Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
03/21/2012 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Kuspuk School District | |
| SB8 | |
| HB330 | |
| HJR39 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 8 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | HJR 39 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 330 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 330-STATE EDUCATION STANDARDS
8:59:24 AM
CHAIR DICK announced that the next order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 330, "An Act establishing a Joint Legislative
Task Force on Education Standards; requiring the Department of
Labor and Workforce Development to provide information and
resources to the task force; establishing state education
standards; amending the authority of the Department of Education
and Early Development to adopt education standards; and
providing for an effective date."
8:59:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PRUITT moved to adopt the proposed committee
substitute (CS) for HB 330, Version 27-LS1100\E, Mischel,
3/20/12, as the working document.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for discussion.
9:00:20 AM
ANNETTE KREITZER, Staff, Representative Alan Dick, Alaska State
Legislature, directed attention to the handout, in the committee
packet, titled "Sectional Analysis CS HB 330 ( ) Version E State
Education Standards," dated 3/20/12, paraphrasing the language,
which read as follows [original punctuation provided]:
Section 1:
Sets out the findings substantiating the creation of
the Jt. Legislative Task Force on Sustainable
Education.
Section 2:
The purpose of the Task Force is to: examine the
efficiency and effectiveness of education delivery in
Alaska, with a specific focus on education funding and
educational standards, and the ability to prepare
students for significant careers.
The Task Force will submit a report of its findings
and proposed legislative changes to the governor, the
legislature and the Board of Education and Early
Development by September 30, 2013, and make any
additional reports it considers advisable.
The duties of the task force begin at Page 2, Line 30:
1. Create a process for vetting proposed education
standards before the standards are adopted by the
state board of Education and Early Development
2. Propose separate education tracks for
postsecondary vocational and college readiness;
3. Evaluate school district challenges that result
from implementation of federal education laws;
4. Evaluate the efficacy, cost-effectiveness, and
redundancies of various education assessment,
including the high school graduation qualifying
examination, and make recommendations to the
legislature, the governor and the state Board of
Education and Early Development for improvement or
restructuring of assessments;
5. Conduct an analysis of public education that
funding that includes:
A. A determination of the adequacy of public school
funding for coverage of appropriate education
expenses;
B. A determination of the appropriate uses of the
base student allocation;
C. Alternative methods of addressing fluctuating
energy, health, insurance, personnel, and pupil
transportation costs;
D. The total amounts of state, local, and federal
funding available to each district and for each
category of special needs service area;
E. A comparison of the allocation of administrative
and instructional personnel among districts;
F. Whether the allocation of administrative and
instructional personnel has an effect on the ability
to provide effective instructional services in each
district; and
G. The effect of pension and health care expenses on
total state education costs
6. Evaluate the availability of courses meeting core
academic curriculum requirements under AS
14.43.820(a)(3) in each district.
The membership of the Task Force begins on Page 3,
Line 31:
The Task Force members are appointed by the Senate
President and House Speaker and represent:
a. Six members of the Legislature including chairmen
of the Education Committees
b. Eight members as follows:
i. a representative of the Department of Education
and Early Development
ii. a small business owner
iii. a superintendent
iv. a school board member
v. a public member
vi. three representatives of major career
destinations of high school graduates in the state,
jointly nominated by the commissioner of labor and
workforce development and the commissioner of
commerce, community, and economic development.
The task force meets at the call of the chair. The
Senate President and House Speaker shall jointly
appoint the chair and vice chair of the task force.
Section 3:
The existing content and performance standards will
remain in effect until the new process is developed
and the newly vetted standards are adopted.
Section 4:
The task force is repealed on July 1, 2014. The
temporary law in Section 3 is also repealed July 1,
2014.
Section 5:
The bill has an immediate effective date.
9:04:21 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection. Without further
objection, Version E was before the committee.
9:05:58 AM
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner, Department of Education and Early
Development (EED), expressed concern for the lengthy timeline
that is involved with the duties placed on the task force. The
ability to adopt appropriate standards, and to bring a college
ready curriculum to students of the state, would be delayed by
at minimum one and one half years, which could be longer
depending on legislative response or other adjustments. Thus
far, the proposed standards have been in development for two
years. Appointing a task force charged with beginning this
process over could delay introduction of new standards until
2016. The proposed standards have been developed to provide
students with a career and college ready foundation, and he
said, it has been recognized that the current standards do not
provide the necessary rigor and have been deemed inadequate.
College reports indicate that students arrive at college
unprepared and require remediation, and employers report that
new recruits lack necessary work skills. Also, three of the
largest school districts have lamented that, "the State's going
too slow," and indicated interest in adopting the federal common
core standards rather than wait longer. He referred to the
comments of Superintendent Allen, heard earlier today, who said
that meeting the requirements of the proposed standards might be
a challenge, but the necessary actions would be taken to
accomplish the task. He opined that the cost of maintaining the
status quo, or delaying the process, would be to the students.
Regarding the development of a two track system, he said the
burden could present an impossible mandate, particularly in
small districts with limited staff. He offered an example of a
small school, with an enrollment of 25, deciding which track to
offer. Considering the statewide transient rate of 15-30
percent, a student could easily enter a new school with an
alternate focus and find themselves out of alignment. The issue
would then become a question regarding what could adequately be
offered to students in a comprehensive way, and he predicted
that two tracks would create dis parity.
9:10:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI noted that the primary duty of the task
force is to develop a process for vetting the proposed
standards, prior to adoption by the Board of Education, and he
asked for an understanding of how the current standards were
developed.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said it was an open process and federal
guidelines were followed. Primarily educators provided
feedback, but other stakeholders and members of the private
sector were invited to comment and vest themselves in the
development of the educational standards.
9:12:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE CISSNA opined that rural Alaska is in a state of
collapse, and enormous loss is occurring, as evidenced by the
district presentations reporting declining enrollments. A
variety of conditions are contributing to the loss including the
cost of energy and infrastructure for communities. Reports
issued by Commonwealth North indicate that dependency on diesel,
in the Alaskan Bush, is a major factor to the collapse. She
stressed that the survival of rural Alaska and the human
resources that exist in the Bush are on a timeline. The loss of
what is currently in place would represents a cost to the state,
she said, and suggested the need to take this under
consideration. Additionally, she opined, the state must pay
more attention to the educational needs and identify appropriate
changes that are necessary for students to persevere and
progress.
9:14:25 AM
CHAIR DICK agreed. He then said that educational rigor is
important and the students need to be challenged. The proposed
standards will prove suitable to prepare students for tackling
postsecondary degree programs, he predicted, but questioned the
lack of evidence indicating how the needs of the remaining 93
percent will be met. Referring to notes, he paraphrased a
recent statement from Ben Bernanke, Chairman, U.S. Federal
Reserve, stating:
The U.S. has to foster development of a skilled
workforce, if it is going to enjoy good long term
prospects. The U.S. education system, despite
considerable strengths, poorly serves a substantial
portion of our population.
CHAIR DICK said that the best and the brightest are being
served, and concern must be directed to the students whose needs
are not being met; those who will not complete a four year
degree.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated his belief that the proposed
standards will meet or exceed what is required for career and
technical training.
CHAIR DICK concurred and pointed out that the question is
whether or not every student must meet the standards. The idea
to have every child excel is good, but in reality the needs of
students who are not college bound may be lost. He indicated
that only four non-educators were involved in the development of
the standards and suggested it may be due to the prevalence of
the esoteric language utilized. A conversation needs to occur
that involves more stakeholders, he opined, stating that the
process for creating standards has not changed and a better,
updated system, written in an applicable manner, would prove
helpful.
9:19:43 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON acknowledged that the development process
for creating standards could be frustrating and give pause for
questioning. However, he reminded, that the passage of HB 330
would accept and retain the current standards until 2016, and
conjectured whether that would be appropriate. One third of the
students may be opted out of the current standards, if three
large districts elect to adopt the federal core standards in the
coming months; removing the state from the process. The bill
poses a challenging idea with a difficult timeline to consider,
and he said his office would offer amendments.
9:22:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE agreed that additional outside opinions
would be helpful in creating new standards. He suggested that
industry retirees may be a resource.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY concurred.
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE noted that the new standards will raise the
bar, and opined that doing so does not represent a negative
action. Raising the bar should that be a problem for students
who do not aspire in the same direction as their peers.
Further, he said that the proposed standards are reported to be
understandable by the current teachers, and questioned the
wisdom of putting a hold on the process, thus creating a
possible four year delay. The change may be an attempt to fix
something that is not necessarily broken, he opined. The idea
of a task force is reasonable and he suggested proceeding with
the adoption process, as well as seating a task force.
9:26:44 AM
CHAIR DICK reminded the committee that the proposed standards
are purported to have been developed specifically, of, by and
for Alaskans. However, having conducted a page by page
comparison, he stated his believe that the standards were
created by cutting and pasting the federal core standards, save
a few minor changes. Referring to the Brookings Institute
handout, available in the committee packet, he reminded members
that the findings indicate how it is necessary to look beyond
the common core standards in order to improve education in
America. The proposed legislation has drawn a cursory response
that it would create a dumbing down of the standards, which is
not the intent. To understand the intent it may prove helpful
to scrutinize and understand the term "rigor" in an educational
context. In a school setting, he said the term is understood to
mean that a student will advance beyond comprehension and recall
and learn higher level thinking skills as developed through
synthesis, analysis, and evaluation. He directed attention to
the committee handout, titled "Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Levels,"
and introduced it is a tool used by teachers when incorporating
higher level thinking skills; that is rigor. One myth that
needs debunking is that high level math, trigonometry and
calculus, are required in order for rigor to preside; however,
relating math to realistic, daily activities, can afford
appropriate and adequate rigor, as applied to farming, mining,
and other realistic situations. Further, he agreed that the
current standards need to be replaced. He reported that he
worked on developing the existing standards, and opined that the
process was flawed at the time and that without change it will
continue to be flawed. Referring to Representative Feige's
suggestion to adopt the proposed standards and "go with the next
cycle," he pointed out that it will require another six year
cycle before assessments are analyzed and changes can again be
considered. Once the proposed standards are adopted, there is
no turning back on the path and, he maintained, further
information is needed prior to taking that step. He suggested
sending samples of the standards to districts for a period of
time as a field test, as well as other means for improving the
system, which could include writing the standards in layman
language, and conducting a state survey asking participants to
rate their Alaskan educational experience. He stressed that
submitting the proposed standards to a task force for review
would be important and perhaps result in advice to continue the
process for adoption. Finally, he stated his belief in having
high standards and pointed out that currently many districts are
teaching beyond what is required, as the standards represent the
information that will be assessed without restricting what is
taught.
9:33:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON recalled that districts currently
establish independent policies for high school graduation
requirements, and the standards should not mandate what classes
a district must require. He said that the assessments allow
comparison of the knowledge base between areas.
9:35:48 AM
CHAIR DICK stated his understanding that the proposed standards
dictate to each district that every student is required to learn
trigonometry. He predicted that having this mandate will affect
AYP, and stressed the need to have standards that reflect the
abilities of all students, while maintaining extremely high
goals.
9:36:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON commented that the commissioner
previously indicated that the proposed standards are directly
from the core standards, with minimal alterations. Also,
districts have not been restricted from developing approaches
and establishing course determinations and credit requirements
for gradation, under the current standards. A problem does
exist, when students arrive at college unprepared. She held
that adopting new standards, developed by the state or common
core, will not change what is occurring in the districts.
However, adopting the proposed standards will allow the state to
qualify for a waiver to out of NCLB, thus removing the AYP
compliance factor. She opined that opting out of NCLB to avoid
the AYP factor is not an appropriate action. Having a task
force will prove to be helpful and provide important feedback,
she said and predicted that meaningful determinations would be
the result. Finishing, she conjectured that the standards are
not a big deal, but it would be important to have a means to
identify what is a big deal and take appropriate measures.
9:41:29 AM
CHAIR DICK commented on the rationale for providing two
educational tracks and standards. The standards, and text books
that are in use, are designed for college bound students, thus
one track already exists. He suggested that college bound
students may be slowed down in class by those who do not have
the same focus. The two track approach taken in Northern
Ireland has resulted in an increase of career bound students
deciding to attend college. Regarding the development of the
standards, he said it would be helpful to have input from
professionals who did not create a foundation of financial
success based on, or derived through, obtaining a college
degree.
9:43:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said the Northern Ireland approach is
instructive but creates a number of questions regarding how
applicable it might be to the situation in Alaska, and the task
force would make those types of determinations. He agreed with
Representative Wilson that the standards aren't a dictate for
the way in which children are taught, but represent the basis of
what is to be learned. The knowledge base in what is important
and what is being addressed in the schools. He stated support
for a task force, and conjectured that it would be able to
explore information, such as the Northern Ireland approach and
whether it employs two sets of standards, or establishes two
methods for student engagement utilizing vocational and academic
tracks.
9:45:22 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said the state standard establishes a
requirement for a minimum of 21 credits for graduation, which
must include two years of math and certain other courses. He
pointed out that the two year math requirement could be
satisfied without taking a senior level math course.
CHAIR DICK asked whether the students would be tested on the
proposed standards.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY responded that the students would be
assessed in grade 10 [HSGQE] on the standards. The standards
are currently established for grades 3-10, and he said he would
not anticipate a change in the assessment structure.
CHAIR DICK questioned the structure and accuracy of the
assessments.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that the curriculum will be
aligned with the standards to help students attain their highest
level of interest. He pointed out that two courses in math may
put a student through Algebra but does not allow them to qualify
for certain opportunities, including the Alaska Performance
Scholarship, which requires four. In closing, Commissioner
Hanley said HB 330 requires placing a freeze on the current
standards until the legislature takes further action, and he
expressed concern for creating that type of delay. Finally, he
stated his understanding that the task force would be reviewing
the process for creating standards, not reviewing the proposed
standards for approval.
[HB 330 was held over.]
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB 8 Sectional 27-LS0084A-revised 2-23-2013.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 2011 AK Youth Risk Behavior Survey Results.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SB 8 |
| SB 8 Sponsor Statement rev 4-4-2011.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
SB 8 |
| HJR039 Version A.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 39 |
| HJR039 Sponsor Statement.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 39 |
| HJR 39 States Requesting Flexibility NCLB.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 39 |
| HJR 39 Education Brief Common Core Standards 032112.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HJR 39 |
| CS HB 330 Version E.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 330 |
| CS HB 330 Version E sponsor statement 032012.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 330 |
| CS HB 330 Version E sectional analysis 032012.pdf |
HEDC 3/21/2012 8:00:00 AM |
HB 330 |