWICK responded that teachers and nurses have the highest
incidence of [ridges in thumbprints] wearing out. He offered
that teachers and nurses are required to have fingerprints done,
but welders generally are not.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF disagreed with Mr. Warwick on that point.
There are welders that work in secure areas around the country
that are required to be fingerprinted.
Number 0652
CHAIR GATTO announced for the record that Representatives Wolf
and Kapsner have joined the meeting.
Number 0676
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how many [teachers] in the state
have unreadable fingerprints.
MR. WARWICK referred the members to a list highlighting
fingerprint submissions over a 9-month period in 2003
[memorandum dated March 13, 2003, Linda Judd, Supervisor,
Teacher Certification, Department of Education and Early
Development]. That memorandum states that of the 1,567 teacher
applicants, 42 applicants resubmitted their fingerprints at
least two times. He pointed out that during that 9-month period
these teacher applicants had three sets of prints rolled.
CHAIR GATTO asked if these prints are reviewed electronically.
MR. WARWICK replied that he is not an expert on fingerprint
technology.
CHAIR GATTO commented that DPS could likely respond to that
question.
Number 0740
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked if school bus drivers are required
to be fingerprinted.
MR. WARWICK responded that school bus drivers are required to be
fingerprinted, and pointed to Section 17 of the bill [page 10,
lines 9 through 12].
Number 0777
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON inquired about the new technology now
being used at airports where green light scans fingerprints. He
questioned whether this method might be more effective than ink
and paper.
MR. WARWICK replied that he has never seen print scanners in
airports so he cannot comment on its effectiveness.
Number 0886
KATHRYN MONFREDA, Chief, Criminal Records and Identification
Bureau, Division of Statewide Service, Department of Public
Safety, testified on SB 179 and answered questions from the
members.
CHAIR GATTO asked for Ms. Monfreda to comment on the issue of
fingerprints wearing out.
MS. MONFREDA explained that fingerprints do wear out. She
commented that mechanics and bricklayers have a high incidence
of that. She explained that there are problems with teachers'
fingerprints also. In particular, women's fingers are more
delicate than men's fingers and the ridges seem to be finer. It
is easier to work them down to the point that they are
unidentifiable, she said. She commented that Representative
Wolf was correct that it can be any occupation that could
experience this effect. For example, fishermen are susceptible
with drying and cracking of the hands. Ms. Monfreda told the
members that people who deal with a lot of paper can also wear
out the ridges of their fingertips.
Number 1040
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON inquired about the electronic technology
that is currently being used and asked if it could address some
of these problems.
MS. MONFREDA commented that there are misconceptions about live
scan machines. She agreed that generally better fingerprints
can be obtained from a live scan machine versus rolling in ink.
However, she shared that several of the teachers in the
Anchorage area have come into the office for live scan
fingerprints and it was found that the ink actually looked
better.
CHAIR GATTO asked if it is possible to determine if a person has
filed his/her fingerprints down to deliberately defeat the
system.
MS. MONFREDA replied that it is not possible to tell if it is
done totally intentionally unless the fingertips have been
sliced with razors or something of that nature. She pointed out
that if the fingertips are filed down, the ridges will grow
back, and that is why the Federal Bureau of Investigation
requires multiple submissions.
Number 1155
CHAIR GATTO pointed out that if a person were going in for
fingerprints at 2 p.m. then he/she could file them down at noon.
MS. MONFREDA agreed with Chair Gatto. She suggested that there
needs to be some leeway for individuals whose ridges will not
grow back. Ms. Monfreda commented that she and her staff are
pretty adept at determining if fingerprints ridges will grow
back.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF asked who takes the fingerprints of teacher
applicants and are these individuals trained and experienced in
this process.
MS. MONFREDA replied that she hopes these people are trained and
have experience. There is nothing in statute that says any
certification is required to do fingerprinting. The DPS
provides training to anyone who requests it. Between 8 percent
and 10 percent of the fingerprint cards that DPS receives for
applicant purposes are rejected for poor quality, she added.
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF commented that the justice system bases
entire cases on fingerprints at a crime scene. He asked if
there is different technology used between background checks for
teacher applicants and that used in crime labs for crime
investigations.
Number 1348
MS. MONFREDA replied that there is a difference. She explained
that a latent fingerprint which has been lifted from a crime
scene is run blindly through the FBI's 14,000,000 or more pool
of fingerprints. Fingerprints which are rolled are run through
a smaller pool of fingerprints and are examined by an operator
who looks at all ten fingers of the hand.
CHAIR WILSON asked what the procedure is in collecting
fingerprints for teacher applicants. She commented that in
[Wrangell] she assumes teachers go to the police station to get
fingerprinted.
Number 1458
MS. MONFREDA commented that she believes that the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) contracts with companies
to run the prints.
Number 1496
CYNTHIA CURRAN, Administrator, Teacher Education and
Certification, Department of Education and Early Development,
testified on SB 179 and answered questions from the members.
She told the members that DEED does not contract with anyone to
do fingerprinting. The department's policy is that teacher
applicants go to a certified fingerprint roller. Applicants
might go to the Department of Public Safety from the state where
the applicant lives or he/she might go to someone who is
licensed and bonded to do fingerprints, she added.
CHAIR GATTO explained that the Human Resources Department in the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District have been doing
fingerprint checks as part of its overall hiring policy for the
past eight years. He said that when the borough has completed
its evaluation and has hired individuals, there has not been one
time in those eight years that a fingerprint has come back which
would have nullified the district's decision to hire the teacher
applicant. Chair Gatto asked if DEED has had the same results.
MS. CURRAN responded that DEED does background clearances as a
statutory requirement for teacher certification, so in order to
have the teacher certificate it would be necessary for him/her
to be fingerprinted and complete a background clearance before
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District would have been able
to hire the teacher. She reiterated that these teachers have
already gone through a background clearance if the teacher is an
initial applicant.
Number 1599
CHAIR GATTO commented that the bill really deals with the
authorization of the DEED to extend the time [a teacher may
continue to teach] if the delay in returning the fingerprint is
no fault of the applicant.
Number 1635
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that she knows there is a
backlog problem. She asked what number of teacher applicants'
fingerprint background check are backlogged.
MS. CURRAN replied that there are 12 people who have done the
fingerprint submissions numerous times. She explained that last
year the DEED tried to address this issue through regulation.
The department believed that two submissions were enough, but
there was concern that an applicant might go to someone who may
be less than reputable and the department would not know. It is
for that reason that DEED requires that an applicant would have
to get documentation from a doctor which states that an
individual could not get readable fingerprints due to medical
conditions such as chemotherapy, amputation, or arthritis.
MS. CURRAN explained to the members that when an applicant
applies for a teaching certificate and his/her paperwork is
processed and a yellow postcard is sent to the applicant. That
postcard is proof to school districts that the teacher has
applied for certification and that the applicant's fingerprints
and paperwork is in the process. Ms. Curran pointed out that a
school district would know that it could hire the applicant and
that the only thing that would hold up hiring the person is the
background check. She explained that in the state of Alaska it
is not possible to get the background check back in two weeks.
Ms. Curran complimented the Department of Public Safety because
in 2001 there was a huge backlog and now the background checks
move much more smoothly. She emphasized that backlogs are no
longer the problem; the main issue is for those who cannot get
fingerprints. When an individual gets rejected by the FBI or
the Alaska Department of Public Safety upon the advise of the
Department of Law, DEED issues a conditional certificate. That
certificate would allow the person to teach for another four
months while efforts are made to clear the fingerprints again.
She emphasized that it does not solve the problem of the lack of
ridges on the applicant's fingertips, but DEED needs another
submission in order to issue a conditional certificate so the
applicant is still in the process.
Number 1827
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked who pays for the repeated submission
of fingerprints.
Number 1907
MS. CURRAN replied that the teacher applicant has to pay the
fingerprint roller for the additional fingerprints. She
suggested that Kathryn Monfreda in the DPS would have more
details on how the fingerprints checks are done. The DEED pays
for the background checks, she added.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked Ms. Curran how many individuals have
had the background check and it has been found that the
applicant cannot teach [due to some criminal history].
MS. CURRAN explained that when a person applies there is a box
on the application that must be checked as to whether the
applicant has ever committed a felony or been arrested. She
added that [DUI] (driving under the influence) must also be
included. Ms. Curran said that if those boxes are checked then
the application is sent to the Professional Teaching Practices
Commission and an investigation is done to determine if the
person could teach in Alaska. She commented that the
fingerprints are still going through the process. There is a
national clearinghouse that the state belongs to which tracks
teachers who have had his/her [teaching] license revoked in
another state for criminal activity. The department can check
that database to ensure the applicant is not listed there.
However, if something is found, that information is also
forwarded to the Professional Teacher Practices Commission. Ms.
Curran clarified that DEED does not have the power to revoke a
teaching certificate. The Professional Teacher Practices
Commission has that power.
Number 1887
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how many times applicants have been
refused or rejected.
MS. CURRAN replied that DEED has not had any applicants that it
could not issue a certificate. There have been cases where
applicants do not self-report, then there is a hit from the DPS
or the FBI. At that point the applicant's paper work is sent to
the Professional Teacher's Practices Commission. After the
commission's review of the application it will contact the
applicant and advise him/her that while his/her certification
will not be denied there is notification that in the future it
is essential that reporting whatever the hit was on must be
reported on renewal applications.
Number 1993
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked what other states are doing. She
commented that she is sure other states are facing the same
dilemma.
MS. CURRAN replied that other states have a different approach.
For instance, Florida has very expensive technology thanks to
Lockheed Martin [Corporation] where the state is able to get
fingerprints done virtually over night, she said. Other states
do not allow teachers to apply for certification until he/she
has had a background check. She explained that the background
check never comes to these states' departments of education, but
the results do. In these cases the teacher would have to deal
with the department of public safety. Once the background check
has been completed the teacher could at that time apply for
certification, she added.
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER said that Ms. Curran's answer gives her
reason for concern. She commented that Alaska is much more
lenient. Some would says that Alaska is viewed as an end-of-
the-road state. Representative Kapsner said she is concerned
that Alaska is getting teachers who are not self-reporting and
are allowed to teach for months on end. She said she
understands the administrative problem that this presents, but
as a parent of small children she is very concerned.
Representative Kapsner stated that one teacher could do a lot of
damage in a community.
MS. CURRAN agreed with Representative Kapsner and that is the
reason for DEED's concern regarding the additional 60 days that
are allowed in the bill. She commented that there are a lot of
people who know how to play the system, and no system is ever
foolproof. She told the members that there is another problem
DEED experiences where a teacher has been in a classroom for two
months and waits until the last minute to apply for
certification. Ms. Curran emphasized that statute says teachers
are required to have a teaching certificate before teaching.
Number 2145
CHAIR GATTO asked for clarification that the additional 60 days
is discretionary.
MS. CURRAN that is correct.
Number 2149
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER asked who bears the final responsibility
if there have been extensions to a teacher who really should not
be in the classroom.
MS. CURRAN replied that the ultimate responsibility for hiring
decisions in a district rests with the superintendent. She
noted that superintendents are using the statutes dealing with
teacher certification when making hiring decisions.
Number 2185
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON commented that most of the teachers have
been working in other states. Since the department has the
applicant's name and social security number, is a background
check run on that data while waiting for the fingerprint check
to return, he asked.
MS. CURRAN replied that the background clearance is based on the
fingerprint check at this point. The only time a name check is
allowed by the FBI is when it has been determined that
fingerprint cards are unreadable, she explained. She emphasized
that unreadable fingerprint determinations cannot be based on a
technical error, [but a for a medical reason]. After two tries
the FBI will do a name check. Ms. Curran further explained that
other jurisdictions do not share the results of background
checks. She pointed out that Montana does not even do
background checks.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for further clarification on the
database or clearinghouse Ms. Curran mentioned earlier.
Number 2322
MS. CURRAN replied that Representative Seaton is referring to
the National Association of State Directors of Teachers
Education and Certification (NASDTEC). She explained that when
a teacher has a license revoked or suspended the teacher's name
and a code is placed into that database. While the state cannot
see the details about the suspension or revocation it does show
that there was a reason for this action. In Alaska a teacher's
suspension or revocation may not be enough of a reason to deny a
teacher applicant a certificate. This is another reason for the
background, she commented.
Number 2355
CHAIR GATTO asked Ms. Curran if it is an invasion of privacy for
someone in Montana to relay results of a background check.
MS. CURRAN responded that she is not sure, but knows that
information is not shared. One example where fingerprint
background checks are not shared in Alaska is when a teacher has
had to get fingerprint [background check] done to get certified,
but is then required to be fingerprinted again as a condition of
employment by a district. The DEED cannot share its results
with the district, she emphasized.
Number 2390
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF said that he is very concerned with the
thought of a pedophile working within a school district. He
said he surmises that no one really knows the number of
applicants nationwide or statewide who have been rejected.
Representative Wolf stated he would like to know if this is a
chronic problem.
MS. CURRAN agreed with Representative Wolf's concern. She
stated that in her perfect world no one would hire a teacher
unless that teacher held a valid Alaskan teaching certificate.
Then everyone would know that the teacher had no criminal
history, Ms. Curran said. Ms. Curran confirmed that DEED does
not have information on how many people are rejected. She
emphasized that many of the people who are being rejected now
are older women, in their 60s and 70s, who lack the ridges in
their fingers because of all the paper they have handled.
Number 2530
REPRESENTATIVE WOLF shared that his 74-year-old mother-in-law
has taught school for 37 years in Los Angeles and has never had
a problem with her fingerprints.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that she has a problem with this
bill. She asked if the 12 teachers who have not completed their
background checks are actually teaching.
MS. CURRAN responded that maybe 3 or 4 of them are teaching.
Many of them are retired teachers who have never before been
fingerprinted in the state of Alaska and in order to get the
retirement certificate, must now be fingerprinted.
Number 2608
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that she sees the value in
having an alternative for those individuals who cannot be
fingerprinted for some reason. She said that she does not like
the idea that teachers can be in the classroom until it is
decided that they absolutely should not be there.
Representative Wilson shared that for a number of years she
lived in Tok and worked at the clinic there. It is amazing how
many people come that far and would then just disappear into the
wilderness for whatever reason, she said. It is important to be
very careful in Alaska. Even though 99.9 percent of the people
that come up here are not hiding anything, if one person [who
shouldn't be there] slips through a child could be affected, she
cautioned. Representative Wilson reiterated that she does not
like the idea of a provisional certificate being given to a
teacher so he/she can go into a school before a background check
is complete. She asked for the other members' view on this
portion of the bill.
Number 2709
CHAIR GATTO reminded the members that this bill simply allows
for more time to get the fingerprint check back. He pointed out
that there are teachers in the Anchorage School District who
have been convicted of possessing illegal substances that are
still in the classroom. This bill is not really intended to
address that issue. What this bill says is that for perfectly
legitimate reasons a person could not get a fingerprint check.
Alaska has a problem getting teachers, he commented.
CHAIR GATTO shared that in Matanuska-Susitna Borough School
District if a teacher passes the district's background check
there has been instance where the fingerprint check has come
back with a hit. He commented that the Matanuska-Susitna
Borough School District's background check is so thorough that
DEED's is almost unnecessary. He asked Ms. Curran how many hits
there have been on teacher applicants. He said that this bill
really deals with good people who cannot get their background
checks completed because of poor fingerprints. If an individual
is capable of getting through the system, he said he is not sure
this committee is capable of dealing with that.
MS. CURRAN asked if he is referring to people with a criminal
history.
Number 2813
CHAIR GATTO confirmed that he is asking how many people were
missed in a background check, but identified in a fingerprint
check.
MS. CURRAN replied that [DEED views] the fingerprint check as
the background check.
CHAIR GATTO commented that Matanuska-Susitna Borough School
District does more than that. Phone calls are made, he added.
MS. CURRAN asked if he is referring to people who already hold
Alaska teaching certificates.
CHAIR GATTO clarified that he is referring to people who have
taught in other states; who go to the job fair; and then call to
say that they are interested in a job in Alaska. The human
resources department will accept the individual's application,
proceed with a background check including fingerprinting, hire
them, and have him/her in the classroom teaching while waiting
for the results of the fingerprint background check. Chair
Gatto pointed out that the results of the background check could
kick the teacher right out of the classroom, but that has not
happened.
MS. CURRAN responded that in order to be teaching in classrooms
in Alaska a teacher must have an Alaskan teaching certificate.
The fact that a teacher possesses a certificate from another
state does not automatically qualify an applicant. An
application must be made to the state of Alaska for a teaching
certificate, she added. Ms. Curran commented that she may be
misunderstanding what Chair Gatto is saying.
CHAIR GATTO asked if any state offers reciprocity on teaching
certificates.
MS. CURRAN responded that Alaska is probably the most reciprocal
state in the union at this point. Alaska will grant a teacher
who passes the criminal background check a type Q teaching
certificate. She explained that it is a preliminary certificate
which is valid for one year and is based on endorsements from
out of state. The one-year certification is good while the
teacher takes the Praxis I which is a statutory requirement, and
when DEED receives [passing] test scores the certificate is
extended for two more years. Ms. Curran clarified that the
certificate is good for three full years if the teacher passes
the basic competency test. She emphasized that many states do
not accept endorsements and an applicant would have to meet that
state's standards as soon as possible. Alaska's requirements
include Alaska studies, multi-cultural classes, and the basic
competency test, she explained.
Number 2940
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER commented that she is okay with this bill
going out today because she understands that this is an
administrative issue. She said, however, that whatever the cost
is to obtain the technology used in Florida it sounds like it
would be worthwhile to protect Alaska's children.
TAPE 04-17, SIDE B
Number 2943
REPRESENTATIVE KAPSNER commented that she is aware of the
teacher shortage in Alaska and does not want to impose any
hardships on that system. She emphasized that she is still not
comfortable with the legislation, but understands the dilemma.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if she understands correctly that a
teacher can come to Alaska from another state, provide [an
application and] fingerprints, and then receive a one-year
temporary teaching certificate. If the teacher is hired by a
school he/she can go into the classroom while the background
check is being done.
Number 2886
MS. CURRAN replied that in her perfect world the teacher would
have done all of that prior to being hired by the school
district. Ideally the results of the background check would
already be done and the district could be assured that it was
hiring someone who has a spotless record. Unfortunately, many
times [applying for the teaching certificate and getting the
fingerprint background check] is the last thing the teacher
does.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked why a school would hire someone when
the background check is not complete.
MS. CURRAN responded that the district believes the candidate is
right person for the job. The district probably has looked at
the credentials and made sure that the person meets the criteria
in what is needed. She explained that the background check for
many districts is a formality.
Number 2827
CHAIR GATTO commented that not every person that fails the
background check is a pedophile. He said that there may be
people who had serious problems while going through a divorce
and did not pay [alimony]. In a case like that the person could
still be a perfectly capable classroom teacher. He asked Ms.
Curran if the background check focuses on whether the individual
has done something to harm children or if he/she has been
convicted of doing illegal things.
MS. CURRAN replied that the background check looks for criminal
activity.
CHAIR GATTO commented that the background check could trigger on
many things, but it does not mean the individual is an incapable
teacher.
MS. CURRAN agreed with Chair Gatto assessment.
CHAIR GATTO said he may know teachers who have done things in
their past and who freely admit it, but the individual is
watched closely, does well, and is well thought of.
MS. CURRAN replied that is the reason the Professional Teachers
Practices Commission reviews applications of those who self-
report or when a background check comes back which reflects
criminal activity. An investigation can be done and a
determination can be made as to whether a teaching certificate
should be revoked or denied.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if anyone is at the meeting
representing the Professional Teachers Practices Commission.
MS. CURRAN replied that she is on the board.
Number 2737
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked Ms. Curran if she would provide
instances of criminal activity and the subsequent determination
as to whether an individual could teach school. For example, if
a person were convicted of drunk driving would he/she be able to
teach school.
Number 2715
MS. CURRAN responded that when Teacher Education and
Certification gets a hit or a self-report then that applicant's
name and paperwork goes to the executive director of the
Professional Teacher's Practices Commission. She is empowered
by the commission to do an investigation which may include
calling another state's equivalent commission to find out more
information. She explained that when an applicant self-reports
the individual needs to attach supporting documentation
regarding the offense so that a determination can be made as to
whether it rises to the level that requires commission review.
Ms. Curran commented that 98.6 percent of the time the offense
does not rise to the level of seriousness that would require
commission review. The executive director does advise the
commission of her findings and recommendation that it would not
merit denying a certificate.
MS. CURRAN explained that the commission hears the serious cases
where action needs to be taken against a teacher. For example,
child molestation, possession of drugs, or moral turpitude are
causes for revocation. She pointed out that contract violations
may be cause for suspension. Ms. Curran went on to say that due
process goes forward with an investigation, finding, hearing,
and the commission makes a determination.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked Ms. Curran how long she has been on
the commission.
MS. CURRAN replied that she has been on the commission since
March 2001 and is on her second term. In response to
Representative Wilson question, Ms. Curran said that the
commission has revoked four teacher certificates in that time
period. She emphasized that some teachers voluntarily give up
their certificates because they are aware that they have
committed a crime where the certificate will be revoked.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how many were given up voluntarily.
How many were taken away; and of those, how many were in the
classroom teaching at the time of revocation.
Number 2515
MS. CURRAN responded that all of the teachers whose certificates
were revoked were at one point teaching in the classroom. In
some instances the individual school districts may have removed
the teacher from the classroom and put him/her on administrative
leave so that the teacher would not be in the classroom once the
crime had been committed, she explained. Then the commission
takes the action against the certificate. Ms. Curran emphasized
that districts have the power to remove a teacher from the
classroom. Of the eight that committed crimes the district
removed the teachers from the classroom and the case was brought
to the Professional Teacher's Practices Commission.
CHAIR GATTO pointed out that the next committee of referral is
the House Health, Education and Social Services Standing
Committee.
Number 2467
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented that she surmises that of those
individuals that Ms. Curran mentioned those examples would not
fit this bill because the individuals were teaching when the
crime was committed.
MS. CURRAN replied that is correct. The cases mentioned were
teachers who had already passed DEED background check and the
district background check, she added.
CHAIR GATTO asked if DUI applies.
MS. CURRAN replied that she does not know.
CHAIR GATTO asked how long a certificate is good for.
MS. CURRAN replied that a regular type A certificate, which is
Alaska's standard teaching certificate, is valid for a period of
five years and is renewable upon verification of employment or
proof of completion of requirements.
CHAIR GATTO stated that this bill has a lot of merit.
Number 2352
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report CSSB 179(FIN) version V,
out of committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes.
Number 2321
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON objected. She asked if all schools
require background checks and does Ms. Curran believe that the
schools follow through.
Number 2301
MS. CURRAN responded that the larger districts require an
additional background check even after an applicant has received
a teaching certificate. It is done because something could
happen between the time a certificate is obtain and when the
teacher is employed. She said that the schools do not conduct
the background check; it is done at the district level. Not all
schools do background checks, Ms. Curran commented.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON shared that her husband [who is a
superintendent of schools] does very thorough background checks.
She asked if generally the larger districts to the check and the
smaller ones do not.
MS. CURRAN replied that she does not know how many district
actually do additional background checks.
Number 2218
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON withdrew her objection.
Number 2215
CHAIR GATTO announced that there being no further objection,
CSSB 179(FIN) was reported out of 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 12:07
p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|