Legislature(2001 - 2002)
03/19/2001 01:36 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION & SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE
March 19, 2001
1:36 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Lyda Green, Chair
Senator Loren Leman, Vice Chair
Senator Gary Wilken
Senator Jerry Ward
Senator Bettye Davis
MEMBERS ABSENT
All Members Present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
SENATE BILL NO. 86
"An Act relating to employment of teachers who have subject-
matter expertise; and providing for an effective date."
EDUCATION FUNDING TASK FORCE PRESENTATION
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
SB 86 - See HESS minutes dated 3/16/01
WITNESS REGISTER
Mr. Bob Weinstein, Chair
Education Funding Task Force
Office of the Governor
PO Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001
POSITION STATEMENT: Education Task Force Presenter
Mr. Roger Chan, Vice-Chair
Education Funding Task Force
Office of the Governor
PO Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001
POSITION STATEMENT: Education Task Force Presenter
Mr. Darroll Hargraves
Education Funding Task Force
Office of the Governor
PO Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001
POSITION STATEMENT: Education Task Force member - answered
questions.
Mr. Roy Nageak, Sr.
Education Funding Task Force
Office of the Governor
PO Box 110001
Juneau, AK 99811-0001
POSITION STATEMENT: Stressed the need to do an area cost
differential study and provide funding.
Dr. Bruce Johnson
Deputy Commissioner
Department of Education &
Early Development
th
801 W 10 St.
Juneau, AK 99801-1894
POSITION STATEMENT: Discussed regulations proposed by the state
board of education to alleviate the shortage of teachers and
discussed implementation problems associated with CSSB 86(HES).
Mr. Rich Kronberg, President
NEA-Alaska
114 2nd Street
Juneau, AK 99801
POSITION STATEMENT: Asked that questions regarding CSSB 86(HES)
be answered before it passes.
ACTION NARRATIVE
TAPE 01-25, SIDE A
Number 001
CHAIRWOMAN LYDA GREEN called the Senate Health, Education &
Social Services Committee meeting to order at 1:36 p.m. Present
were Senators Davis, Ward, Leman and Green. She asked Mr. Chan
and Mr. Weinstein to present to the committee.
EDUCATION FUNDING TASK FORCE PRESENTATION
MR. BOB WEINSTEIN, Chair of the Education Funding Task Force,
informed the committee he is the mayor of Ketchikan and a retired
school superintendent. In December, the Governor appointed
people from the education community and businesspersons to the
task force for the purpose of making recommendations on education
funding for a five-year period. The task force was not asked to
rewrite the foundation formula. Task force members began by
reviewing reports and data related to the SB 36 report, including
the adequacy study. The task force also looked at the report
that came out of the education summit, in which school districts
identified their needs and changes required to meet those needs.
MR. WEINSTEIN said that paramount in the task force's discussions
was a simple vision: that all Alaska students could meet the high
stakes standards if school districts were given appropriate
financial and other tools. Task force members believe the result
will be a well-educated group of young people who will be ready
to work and take good paying jobs as they become available.
With regard to accountability, Mr. Weinstein thanked legislators
for efforts in that arena in recent years. The task force worked
with those in mind throughout its discussions. Examples include
legislation passed in 1996 that improves teacher and
administrator evaluation, legislation passed in 1997 that created
the high school exit exam, legislation passed in 1998 that
requires teacher competency testing and SB 36, which contains
several accountability provisions. The Department of Education
and Early Development (DOEED) was required to develop student
performance standards in reading, writing and mathematics and to
develop benchmark exams at designated grade levels. The quality
schools portion of SB 36 not only required benchmark exams to
test academic standards, it also required each school to complete
a developmental profile on incoming kindergarten and first grade
students. It provided for quality school initiative grants and
it required school districts, over a three-year period, to devote
a minimum of 70 percent of their budgets to instruction. In
addition, beginning next year, school designators will be in
place to identify schools as distinguished, successful, deficient
or in crisis.
MR. WEINSTEIN informed the committee that after those pieces of
legislation were passed, the state board of education adopted,
through regulation, performance standards for reading, writing
and mathematics and the benchmark and high school exit exams
based on those standards. The task force's recommendations are
intended to invest new education dollars in a very focused way in
an effort to meet the standards that have been adopted for all
school children in Alaska. He asked Mr. Chan to continue.
MR. ROGER CHAN, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer for VECO Corporation in Anchorage, suggested the task
force report may be more valuable in what it didn't do, rather
than in what it actually does. It did not go back to the same
old template for funding education and request funds from the
legislature with no explanation of how those funds would be
spent. Instead, the task force took a business plan approach.
He pointed to examples at the back of the report of increased
costs that directly impact how education dollars are expended.
He said he is proud of the task force's work product. It is data
driven. All of the recommendations are "bottom up" formulas for
increased funding. The central theme of the report is how to tie
accountability to the expenditure of additional dollars.
MR. CHAN reviewed the report. Page 8 contains a summary of the
expenditures recommended by the task force for increases in the
annual funding formula. The net result in year 1 in the per
student funding formula is $164; in years 2 through 5 the
increase would be relatively nominal. One of the real drivers
for the business decision-making that went on within the task
force was trying to figure out how to accomplish one objective,
that being: how to increase the educational quality of our
students in the state?
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked if the task force's recommendations are
prioritized.
MR. CHAN said they are not and that no order was contemplated.
He pointed out the second item calls for curriculum alignment and
acquiring instructional materials consistent with the
realignment. The task force estimated a cost of $500,000 for
year one and two, with costs dropping off in years 3, 4 and 5
because the task force believes curriculum alignment is a
relatively short process. The task force then calculated the
average price of a textbook at $40 and multiplied that by 135,000
students for a total of $5.4 million. The task force expects
that expenditure to be made after the curriculum is aligned to
get maximum benefit from that expenditure.
MR. CHAN explained that the task force then took a look at
special needs students, and came up with $5.3 million. That
number was actually formula driven from the foundation formula.
The task force believes that over a period of time, enough
funding has been diverted from special needs students to satisfy
other needs. Alaska needs to realign those percentages again.
MR. CHAN said he feels very enthusiastic about the task force's
recommendation to create direct student intervention programs at
a cost of $10 million. The task force calculated that amount by
estimating that 250 schools would offer instruction to one-third
of all students (44,000). That expenditure should have direct
consequences on students' test scores.
MR. CHAN pointed out the other recommendations included in the
task force's proposal.
· $4 million for facilities upkeep, calculated by applying a 5
percent facilities upkeep cost to an estimate of the total
cost of all facilities in the school districts. That number
meets normal industry standards.
· $9.4 million for teacher salaries. That amount does not
represent an inflationary adjustment or a "catch-up"
payment. It applies a 2 percent salary increase for teachers
designed to keep Alaska current.
The total amount of expenditures recommended by the task force
for the first year is $34.6 million. Per student, that equals an
increase in the per pupil allotment of $164 for a total of $4104.
The second item in the recommendations is outside of the annual
funding formula. Its purpose is to reward students for performing
at a higher level, to develop a center of excellence, and to
provide funding for schools that are having difficulties. The
total cost of those items will be $7 million. Mr. Chan explained
the cost of the incentives for high performing schools was
calculated at 50 schools at a cost of $40,000. Money will be
needed to coordinate these activities so a center of school
excellence would have to be developed. The center would be the
mechanism from which other funding within the initiative would be
allocated. It will help determine whether or not the high
performing schools receive additional money or whether it should
be committed to low performing schools. Mr. Chan pointed out the
money proposed for the high performing schools will increase from
$2 million per year in year one to $3.6 million in year five
because the assistance for low performing schools is likely to
decrease.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked if that approach was modeled after another
state.
MR. CHAN said he did not know the answer to that question. He
summarized by saying the task force believes the conclusions it
came to are the natural progression of all of the different
initiatives taken by the legislature already. All of the
legislation led the task force to this logical point. Now that
the task force has determined what issues remain, it needs to
identify funding sources. DOEED has come up with a work plan
describing how the task force's recommendations could be
implemented. He suggested committee members review that work
plan.
Number 1123
SENATOR LEMAN noted a few things stand out in the task force's
report, the first being that the task force assumed the existing
delivery system is an appropriate one and should be continued.
He asked if the task force discussed alternative delivery systems
that are lower cost.
MR. CHAN said from his perspective, the state is on a course of
action set in 1997 that put some requirements into law. That
model requires one additional step - funding. The task force's
discussion focused on how to take the current model to the next
step.
MR. WEINSTEIN added that the focus of the task force's work was
looking at what existed in terms of elementary and secondary
schools. Members were aware of alternatives, which were also
provided for in statute, but the task force did not focus on the
latter.
SENATOR LEMAN said that is one of the things he saw as a void.
He stated some of the most successful things the state has done
have the added benefit of a lower cost so we should learn from
and apply more of them. He said he recognizes constraints
related to community size and geographical location, but he
believes the benefits of those programs should be seriously
considered.
MR. WEINSTEIN pointed out that one of the task force's
recommendations is that funding be provided to expand the state's
offerings of high school level courses to small secondary schools
throughout the state via distance delivery. That is one way to
address Senator Leman's concern.
SENATOR LEMAN acknowledged that he had read that recommendation.
He said he supports the idea of paying the highest performing
teachers something additional as he believes that would improve
education in Alaska. He expressed concern that some of the ideas
with the most promise get lost in the politics of education and
that the task force had such a limited timeframe in which to do
its work.
MR. WEINSTEIN contended the task force did not spend time on the
pay for performance issue. One of its main concerns was the
growing national teacher shortage and its potential impacts on
Alaska. He felt the task force dealt with teacher salaries in a
broader manner, keeping in mind that teacher compensation is
decided by local school boards. He noted nothing would prevent a
school board from instituting the idea that Senator Leman
suggested.
SENATOR LEMAN maintained that the task force suggested a
mechanism to provide a cash flow stream that would eventually
find its way to school districts. He was suggesting that perhaps
a mechanism ought to be available to inspire school districts to
implement things that may revolutionize education in Alaska.
Number 1504
SENATOR WARD referred to page 12 of the executive summary of the
task force report, and noted the task force recommended that
funds be provided to develop a new and appropriate methodology to
calculate district cost factors. The task force considers the
current methodology to be flawed because it is based on expenses
rather than costs, yet the task force report is based on district
expenses, not costs. He asked what the task force discussed
regarding area cost differentials.
MR. WEINSTEIN said that was of concern to task force members. He
explained that he was involved in the McDowell Group's work prior
to the passage of SB 36. Because of the short timeframe for the
study, the McDowell group could not determine what it costs
school districts to provide the same services.
Number 1504
SENATOR WARD questioned why the timeframe was insufficient.
MR. WEINSTEIN recalled the McDowell Group was given two or three
months to make recommendations to a legislative committee.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked if that was done during the interim.
MR. DARROLL HARGRAVES, Alaska Council of School Administrators,
informed the committee that the Legislative Budget and Audit
Committee put out a request for bids.
MR. WEINSTEIN stated,
But again, as a marker if you will, especially for the
non-personnel costs, the actual expenditures were used
as a guide to the relative cost of doing business
statewide under the theory that school districts
typically would not spend more on fuel or electricity
than they absolutely needed to. It was that kind of
data that was available at that time. The adequacy
study for SB 36, as well as other reviews of that,
including by the McDowell Group itself apparently, is
that that methodology for the reason stated is flawed
and should not be used to perpetuate the flaws into the
future. One of our recommendations, which aligns with
Representative Wilson's, is frankly to have a very
thorough district cost factor study be done and,
related to that, we recommended that the current
funding floor erosion be suspended pending the
completion of that district cost factor study.
SENATOR WARD commented that the task force recognized a flaw
because the cost differential is based on spending, not on actual
costs, yet the recommendations of the task force are to spend
more money on a flawed system.
[SENATOR WILKEN arrived.]
MR. WEINSTEIN responded by saying the task force believes the
system in place is in need of increased funding in order to meet
some of the accountability measures that have been mandated.
However, the task force is also recommending that, in short
order, the district cost factor issue be reviewed so that by the
legislative session next year, which would be the beginning of
the second year of a five-year plan, the legislature would have
the information in hand to make a decision as to whether the
district cost factors currently contained in the foundation
formula should or should not be revised. He suggested the
information coming back might show that the district cost factors
are largely aligned with current data. He noted a majority of
the districts in the state, including Anchorage, Ketchikan and
others, do not have the cost factor adjusted by any significant
amount. Anchorage is the base and probably under any system
would remain so.
SENATOR WARD asked, if the legislature is to fund this study,
whether it would be wise to spend precious dollars to fund a
flawed system in the meantime.
MR. CHAN told the committee that the first inclination of task
force members was to tinker with the funding formula and they
headed in that direction until they realized it was out of the
scope of the Governor's request. The Governor asked the task
force to review all of the reports that had been generated in the
past, to identify needs and to rationalize those needs into
dollars and apply the dollars to the areas of highest need. The
task force did not intend to discriminate against any student in
any area based on the funding formula. It was to determine
whether intervention was appropriate in certain areas and, if so,
recommend that part of the $10 million in the funding formula be
spent on intervention. For example, if districts need curriculum
alignment, part of the $500,000 should be spent on a plan to do
that.
MR. CHAN said the task force painted everything with a broad
brush. It looked at the total of 135,000 students in the state
as having the same needs. Instead of looking at each district
and tinkering with their funding formulas, the task force decided
to provide the funds and let the school districts decide how to
expend that money.
Number 1827
SENATOR WARD said he appreciates Mr. Chan's explanation, but when
he looked at the recommendation regarding the district cost
factors because the current methodology is flawed, he questioned
why the task force recommended putting more money into it.
MR. CHAN said he does not believe that is what the task force
did. The task force is recommending that the Governor get the
funding formula in alignment. Once that is done, he assumes the
funds requested by the task force will be realigned pursuant to
that exercise. He felt the task force may have put the cart
before the horse a little bit, but not so much in front that the
carriage won't go because the task force identified what
requirements need to be funded. If the cost factors are aligned,
everything should work properly. The task force took that
approach simply because it couldn't do anything else.
SENATOR WARD said if the funding is aligned and the area cost
differential is not adjusted, then the legislature will be giving
a dollar to some entity that should be getting 80 cents or $1.20
and taking from another entity.
MR. CHAN said he does not believe dollars will be taken from
anyone under this proposal; it only adds dollars.
MR. WEINSTEIN commented that the bulk of the foundation formula
funds are outside of the district cost factor. He ventured to
guess that were there to be a comprehensive study of the
differential cost of doing business in each school district,
there would be some changes but, again, it would be for a limited
portion of the total distribution of dollars.
SENATOR WARD said his district just lost a teacher and that every
single dollar is very important.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN acknowledged the presence of Senator Wilken and
then asked the other task force members present to introduce
themselves. Mr. Roy Nageak, Sr., Mr. Ernie Hall, Mr. Darroll
Hargraves, Mr. Rich Kronberg and Ms. Alison Knox, who was sitting
in for Mr. Carl Marrs, introduced themselves.
Number 1975
SENATOR WILKEN felt it was important to provide a history of this
issue. He stated that when he worked on education reform, he
found that the 1987 instruction unit formula was based on a
Department of Labor market basket survey done in 1984. 19 of the
voting districts of Alaska were surveyed. That information was
used to establish the district cost factors. Not only was the
information partial and flawed, it was adjusted by legislators at
the committee table at that time, resulting in district cost
factors that were suspect at best. The state lived with those
for 12 years. Under education reform, the thought was to find
out what the real costs were, which resulted in the McDowell
Group study. The McDowell Group came back and said it couldn't
tell what goes on in the school districts because using the
principle that school districts should decide how to spend their
money, the basics of accounting have been neglected - that being
the chart of accounts. The varied accounting procedures used
made a comparison impossible. That drove the McDowell Group to
do a de facto cost analysis of what districts were actually
spending.
SENATOR WILKEN said he believes that is what the task force is
saying, that being the next step is to define what it costs to
deliver education across the 53 school districts. The task force
report speaks to the cost of doing a district cost factor
analysis based on the cost of delivery education across the state
but that is not possible until all districts use a uniform chart
of accounts. He pointed out the fairest way to proceed is to set
a model of the costs of education delivery that can be analyzed
on a regular basis. He felt that is where the task force is
trying to head so that the district cost factor issue can be
resolved.
Number 2071
MR. ROY NAGEAK, SR., informed the committee that he is a member
of the local school board on the North Slope. He noted that the
study will determine the actual costs of delivering education and
that, regarding Senator Ward's comment, more funds have been
reallocated under SB 36. A new student in a rural area will
receive 60 percent funding compared to an urban student. He also
pointed out the formula has not been adjusted for inflation and
the cost of doing business continues to rise each year. He stated
he does not believe a study would take money away from school
districts and reallocate it, like SB 36 did. He said it is
important to provide adequate funds for districts across the
state so that all children can pass the exit exam. He thanked
all involved in the development of the exit exam because his
district is now seeing student improvement. He expressed concern
about the need for teachers in rural areas and the crisis that
may occur if that need is not met soon.
Number 2232
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN informed Mr. Nageak that the Senate Finance
Committee recently had an interesting discussion about the
teacher shortage. Representatives from the University of Alaska
said there is not a net loss of teachers in the state, but there
is by location. She noted she is not sure whether the problem is
a teacher shortage nationwide or whether the problem is the
choice of teaching locations. She then drew the committee's
attention to the Governor's directions to the task force and
pointed out that committee members might have charged a task
force with a different mission. She asked task force members
whether they received any information regarding the 70/30 funding
of school districts and the extension of waivers.
MR. WEINSTEIN said the task force discussed those issues and was
aware of the 70 percent requirement.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked, "Did you see any anomalies out there or
anything - you know, these guys really better get with it and
bring their school in alignment or do you feel like that was more
of the department's chore?"
MR. WEINSTEIN said the task force felt that was more of the
department's prerogative. The task force did not focus on a
given district, it dealt with the issue globally, recognizing
that with rising fuel costs in the past year, those school
districts that may have been borderline may need to request a
waiver.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN said, regarding student loan payment waivers for
teachers, whether the task force has assumed that will be paid
for with general funds rather than expecting the student loan
program to waive repayment.
MR. WEINSTEIN said the task force did not identify the funding
source for any of its recommendations; it felt that is the job of
the Governor and the Legislature.
TAPE 01-25, SIDE B
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked Mr. Chan if he could identify the single
most important issue raised in the report that needs to be
confronted immediately.
MR. CHAN said the task force did not establish priorities but, if
one looks at the rationalization for the creation of the task
force, the priority issue would be the crisis created by the
number of students who have been unable to obtain passing test
scores on the practice exit exam. Based on that, the highest
priority to improve scores would be the intervention
expenditures.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN noted those expenditures would be for summer
school, an extended school day, and tutoring. She asked if each
district would prioritize which intervention measure to take.
MR. CHAN said that is correct.
Number 2309
SENATOR DAVIS thanked task force members for their work and asked
what members plan to do to help get their recommendations funded
and whether they had suggestions for committee members.
MR. CHAN explained that a number of task force members are in
Juneau for the day and are spending time with individual
legislators to explain the task force's recommendations. He said
they would be happy to make their presentation to anyone who can
help to provide positive funding for education in Alaska.
SENATOR DAVIS asked if task force members are talking to groups
other than the legislature, particularly to the public.
MR. WEINSTEIN told the committee that a few weeks ago the task
force recommendations were the subject of discussion at a
Ketchikan Chamber of Commerce luncheon, which the Governor
attended. In addition, the Alaska Municipal League's legislative
committee will meet in Juneau next week and will discuss this
subject as well. The Anchorage Assembly recently adopted a
resolution supporting the recommendations. The task force views
its role as being available to present and advocate for this
report and other proposals which address the needs of students in
Alaska.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked, in the task force's process of addressing
its mission, if it identified anything that is blatantly wrong
with the education system.
MR. WEINSTEIN said Alaska's education system was fairly
traditional until 1997 when the Legislature and the Governor
instituted a number of accountability measures. Although those
measures have not revolutionized education in the state, they
have helped it to evolve to the next level where every school is
being asked to educate students to the same statewide standards.
Before that, there was no state standardized measure to know
whether students were gaining competencies in given areas. He
said the task force tried to tie each of the recommendations back
to accountability and student performance.
Number 2166
MR. CHAN added that the task force chose not to address issues
such as inflation. It chose to take a needs-driven approach
because it believed that was the only way to get bi-partisan
support and essentially, at the end of the day if students are
not meeting requirements, funding must be provided to eliminate
the shortfall in the process. The task force is recommending
that some money be spent on education and it believes the
mechanisms for accountability are in place to determine whether
the legislature is getting a return on its investment. That is
different than traditional funding models for education.
SENATOR WILKEN said he agrees with Mayor Nageak's comments about
inflation; that is the subject of another bill. However, he does
not agree with the assertion that SB 36 moved money from rural to
urban schools. Of the school districts that received a five
percent increase in funding under SB 36, 46 percent were rural.
Only one school district lost money under SB 36. He noted the
floor was the result of a negotiated agreement to get SB 36
passed. Nothing has changed. Some school districts were
advantaged under the old formula; this is simply a transition
from one to another. The transition could be a lot faster, as it
was designed to be when it left the Senate, but it was modified
in the House. The floor needs to remain in place until a
different system is put in place. He felt that ignoring the floor
is something that should be considered because otherwise, all of
the work put into SB 36 would be thrown out. He asked task force
members if they looked at the question of whether every school
district should have some local participation.
Number 2032
MR. WEINSTEIN said the task force did not talk about that. It
was aware, due to personal experiences, that some districts have
a large local tax contribution while others have none.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN thanked all task force members for their
presentation and the work they have done. She then took a brief
at-ease.
SB 86-TEACHER EMPLOYMENT & SUBJECT EXPERTISE
SENATOR PETE KELLY, sponsor of SB 86, informed the committee that
he introduced SB 86 in response to the widespread need for
teachers in the state. SB 86 does not attempt to cure the
shortage; instead it gives school districts another arrow in
their quiver to deal with this problem. He noted the American
Federation of Teachers and the Alaska Teacher Preparedness
websites both make reference to graphs they have prepared that
show a significant decrease in the number of teacher applicants
and the number of people attending teaching job fairs. One reason
for the shortage in Alaska is that it simply is not as
competitive as it has been in previous years. SB 86 would allow
school districts to hire people with Bachelor's degrees and five
years experience in subjects they are hired to teach. Subject-
matter teachers would not be treated the same regarding tenure,
because if a district eliminates a certain class from its
curriculum, that teacher would not have tenure over teachers who
are certified to teach a broader range of subjects. Subject-
matter teachers would be held to the same level of accountability
when it comes to security matters, which are already in statute
and regulation.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked Senator Kelly if he is referring to
criminal background checks.
SENATOR KELLY said that is correct and includes fingerprinting.
He commented that many people with teaching degrees work in
different professions, and many people in other professions wish
to be teachers but do not have teaching credentials. SB 86 is an
attempt to put qualified people who have a lot to offer the
system in the classroom to alleviate the teacher shortage Alaska
is experiencing right now.
SENATOR WILKEN asked how a fee would be established for subject
matter teachers, whether they would be eligible for retirement,
and whether a school board or DOEED would determine whether they
are qualified.
SENATOR KELLY said the local school board would determine whether
an applicant is qualified and would require that person to take a
competency exam. He tried to leave the other issues Senator
Wilken raised up to the local school boards. It is his intention
to allow school principals to either opt into this program or
remain out of it.
SENATOR WILKEN asked for clarification of pay and retirement.
SENATOR KELLY said they would be considered teachers as far as
school districts are concerned.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if they would fall under the pay scale at
the time of hire.
SENATOR KELLY said he knows of nothing in the legislation that
would preclude that and it was not his intention to do otherwise.
Regarding retirement, he said they are teachers in every sense
except for tenure.
SENATOR WILKEN asked if they would become members of the
bargaining unit.
SENATOR KELLY said that is correct.
SENATOR WARD asked if subject-matter teachers will have to pass a
test.
SENATOR KELLY referred to page 2, line 17, and pointed out the
bill requires the local school board to administer a competency
test [page 2, line 27 of the committee substitute].
SENATOR LEMAN referred to Martin Gross, an author who wrote about
failures in the American education system, and said Mr. Gross
recommended that undergraduate schools of education be done away
with because they are turning out generalists that do not know
their subject matter well enough. He suggests that people get
undergraduate degrees in subject areas and then get a graduate
degree in education. Senator Leman said he tends to agree with
that approach. He asked why not allow school districts to reach
into the communities to find people with the right expertise to
teach.
SENATOR KELLY mentioned the committee substitute has a provision
for a mentoring program to last at least one year for secondary
school teachers. He felt that provision to be a good idea.
SENATOR WARD moved to adopt CSSB 86(HES), Version L, as the
working document of the committee. There being no objection, the
motion carried.
SENATOR KELLY noted the University has a one year Master's level
teaching program but that program will not work for the people he
has in mind.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN pointed out the one-year program is a fast-track
program, while the mentor program will teach the incoming teacher
the systems and protocols of the district. She added that she
could see value to mentoring with several teachers. She then
asked for public testimony.
Number 1470
DR. BRUCE JOHNSON, Deputy Commissioner of the Department of
Education and Early Development, said DOEED appreciates Senator
Kelly's concern for the teacher shortage issue and the changes
made in the committee substitute, particularly the mandated
competency exam, the mentoring program and Professional Teachers
Practices Commission (PTPC) oversight. The state board of
education has also been working on the teacher shortage issue and
has issued three regulations. It has proposed a provisional
certificate, which will allow DOEED to request it to recognize a
teaching certificate from any other state for up to a two-year
period of time. During that two-year period, the teacher would
have to fulfill Alaska requirements. Another proposal is for
specialty endorsement so that with a minor in special education,
a person could qualify for an endorsement in special education.
The state board will also be looking at adjusting some of the
certification fees for licensure.
DR. JOHNSON said, in response to Chairwoman Green's comment about
licensure, that the Type M Certificate is available for military
science, vocational education and Native culture and language.
He recently noticed that Alaska has in excess of 200 of those
certificated teachers. A few districts have 35 or 40 such
individuals, primarily in rural Alaska, certified in Native
culture and language. That has proven to be a useful tool. He
noted the concept of SB 86 has been tried in other states with
success and failure. One of the challenges other states have
faced is a high number of attrition. He cautioned that it appears
to be a little easier than it actually is and the result has not
been improved student achievement. DOEED suggests that if SB 86
moves forward, that the legislature require these people to enter
into a professional development program that would provide
teacher education training. He suggested that DOEED could work
with the University of Alaska (UA) to design a set of courses
that could be delivered in convenient ways so that it would not
place a huge burden on these teachers but would qualify them for
a Type A Certificate.
Number 1196
SENATOR WILKEN asked, if DOEED is proposing a two-year window for
out-of-state certification, when the teacher would have to take
the competency exam.
DR. JOHNSON said they would have to do that within the two years.
He said right now, DOEED allows teachers one year because it is
inconvenient for teachers in rural areas to take the exam.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN said she understood that to be a requirement
before a person could be hired.
DR. JOHNSON said DOEED is finding that, during this time of
teacher shortage, people are hired one day before school starts,
so DOEED cannot require the test in that time. He noted the test
is not administered on a daily basis.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN said that practice needs to be looked at. She
then asked if a person could obtain credit for working with a
mentor, as is done with internship programs. She questioned
whether all of the subject-matter teachers need to return to
college to take methods courses or whether they could obtain
credit in other ways.
DR. JOHNSON said he believes Chairwoman Green is suggesting the
concept used by the Masters of Arts in Teaching (MAT) program at
the University in which teacher trainees spend almost all of
their time working with students under a mentor. They attend
seminars one day per week and attend classes full time for two
summer sessions. The difference between what Chairwoman Green is
suggesting and the MAT program is that MAT students are not paid
during that time. MAT students make a tremendous financial
sacrifice. He informed committee members that the state board of
education worked through another regulation over a 12-month
period. That regulation was targeted primarily for rural Alaska
where some instructional aides have been working at their jobs
for 12 to 15 years but they are unable or unwilling to leave
their communities to enter a university program. The regulation
would allow the University to secure a cohort of students with a
provisional certificate, have a mentor, be paid by the district,
and be engaged in a distance delivery teacher education program.
All of those things would provide good incentives, but DOEED is
finding it is not very cost effective for the University until a
certain number of individuals are interested.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked if a teacher needs six hours of credits to
be re-certified every five years.
DR. JOHNSON said that is correct.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN felt that standard is too low compared to other
professional re-certification requirements. She noted the
discrepancy between the requirements to get certified and the
requirements to maintain certification is very big. She then
asked if any of the mandates in SB 86 could be implemented
without legislation and whether DOEED could only implement them
with emergency regulations.
DR. JOHNSON said he would have to review all of those regulations
but explained the state board of education has fairly broad-based
discretion in terms of the types of certificates they issue.
Number 827
SENATOR LEMAN asked if the fact that he has a Masters degree in
engineering would qualify him to take the competency exam and
teach physics or mathematics. He wanted to know whether SB 86
provides enough flexibility in the writing of the regulations to
allow for that.
DR. JOHNSON said he believes so and he thinks the example Senator
Leman provided is a logical conclusion to draw. He suspects that
if SB 86 passes, DOEED would ask the district that wants to hire
such an individual to document that individual's background and
subject matter expertise and propose the courses that individual
would teach.
SENATOR LEMAN then asked, regarding the work experience, if a
legislative aide with five years of experience would qualify to
teach as a subject-matter expert in government.
MR. RICH KRONBERG, President of NEA-Alaska, said he finds CSSB
86(HES) intriguing. NEA-AK agrees it is necessary to deal with
the teacher shortage issue and appreciates Senator Kelly's
efforts to put together a packet that clearly demonstrates that
need. He believes it is clear that one of the factors behind the
problem is that salaries have not kept pace, but the fact that
working conditions in many school districts are extremely
difficult also accounts for a 40 percent turnover rate in certain
districts.
NEA-Ak believes the teacher shortage issue should be solved using
a three-pronged approach. Alaska needs to recruit, retain, and
retrain teachers. He believes CSSB 86(HES) falls into the last
category. NEA-Ak has many questions about the retraining aspect.
NEA-Ak agrees with Dr. Johnson's comments that a future
commitment is important from people who attempt to get subject-
matter endorsements so that they will engage in continuing
education to develop their skills as educators. He believes NEA-
Ak would be very interested in working with the University to
develop an apprenticeship program if this legislation passes.
MR. KRONBERG said NEA-Ak has the following questions:
· What will the fiscal note be for CSSB 86(HES)? The original
bill had a zero fiscal note, but a mentoring program will
have costs associated with it in terms of time and wages.
NEA-Ak suggests that mentors mentor teachers in the culture
in rural areas. This could provide an opportunity for
instructional aides to do the mentoring if they are from a
village.
· Would this program be for secondary school teachers only?
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN said she believes people could also teach at the
elementary level.
MR. KRONBERG thought Senator Kelly was clear that all people who
get hired under this program would have to meet all of the
requirements and that they would be part of the bargaining unit.
He asked if they would be required to also meet all of the
performance standards that exist for other teachers. He noted
some of those standards clearly deal with pedagogy.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN said she thought it would go without saying that
would be a requirement.
MR. KRONBERG said that is the answer NEA-Ak wanted to hear.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked that Mr. Kronberg and Dr. Johnson talk to
the sponsor about their concerns.
MR. KRONBERG agreed to do so. He pointed out that, regarding the
competency test, it is his understanding that a teacher could be
hired without taking it but could not get a contract because a
contract requires licensure. He stated some teachers were hired
by the Anchorage School District on substitute pay and when they
did not pass a portion of the test, they had to continue on
substitute status because they were unable to get a contract. He
felt the basic concern is that this legislation may not do what
it is intended to do. He said NEA-Ak's data agrees with Dr.
Johnson's statement that many other states have found that
subject-matter teachers do not remain in the profession for more
than three years unless there is some coherent program of
induction, including mentoring. Without that, Alaska may just be
creating a "revolving door". He also believes the state needs to
deal with the problems that drive teachers out of certain
districts, such as inadequate housing and lack of community
support. He stated that NEA-Ak is not opposed to CSSB 86(HES),
but it has serious questions about its implementation and would
like them answered before it can lend its support to this
legislation.
Number 117
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN noted that several years ago, her daughter
graduated from college as a Spanish major. At the time, Wasilla
High School could not find a foreign language teacher. Her
daughter could have successfully filled that position for one
year, but the high school was unable to hire her. Chairwoman
Green felt Alaska has lost a lot of opportunities to put
qualified people in the classroom.
TAPE 02-26, SIDE A
SENATOR LEMAN questioned whether the competency exam is a multi-
subject test or whether a person would only have to pass the one
subject area he or she plans to teach.
MR. KRONBERG said it covers the subjects of reading, writing and
math.
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN asked if it requires any subject area expertise.
DR. JOHNSON explained that DOEED only requires the basic
competency test but the Educational Testing Service offers a test
in each subject area as well, so a district could use that
vehicle to require a subject area test.
MR. KRONBERG commented that NEA-Ak has not had any discussions
about pay for performance in Alaska but he cannot imagine that if
a district brought a serious proposal to the table, any of NEA-
Ak's bargaining units would reject it out of hand. He noted the
difficulty with pay for performance is the need to measure the
added value of an individual teacher. A teacher cannot just be
held accountable for the absolute results in a classroom because,
for example, what a 7th grade teacher is able to do depends on
what happened during the first six years of that student's
education. Alaska does not have any systems available to measure
the value a teacher is adding. Other states are working on those
systems but they are not fine tuned yet.
SENATOR LEMAN said he knows a system is in place to choose the
teacher of the year by both districts and the state. He has
participated in that process and has been very impressed with the
people who have been the finalists. He agreed that a pay for
performance program may be difficult to implement, but he
believes it is a worthy idea.
There being no further business to come before the committee,
CHAIRWOMAN GREEN adjourned the meeting at 3:20 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|