Legislature(1993 - 1994)
02/10/1993 01:40 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
February 10, 1993
1:40 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Steve Rieger, Chairman
Senator Bert Sharp, Vice-Chairman
Senator Mike Miller
Senator Johnny Ellis
Senator Judy Salo
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Jim Duncan
Senator Loren Leman
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 61
"An Act implementing certain recommendations of Alaska 2000
to improve the state's education system; and providing for
an effective date."
SB 59 (SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION & MAINTENANCE GRANTS) WAS
SCHEDULED BUT NOT HEARD THIS DATE.
SB 60 (APPROP:SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION GRANT FUND) WAS SCHEDULED
BUT NOT HEARD THIS DATE.
PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 61 - See HESS minutes dated 2/8/93.
SB 59 - See HESS minutes dated 3/2/93.
SB 60 - See HESS minutes dated 3/2/93.
WITNESS REGISTER
Vince Barry, Director
Education Program SUpport
Department of Education
801 West 10th Street, Suite 200
Juneau, Alaska 99801-1894
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed SB 61.
Mary Rubadeau, Assistant Superintendent
Kenai School District
148 North Binkley
Soldotna, Alaska 99669
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Richard Kronsberg
3511 Chiniak Bay Drive
Anchorage, Alaska 99515
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
David Schwantes
8148 East 4th Avenue
Anchorage, Alaska 99504
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Bonnie Barber, President
Fairbanks Education Association
3198 Judge Arend
Fairbanks, Alaska 99709
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Vernon Marshall
Executive Director
NEA-Alaska
114 Second Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Kathi McCord
1601 Hidden Lane
Anchorage, Alaska 99501
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Pamela Conrad, Teacher
P.O. Box 780
Palmer, Alaska 99645
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
John Cyr, Teacher
P.O. Box 873663
Wasilla, Alaska 99687
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 61.
Carl Rose, Executive Director
Association of Alaska School Boards
316 West 11th Street
Juneau, Alaska 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Supports Alaska 2000.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 93-10, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRMAN RIEGER called the Senate Health, Education and
Services Committee (HESS) to order at 1:40 p.m.
The only order of business that came before the committee
was SB 61 (IMPLEMENT ALASKA 2000 RECOMMENDATIONS).
VINCE BARRY, Director, Education Program Support, Department
of Education, was first to testify. He informed the
committee that he was a principal for the Lake and Peninsula
School District and was the Superintendent of Tanana School
District. Mr. Barry referred to the question "What would
you do to improve education in Alaska" and said first, he
would pay attention to the expectations of the parents.
Second, he would pay attention to the research in eduction -
what works for kids and how do we know. Third, he would
implement the best education practices that have occurred
throughout Alaska and the nation. He informed the committee
he has been conducting a survey over the past nine years
throughout Alaska. He asked the same questions to over
2,000 parents, "Is it your expectation, as a parent, that
after thirteen years in school your child would be prepared
well enough to go on to further education and training."
The 2,000 parents responded "yes." Mr. Barry said he also
asked several other questions such as: Will students would
be prepared well enough to subsist? Will students be
prepared well enough to be trained on a job for an
apprenticeship? Will students be prepared well enough to
get into the military? Will students be prepared well
enough to get into a vocational two and four year programs?
The parents said "yes" to all of the questions and
questioned him as to what percentage of the kids can
currently do that. He said the answer is approximately 30
percent nationwide. Another 30 percent of high school aged
children are considered to be "in school dropouts," and
another 30 percent aren't in school at all. The last 10
percent can be rearranged into the three groups. Mr. Barry
said the task is to move up the middle 30 percent to the
higher 30 percent level and keep all of the high school
students in school. He continued to discuss research in
relation to middle schools and the "Equity 2000 Math
Program."
CHAIRMAN RIEGER referred to Mr. Barry's comment regarding
moving the middle 30 percent of students to the higher level
and asked if the task is to move up the middle 30 percent at
the expense of the top 30 percent. Mr. Barry indicated the
answer is "no." The task is to make sure every child
receives an education that is as good as an education that
any child in the world receives. He noted that wonderful
things are happening in many schools across the state.
SENATOR SALO said she agrees wonderful things are taking
place in relation to school reform and asked how the
provisions of Alaska 2000 and SB 61 fit into that. Mr.
Barry explained Alaska 2000 is one of the most wonderful
things to happen in his life in terms of thinking about the
kids in the State of Alaska and the state taking a
leadership role in the initiative. He said to him, the
promise of Alaska 2000 is on one hand 100 percent
expectation of the parents and on the other hand a 30, 40,
50, 60 or 70 percent delivery system which is a tremendous
caesium between the expectation of the parent and what
actually is occurring. Alaska 2000 closes that gap. He
also said Alaska 2000 is not a perfect approach to the needs
of education, it is what the people think that we should be
taking a look at. It doesn't preclude us from pursuing
academic excellence in any arena.
Number 236
MARY RUBADEAU, Assistant Superintendent, Kenai School
District, referred to the school improvement fund and said
she believes that out of all the aspects of SB 61, this has
the most benefit for districts which are involved in a
significant school restructuring and are at a lull in terms
of being able to provide the resources. Ms. Rubadeau
discussed changing junior high schools to middle schools.
She said she would like to be able to apply for school
improvement money and use it in a research and development
way.
Ms. Rubadeau explained that the Kenai School District is
currently looking at "school based decision making" as a
process for school improvement. A key to that is being able
to feed some of the projects through some resources such as
grant money. The projects then could be used or displayed
at other schools.
Ms. Rubadeau informed the committee that her district
supports the concept of increasing the school term. If the
learning time is increased, the learning rate will also
increase. The key would be the corresponding fiscal notes.
SENATOR SALO asked Ms. Rubadeau if she has information as to
what the attendance patterns are in the Kenai District. She
said her point is if there are a lot of kids currently not
in school the 180 days, making a 200 day requirement doesn't
fix anything. Ms. Rubadeau said she would send Senator Salo
the attendance information. She noted that the district had
to compile the attendance information as part of the school
district report card legislation. The attendance rate in
the Kenai District is very high and in some schools, it is
in the 90 percent range. Senator Salo asked if extra
curricular and school sponsored absences are included in the
report. Ms. Rubadeau informed the committee that those
absences aren't included because they are excused absences
which are considered an extension of the program. Senator
Salo referred to all excused absences and asked if they are
not revealed in the statistics. Ms. Rubadeau explained the
answer is "no." Only the provision of extra curricular is
included as it is an extension of the program.
Ms. Rubadeau referred to extending the school year and said
if there aren't corresponding revenues, they would basically
be undermining existing programs. She said she would have
difficulty supporting that provision.
Number 336
SENATOR ELLIS referred to an attachment to the fiscal note
which read, "Sections 2 and 3 will result in a cumulative
increase of 20 school days by the year 2000. The existing
public school foundation statutes do not fund school
districts on the number of school days. Therefore, under
the current law there is no impact on the state operating
budget if the number of school days is increased." He said
he feels that statement shows no intention on the part of
the administration of asking for required funding to make
the 200 day school year a reality. Senator Ellis noted he
is a supporter of increasing the school year. Ms. Rubadeau
said if there isn't corresponding funding, she believes her
district would be against the provision.
Ms. Rubadeau referred to tenure and said she would send the
committee written testimony. She then continued her
testimony with regard to charter schools. The language in
the bill which relates to the provision that the local
school board would decide whether a charter school proposal
has school district backing is good language. She said
charter schools could be schools which provide opportunities
to go beyond the provisions of the local public schools.
What needs more clarification is state and federal
regulations that would be needed to go through a waiver
process. She said there needs to be some assurances and
more clarification as to what charter schools would do under
district liability. Ms. Rubadeau referred to the language
relating to advisory school boards and said she concurs with
it. She noted that her school board has the provision that
everyone of Kenai's local schools will have a parent group.
Number 418
RICHARD KRONSBERG, testifying from Anchorage, referred to
the section of the bill which discusses the fund for
improvement of public schools and said it seems to have the
most potential for positive results. However, it should be
written into the law that the money will be used to improve
public school performance and will not go outside of the
public school system. Mr. Kronsberg referred to the length
of the school term and said he would like to know what the
fiscal note would be. He said he doesn't understand the
point of adding more days for school to be in session when
there is currently no requirement that the student attend
school at all. He said he would like to know what evidence
there is that lengthening the school year will improve
student performance. Mr. Kronsberg referred to advisory
boards and said he would like to know what the extra cost
will be. He said he would also like to know how many
administrators or bureaucrats will be required to facilitate
the work of the advisory boards. Mr. Kronsberg referred to
teacher tenure and said it seems the entire thrust of it is
to make the tenure process a political one and to reward
members - even those who don't have a regular teaching
certificate. He said the essential problem is that tenure
will now become a matter not of competence but of
popularity. Mr. Kronsberg said his basic concern with
charter schools is there doesn't seem to be guarantees that
would truly ensure equity and that would prohibit the
establishment of exclusive private schools funded by the
public.
SENATOR SALO said currently the tenure review process takes
place between the employer and employee and there is a
certain degree of confidentially that exists. She asked Mr.
Kronsberg how he sees the enactment of the tenure review
committees affecting the confidentiality. Mr. Kronsberg
said it seems that the operations of the tenure review
committees are outlined in the proposed statute and totally
undermine any confidentiality that might exist. He said he
believes the local tenure review committee is a sham as the
members serve at the pleasure of the school board.
Number 497
DAVID SCHWANTES, testifying from Anchorage, explained he has
taught school in Alaska for 28 years. He said he thinks the
bill is trying to do too much too fast with creating
advisory school boards at every school. In Anchorage,
there are 80 schools. The cost of the bill will be
tremendous. He indicated concern with putting a student on
the local tenure review committee as they aren't old enough
to vote for a legislator or school board member and would be
able to vote as to whether a teacher is going to have tenure
or not. Mr. Schwantes referred to page 5, line 14, and
asked if there is anything in the bill that prohibits a
member of the school board from serving on the tenure review
committee. He referred to line 20 which says, "the
committee shall meet once every six months," and said
Anchorage would have a terrible time trying to deal with all
the teachers that apply for tenure. Mr. Schwantes continued
to discuss concerns of the tenure process and indicated he
is opposed to having public testimony on whether or not a
teacher should receive tenure. He asked what kind of
training the members of the tenure review committees will
receive. Mr. Schwantes referred to the legislation saying
the teacher may apply for tenure and asked what happens if
the teacher doesn't apply.
Number 556
BONNIE BARBER, President, Fairbanks Education Association,
expressed her concerns about increasing the school year with
the current under funding of the operating budget for
schools.
TAPE 93-10, SIDE B
Number 001
Ms. Barber referred to tenure and said she sees the creation
of a local tenure review board as politicizing the tenure
process. She referred to the bill and said she doesn't see
a direction to develop an objective criteria to evaluate
competence, nor does she see where training would be
provided for the members of the tenure review committees.
Ms. Barber said the legislation is very confusing, isn't
clear, and it politicizes a process that needs to be
objective and have clear criteria. She referred to charter
schools and said it seems there is the potential to draw
funding away from the local school districts. Ms. Barber
asked if the teachers who would teach in the charter schools
would come from the district. The idea of charter schools
affecting the current funding of schools is very worrisome,
she concluded.
Number 050
VERNON MARSHALL, Executive Director, NEA-Alaska, said he
would like to echo some of the points that were made by
Claudia Douglas at the previous meeting concerning Alaska
2000. He referred to the work done during Alaska 2000 and
said he is surprised that SB 61 is the only vehicle to
implement the changes. Mr. Marshall expressed concern
about kids that fall below the age for admission into the
first grade. He said all that will be done is a plan will
be developed to deal with early childhood education. Plans
are trivial and a commitment needs to be made to adequately
deal with early childhood. He discussed the subject of
students who have dropped out of school and how it isn't
addressed in Alaska 2000. Mr. Marshall referred to
overcrowded classrooms and said determinations need to be
made as to how effective can reduced classes be in terms of
allowing a teacher an opportunity to get closer to children
to provide opportunities. He discussed the increase in the
school year, how much it will cost, and factoring in the
costs in relation to inflation. Mr. Marshall said his
organization is concerned that there isn't a uniform
starting date. There is a possible variance from when a
school district would start. He referred to teachers that
his organization is encouraging to go back to school and
earn advanced degrees in their areas and questioned whether
they would have enough time during the summer to do it if
the school year is extended.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER informed Mr. Marshall that there are time
constraints on the teleconference network and requested that
he finish his testimony later in the meeting.
Number 169
KATHI MCCORD, testifying from Anchorage, said she has been
teaching for the Anchorage School District for the last
nineteen years. She expressed concern that there are
several areas of the legislation which have not been
addressed fully. Those areas are tenure, a longer school
year, and charter schools. Many items in SB 16 are negative
and she doesn't see them bringing added incentive for
positive change in education. She referred to tenure and
said teachers are carefully and extensively evaluated by
their administrator during their first two years of teaching
to determine if they should qualify for tenure. Most
principals have been trained in evaluation processes and
teaching methodology. She said their job is not only to
evaluate, but to help the teacher to improve if need be.
She said there will be a need for training the public
members if the tenure review committees are set up. If the
legislature feels that tenure isn't working, perhaps the
administrative evaluation process is what needs to be
changed. Ms. McCord continued to discuss her views in
relation to tenure.
Ms. McCord referred to charter schools and said she is
surprised that Department of Education (DOE) would promote
schools that are exempt from their own requirements. Every
public school must live by DOE regulations and Alaska
Statutes. She referred to the funding aspect of charter
schools and asked if the funding would come from public
school budgets. If the goal is really to improve education,
give teachers a meaningful role in restructuring schools.
Don't promote unnecessary changes to the current system, she
concluded.
Number 221
PAMELA CONRAD was next to testify on SB 61. She said she
has been teaching public school in Alaska for fifteen years.
Ms. Conrad said she doesn't see any rationale for limiting
tenure and changing teacher evaluation procedures. School
administrators have the responsibility to do adequate
evaluations and changing the tenure law will not change that
responsibility. She continued to discuss the current tenure
law. Ms. Conrad referred to charter schools and said they
would have the option of restricting enrollment to the right
type of students and mix religion in education all with
public funds which is unacceptable. She explained she is a
special education teacher and she has spoken to several
people who do send their kids to private schools. When she
asked them why they choose private schools, their main reply
was lower class size. Ms. Conrad asked why not give public
schools the money so that class sizes can be brought down to
a more desirable level. She thanked the committee for
listening to her testimony.
JOHN CYR, a teacher at Wasilla High School, expressed
concern with the SB 61 and the whole process. He asked if
there would be extra funding for the extension of the school
year. He also asked if the truancy laws would be
strengthened. Wouldn't it be better to ensure that the
children are in school now rather than just lengthening the
school year. Mr. Cyr referred to advisory boards and asked
how they will be funded and what they will do to district
continuity. He asked who will pick the board members, what
criteria will be used, and who will decide when advisory and
local school boards come into conflict. He referred to the
area of evaluations and said public comment endangers
privacy rights. Ms. Cyr said if tenure is denied, what will
be the school district's obligation. Mr. Cyr referred to
charter schools and asked how charter school boards operate.
He continued to ask several questions and said the entire
Alaska 2000 proposal seems to be an attempt to fix what
isn't broken.
VERNON MARSHALL, Executive Director, NEA-Alaska, was
requested to come back before the committee to finish his
testimony. He said his organization has some technical
questions relative to the issues of tenure, charter schools,
and advisory school boards. The expansion of parental
involvement is very important, but we don't know that these
vehicles accomplish that. Mr. Marshall said there are
several questions in relation to tenure. He continued to
discussed concerns and asked questions about the tenure
process, the tenure review board members, truancy, charter
schools, and equal access. Mr. Marshall said he would also
submit several and questions and concerns in writing.
TAPE 93-11, SIDE A
Number 001
Mr. Marshall referred to the tenure review committee and
said it would be created by the local board of education.
He asked what the criteria would be to become a member of
the committee. He said he thinks that a school board would
select a committee that shares similar concerns about their
feeling regarding tenure and how it should be applied. The
bill creates a two tier system of employees. Those employed
prior to July 1, 1993, are grandpersoned into the bill.
Those who are employed after July, 1, 1993, would go into
the new system. He said a person could still be employed
but not have tenure. They would become an "at will
employee." If that does happen, Alaska becomes a state that
has virtually no protection. He said there will not be a
"do process standards" by which the denial would be
measured. He said he doesn't believe that the current
process of tenure is automatic. Mr. Marshall continued to
discuss the tenure section of the bill.
Number 133
CARL ROSE, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School
Boards, said his organization's position is in support of
Alaska 2000. He indicated that there will be more in depth
testimony on the particulars as the association has just
concluded a six region - eight district audio conference
network touching 49 out of 54 school districts in gaining
concurrence. Mr. Rose said he supported Alaska 2000 last
November before the final recommendations were made. They
also support the concept as it has great potential. He
indicated that the association didn't have a chance to
address their concerns with the state board before the
legislation was introduced. Now the association finds that
they have to address the legislation and concerns through
the committee process. He said they want to shape the
Alaska 2000 package to meet the needs of the kids. Mr. Rose
said he views the components of Alaska 2000 as having
positive potential. Rather than look for all the answers in
legislation, they feel that regulation will be a part of the
effort as well.
Mr. Rose referred to SB 61 and said there are many
supporters of increasing the school term, but the point is
to increase the educational opportunity. He said his
organization tends to think there is a class size problem, a
unit increase is required, and early childhood education is
an area that should be reviewed. He said he is in favor of
flexibility in funding grants as anything that can increase
the educational opportunity and school improvements at the
local level. Mr. Rose said there are some concerns about
the latitude which would be given to outside groups as they
are always concerned about public dollars being spent within
the framework of public schools. He referred to the
establishment of advisory boards and said the idea is to get
the public involved. If the language causes people a lot of
problems, then the language should be fixed. The intent of
advisory boards is to include the public.
Mr. Rose referred to the establishment of tenure review
committees and said that he isn't sure that a review
committee to review an administrator's evaluation is the
answer.
Mr. Rose referred to charter schools and said as he reads
and understands the legislation, it would all take place
under the auspices and direction of the local school board.
If an application is made for a charter school and the
criteria isn't satisfied or resources are pulled away from
the educational program, the local school board won't look
kindly on that kind of an attempt. With charter schools,
Mr. Rose said he sees an opportunity for a group of
educators to identify similar groups. He said if a group of
educators were to develop a program to satisfy the criteria,
to provide curriculum and assessments, and to pursue a
course of education through the public schools under a
charter with some flexibility, it may attract some of the
people who aren't interested to coming to public schools.
He said he doesn't look at charter schools as a threat as
long as charter schools aren't formed in a private setting
with public funds.
Mr. Rose said there is a positive side to some of the things
he sees in SB 61. The Alaska Association of School Boards
chooses to take the high road in hopes of helping shape the
legislation to accomplish those things. He explained that
their focus group will convene on Friday and Saturday, and
he will come back before the committee to testify on SB 61.
Mr. Rose said the association supports SB 61 and wants to
work to shape the legislation so that it has a positive
affect on kids.
SENATOR SALO said she is very interested in what the focus
groups have to say about amending the legislation to more
appropriately deal with what real education reform is needed
in Alaska's schools. There was discussion regarding charter
schools by Senator Salo and Mr. Rose.
CHAIRMAN RIEGER requested that Mr. Rose submit written
testimony and indicated that the bill would be back before
the committee the following Wednesday. He also requested
that if there are any proposed amendments, they should be
submitted to him before the Wednesday meeting.
Number 346
Chairman Rieger adjourned the meeting at 3:35 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|