Legislature(2019 - 2020)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/03/2019 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Education Data Analysis | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
April 3, 2019
9:02 a.m.
9:02:29 AM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair von Imhof called the Senate Finance Committee
meeting to order at 9:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Natasha von Imhof, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Peter Micciche
Senator Donny Olson
Senator Mike Shower
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Click Bishop
Senator Bill Wielechowski
ALSO PRESENT
Mark Foster, Public Policy Analyst, Mark Foster and
Associates; Senator Cathy Giessel; Senator Gary Stevens;
Senator Mia Costello; Senator Chris Birch.
SUMMARY
PRESENTATION: EDUCATION DATA ANALYSIS
Co-Chair von Imhof relayed that she had invited a public
policy analyst to the committee as she considered education
to be one of the most important // She remarked that while
// Specifically as it evaluated // She had served on the
Anchorage School Board for a term.
Co-Chair von Imhof continued her opening remarks. The
previous year she had considered education data on poverty
and // After considering the economic impacts on schools,
she had observed and concluded that schools with similar
poverty levels, the // National data showed the same
trends. She questioned how the state could focus //
Co-Chair von Imhof introduced Mark Foster, former CEO of //
^PRESENTATION: EDUCATION DATA ANALYSIS
9:05:52 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof discussed housekeeping.
9:06:09 AM
MARK FOSTER, PUBLIC POLICY ANALYST, MARK FOSTER AND
ASSOCIATES, discussed the presentation, "K-12 In Alaska:
Investing in Effective Measures to Ensure Student Success
in Life," (copy on file).
Mr. Foster showed Slide 2, "Overview":
How are Alaskan Students Doing on Standardized
Tests?
? NAEP & PEAKS, 4th & 8th Grade Reading/ELA &
Math
? What drives the variation in standardized test
scores?
? Poverty & Standardized Test Scores
? How do we measure effective teaching?
? Growth & Proficiency
? Which schools have students who are performing well
above expectations?
? What do local superintendents report as the key
factors driving student assessments?
? What does the national/international research say?
? Summary recommendations for Alaska
9:07:22 AM
Mr. Foster discussed Slide 3, "Disclosures, Caveats &
Limitations":
Disclosures
1. Mark A Foster & Associates (MAFA) has been retained
by Senator von Imhof to assist in the compilation and
analysis of what drives student success and what
education initiatives look most promising to deliver
effective, efficient and affordable education services
for all Alaskan students
2. Mark Foster was appointed to fill a short-term
vacancy on the Anchorage
School Board, Seat A (October 2018-April 2019).
3. Mark Foster served as the Director, Office of
Management & Budget, and CFO for the Anchorage School
District from 2012-2016. Mr. Foster was the project
manager on the Evidence Based Model for ASD (April 4,
2016).
4. MAFA has consulted for a wide range of private and
public sector clients across multiple sectors in
Alaska, U.S. and Internationally since 1994.
5. Mark Foster graduated from Lathrop High School in
Fairbanks in 1979.
Caveats & Limitations
1. NAEP and PEAKS Standards Based Tests provide one
summative approach to assessing student academic
performance. Variation in student test scores are
frequently correlated with poverty and related
factors. The Gates Foundation
Measuring Effective Teaching Project and subsequent
research supports the use of student growth and
proficiency as one domain to assess the value that
teachers and schools contribute toward student
academic success.
2. Standards Based Tests are modestly correlated with
success in life (Raj Chetty)
3. Social skills tend to be better predictors of
success in life (Kirabo Jackson, Raj
Chetty)
9:08:41 AM
Mr. Foster referenced Slide 4, "How are Alaskan Students
Doing on Student Standards Based Assessments?" The slide
showed a data table reflecting National Assessment of
Educational Progress (NAEP). He emphasized that his slides
would show progress over time, growth in student
achievement from the fourth to the eighth grade rather than
a snapshot in time.
9:09:36 AM
Mr. Foster reviewed Slide 5, "K-12 Progress to Date AK
Student Growth & Achievement: NAEP Reading," which showed a
graph of 4 to 8 grade reading scale score growth versus
th
8 grade reading scale score. He relayed that he had
examined the growth of the NAEP scores in students, across
thth
the United States, from the 4 to the 8 grade (2013-2017).
th
Those numbers were then compared to the 8 grade reading
scale score. The chart showed that Alaska started from a
low base but showed high growth on the scale score. He
noted that going back in time it was possible to see a
persistent pattern over the previous 15 to 16 years. Alaska
had tended to be one of the leading states in growth. He
submitted that the state was in the high growth quadrant.
9:12:00 AM
Senator Olson thanked Mr. Foster for touching on an
important subject. He observed that there was growth on the
graph and brought of the issue of math and writing scores.
Mr. Foster said that math scores would be covered in future
slides.
9:12:36 AM
Mr. Foster spoke to Slide 6, "K-12 Progress to Date AK
Student Growth & Achievement: NAEP Math," which showed a
graph of math scores. The slide reflected that the state in
the low base and low growth quadrant and had a lot of room
for improvement. He said that math remained a challenge
thth
across districts, from the 4 through the 8 grade. He
encouraged the committee to examine this area when
determining how children could be better served.
9:13:34 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof had found through research that with
reading and language arts, there were outside influences
such as museum trips, plays, theatre, and reading. She
furthered that oftentimes students had less exposure to
math outside of school, and the teacher was the sole
provider of math concepts. She mentioned the concept of
"grit" being applicable to math outcomes.
9:14:39 AM
Senator Hoffman considered math and reading and noted that
the state used to be under a state-operated school system
that dictated what schools taught. The method had not been
effective. He referenced SB 35, which had changed the
systems to give school districts the authority to set
curricula. He wondered what Mr. Foster thought of the two
systems.
Senator Hoffman continued. He recalled that Senator Stevens
had made comments under Special Orders on the Senate Floor
pertaining to the effectiveness of the schools in the
state.
Mr. Foster welcomed the opportunity to address Senator
Hoffman's remarks when he considered the slide showing a
map of school districts.
9:16:43 AM
Senator Micciche asked about the significance of the arrow
on Slides 5 and 6.
Mr. Foster stated that the arrow represented the
aspirational goal to move into the high quadrant.
9:17:04 AM
Mr. Foster turned to Slide 7, "ALASKA PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION FOR ALASKAN SCHOOLS (PEAKS)."
Mr. Foster advanced to Slide 8, "PEAKS Test Results 2017-
2018/ELA Grades 4 and 8/Percent Proficient per School: 4th
Grade English Language Arts," which showed a map of Alaska
peppered with color bubbles that reflected percentage of
proficiency. The slide was plotted by school; the size of
the plot was the number of students that had taken the
test. He highlighted Unalakleet, Kenny Lake, and Kodiak as
schools that continued to provide superior results in early
reading. He noted that Southeast showed mostly high
proficiency. He related that half of the variation in
proficiency was poverty driven.
9:20:14 AM
Mr. Foster looked at Slide 9, "PEAKS Test Results 2017-
2018/ELA Grades 4 and 8/Percent Proficient per School: 8th
Grade English Language Arts," which showed a map of Alaska
th
with the colored bubbles reflecting a pattern of where 4
th
to 8 grade reading improved and places that had not
improved. He pointed to more proficiency in Southeast and
Kodiak, as well as along the Railbelt. He lamented that
there was still persistent low proficiency in lower income
areas of Anchorage and other areas of the state.
9:20:47 AM
Co-Chair Stedman looked at Southeast Alaska on the map. He
thought it appeared that the disparity was predominantly
between rural and urban, native and non-native communities.
He countered that Prince of Whales Island was non-native
and was in the red. He looked at Kake, which was
th
predominantly Alaska Native, and was green in 4 grade,
th
changing to red in the 8 grade. He wondered whether the
scores would be the same if other years were used for the
aggregate.
Co-Chair von Imhof asked to keep in mind that 2017 was the
first year of PEAKS testing. He said that statewide MAPS
scores would also be discussed.
9:23:18 AM
Mr. Foster offered that the state tests available were the
ones that had been plotted. He addressed Co-Chair Stedman's
question about a similar pattern over time. He considered
communities he was familiar with and contended that
patterns tended to be consistent. He used Skagway as a
classic example of a community of high support for students
and education. There was not a rich, broad data set over
time; rather, there was an attempt to validate the
available samples as reasonable robust for comparison. He
argued that there was persistence over time for community
that were experiencing success.
9:24:32 AM
Co-Chair Stedman looked at Ketchikan on the map and noted
there was an orange dot over a green dot. He wondered
whether each dot represented a separate school.
Mr. Foster replied in the affirmative.
9:25:10 AM
Senator Olson compared the map on Slide 9 to the map on
Slide 8. He observed that Unalaska and Sand Point had both
gone to green and wondered how that had been achieved.
Mr. Foster stated that teachers had helped students grow,
and the students had gained proficiency relative to where
th
they had been in the 4 grade.
Senator Olson surmised that good teachers were the secret.
Mr. Foster agreed that they were one important factor to
success.
9:26:04 AM
Mr. Foster reviewed slide 10, "What drives the variation in
test scores?"
1. Test scores reflect poverty/affluence; frequently
around ? of the variation in test scores reflect the
household and neighborhood challenges associated with
poverty
2. The Gates Foundation Project, "Measuring Effective
Teaching" focuses on actual test scores less the
predicted test score (based on social-economic
demographics) to assess how well teachers are helping
all of their students learn and grow, regardless of
where they start.
Mr. Foster thought it was important to be consistently
mindful of the variation in test scores. He said that
across Alaska and U.S. data sets, half of the variation in
test scores reflected poverty, and poverty related factors,
in households and neighborhoods; the combination of the two
factors tended to be significant in test scores. He thought
it was important to measure the difference between how well
students were doing, and how well they would be expected to
do under the weight of poverty. The Gates Foundation had
examined the matter in 2014 and had concluded the best way
to measure a school and a teachers contribution was to
consider relative proficiency related to the students
economic standing.
9:27:45 AM
Senator Hoffman had travelled extensively throughout the
state and estimated he had visited over 200 communities in
the state. He agreed that high levels of unemployment,
poverty, and parental involvement were key factors in
student achievement. Another factor that rose to the top
was teacher turnover. The turnover rate in rural Alaska had
become astonishing in the previous years. He shared that
many students asked teachers at the end of the school year
whether they would be coming back to teach. He believed
that the problem of teacher retention, and the issues
associated with retention, was a major contributing factor
in low proficiency.
9:30:18 AM
Senator Micciche looked at the Kenai Peninsula, and noted
that communities had come together to offer homework help
and other programs. He wondered whether Mr. Foster had
evaluated other factors in highly impoverished areas that
might have proved successful.
Mr. Foster answered in the affirmative.
9:31:15 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof agreed with Senator Hoffman and thought
the trend needed to be addressed. She considered the many
factors related to teacher retention in rural areas of the
state.
Senator Hoffman suggested cultivating teachers within the
communities could be a solution.
Co-Chair von Imhof agreed.
9:33:01 AM
Mr. Foster reviewed Slide 11, "Student Achievement and
Poverty Are Highly Correlated across the U.S." He asserted
that the pattern in Alaska was like that of the pattern in
the United States. He pointed out that the map of the
United States on the left showed the percentage of school
aged children living in poverty, by school district. The
map on the right showed the average test scores, by school
district. He observed that poverty was the primary driver
in the difference in test scores across the country. He
encouraged members to be mindful that there were
significant challenges in getting children to high levels
of proficiency.
9:34:06 AM
Mr. Foster showed Slide 12, "Student Achievement and
Poverty Are Highly Correlated Across Alaska," which showed
4 graphs. He relayed that looking at test scores against
the percentage of economically disadvantaged in English
thth
Language Arts and Math, 4 through 8 grade, showed a
consistent pattern for all schools in the state; a lot of
dispersion around the general pattern following poverty. He
noted that he had investigated the schools that performed
at high levels regardless of economics. He said that places
that performed well despite the patterns of poverty could
be found across the state.
9:35:10 AM
Mr. Foster reviewed Slides 15 through 18:
• "K-12 Progress to Date Student Assessments - AK
PEAKS English Language Arts 4th Grade"
• K-12 Progress to Date Student Assessments - AK
th
PEAKS English Language Arts 8 Grade
• K-12 Progress to Date Student Assessments AK
th
PEAKS Math 4 Grade
• K-12 Progress to Date Student Assessments AK
th
PEAKS Math 8 Grade
Mr. Foster explained that the slides showed places that
were doing well relative to the patters of poverty. He said
that the superintendents in those districts had been asked
about the methods used to inspire student success.
9:35:50 AM
Mr. Foster advanced to Slide 19, "Measuring Effective
Teaching English Language Arts (ELA) Growth & Proficiency
7th to 8th Grade," which showed a graph entitled 'Growth
vs. Proficiency - 7th to 8th Grade MATH PEAKS Assessment.'
He said that the slide offered an example of measuring
effective teaching related to how far student were growing
in in percentage proficiency, how many more students were
thth
becoming proficient from the 7 to the 8 grade, and how
well students were doing relative to what would be expected
based on students economic status. He noted that some of
the higher scoring students were looking into vocational
and technical education in the middle school years,
preparing for jobs rather than a strictly academic program.
The academic result associated with vocational and
technical programs were high.
9:37:07 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof interjected that the Lower Yukon school
district was partnering with the Anchorage school district,
purchasing a hotel on Lake Hood to send students into
Anchorage to attend classes at a career center in
Anchorage. She added that the King Career Center had
switched from a part-time to a full-time school. Students
could attend the center and take all the courses necessary
to graduate from high school. She relayed that teaching a
culturally relevant and engaging curriculum was a great
benefit to students.
9:39:50 AM
Senator Micciche felt that charter schools did not
represent a cross-section of a school district. He said
that his daughters school, Aurora Borealis, served
predominately low-poverty, high performing students. He
relayed that another daughter went to a public school where
teachers energy was spent on issues unrelated to educating
students; i.e., behavioral issues and other. He wondered
whether there was data for any public school that provided
best practice elements to a larger, general population of
students.
Mr. Foster directed Senator Micciche to Slide 16. The
parentheses showed the number of students tested. He noted
that Mirror Lake, where 198 students were tested, was doing
well comparative to what was expected relative to its
diverse population. He added that even the charter schools
were doing better than expected, even with low poverty.
9:42:37 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof referenced Slide 17 and pointed to the
numbers for Baxter and Klatt. She related that PEAKS
rdth
testing began in 3 grade and went through 10 grade. She
said that looking at the scores in terms of growth from one
year to the next would reveal the strengths and weaknesses
within schools, which would be helpful.
9:44:17 AM
Co-Chair Stedman looked at Slide 17, and asked Mr. Foster
to discuss the correlations. He thought the squared numbers
seemed low.
Mr. Foster stated that with smaller sample sizes, there was
more dispersion in the data.
Co-Chair Stedman thought it would be helpful to have the
charts reprinted to identify schools in specific areas. He
wanted to be able to identify the schools in his district.
Co-Chair von Imhof stated that she was hoping to have the
charts interactively available on the Senate Finance
Committee website.
9:46:03 AM
Co-Chair Stedman considered previous questions and Senator
Hoffman's comments about teacher longevity. He expressed
concern for students that advanced beyond the help parents
could offer academically.
9:47:09 AM
Senator Micciche asked to go back to Slide 17. He looked at
the trend line, and assumed it was the mean. He referenced
Co-Chair Stedman's remarks. He noted that his kids had all
had the same teachers. He considered the relationships
versus the turnover rate as discussed by Senator Hoffman.
He did not know how to address the problem but thought the
instability of high teacher turnover was an important part
of the education discussion. He wondered whether there was
a way to overlay something over those challenged districts
that could compensate for the instability. He wondered
whether the private sector could provide more stability.
Mr. Foster stated that part of the conversations with
superintendents had been to ponder what was driving
superior results as well as the challenged they faced. He
said that rural districts, with high teacher turnover
rates, had a lot of challenges preparing kids for success
in life.
Mr. Foster showed Slide 22, "What do local subject matter
experts tell us when we ask, what is driving your superior
results?"":
Rural Considerations:
?Rural districts with high teacher turnover rates
often graduate fewer than half of their students, and
their students have significantly lower reading [and
math] proficiency
?Finding ways to engage students, with place-based
learning and courses that incorporate local culture
and industry, is critical in making learning more
relevant for students, teachers and the community
Railbelt / Southeast Considerations:
?Highly experienced & effective teachers
?Community of parents that value education
?A generous and supportive municipality
?Kids that respond to our practices; work hard, desire
to do well not only as a reflection of their own
academic achievement but also a reflection of their
school and community
?The more we have, the more we can do for our kids
?Instability in finance and policy are our biggest
threat to continued success
9:50:10 AM
Senator Micciche noted that the mean was significantly
separated, looking at the Railbelt versus Southeast. He
wondered how the Railbelt competed nationally.
Mr. Foster offered that there were preliminary maps that
would be made available. He added that given the poverty,
English Language learners, and Special Education prevalence
in Southeast and the Railbelt, they were comparable with
national schools with similar conditions.
9:51:32 AM
Senator Shower asked whether Mr. Foster had historic data
that was comparative. He wondered about trends, and whether
anything had changed.
Mr. Foster replied that he had looked at the NAEP data,
given its relative stability as a test. State tests had
varied overtime, which made comparisons a challenge. He
said that sample sizes in the state were relatively small
and a difference in a few dozen could skew results. He
thought that NEAP was likely the best back cast but that it
did not have a long history in the state.
9:53:16 AM
Senator Shower wanted to see past data. He thought it would
be interesting. He spoke to the size of Alaskan school
districts. He made a correlation with Alaska State Troopers
and teacher turnover. He asked if there was a consideration
of reducing school district size.
Mr. Foster stated that there was a slide coming up that
outlined recommendations.
9:54:52 AM
Senator Olson referenced Mr. Foster's point about early
literacy. He asked about the importance of Pre-K education
such as Head Start.
Mr. Foster offered that Pre-K can be very effective in
helping children from challenging environments. He said
that Pre-K had also been determined to help children later
in life to find employment and raise families.
9:56:35 AM
Mr. Foster highlighted the rural and Railbelt and Southeast
considerations. He thought clearly there was agreement that
effective teachers and small class sizes were key. He
thought the challenge was that it was hard to attract and
retain effective teachers in many communities. He thought
some of the reasons were related to specific factors in
those communities. The challenge was how to bring together
the groups that had an interest in making sure students had
an equal opportunity to have an equal education. He said
that the test results indicated that the state had a lot of
room for improvement. He stressed that the focus should be
on teachers and making sure that they were well prepared
and effective in a wide range of community settings.
9:58:24 AM
Mr. Foster showed Slide 24, "K-12 Investing in Effective
Measures to Support Student Success in Life: National &
International Research (Hattie)," which showed support for
the conclusions of state superintendents. He said that the
issue had been debated vigorously. He stressed that the
bigger issue was how to get effective teachers and small
class sizes so that all children had an opportunity to
learn.
9:59:26 AM
Mr. Foster showed Slide 26, "Rigorous U.S. "Big Data"
Research Supports Highly Effective Teachers + Small Class
Size. He offered that researched showed that a high-impact
teacher could make a significant difference, in a few
school years, for all students.
10:00:21 AM
Mr. Foster discussed Slide 27, "Reducing Class Size +
Highly Effective Teachers = Large Long-Term Returns." He
said that the all the suggested items were necessary to
bring about meaningful change.
10:00:40 AM
Mr. Foster showed Slide 29, "Successful State-Local
Partnership"
10:01:00 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof asked to go back to Slide 27. She
pointed out that the study had shown that small class size,
coupled with highly effective teachers, made the largest
impact.
10:01:47 AM
Senator Shower asked Mr. Foster to expand on the top bullet
on slide 27. He asked how a highly effective teacher was
measured.
Mr. Foster stated he had initiated a dialogue with the
commissioner of the Department of Education and Early
Development (DEED) on how to measure teacher effectiveness.
He said that the state needed to do more to attract and
retain high impact teachers. He thought this was
particularly relevant at the state level.
Senator Shower asked about the first bullet that referenced
changing schools in "specific ways.
Mr. Foster said that Professor Chetty had concluded that
small class sizes as well as effective teachers was the
most effective way to make a difference in childrens
lives.
10:04:13 AM
Co-Chair Stedman referenced comments about effective
teachers. He discussed teachers fitting in within the
communities they served. He discussed the cultural
differences in the state. He asked what was being done to
encourage Alaskan kids to become teachers and then come
back to serve their home communities.
10:05:52 AM
Senator Hoffman thought another key factor directly
attributed to teacher turnover was transient teachers. He
said that when 90 to 100 percent of teachers failed to grow
roots in communities it could subconsciously affect their
work as educators. He mentioned improvements that had been
made with the retention of healthcare workers in rural
areas, through educating locals in healthcare positions,
who then remained in the community for significant amounts
of time. He wondered if a similar template could be applied
to educators.
10:08:02 AM
Mr. Foster made two points in conclusion. He asserted that
success would require partnership between the state and
local communities. State support for effective teachers,
small class sizes, culturally relevant education, and early
literacy were critical components to success.
10:08:58 AM
Mr. Foster showed Slide 30, "Recommendation":
Target Investment
? Small class size
? Effective teachers
? Early Literacy
Accountability
? Every child deserves one year of progress for each
year of school
Mr. Foster encouraged the committee to target investments
in small class sizes. He encouraged learning form the
example of the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium,
where resources were focused, local communities were
engaged, and ensuring effective teachers in classrooms.
10:10:02 AM
Senator Shower mentioned a policy recently instituted in
Arizona that had experienced success in reading
proficiency. He agreed that each child deserved one year of
progress but wondered whether some children should be held
back if they were not prepared to advance to the next
grade. He asked whether a performance-based system for
tenure for teachers had been discussed.
Mr. Foster stated that historic research suggested that
grade retention policies based on proficiency tended to
have negative results over time. He added that recent
analysis suggested that grade retention policies tended to
disproportionality effect young mothers, lacking in college
education, and their children. He urged caution on crafting
policy that raised the bar for holding children back for
them to gain mastery. He noted that focusing on behavior,
rather than academics, when considering holding a child
back, was a more effective approach.
10:14:01 AM
Mr. Foster thought that a better job needed to be done on
measuring teacher effectiveness, and that 3 to 5 years data
was needed to reliably measure teacher effectiveness. He
felt that in Alaska, given the wide variety and the smaller
sample data, it could take up to 5 years to identify high
impact teachers.
10:15:11 AM
Co-Chair Stedman referenced the subject of teacher turnover
in rural Alaska. He thought it was important to mention
that it took time to integrate someone into a community and
2 to 3 years was not long enough. He stressed that it could
take a decade to integrate into a community, particularly
when considering cultural differences.
10:16:31 AM
Senator Wilson thought education was as complex and issue
as healthcare. He lamented that there was not matrix for
accountability for low performing teachers. He spoke to the
myriad of challenges facing Alaskas school districts. He
wondered whether models that had proven successful in other
parts of the country could be applied to the state.
Mr. Foster recommended that the legislature understand
where local communities were coming from; talk to local
subject matter experts to understand what works and what
does not and validate that information against national
case studies. He said that outside models would need to be
fashioned for local effectiveness. He stated that he had
experienced more success over time by staring with a local
model and building on that. He offered his personal
experience working in public health for decades with the
Native Tribal Health Consortium. He shared that he had
looked at what was happening, on the ground, in each
community to identify the challenges. He relayed that the
fixes were not always simple and could involve a change of
governance but always included accountability measures. He
urged the committee to listen to local experts.
10:20:44 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof thought Senator Wilson had identified an
important point: what the state could do about education as
it contemplated the budget. She asserted that the state
could invest in broadband, explore tribal compact
agreements, work with the University to aggressively
campaign for students to become teachers in their
communities, and bring together stakeholders in the
different regions to discuss ideas and formulate a plan.
She noted that the implementation of any plan could take a
decade, or two, to yield results.
10:22:34 AM
Senator Micciche said that none of the information in the
presentation was new. He wondered whether a think tank
existed that was exploring the issues. He spoke issues
related to Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACEs) and
lamented that in many parts of the state it was impossible
for children to come to school ready to learn because of
challenges to basic survival. He thought that an isolated
think tank made up of the right people could help; the
school system could not solve all the problems alone.
10:24:32 AM
Senator Shower thought part of the solution was more
teachers. He thought the findings were thin and had hoped
to be presented with more solutions. He thought there might
be a two-tier system: one for the Railbelt, and one for
rural Alaska. He stressed that there were geographical and
cultural issues that were different from one area to the
next. He suggested that there were two separate groups in
Alaska that needed to be taught, he reiterated the issue of
cultural differences.
Mr. Foster looked at a study that contemplated school
systems with diverse populations and what they had done to
address performance. He said that the models used had
allowed schools to have autonomy, with accountability back
to the central funding source. He believed that the best
way forward included listening to local communities when
they shared what they needed to be successful, combined
with funders who provided adequate funds while demanding
accountability, and allowing enough time for results.
10:27:26 AM
Senator Olson was alarmed with his home school district
having progressed into non-graded homework. He said that in
his experience homework had provided discipline. He
wondered about studies that investigated homework and
graduation rates.
Mr. Foster had not done independent research on the issue
of homework. He was biased in the direction of graded
homework, based on his schooling experience.
10:28:49 AM
Senator Wilson was hearing two different things. He thought
Mr. Foster was saying the state was so unique it could not
use other systems that worked in other states, while human
development was similar across the planet. He wanted to
know what could be done sooner rather than later to correct
the downward curve of education. He thought Alaska was not
so special that it could not use other techniques from
around the world.
Mr. Foster offered that there were many lessons that could
be imported from out of state, but if the local community
was not willing and able to import the lesson it would not
have an impact. He thought in order to be successful, the
local community needed to be engaged in serious substantial
dialogue about what was needed for the children of the
community to be successful. He contended that in order to
really build a successful model, it had to be built from
the local community upward.
10:32:10 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof added that there were things the state
could do sooner rather than later. She said that
educational funding could be used to decrease class sized
by hiring more teachers versus administrators, and that
seniority rules should be examined so that good, new
teachers can be retained over less effective teachers that
have seniority. She said that funding could be tied to
accountability measures once the trends became more
illuminating.
10:33:30 AM
Senator Hoffman considered the village of Tuntutuliak,
which was an isolated community and cost approximately $350
for a roundtrip flight from Bethel. He said that a teacher
recruited to the village would be transported by 4-wheeler,
as the community was connected by boardwalks, to whatever
housing was available without running water. He furthered
that then the teacher would go to the store for basic
needs; no spices, little fresh produce would be available,
and a gallon of milk would cost $12. In September all the
teenaged boys would be absent from class for two weeks
because they would need to go moose hunting and would be
intermittently hunting throughout the year to subsist. The
teacher would have no luxuries in their downtime, no movies
or restaurants. He said that the communities would continue
with their cultural activities regardless of the teachers
expectations. He perceived that being paid $35,000 per year
to be isolated for 9 months was a grim reality for a new
teacher from outside of the community. He wondered how any
teacher was expected to be eager to enter that reality, let
alone an effective teacher.
10:37:23 AM
Senator Hoffman continued his comments. He recalled that
Senator Stevens had a daughter that taught in rural Alaska
and had conveyed to her father the drastic differences of
teaching in a rural community versus living on Kodiak
Island. He argued that people in rural communities loves
their way of life and the challenge was to address the
cultural shock for incoming teachers.
10:38:51 AM
Senator Shower declared that the lowest income Alaskans
were affected the most by the size of the dividend. He
thought that this point was germane to the conversation. He
mentioned that Mt. Edgecumbe School, which had a high
native population, had done very well. He wondered what
could be learned from that school.
Mr. Foster had not had a chance to consider data for
individual schools and did not have an informed opinion
about Mt. Edgecumbe.
10:41:00 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof thought it would be interesting to look
at Mt. Edgecumbe, Galena, Nenana, and Bethel. She
referenced Senator Hoffman's comments and remarked that
there was a saying, If you give a man a fish, through a
$3000 dividend, you feed him for a day or a couple of
months. You teach a man to fish, and you feed him for a
lifetime.
10:41:39 AM
Co-Chair Stedman thought that care should be taken when
discussing Mt. Edgecumbe School. He related that the school
brought in high performing students from all over the state
into a very closed environment. He thought that comparing
the school to other schools in the state was unfair. He
said that the schools performance was commendable and that
the attitude of the students was geared toward discipline
and academic achievement. He believed that it was important
to be cognitive of the structure of the school when
comparing it to other schools in the state.
Senator Shower agreed that everything should be taken with
a grain of salt. He thought that successful schools should
be examined, particularly for the Native population, to
replicate successful practices elsewhere in the state.
10:45:13 AM
Senator Micciche relayed that the Alaska Native graduation
rate on the Kenai Peninsula was higher than the non-Alaska
Native population. He wanted to understand the correlation
with poverty and academic challenges. He thought that less
money was not the reason for poor academic results. He
believed it was a lack of skill, opportunity, motivation,
incentive, vision, and inspiration. He thought that those
were the real challenges of poverty-stricken places, not
lack of money, and he wondered if there was a way to
counteract those challenges. He asserted that in some cases
there was a lack of a role model. He said that he had no
way of understanding the challenges faced by rural Alaska
and that the challenges there were not comparable to the
rest of the country.
Mr. Foster offered that the issue was being explored. He
said that the results were being investigated on an
individual student level to understand the risk factors and
the tailwinds that were making a difference in children's
lives. He reminded the committee that the presentation was
aggregated at the school level and not for individual
students. He said that the best way to get information on
individual students was to talk to local high-impact
teachers.
10:48:42 AM
Co-Chair von Imhof added that there were two organizations:
The Mat-Su Health Foundation, which was singlehandedly
paying for a behavioral health therapist to be in 9 pilot
schools to help families with any challenges that might be
affected by behavioral health issues. She added that the
United Way in Anchorage had helped fund several school
counselors in schools to provide support in several areas.
She related that positive effects were being seen in
attendance, behavior, and academic outcomes. She lamented
that the practice was costly and required significant
cooperation between local and state agencies.
10:50:30 AM
Senator Olson asked what kind of influence mission schools
had in the state.
Mr. Foster replied that an independent study had not been
done. He said that the mission schools stood out in the
data. He thought that it would be interesting to test
whether the correlation matched the national data. He
believed that there were potential lessons to be learned
from mission schools about longevity and the value placed
on education.
Co-Chair von Imhof discussed housekeeping.
ADJOURNMENT
10:53:02 AM
The meeting was adjourned at 10:53 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 040319 Recommendations to Improve K-12 Across Alaska.pdf |
SFIN 4/3/2019 9:00:00 AM |
K-12 Education |