HB 5-CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY CURRICULUM  CHAIR DICK announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 5, "An Act requiring a standardized statewide history of American constitutionalism curriculum and a secondary school history of American constitutionalism examination in public schools in the state; and providing for an effective date." [In front of the committee was Version E, adopted as the work draft on February 25, 2011.] 8:35:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER provided a brief overview of the bill, as previously heard, and stated that it was: A mandate on school districts to teach the values of American constitutionalism as portrayed in the Declaration of Independence, the early states' constitutions, the Articles of Confederation, the US Constitution, the Federalist, and the Bill of Rights. He cited the current world affairs as a reason for his request of this bill at this time. He extolled the importance of understanding the idea of inalienable rights, as they differ from the human rights bestowed by governments. He pointed out that it was a very broad history mandate, a "mandate-lite." CHAIR DICK indicated his concern for an unfunded mandate. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that he shared the concern but that proposed HB 5 was to a very high level of importance. He opined that many districts already complied, and that proposed HB 5 was a focal point and was "worthy of doing." 8:40:23 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked what version of proposed HB 5 was before the committee. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that it was Version E. 8:40:59 AM REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA remarked that Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs was more important than the constitution, and she asked if this bill could be addressed after the basics of survival, including schooling, were resolved. 8:42:34 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER clarified that proposed HB 5 was not a mandate to teach the US Constitution, but to teach the values of American constitutionalism, with the documents to be used as a source of information. In response to Representative Cissna, he agreed that survival was a priority, but that the importance of these values was akin to the most fundamental core needs of Americans. He emphasized that some of the resources supplied to schools needed to be "directed at preserving the knowledge of these values." 8:44:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON reminded that earlier discussion of proposed HB 5 had clarified that the bill was not mandating a civics classes, but centered on teaching values. He asked if the purpose of proposed HB 5 was to teach "the values that were in those 15 year time span." 8:45:11 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER agreed that the bill was not a civics mandate; it was a history mandate to teach and emphasize the values of American constitutionalism found in these early documents. 8:47:13 AM CHAIR DICK questioned whether a school district which offered a five minute course with a one question examination would meet the criteria of the bill. REPRESENTATIVE KELLER, in response, stated that it would meet the criteria, but not the intent of the bill. 8:47:57 AM CHAIR DICK opined that the proposed HB 5 mandated a conversation between a school district and its community. 8:48:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER offered his vision for this bill to be a graduation requirement and a catalyst for community discussion. 8:48:56 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON noted that discussion during the four previous hearings on the bill had included the unfunded mandate, and the graduation requirement. She asked for a further definition to American constitutionalism. 8:50:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE KELLER replied that American constitutionalism was defined in the early 19th century as a term referring to the unique American values and it was a broad term, purposefully selected to allow districts teaching latitude. 8:52:17 AM REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI, reflecting on current world affairs, shared that the Egyptian constitution was one of the oldest in the world, and he listed the freedoms it enumerated. He also listed many of the freedoms written in the Libyan constitution. He suggested that it was necessary to study and compare with other constitutions, but that he did not want a mandate, or to teach to a test. He offered his belief that students needed to be taught more critical thinking skills. 8:55:13 AM CHAIR DICK opened public testimony. 8:55:32 AM CAROL COMEAU, Superintendent, Anchorage School District, agreed with the importance for students to understand the US Constitution, the founding documents, and the values on which the United States was based. She emphasized that the Anchorage School Board and the administration were opposed to proposed HB 5 as it was an unnecessary mandate with many negative ramifications. She listed the civics courses already required, and that the proposed bill would only create additional barriers for students. 8:57:29 AM CHAIR DICK expressed a concern about "folks that are here in this country without a knowledge of the rules by which the rest of us play." He asked when students would receive this information. 8:58:14 AM MS. COMEAU replied that she was not privy to the immigration status of students and that she was not knowledgeable about illegal students. She pointed out that naturalization ceremonies revealed the value of the US Constitution and citizenship. She offered her belief that many students born in the United States did not have this knowledge. She opined that it was necessary to work through the current curriculum, and not add an additional mandatory test. 9:00:00 AM BILL MCLEOD, Superintendent, Dillingham City School District, stated that proposed HB 5 did not meet any of the needs in his district, as there was already a course and curriculum on government. He paraphrased the Alaska Standards for a government class and pointed out the similarities of these requirements to proposed HB 5. He lauded the concept of proposed HB 5, but stated that it was already being taught in the schools. 9:02:56 AM JEFF THIELBAR, PhD, Superintendent, Skagway School District, Board Member, SERRC (Southeast Regional Resource Center), testified that the Skagway School District was opposed to the unfunded regulation of proposed HB 5 as it required oversight at many levels to a curriculum which was already mandated by the State of Alaska. [HB 5 was held over.]