Legislature(2017 - 2018)BUTROVICH 205
04/04/2017 03:30 PM Senate EDUCATION
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 | |
| SB96 | |
| SB102 | |
| SB103 | |
| SB104 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | SB 102 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 103 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| *+ | SB 104 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| += | SB 96 | TELECONFERENCED | |
SB 104-EDUCATION CURRICULUM
4:29:19 PM
CHAIR HUGHES announced the consideration of SB 104.
SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking on
behalf of the Senate Finance Committee, explained that SB 104
proposes to suspend curriculum adoption for schools for three
years and allow time to work with DEED to find best practices
and curriculum from other states and nations that have better
outcomes than Alaska has, specifically for math and Language
Arts
4:30:05 PM
MS. HUTCHISON provided the sectional analysis:
Section 1 AS 14.07
A) Adds a new section titled, "Curriculum Approval and
Review".
B) This section allows the State Board of Education (BOE)
to approve of all curricula from the largest 5 school
districts, based on the 2015-2016 ADM and 2 rural
school districts, chosen by the BOE, and makes it
available for all school districts to use, on a
voluntary basis.
C) The Department of Education and Early Development
(DEED), in consultation with school districts, shall
review curricula used in other states and other
countries to find the best curricula and best
practices in the areas of Math and English language
arts. DEED has one year to complete this review. DEED
shall then implement a way to test this new curricula,
for a period of two years, to make sure that it is
appropriate and then submit it to the State BOE for
approval.
D) DEED may submit the curriculum to the BOE for
approval, after testing, if it meets the requirements
of being: appropriate, incompliance with
nondiscrimination standards, aligned with stat
education standards, and result in improved academic
achievement for students
E) If the State BOE approves of the curriculum, they
shall make it available for all school districts to
use on a voluntary basis.
F) The State BOE shall adopt standards for the approval
of the curriculum and best practices.
G) School districts do not have to have their math and
English language arts curriculum go through the
approval or review process for three years. After the
three years, if a school district adopts the BOE's new
approved curriculum for math and English language
arts, they do not need that curriculum reviewed or
approved.
H) Defines School District as having the meaning given in
AS 14.30.350.
4:31:13 PM
CHAIR HUGHES asked if curriculum review will be an on-going task
for DEED.
MS. HUTCHISON said it would be a one-time provision.
CHAIR HUGHES suggested considering that it may be needed more
often.
SENATOR MACKINNON reported that over a year ago she submitted a
letter to the State Board of Education requesting that they take
on the responsibility of finding curriculum appropriate for
smaller districts. She said that DEED has lost most curriculum
specialists, so a fiscal note might be warranted. If curriculum
were to be adopted by the State Board as a matter of practice on
a regular basis, then smaller school districts could choose to
look to the State Board for curriculum review for possible cost
savings. She concluded that it is not in the bill in perpetuity
because she believes it is a State Board responsibility and they
should work together with DEED and districts to see if there is
interest and cost savings.
4:33:21 PM
SENATOR BEGICH understood that the fiscal note would provide
funding for DEED. He asked if the bill's intent is not to have a
mandate for math and English, but to prepare the curriculum so
that a local district may choose it.
SENATOR MACKINNON said yes; it is an opt-in and has no mandate.
She hoped the State Board would agree that it is of value to
smaller school district. Many of the "big five" school districts
are already using similar curriculum. Small districts may have
more varied curriculum.
SENATOR BEGICH commented on the great innovations happening in
Copper River School District and in Chugach School District. He
suggested curriculum for small districts might already be
available. He wanted to ensure the power of the local school
board.
SENATOR MACKINNON said local control is mandated in the
constitution and the bill tries to honor that. She agreed there
are great performing districts in Alaska.
4:36:13 PM
CHAIR HUGHES asked what it costs a district to review a K-12
curriculum.
MS. HUTCHISON said DEED told her it cost about $323 per student
to update curriculum.
4:37:05 PM
CHAIR HUGHES stated she would hold SB 104 in committee.
4:37:24 PM
SENATOR MACKINNON stated that they are not pre-assuming cost
savings in districts in any amount. All provisions are on a
volunteer basis. She noted it is an open dialogue and is a
process.
CHAIR HUGHES concluded that there could be savings by districts
if they decided to go with some of the provisions in the bill.
4:38:26 PM
JENNIFER MCNICHOL, Vice President, Sitka School Board, testified
on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said they have no problems
with the internet provisions in SB 102, however, they do have
concerns about micromanagement and diverting funds from general
education.
She spoke to SB 104 and the provision against maintaining the
APS. She pointed to successes due to the APS and students'
choices to attend UAS because of it. There will be ripple
effects from discontinuing the fund, such as students leaving
the state for education and not returning. She recalled that APS
was also on the block last year and students came to lobby for
it.
4:42:06 PM
MS. MCNICHOL spoke of concerns about the Innovative Grants being
subject to legislative appropriation. There is no guarantee they
will be available in future years. The district has been under
budget constraints and has been trimming their budget, which has
led to some wonderful innovations, such as collaboration with
non-profits and using more grants. However, there are costs in
administering grants. The overall feeling by the district is
that they would rather have more general education funding than
pursuing and competing for grants.
4:44:06 PM
MS. MCNICHOL addressed the achievement gap and poor outcomes.
She pointed out that in the past two to three years there has
been no consistent statewide assessment. Things may have changed
that have not been measured.
MS. MCNICHOL voiced a concern in SB 104 regarding curriculum
review. She liked the notion of fiscal support for DEED to
develop math and English curriculum, however, a one-time review
of curricula is a concern. Districts are mandated to review
curricula every six years, which seems reasonable. They support
best practices for curricula, but also highly value local
control. Sitka is in the midst of implementing culturally
responsive programming at every level in every class. She feared
the pressure to adopt a statewide curriculum would jeopardize
that effort. She was happy it was not mandated. She thanked
committee members for their service.
4:47:18 PM
PETE HOEPFNER, Superintendent, Cordova School District,
testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. He said increasing
bandwidth, as provided in SB 102, is a good idea, but they have
concerns with SB 103 about the elimination of the APS and the
rigorous course work it requires. Students have been focusing on
a rigorous pathway in order to qualify for the APS. He
questioned how long the innovation grants would be available.
Regarding SB 104, he noted that Cordova has a six-year
curriculum review schedule.
4:49:57 PM
PENNY VADLA, Vice President, Kenai Peninsula School Board,
testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said the district
has not had enough time to thoroughly consider the bills. She
commented that the broadband in SB 102 would be nice for schools
who lack enough access. She spoke in favor of keeping the APS,
not eliminating it as proposed in SB 103 because it helps so
many students and keeps them in Alaska.
She noted some issues with the Innovation Grant because KPBSD
has been very good with innovation and has used efficiencies
well. They have used Digital Incentive Grants for innovative
purposes and already have new programs in place. They have a lot
of knowledge and can share their curriculum with other
districts. She did not think DEED needs to look out-of-state for
innovative curricula. She stressed the importance of looking
inward for innovation, making use of professional development to
share it, and saving money.
4:53:21 PM
MS. VADLA stated that curriculum review in KPBSD is happening
currently in the areas of math and English. She stressed the
importance of cultural inclusion in curriculum. She opined that
some of the test results in Alaska are good, such as ACT in math
and reading, which are above national norms. She encouraged the
committee to believe that results aren't necessarily poor. She
noted that districts are already partnering and sharing
information.
4:56:09 PM
CHAIR HUGHES agreed that Kenai was doing great things and said
the committee was able to participate in a virtual classroom
with them.
4:56:35 PM
JEANNIE KITAYAMA, Member, Haines School Board, testified on SB
102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said she is a newly retired
teacher. She agreed with previous testimony by experienced
school board members. She spoke in favor of increased broadband,
and the retention of the APS. She thought innovation was a
popular buzz word. She said charter schools were developed in
order to try different ideas, taking successful ones into public
schools. She commented that Alaska Schools are unique and
diverse. She questioned whether a curriculum could be found that
would fit every school.
4:58:37 PM
CASS POOK, Member, Sitka School Board, testified on SB 102, SB
103, and SB 104. She spoke in opposition to doing away with the
APS. She shared a personal story about her son who would be a
beneficiary of the APS.
She said the state would not need to be looking at the bills if
there had been adequate funding for the past 8-10 years. She
asked how they can work together to ensure that more things are
not taken away. She thanked the committee for their work.
5:01:39 PM
CHAIR HUGHES noted public testimony would continue tomorrow.
CHAIR HUGHES held SB 104 in committee.