Legislature(2013 - 2014)BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
03/31/2014 08:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB162 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 162 | TELECONFERENCED | |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
March 31, 2014
8:00 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Gary Stevens, Chair
Senator Mike Dunleavy, Vice Chair
Senator Charlie Huggins
Senator Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Bert Stedman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 162(EDC) AM
"An Act relating to tenure of public school teachers; and
providing for an effective date."
- HEARD & HELD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
BILL: HB 162
SHORT TITLE: TEACHER TENURE
SPONSOR(s): REPRESENTATIVE(s) T.WILSON
03/11/13 (H) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
03/11/13 (H) EDC
03/22/13 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/22/13 (H) Heard & Held
03/22/13 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/27/13 (H) EDC AT 8:00 AM CAPITOL 106
03/27/13 (H) Moved CSHB 162(EDC) Out of Committee
03/27/13 (H) MINUTE(EDC)
03/28/13 (H) EDC RPT CS(EDC) 3DP 4NR
03/28/13 (H) DP: SADDLER, P.WILSON, GATTIS
03/28/13 (H) NR: LEDOUX, DRUMMOND, REINBOLD, SEATON
04/04/13 (H) AM NO 3 TABLED Y28 N8 E4
04/04/13 (H) PASSAGE OF BILL NOT IN ORDER MOTION
WITHDRAWN
04/04/13 (H) TRANSMITTED TO (S)
04/04/13 (H) VERSION: CSHB 162(EDC) AM
04/05/13 (S) READ THE FIRST TIME - REFERRALS
04/05/13 (S) EDC
03/31/14 (S) EDC AT 8:00 AM BELTZ 105 (TSBldg)
WITNESS REGISTER
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of HB 162.
BRUCE JOHNSON, Executive Director
Alaska Council of School Administrators
Juneau, Alaska,
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented information related to HB 162.
TAMMY SMITH, President
Fairbanks Teacher Association
Fairbanks, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified in opposition to HB 162.
WILLIAM ERNST, Teacher
Fairbanks North Star Borough
Fairbanks, Alaska,
POSITION STATEMENT: Voiced opposition to HB 162.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:00:12 AM
CHAIR GARY STEVENS called the Senate Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 8:00 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Gardner, Dunleavy, and Chair Stevens.
Senator Huggins arrived shortly thereafter.
HB 162-TEACHER TENURE
CHAIR STEVENS announced the consideration of HB 162. He said
version U.A was before the committee.
8:01:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau,
Alaska, sponsor of HB 162, shared the history of the bill's path
through the legislative process so far. She discussed the change
of tenure from after-three to after-five years. The House
proposed an amendment that would exempt Rural Education
Attendance Areas (REAA) and communities with 5,500 residents or
less from the provision to change tenure to after five years.
The following school districts were left: Anchorage, Kodiak
Island, Mat-Su, Fairbanks, Juneau, Kenai, and Ketchikan. She
noted that those districts had previously requested the change
in tenure.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON related that flexibility in new hires -
related to budget cuts - was also an issue as to why the bill is
needed. She further addressed the reasons tenure needs to be
changed. She used Fairbanks as an example of a district that has
its own tenure policy in place. She opined that tenure decisions
should be left up to districts to determine. If HB 162 were to
pass, districts could continue allowing tenure after three
years, but they would not be required to do so. She explained
that there is a portability provision in the bill which provides
that a teacher who has taught in a district for several years
can take those years of experience to the next contract.
Representative Wilson suggested that the word "tenure" has a
variety of meanings. Universities have a complicated tenure
system.
8:04:52 AM
CHAIR STEVENS spoke from experience about tenure at the
university. He questioned the decision to go from three years to
five years and what that time extension might entail. He asked
if there would be more classroom observation involved. He also
inquired how student achievement enters into it. He assumed that
the goal of having tenure is to help teachers become better.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON replied that districts would not be
required to wait five years. There is flexibility in the bill to
allow excellent teachers to receive tenure sooner than five
years. A longer tenure period allows districts to draw from a
larger pool when making cuts and allows for more mentoring of
new teachers. She questioned the five-year component and
wondered if the decision could be left up to the district.
CHAIR STEVENS shared that his district has a large school and
five small schools that the bill does not exclude from the
tenure provision because they are within a large district.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that the discussion should
continue on allowing each district to decide how to deal with
tenure.
8:09:49 AM
SENATOR GARDNER inquired who within the five districts requested
the bill.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that the five aforementioned
school districts joined together and presented a list of issues
that would provide them with more flexibility.
SENATOR GARDNER inquired if the biggest reason for needing HB
162 is so that districts can have control over who to retain
when there will be a layoff.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said special education teacher positions
are hard to fill. Also, there is the issue of portability when
teachers move into new districts and only have one year to
adjust to the new school. She noted a complaint about
underperforming teachers and the method of releasing them.
SENATOR GARDNER provided an example of a teacher with tenure in
a REAA district who moves to a larger district. She asked if the
bill applies to them.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said the bill does not deal with that
situation.
SENATOR GARDNER thought tenure did not transfer.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON believed each district makes that
determination.
8:13:36 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked what happens to a teacher who needs more
time after three years. He wondered if the tenure process could
be extended.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON did not think so, currently. The bill
provides for an extension as needed. At the end of the fourth
year the contract could be offered.
CHAIR STEVENS said on page one it says "shall". He asked where
the bill permits giving tenure sooner than five years.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON explained that there is nothing that says
you can't do it earlier, therefore you can.
8:16:00 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked why tenure exists.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said it came from the universities. She
opined that there were some teachers who had a conflict with
their administration and felt they needed protection. It began
during the BIA schools. She stressed that it is not the
responsibility of the state to tell schools what to do.
CHAIR STEVENS added that the reason tenure was introduced was to
protect teachers from unwarranted firing.
8:18:28 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS said every profession has employee/employer
conflicts. He opined that tenure is not exercised; a very small
percentage of teachers are dismissed.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON did not think he was wrong. She related
that tenure was borrowed from the university where tenure was a
reward. In public schools it is based on years. The bill would
provide flexibility to schools to manage their own tenure
policies.
SENATOR HUGGINS recalled how difficult it is to find special
education teachers. He requested more data about tenure. Many
teachers left teaching due to the new retirement system. He
maintained that everyone receives tenure at three years.
8:22:59 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked how many teachers are dismissed before they
are tenured.
SENATOR HUGGINS provided an example of how a teacher could get
in "under the radar."
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said it is a lot easier for marginal
teachers to stay on point for three years. She said it was never
the intent to speak poorly about "good" teachers. She did not
think there was data at the department regarding non-retained
teachers.
CHAIR STEVENS said in the past he heard that administrators
didn't have time for classroom observations. He voiced concern
about postponing the tenure decision for two more years. He also
asked how much it would cost the district to mentor a teacher
for two more years. He said he did not understand the rating
process and how student evaluations would be tied in.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said that teacher evaluation was a big
concern in small districts. She opined the bill is not about
delaying the decision for two more years. The classroom is an
inconsistent environment. She compared it to being a new
legislature. It is the opposite of delaying the decision; it
provides more time for evaluation. She questioned whether the
tenure period needs to be mandated.
8:29:25 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS maintained that another factor is having to let
the non-tenured excellent teacher go, due to budget cuts.
CHAIR STEVENS said one reason for tenure is that districts might
choose to hire a less expensive teacher and tenure protects the
senior teacher from being fired.
SENATOR HUGGINS agreed. He noted there are retirement incentives
that pay people to retire early.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON said, on one hand, districts are measured
on accountability and a poor teacher will interfere with
results. On the other hand, good teachers provide good results.
She opined that with contracts and union involvement protections
are in place.
8:33:57 AM
SENATOR GARDNER requested a copy of the five districts' request
list.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON offered to provide that information
SENATOR DUNLEAVY requested that NEA and the Alaska Council of
School Administrators testify.
8:36:25 AM
BRUCE JOHNSON, Executive director, Alaska Council of School
Administrators, Juneau, Alaska, presenting information related
to HB 162. He said Council members have a variety of opinions on
the bill. He said the rationale behind favoring the extension is
that, in times of reduction, often beginning teachers are moved
from one site to another and have three different supervisors.
Sometimes, people fall between the cracks.
CHAIR STEVENS asked if tenure transfers.
DR. JOHNSON said no, tenure is a district-awarded concept. If a
teacher moves from one district to another there is a shortened
period until tenure is acquired in the new district. He pointed
out that when there is a dismissal of a tenured teacher, it is
costly. Previously, there was a tenure renewal clause, which was
removed. Districts consider dismissal very purposely due to the
cost, time, and energy, as well as the morale issues. For those
reasons, the Council would entertain a reinstatement of that
clause in the future.
He said when it comes to making a tenure decision in a district,
each individual teacher is evaluated and a very conscious
decision is made about whether or not the performance of the
individual in the first three years has been sufficient. It is
not taken lightly and is not left up to an individual principal.
He noted that there have been improvements in teacher
recruitment efforts. He said in smaller districts there was a
problem with finding outstanding teachers versus an adequate
teacher who is willing to go to an outlying area.
DR. JOHNSON said tenure is a complicated issue worthy of
discussion. He suggested the issues surrounding the bill should
be well thought out. He opined that it is great to have local
control, but at the same time there is a fairness issue, which
collective bargaining addresses.
8:43:43 AM
CHAIR STEVENS thanked Dr. Johnson for his years of service. He
asked if it is a problem having different tenure rules for small
districts.
DR. JOHNSON said no. It is designed so that rural districts have
a good recruitment tool of offering tenure in three years. He
noted he does not know of any schools that offer tenure before
the end of the third year.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked if a principal who holds a teaching Type
A endorsement and an administrative Type B endorsement receives
teacher tenure after three years.
CHAIR STEVENS asked for an explanation of Type A and Type B
endorsements.
DR. JOHNSON explained that Type B is an administrative
endorsement; Type A is a teaching endorsement. Often, a
principal will have teaching experience and will have tenure as
a teacher, or will have teacher tenure awarded for being an
administrator.
SENATOR DUNLEAVY asked if an administrator who has never taught
can be granted teacher tenure as an administrator.
DR. JOHNSON said yes.
8:48:43 AM
SENATOR GARDNER asked what is required to receive tenure after a
teacher has left the district and then returns.
DR. JOHNSON said if a teacher leaves a tenured position and
returns to the district at a later time, tenure is not
reinstated, but would have to be earned again. A teacher can
move within a district and retain tenure.
SENATOR GARDNER asked if an administrator has to keep the Type A
license current.
DR. JOHNSON said yes. Administrators also must meet the six-
credit requirement every five years to maintain either Type A or
Type B, or both.
CHAIR STEVENS inquired, if a teacher has taught for three years
and is not ready for tenure, does the principal have a choice to
fire the teacher, grant tenure, and extend the tenure probation
period.
DR. JOHNSON responded that he has worked with the union to
develop an extension due to a catastrophic incident, but it is
rare.
8:52:29 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked for more information about teacher
observations. He voiced concern that extending the time will
postpone observations and assistance to a teacher that needs
more help.
DR. JOHNSON explained that observations vary district to
district. It ranges from observations every week to having
personnel hired to do observations. The point of observation is
to help teachers improve sooner, rather than later, and
intervene in a way that is helpful. He opined it is very rare
where there are few observations of non-tenured teachers. He
concluded it is an area that has made great strides.
SENATOR GARDNER asked about the process of becoming a highly
effective teacher. She related some of the components to that
effect: better selection of teacher candidates, better
instruction for teachers in training, longer student teaching
time, mentoring, continuing education, and MAT programs. She
inquired if the districts who want five-year tenure programs
anticipate needing help to assist teachers with improvement
programs during the additional two years until tenure.
DR. JOHNSON said the point is well taken. He said he could only
speak about districts he has personal knowledge with. For
example, Mat-Su has advocated for the increase and has a very
robust teacher support system, a rich collection of offerings
and assistance. Even with that in place, some teachers will slip
between the cracks because they are moving from school to
school. He guessed that three years is enough time to determine
if a person will be a quality teacher and he would be reluctant
to grant tenure to someone who has not demonstrated competency
after three years. However, there are places in Alaska where it
is difficult to attract and retain teachers.
8:58:35 AM
SENATOR GARDNER recalled the discussion about extending the
tenure period because if extenuating circumstances. She inquired
if there has been an example of a teacher who is marginal and
receives an extension for two years under an improvement plan.
DR. JOHNSON said that instance would be district specific and
require an agreement with their teacher association. He thought
it was worthy of consideration.
9:00:18 AM
TAMMY SMITH, President, Fairbanks Teacher Association,
Fairbanks, Alaska, testified in opposition to HB 162. She shared
her history and pride as a teacher for over thirty years. She
opined that the way to improve a system is not through extending
the requirements, which makes it harder for a new teacher to
achieve a sense of commitment, but to guarantee that all the
steps are in place to ensure success. She maintained that it
must be a system that promotes the highest standards. She said
she is on the teacher evaluation task force in Fairbanks which
is selecting a new teacher evaluation and determining the best
way to implement it. Additionally, the task force will be
determining how to meet the new regulations, tying teacher
performance to student growth.
She related that she is also a member of the Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) teacher evaluation group.
That task force is also working on useful components for both
teacher and administrator evaluation tools. She opined that this
work being done at the state and local level will provide
significant growth in teacher performance and administrative
oversight. She maintained, "If we want to improve the overall
performance of teachers, it cannot be by holding a hammer over
their heads, but instead by putting into place reasonable steps
to ensure the high quality of teaching in the classroom." She
said this can be done by making sure there are rigorous teaching
programs at the university, by providing administrators and
supervisors excellent evaluation tools to work with, having job
collaboration and professional development, on-going mentoring
programs, increased pre-service teaching opportunities, more
training for school boards, superintendents, and administrators,
setting aside time for professional learning communities, and,
if necessary, for individuals not up to the job, to educate them
out of the field.
She opined that the current progress being made by DEED with the
teacher and administrative evaluation tool is the most key
element to support. She requested support for a rigorous
evaluation tool which research supports.
9:04:32 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked if Ms. Smith is a better teacher after 30
years.
MS. SMITH said yes. She said she is at her peak, with two
master's degrees and the desire to try new things. She has a
better understanding of what it takes to be a good teacher and
to help her colleagues and administrators. She has a thorough
understanding of education philosophy and an ability now to
provide guidance to newer teachers.
CHAIR STEVENS thanked Ms. Smith.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked for Ms. Smith's three priorities to help a
beginning teacher improve.
MS. SMITH said a beginning teacher needs to work with a mentor
teacher on site, must know their content, and there must be
continuing mentorship in the classroom.
9:08:47 AM
MS. SMITH responded to a question from Senator Huggins. She said
teachers have to be flexible and change with the culture and
address varying needs of students. She used technology as an
example.
SENATOR GARDNER asked why teachers leave the profession quickly.
MS. SMITH said up to 50 percent leave the profession within five
years. She said they need to have good mentors on site. There
are many challenging requirements that can be overwhelming to
new teachers, leading to a sense of frustration. She concluded
that teaching is a community job.
9:14:12 AM
CHAIR STEVENS said the bill changes tenure from three years to
five years. He voiced concern about what happens in that extra
two years and about the cost.
MS. SMITH thought that what should happen in the extra two years
is to allow a new evaluation system to be in place. In Fairbanks
the Danielson Model has been adopted. She suggested putting
money into evaluation tools. If a teacher is not seeing growth
in the second or third year, there needs to be an honest
conversation with that person.
CHAIR STEVENS asked about the five categories of ratings.
MS. SMITH said it depends on the tool; the categories are
specific to a model. She spoke of the Danielson Model and the
need for the administrator to take the training for it in order
for it to be effective.
9:17:59 AM
CHAIR STEVENS asked if student achievement should be a part of
tenure.
MS. SMITH said it is a tough issue. She said tying student
performance to the teacher evaluation is a work in progress. She
opined that testing is a complex issue. There is a new
regulation that addresses that issue.
CHAIR STEVENS said special education is also a consideration.
MS. SMITH agreed that it is an issue. She described special
education intervention via the individual education plan.
9:20:30 AM
SENATOR HUGGINS asked if she works on teacher evaluations.
MS. SMITH said yes.
SENATOR HUGGINS believed in two elements important in
evaluations. The conversation between the principal and the
teacher should include the teacher sharing their goals as a part
of the evaluation. Later on the conversation should include how
the teacher met their objectives.
MS. SMITH said pre-conferences and post-conferences include both
the teacher's goals and the principal's views. She emphasized
how important it is for administrators to spend time in the
classroom.
SENATOR HUGGINS provided an example of evaluation benchmarks.
MS. SMITH said in most cases there are timelines throughout the
year for these conversations.
SENATOR HUGGINS asked how many teachers did not get tenure in
Fairbanks.
MS. SMITH said she is not privy to that information. She shared
that tenure is a big deal to new teachers.
SENATOR HUGGINS agreed tenure is important. He restated his
question about the number of teachers in Fairbanks that were
denied tenure.
9:28:11 AM
CHAIR STEVENS suggested they will research the numbers of
teachers that did not receive tenure.
SENATOR GARDNER asked how many teachers quit before they were to
receive tenure.
CHAIR STEVENS hoped those statistics are available.
SENATOR HUGGINS said 50 percent leave the teaching profession
within five years.
9:29:22 AM
WILLIAM ERNST, Teacher, Fairbanks North Star Borough, Fairbanks,
Alaska, voiced opposition to HB 162. He shared his involvement
with the teacher association and with the teacher evaluation
committee in Fairbanks. He said he is not in favor of extending
tenure for an extra two years. He provided the history of tenure
and what other states do. He maintained that delaying tenure
will hinder the recruitment and retention of new teachers. He
shared that young teachers are leaving the state due to the new
retirement system and high medical and energy costs. Delaying
tenure would be the third strike.
He said the three-year tenure period is working and provides
security for teachers. He opined that having a variety of tenure
policies is a disadvantage.
SENATOR HUGGINS recalled when the tenure policy was increased
from two to three years. He asked how teachers reacted to that
change.
MR. ERNST opined that it did not change anything and it was in
line with national standards. A change from three to five years
will have a negative effect. Only Missouri, Indiana, and Ohio
have tenure laws past three years.
SENATOR HUGGINS said there was no flight of teachers out of
state when the benefit program changed.
MR. ERNST commented on the two teacher retirement systems.
SENATOR HUGGINS did not think a change in tenure would
facilitate teachers leaving. He opined that tenure is a non-
event.
MR. ERNST agreed. It said it is an administrator's job to make
sure teachers are competent. Extending tenure two years has no
benefits. He noted tenure is a different process at the
university level.
9:41:27 AM
CHAIR STEVENS said the bill will be discussed again on April 2.
He set HB 162 aside.
9:41:35 AM
There being nothing further to come before the committee, Chair
Stevens adjourned the Senate Education Standing Committee at
9:41 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 01_HB162_BillText_VersionUA.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 02_HB162_SponsorStatement.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 03_HB162 FiscalNote.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 04_HB162_Sectional.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 05_HB162_ExplanationofChanges_revised.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 06_HB162_Support Doc_ECS_TeacherQualityTenureStudy_2011.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 07_HB162_Support Doc_Time Mag. Artical Nov. 2008.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 08_HB162_Support Doc_The Next American 10-23-2012.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 09_HB162_Support Doc_Pro & Con_updated 02-05-2013.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 10_HB162_Support Doc_ShouldTeachersGetTenure_Updated 02-05-2013.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |
| 11_HB162_NEA_Opposed.pdf |
SEDC 3/31/2014 8:00:00 AM |
HB 162 |