Legislature(2021 - 2022)SENATE FINANCE 532
01/25/2022 01:00 PM 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 | |
| SB111 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 111 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE FINANCE COMMITTEE
January 25, 2022
12:57 p.m.
12:57:26 PM
CALL TO ORDER
Co-Chair Bishop called the Senate Finance Committee meeting
to order at 12:57 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Click Bishop, Co-Chair
Senator Bert Stedman, Co-Chair
Senator Lyman Hoffman
Senator Donny Olson (via teleconference)
Senator Natasha von Imhof
Senator Bill Wielechowski
Senator David Wilson
MEMBERS ABSENT
None
ALSO PRESENT
Senator Roger Holland, Sponsor; Senator Tom Begich,
Sponsor; Shelley Hughes, Senator, Juneau; Deena Bishop,
Superintendent, Anchorage School District; Michael Johnson,
Commissioner, Department Education and Early Development,
Juneau.
SUMMARY
SB 111 EARLY EDUCATION; READING INTERVENTION
SB 111 was HEARD and HELD in committee for
further consideration.
SENATE BILL NO. 111
"An Act relating to the duties of the Department of
Education and Early Development; relating to public
schools; relating to early education programs;
relating to funding for early education programs;
relating to school age eligibility; relating to
reports by the Department of Education and Early
Development; relating to reports by school districts;
relating to certification and competency of teachers;
relating to assessing reading deficiencies and
providing reading intervention services to public
school students enrolled in grades kindergarten
through three; relating to textbooks and materials for
reading intervention services; establishing a reading
program in the Department of Education and Early
Development; relating to school operating funds;
relating to a virtual education consortium; and
providing for an effective date."
1:03:25 PM
SENATOR ROGER HOLLAND, SPONSOR, discussed the presentation,
"Senate Bill 111; Alaska Academic Improvement and
Modernization Act; Presentation to Senate Finance on May
14, 2021" (copy on file). He discussed slide 2, "2019 NAEP
Scores by State (4th grade reading)." He addressed slide 3,
"This Isn't a New Issue."
1:05:27 PM
Senator Holland highlighted slide 4, "Florida The First
Mover." He stated that after enacting the program, Florida
nd
went from 32 place to among the top five in the nation in
fourth grade reading. He stressed that the program was so
successful that it was commonly referred to as the Florida
model as the idea circulated through the states.
Senator Holland pointed to slide 5, "Mississippi A Recent
Success." He furthered that Mississippi had taken similar
action that in turn improved their overall reading scores.
Senator Holland discussed slide 6, "Recent K-3 Reading
Survey Finding":
"Clearly this report shows that there is an
inconsistent approach to reading instruction across
our state with inadequate measures for quality
control. Alaska's students need focused, comprehensive
reading legislation grounded in science based reading
instruction and intervention for pre k through third
grade students"
Department of Education and Early Development
SB 111 is that legislation.
Senator Holland addressed slide 7, "Senate Bill 111
(Committee Bill)":
? Product of significant and spirited debate
? Developed from previous legislation
? Includes key components of Senate Bill 42 and Senate
Bill 8
? Which were built from the legislation going back to
at least 2014
? Features three main components
? Early education
? Evidence based reading instruction
? Virtual consortium
1:07:50 PM
SENATOR TOM BEGICH, SPONSOR, discussed slide 9, "Early
Education":
?Ensuring Students are Prepared to Learn
? Rewards districts for having high quality Pre K
by allowing qualifying programs to count students
at one-half an ADM
? Establishes a grant program for districts to
develop a high quality pre K program
? Recodifies the Parents as Teachers program
? Available to four and five year old children
that are not ready for kindergarten
Senator Begich highlighted slide 10, "Reading Intervention
Services":
?Testing with Purpose
?Up to three assessments per year for all K 3
students
?Helping students in need
?District designed interventions
?Individual reading improvement plans
?Delaying progression as an intervention of last
resort
?Parents always have the final decision
Senator Hoffman wondered whether it would be a funded or
unfunded mandate.
Senator Holland replied that it was the job of education.
He stressed that teachers must assess their students, and
believed that the proposal was simply a part of the
teachers jobs.
Senator Begich furthered that the department would fund and
create a universal testing for students. He stated that it
was a funded mandate because the Department of Education
and Early Development (DEED) would create a universal
assessment tool.
1:15:19 PM
Senator Wilson wondered about social promotion as it
related to the delayed progression of some students.
Senator Begich replied that the promotion did not affect
the current promotion policies within the districts. He
stated that the exception was that parents have the final
say within the bill.
1:17:06 PM
SHELLEY HUGHES, SENATOR, JUNEAU, explained that social
promotion would be damaging to a child on an emotional
level, because once they reach the higher grades there
would be a negative impact. She stated that studies showed
that the impact on social emotional development was
minimal, when applied at the kindergarten or first grade
level. She stressed that parents had the final decision.
Senator Wilson recalled that the states that had adopted
the policy early on had a strict promotion policy, which
was not in the current bill.
Senator Begich agreed. He stated that the bill preserved
the local control over promotional decisions. He stated
that the promotion policies in the other states were not
stricter, because there were numerous exemptions. That
information was applied to the bill based on the other
states best practices.
Senator Holland remarked that there was variation state to
state and agreed to provide the information about
progression from other states.
Senator Hughes reiterated that it was a policy call. She
shared that there was hesitation around a strict promotion
policy because the other states had a sudden hard
adjustment related to promotion which resulted in many
exceptions.
1:24:00 PM
Senator Holland addressed slide 11, "Reading Specialists
Program":
?Providing direct assistance and training for teachers
?DEED funded positions building expertise within
schools
?Evidence based training and testing requirements
for teachers
?DEED purchased textbooks for students
?Pilot program in 5 of the lowest performing
schools
Senator Hoffman stressed that teacher retention was
possibly the largest problem facing the lower performing
schools, particularly in his district. He wondered whether
the legislation addressed teacher retention.
Senator Begich stated that it was not, because there would
be separate legislation related to teacher retention. He
explained that the bill would provide support, which in
turn would be good for teacher retention.
1:30:16 PM
Senator Hughes stressed that the bill would provide support
for teachers. She stated that Mississippi teachers stated
that the program was very rewarding, so therefore they did
not leave the profession.
Senator Holland furthered that a large component of the
bill was the virtual consortium.
Senator Hughes pointed to slide 12, "Virtual Consortium":
?Leveraging Technology Gains
?Maintains a statewide learning management system
?Clearing house for professional development
courses
?Live assistance and training for teachers
Synchronous, asynchronous, and blended course
offerings across districts
?Builds off investments, training, and success gained
through the recent experience with virtual instruction
1:36:56 PM
Senator von Imhof felt that the legislation had lofty goals
and great ideas. She also felt that some of the objectives
would require great cost to the state.
1:40:05 PM
Co-Chair Bishop remarked that there were current efforts in
the budget to address internet broadband. He wondered
whether maybe there could be a utilization of some of the
new satellites to address access to teacher training.
Senator Hughes agreed that the bill was comprehensive, but
was merely the first step in addressing the main issues.
Senator Wilson remarked that he was not a large fan of
virtual learning, and noted that there were some learning
gaps with e-learning. He wanted to ensure that there was a
higher focus on ensuring that students do not fall behind
because of the e-learning issue.
Senator Hughes commented that there would be a serious
hiccup due to the learning during the pandemic. She
remarked that the bill required a standard.
1:46:41 PM
Senator Begich addressed one of the many areas of the needs
in education. He stressed the need to address the issue of
reading. He remarked that the virtual education component
was due to mixing and matching of resources.
1:50:06 PM
Co-Chair Bishop remarked that the governors budget had an
over $30 million increase in the Department of Public
Safety (DPS), and no one seemed to have an issue what that
funding. He felt that increasing the focus on reading
education might result in shrinking the public safety
budget.
Senator Holland highlighted slide 13, "Parents and
Districts in Control":
?Parental engagement and choice
?Required notification when a deficiency is
located
?At least 10 updates per year
?Encouragement for parent student reading plans
?Required parent teacher conference in the spring
if the student is still behind
?Parents always have the final say on progression
decisions
?Local Control
?Programs and policies are locally designed and
culturally responsive
?The Department provides oversight and support
Senator Holland pointed to slide 14, "Required Review of
Programs":
?All new programs sunset in 2034 unless extended
?Early education programs, reading intervention
services, reading specialists, and virtual
consortium
?Required annual reports to the legislature
?Parents as Teachers
?Reading progress of students
?Count of promotion with a deficiency or delayed
promotion
?Use of virtual consortium
?Required final report and recommendation to 38 the
legislature
Senator Wilson remarked that Parents as Teachers was one of
the only programs required in order for the state to
receive money from the Family First Services Act. He
wondered whether there was another program to supplement
that funding.
Senator Holland stressed that there were no easy answers
for the education problems in the state. He noted that the
proposal was based on what works in other states, and noted
that there would be cost, but something needed to be done
to stop failing the students in the state.
1:55:18 PM
AT EASE
1:58:15 PM
RECONVENED
DEENA BISHOP, SUPERINTENDENT, ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT,
testified in support of the bill. She responded to some
testimony. She stressed that literacy was a fundamental
right of all students in the state, and must become a no-
fail mission for all classrooms. She explained that
children were tougher and smarter than assumptions. She
felt that sometimes empathy for a childs home life
stripped the rigor from the classrooms. The family status
should not be the reason for their failure.
2:04:55 PM
Senator von Imhof asked whether the state had set standards
for reading and writing.
Ms. Bishop replied in the affirmative.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether those standards were
disseminated in all the districts in the state.
Ms. Bishop replied that the understanding of the standards
by all districts was marginal.
Senator von Imhof wondered who was responsible at the
district level for assimilating the standards.
Ms. Bishop said that an articulation in expectation ensured
that things got done. She remarked that the education
personnel turnover left the children without a clear focus.
Senator von Imhof asked whether the bill would change that
issue.
Ms. Bishop replied that the accountability outlined in the
bill would ensure that things get done.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether the accountability
included other curriculum outside of reading.
Ms. Bishop hoped that the government and community would
already have the expectation. She stressed that
measurements ensured accountability.
Senator von Imhof understood that pre pandemic and annual
statewide assessment exam had been changes to online. She
wondered whether it had been successful.
Ms. Bishop said that in 2016 the online assessment was
online.
Senator von Imhof asked whether all districts could
successfully administer and electronic test.
Ms. Bishop stated that her district had a paper and pencil
test, and an electronic test.
2:09:16 PM
Senator Wielechowski asked whether kids who liked school
did better academically.
Ms. Bishop said that success bred success.
Senator Wielechowski spoke to children who said they did
not like school. He was curious if more testing would make
school more enjoyable for children.
Ms. Bishop responded that the assessment were simple. She
stated that they were mostly based on observation.
Senator Hoffman expressed concern about the level playing
field, because many rural schools were considered
substandard.
Ms. Bishop replied that there will never be a level playing
field, so a system needed to be responsive to that unlevel
playing field.
2:17:38 PM
Senator von Imhof felt that the pilot project that brought
rural students to the cities. She remarked on grassroots
efforts where students were traveling to larger hubs. She
noted that the bill would bring reading teachers to
communities.
Ms. Bishop agreed.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether the bill could integrate
with the behavior of moving the students to larger hubs for
learning.
Ms. Bishop replied that older students traveled to the
hubs, so younger students would not be the best option for
plane travel.
Senator Wielechowski queried the research for top
indicators of student performance.
Ms. Bishop replied that top indicators of performance were
high expectations of teachers and strong support of
teachers to gain the knowledge needed to teach.
2:22:47 PM
Senator Wielechowski wondered how much the state would get
to that effort within the bill.
Ms. Bishop replied that policy established the
expectations.
Co-Chair Stedman asked about whether the mandate was had
current funding.
Ms. Bishop responded that the state funded public
education. The program offered support that was shown as a
need in education. Therefore, there was already funding to
teach the basics of education.
2:26:44 PM
Senator von Imhof stressed that districts had the ability
to prioritize a specific subject.
Ms. Bishop remarked that it was important that the state
policy on reading is essential to ensuring educational
success.
2:30:15 PM
MICHAEL JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT EDUCATION AND
EARLY DEVELOPMENT, JUNEAU, shared some history of the
importance of reading education in the state. He stressed
that every state should have high national standards.
Senator Hoffman wondered whether the intervention in the
Yupik School District was successful.
Commissioner Johnson replied that the intervention occurred
before his tenure, but stated that the Yupik School
District was still struggling.
Senator Hoffman wondered how SB 111 would help the Yupik
School District with reading, and asked if that district
would get special attention due to low performance in that
district.
Commissioner Johnson replied that the bill had funding for
four-year-old children to attend preschool to ensure they
have a head start on reading. The bill had several
requirements for appropriate cultural language and
components.
Senator Hoffman wanted to ensure that the statements had a
change to be proven true for the Yupik School District.
2:36:42 PM
Senator von Imhof remarked that there was deficit spending
in the governors budget, and required reductions in
spending. She wondered whether the Headstart programs were
preschool programs that were funded by the federal
government.
Commissioner Johnson replied in the affirmative.
Senator von Imhof queried the number of Headstart programs
in the rural districts.
Commissioner Johnson agreed to provide that information.
Senator von Imhof surmised that there were more than ten
programs.
Commissioner Johnson agreed.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether those students had
assessments to determine kindergarten readiness.
Commissioner Johnson stated that those districts could
provide assessment data.
Senator von Imhof wondered whether the bill would replace
the Headstart program, as well as other evaluations of the
Headstart program in order to determine the need for
another preschool option.
2:39:12 PM
Senator Wilson wondered whether the Parents as Teachers
program was eliminated, and asked if the bill was merely
mandating that program.
Commissioner Johnson replied that Parents as Teachers was
still in existence, and remarked that it was an effective
program.
Senator Wilson asked how much federal money was provided in
order for the program to exist in the state.
Commissioner Johnson agreed to provide that information,
but believed it was a state-funded program.
2:40:16 PM
Senator Wielechowski queried the reasons that Alaska was
the worst in the country for fourth grade reading.
Commissioner Johnson replied that it was based on national
data. He did not believe that there was one reason, but
many variables that did not compare well with the other
states. He stressed that the intent of the bill was to
cover the issue of Alaska potentially may not have policy
attached to funding like other states.
Senator Wielechowski did not want to assign blame, but
wanted to ensure that the problem was addressed. He felt
that it was important to know how to fix the problem.
Commissioner Johnson remarked that there were many things
that could be done to address the problem, but currently it
was important to apply just a number of solutions to begin
the process.
2:44:18 PM
Co-Chair Bishop wondered whether the ranking was based on
an apples to apples test across all fifty states.
Commissioner Johnson replied in the affirmative, but it was
a statistically sampled test.
Co-Chair Stedman asked whether there were discussions about
setting aside the FY 23 funds for reading enhancements.
Commissioner Johnson replied that DEED was encouraged that
the administration continued to support reading education
in their fiscal notes. He stressed that the State Board of
Education continued steadfast in urging continued support
for comprehensive reading legislation.
Co-Chair Bishop discussed the following day's agenda.
SB 111 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further
consideration.
ADJOURNMENT
2:48:59 PM
The meeting was adjourned at 2:48 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| CSSB111(EDC) Fiscal Notes Overview 5.12.2021.pdf |
HEDC 5/14/2021 8:00:00 AM SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Public Testimony Covington.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 130 Public Testimony Treadwell.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 130 |
| SB 111 Sectional Analysis version N.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SEDC 3/26/2021 9:00:00 AM SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Presentation 012522.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Public Testimony Brooks.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Bishop Deena - SB 111 Senate Finance Committee Testimony 012522.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 Head Start and Early Head Start Grants Allocations.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 1.25.2022 (S) FIN Hearing DEED Follow-Up.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |
| SB 111 DEED EARL 2022 Report.pdf |
SFIN 1/25/2022 1:00:00 PM SFIN 3/15/2022 9:00:00 AM |
SB 111 |