Legislature(2019 - 2020)ADAMS 519
03/16/2020 09:00 AM House 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 | |
| HB185 | |
| HB24 | |
| HJR15 | |
| HB181 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 185 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HJR 15 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 181 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HOUSE BILL NO. 24
"An Act relating to instruction in a language other
than English; and relating to limited teacher
certificates."
9:10:42 AM
Co-Chair Foster MOVED to ADOPT the proposed committee
substitute for HB 24, Work Draft 31-LS0290\G
(Marx/Caouette).
Co-Chair Johnston OBJECTED for discussion.
ERIN SHINE, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE JENNIFER JOHNSTON,
directed committee members to page 1, lines 11 through 12
in the committee substitute (CS) that incorporated the
amendment that had passed the previous Friday. She relayed
it was the only change in the CS.
Co-Chair Johnston WITHDREW her OBJECTION.
There being NO further OBJECTION, Work Draft 31-LS0290\G
was ADOPTED.
Representative Wool was concerned that immersion schools
were being treated differently than other public schools.
He noted they were all funded the same way and were in the
same school district under the auspices of the Department
of Education and Early Development (DEED). He detailed that
when there was a language teacher shortage in a regular
public school they had to go through the typical process;
however, immersion schools had a fast track to getting
teachers. He believed language teachers were needed
everywhere and he had heard from his school district about
the need. He reported that his district would be willing to
accept a teacher under the conditions of the bill. He
supported the concept. He reasoned that immersion schools
were likely similar to charter schools (there was no
immersion school in his community). He highlighted that
kids attending charter schools tended to have parents who
could drive them to school. He elaborated that the parents
were typically more involved, and the kids were usually
higher performing. He explained that it tended to attract a
different kind of student. He reiterated that he did not
have an immersion school in his district, but he was basing
his experience off of charter schools that tended to be a
little higher performing.
Representative Wool thought it seemed slightly
disadvantageous to the schools and children who could not
afford to be driven to school but wanted language exposure.
He considered that perhaps the bill did not apply to high
school. He noted a person who had testified previously had
stated there were K-12 programs; however, the bill sponsor
had relayed there were not many vibrant K-12 programs. He
remarked that younger kids did not have language programs
in public schools. He objected to the idea that only
immersion schools had the advantage of the hiring process,
even though they were all in the public school system and
all received state funds.
9:13:52 AM
Representative LeBon considered how districts treated the
immersion language program. From his perspective, the bill
opened the door for a school district to pursue immersion
language opportunities for students. He asked whether an
immersion language opportunity allowed a student to receive
foreign language credit towards graduation. Alternatively,
he wondered if the immersion program was an enhancement to
a student's academic portfolio, similar to a foreign
language club. He considered whether the immersion program
was a substitute for curriculum requirements to graduate by
senior year in high school. He believed most of the
programs would be at the high school level or may begin in
middle school. He asked if the immersion language was
intended to be an enhancement to the school day and to the
language for a student or whether it was also intended to
be a substitution for the foreign language requirements
that a school district may establish for graduation from
high school. He asked if it was one or the other or both.
Representative LeBon shared that when he had served on the
Fairbanks School Board, the board would approve curriculum
for foreign language requirements to graduate. He stated
that if the school district chose to allow the bill to be a
substitution for the foreign language requirements to
graduate, the curriculum for the immersion language program
would need to be reviewed and accepted by the school board.
Additionally, the performance of the instructor and student
would have to be measured and tracked. The minimum
requirements as established in the curriculum would have to
be met if the bill substituted for the foreign language to
earn credits to graduate. He summarized his questions. He
wondered if the bill resulted in an educational enhancement
as in a foreign language club or if it would add to the
foreign language curriculum where standards would be
established for the instructor and student. He believed it
was an enhancement and not a substitution, given the name
Alaska Native language preservation. He believed it would
be up to a school district to decide whether to treat the
program as its foreign language requirement.
Co-Chair Johnston noted the department was available for
questions.
TAMARA VAN WYHE, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INNOVATION AND
EDUCATIONAL EXCELLENCE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY
DEVELOPMENT (via teleconference), asked Representative
LeBon to repeat the question.
9:17:49 AM
Representative LeBon repeated his question. He wondered if
the bill would allow a school district to take an immersion
language opportunity and treat it as part of the foreign
language curriculum for graduation. Alternatively, he
wondered if it was up to the district to decide. He asked
if the department had any insight into how a district may
treat the issue.
Ms. Van Wyhe replied that much of the decision would be up
to the school districts to determine. She elaborated that
if a district or school offered foreign language in a club-
type scenario with no credit attached, certification for
the instructor would not be necessary. However,
[instructor] certification would matter if academic credit
was earned. She elaborated that the district would need to
go through the proper channels to ensure the instructor was
certificated. How the issue was handled would be a school-
by-school and district-by-district decision.
9:19:08 AM
Representative LeBon provided a scenario where a school
district wanted to take advantage of the talent of a
foreign language speaking individual in the community and
allow the language (e.g. Russian or Chinese) to be part of
the foreign language requirement curriculum. He asked if
the class would be part of the curriculum and would fall
under a whole different approval process. He stated that it
was typically referred to a curriculum committee to write
the curriculum and establish standards for instruction and
student performance. He surmised it would have to be
tracked and followed and a passing grade would have to be
earned to check off the foreign language requirement for
graduation. He had been reading the bill as an immersion
program that would enhance the preservation of Alaska
Native languages via a community member coming to the
school to teach for a stipend or activity fee (not at the
pay level of a certified language teacher). He asked for
comment.
Ms. Van Wyhe answered that it would be a question for the
individual school districts. The way districts handled
special coursework related to a uniquely qualified
individual was specific to each district - it would depend
on the size of the district, the resources available, and
the size of the teaching staff. She was not comfortable
answering the question for districts across the state. She
deferred to the bill sponsor for additional clarification.
REPRESENTATIVE JONATHAN KREISS-TOMPKINS, SPONSOR, asked if
the question was whether fluency attained through an
immersion credit should not qualify as a language credit in
a school district.
Representative LeBon explained he was trying to understand
the world the bill applied to. He asked if the bill applied
to a foreign language offered by a school district and
perhaps it required students to take one year of foreign
language to graduate. If so, he asked if the immersion
language would or would not potentially satisfy the
requirement to graduate.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins answered that Brandon Locke
[director of the World Languages and Immersion Programs in
the Anchorage School District] would have been best suited
to answer the question because it would be on a district-
by-district basis [Mr. Locke testified previously on the
bill in a 3/10/20 10:00 a.m. meeting]. He believed it would
be fairly absurd to not credential scenarios where students
were fully fluent in a language. For example, if there were
students coming out of grade 6 who could fluently speak
Japanese and continued to do so through high school,
something would be wrong if the school district did not
recognize it as foreign language credit. He noted that he
did not know how the foreign language credit worked. He
added that the issue would be on a district-by-district
basis. He surmised there was probably an existing mechanism
to determine how the language would be credited.
9:23:12 AM
Representative LeBon used the example provided by the bill
sponsor about a Japanese speaking student. He considered a
situation where a school did not offer Japanese as a
language and the student was the only student taking the
language in an immersion course. He thought the district
would have to determine whether to formally recognize
Japanese as an immersion language and to give the student
foreign language credit. He continued that it would be
necessary to run the course through a curriculum
development process and ensure the instruction met the
standards; it would also require approval by the school
board. He continued that it would also be necessary to
measure proficiency and declare that the instructor and
student met the minimum standards and performance
expectations, respectively.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins responded that he understood
the direction of the questioning. He thought it was a
nuanced inquiry. He had dialogued with over a dozen
districts during the four years he had carried the
legislation and the topic of how students coming out of
immersion language programs qualified towards foreign
language programs had never come up as a "sticky wicket."
He did not have the answer to the question. He explained
that someone who ran an immersion program would have to
answer the question. He explained that the programs had
been around for a long time and operated successfully.
Representative LeBon referenced a scenario where a student
entering a school district was fluent in Japanese. He asked
if the student could opt out of taking a foreign language
to graduate to meet the foreign language requirements of
the district if Japanese was not one of the offered
languages. He asked if the student would be required to
take Spanish, French, or German if they were the three
offered foreign languages and the district had no immersion
program. He wondered if the student would be given a pass
because they spoke fluent Japanese. He guessed the answer
would be no. He surmised that the student would be required
to take another foreign language even though they already
spoke a foreign language fluently.
9:26:26 AM
Vice-Chair Ortiz asked if there was a handle on the number
of existing immersion schools and whether they only existed
at the elementary or high school level.
Ms. Van Whye replied that DEED did not track the data. She
would check with the teacher certification administrators.
Representative Wool followed up on Vice-Chair Ortiz's
question. He recalled that a testifier who ran the
immersion programs in Anchorage had referenced a K-12
program; however, the bill sponsor had communicated that
the program was not robust. He believed many of the
immersion programs were for younger students in K-6 or K-8.
He assumed those classroom hours would not apply towards
high school requirements. He did not believe [entering
school] speaking a foreign language was enough to exempt a
student from the foreign language requirement. He shared
that his sister-in-law spoke a foreign language and her
kids were fairly fluent and they had been a bit discouraged
when they had to take a foreign language in school. He
reasoned that it was not merely about speaking a language
or else students would not have to take high school
English. He thought the foreign language requirement was
more of an academic requirement than just being able to
speak the language.
Representative Wool highlighted that the bill specified an
immersion program. He thought Representative LeBon may have
been referring to an immersion program within a
conventional school. He surmised the bill would apply if a
school wanted to start a program; however, the person
instructing within the immersion program would not be able
to teach a "regular" foreign language class within the same
school, which he found challenging. On the other hand, he
considered that perhaps the immersion teacher would be too
busy teaching economics, history, and other topics in the
immersion program. He had many questions remaining. He
asked what a typical grade 9 through 12 immersion program
looked like at present and into the future.
Representative Kreiss-Tompkins believed the programs
varied. He stated the question would have been best
directed to Brandon Locke. The bulk of immersion programs
were K-6 (whether they terminated at 6th grade varied).
There were different language immersion tracks in the
Anchorage School District where there was a continued study
and maintenance of the language, including at higher levels
(e.g. studying literature of the language). He did not
believe there was a cookie cutter answer as to what an
immersion program looked like after grade 6. Broadly
speaking, immersion programs were primary education focused
and the amount of time spent in a target language classroom
tapered off as a student approached 6th grade. He explained
that the immersion programs were frontloaded in the first
few years of primary school. He relayed that the questions
would be best directed to administrators of the programs.
9:30:45 AM
AT EASE
9:30:54 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster MOVED to REPORT CSHB 24(FIN) out of
committee with individual recommendations and the
accompanying fiscal notes. There being NO OBJECTION, it was
so ordered.
CSHB 24(FIN) was REPORTED out of committee with six "do
pass" recommendations and five "no recommendation"
recommendations and with one new zero note from the
Department of Commerce, Community and Economic Development
and one previously published fiscal impact note: FN1 (EED).
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| HB 24 ver. G 3.13.2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/16/2020 9:00:00 AM |
HB 24 |
| HB 185 ver. E 3.12.2020.pdf |
HFIN 3/16/2020 9:00:00 AM |
HB 185 |
| HB 30 public Testimony Red'd by 030920.pdf |
HFIN 3/16/2020 9:00:00 AM |
HB 30 |