Legislature(2017 - 2018)ADAMS ROOM 519
04/18/2018 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 | |
| SB216 | |
| SB102 | |
| SB104 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | HB 383 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 216 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
CS FOR SENATE BILL NO. 104(2d FIN)
"An Act relating to the duties of the Department of
Education and Early Development; relating to the
duties of the state Board of Education and Early
Development; relating to school curricula; and
relating to a system for managing student information
and records related to individualized education
programs for children with disabilities."
3:24:13 PM
MICHAEL JOHNSON, COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND
EARLY DEVELOPMENT, spoke in support of the bill. The bill
benefited school districts. Some school districts would
benefit financially from the legislation. The department
was appreciative because it benefited all schools in the
state by providing educators additional information about
what was working and being used at other schools around the
state. It provided the department the ability to collect
information and publish it on the department's website.
Commissioner Johnson continued that the department was
particularly appreciative of the bill for the information
it provided parents and policy makers. It reported what
curriculum was being used and invited parents to be a part
of the process in understanding what was being used for
their students and schools. Mostly, the department was
appreciative that the bill did something great for
students. He suggested that by providing all of the other
people in the system the resources and information,
decisions would be made to benefit students in the
classroom. The department was appreciative of the bill and
the conversation that took place around it. He was hopeful
that the department would be able to apply it for the
benefit of students in the state.
Co-Chair Foster invited the bill sponsor to the table.
3:26:49 PM
SENATOR ANNA MCKINNON, SPONSOR, introduced the bill that
was an attempt to improve educational outcomes for
students. It was not mandatory for districts to
participate. However, it allowed the Department of
Education and Early Development to see if they were ready
to move forward in a process.
Senator MacKinnon continued that the bill would make a
pilot program available for up to 5 schools. Hopefully
those schools would be able to participate in each
curriculum in the effort to improve math and language arts
- basic skills that all students needed to be successful in
elementary school, middle school, college, and life beyond.
She explained that the 3-year pilot program would be
constructed on the ability to be able to go forward and
look at the change. Through the first year of the program,
DEED would work with districts and teachers proficient in
these skills to look around the world, inside America, and
inside Alaska to see if the state had best practices in
place and whether students could achieve outcomes
consistent with the current standards. She admitted that
the standards could change and that the bill did not
address the standards in place. The bill stipulated that
whatever curricula moved forward should meet Alaska State
standards.
Senator MacKinnon continued to detail the bill. The
legislation would require school districts to put their
curriculum on DEED's website so that parents would have an
opportunity to understand and engage in a student's
education and opportunities to support that student in
individual schools. She emphasized that it was the only
mandate in the bill.
Senator MacKinnon relayed that the bill also updated and
would support schools that wanted to improve communication
for individual education performance plans. She offered
that she could go into extensive detail about the paperwork
required to communicate an individual education plan. As
she recalled there was a minimum of 27 pages and sometimes
up to 3, 5, or 15 people that needed to come together to
sign off on all of the paperwork for an individual student.
She would leave it up to her staff to explain further.
Senator MacKinnon offered that the bill created a new fund
called the "Curriculum and Best Practices Fund." It was
charged with $30 million. The money would not be extended
in a huge part in year 1. It was an up to amount of $10
million in year 1, year 2, and year 3 of the pilot program
as the program went forward. She indicated that depending
on the schools and their readiness or willingness to engage
in the incentivized curricula, the fund would offset or
help individual schools, the number would be expended for
the remaining 3 years in different segments.
Senator MacKinnon did not anticipate spending the entire
$30 million. As she understood, the Anchorage School
District recently reviewed some of its curricula. It was
her estimation that they would not redo their curricula.
She highlighted another change in the bill which had to do
with length of time. Legislators had tried to find ways to
deploy and streamline processes for educators. They were
working hard and doing a good job in many areas around the
state. However, some students were struggling. She argued
that curricula were the foundation of trying to provide a
stepping stone to create consistency and support from DEED.
Senator MacKinnon continued that Alaska's constitution
guaranteed local self-determination. The reason why there
was a pilot program was to try to bring people together,
specifically Alaska's Board of Education to agree on what
was best to achieve something for students that they could
align with and succeed with in their future. There was a
process outlined in the bill where the department worked
with school districts across the state in forming and
finding the curricula that might be available and then
incentivizing its use should districts choose to do so on a
voluntary basis. As she understood, specifically in math,
Alaska's largest districts were circling around similar
curricula. Sometimes the same process was not available to
smaller schools. She elaborated that depending on school
size, a school might have different levels of expertise in
individual subjects in smaller school districts. Although
the curricula review was extended from 6 years to 10 in the
bill, the state school board would be required to review
curricula for math and language arts every 5 years to
ensure that the core portion of learning was looked at all
of the time. She was available for questions.
3:32:50 PM
BRITTANY HUTCHINSON, STAFF, SENATOR ANNA MCKINNON, was
available to present the sectional analysis, if it was the
will of the committee.
Co-Chair Foster did not think the committee needed a review
of the sectional analysis. He reviewed a list of available
testifiers. He asked the senator if she wanted to continue
or if she wanted to wait.
Senator MacKinnon thought that the will of the legislature
was for the co-chairmen to meet and to try to solve and
find a path forward on the budget. She was happy to wait
for questions until after the public hearing. Ms. Hartman
could stay to answer questions. She was aware of the huge
fiscal note associated with the bill. She assured members
that the money was saved rather than spent. She explained
the reason the number was so high was because of the ADM at
$150 per student. Everyone had the ability to participate.
However, for the pilot program only a maximum of 5 schools
would be allowed to participate - 1 rural and 1 urban. She
recollected that Anchorage had already done a rewrite.
Co-Chair Foster indicated the committee would bring the
bill up the following day, rather than being in a rush.
3:35:38 PM
AT EASE
3:36:10 PM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Foster would pass the gavel to Vice-Chair Gara.
Vice-Chair Gara OPENED public testimony.
3:37:10 PM
DR. DEENA BISHOP, ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT, ANCHORAGE (via
teleconference), spoke in support of SB 104. She relayed
that curriculum was a foundational piece of quality
instruction. She understood education took resources and
education made a difference. The bill would provide a means
for all districts to access and guarantee them viable
curriculum. State approved curricula was a standard found
in many states allowing for the expertise and resources to
be shared by the largest and smallest communities. She
thought the bill was exactly what districts should be
asking from the state in support of its schools in
partnership with DEED. She Reported that Anchorage School
District supported the bill.
Representative Wilson asked when the Anchorage school
system last updated its English and math curricula. Dr.
Bishop responded that the district had its first adoption
of its K-12 literacy program. The district had gone through
a process in the prior year to adopt an evidence-based
reading curriculum. The district updated its math
curriculum 5 years ago. The district was not looking to
change curricula. The school district was using data to
demonstrate the area for which it needed to find growth.
Representative Wilson asked about the process of reviewing
the district's curriculum. Dr. Bishop responded that the
district had conducted the process in small units due to
budget constraints. The district had looked at elementary
K-2, which had new curriculum, instruction, and
assessments. In the following year the district would be
rolling out 3-5. She elaborated that professional
development and preparation were required in the rolling
out of new curriculum.
Vice-Chair Gara indicated there were no other testifiers
online.
3:40:49 PM
Representative Ortiz asked Dr. Bishop about science
curriculum being reviewed. He wondered if things changed
more rapidly than every 10 years. Dr. Bishop explained that
the school district used its data. For instance, the
district's math data was enough to be reviewed. The
district had reviewed its data and found that what was
happening in its classrooms currently was not meeting its
goals in some areas. The district was choosing to reinvest
in some areas. In other areas, in a 6-year continuous
cycle, the district felt confident. The district was
focusing its energy on where the need existed. She hoped
that leadership around the state and individual districts
would do the same. The legislation would allow for the
expertise to be statewide so that for smaller districts
that did not have the means could engage in the process.
Anchorage School District's science was addressed every
year. The district was working through science, technology,
engineering, and mathematics (STEM). She elaborated about
curriculum reviews and looking at the impact in student
learning and whether outcomes were where they were expected
to be. If they were not, the school district would look at
what was happening in the schools from day-to-day. The
school district wanted to ensure the success of its
students when they left the district.
Vice-Chair Gara thanked Dr. Bishop for her testimony.
3:44:33 PM
Vice-Chair Gara CLOSED public testimony.
Vice-Chair Gara reported that amendments were due by
Friday, April 20, 2018 at 5:00 p.m. [The meeting was
recessed to the call of the chair but never reconvened.]