Legislature(2013 - 2014)SENATE FINANCE 532
02/05/2014 09:00 AM Senate FINANCE
Audio | Topic |
---|---|
Start | |
SB82 | |
SJR9 | |
SB111 | |
Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ | SB 82 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | SB 111 | TELECONFERENCED | |
+ | TELECONFERENCED | ||
= | SJR 9 | ||
SENATE BILL NO. 111 "An Act repealing the secondary student competency examination and related requirements; and providing for an effective date." 10:27:49 AM SENATOR GARY STEVENS, introduced SB 111 and indicated that the bill would repeal the high school exit exam. He discussed the vote on the exit exam on the House Floor in 2001 and noted that it had passed 40-0. He recalled that at the time, the issue had seemed very important because students were graduating without basic skills for jobs, careers, and college. The exit exams had been in effect since 2004 and had been in operation for 10 years. He offered that very little was gained through the exit exam and that new accountability measures were in place that made it obsolete. He discussed the new standards that had been implemented and opined that it no longer made sense to have the exit exam because it was not aligned to the new state common score standards. He pointed out that the exit exam was high stakes and that it caused enormous anxiety among students, teachers, and parents. He recalled that when the legislature had passed the exit exam, it had made sense to him to establish a floor and that all children should have certain abilities upon graduation; however, it had become a ceiling and not a floor. He recalled that children thought that if they passed the exit exam their sophomore year, they were done with high school. He reported that the exit exam was expensive to the state and had a cost of $3 million annually; furthermore, it took 6 days out of the school year. Senator Stevens continued to address the bill and related that there was enormous support for repealing the exit exam from students, parents, school boards, superintendents, the State Board of Education, the commissioner of DEED, and the governor. Co-Chair Kelly inquired if Senator Stevens had a number for how many people had a certificate of participation over this period of time. TIM LAMKIN, STAFF, SENATOR GARY STEVENS, responded that the numbers could probably be extrapolated from the test results in the packet, but deferred to DEED for a specific number. Co-Chair Kelly thought that the bill did not envision what the state would do with the people that did not pass the exit exam and had only received a certificate of participation; he did not want to leave those people high and dry. He recalled that the summer after he had voted on the exit exam, he had more time to think about the issue and had decided that he did not like the whole idea. He stated that one of things he liked least about the exit exam were the certificates of participation; he did not want people from Alaska who received a certificate of participation to be at a disadvantage against students from other states who may have received the same education. He wanted to make sure that people who had certificates of participation while the exit exams were in effect received credit for a high school education. He thought that a high school diploma should be the test and that the state had lost sight of that because it was eager to address an ongoing education problem. He wanted to remember the people who received certificates of participation during the discussions on education. 10:33:34 AM Senator Stevens stated that the exit exam was a national movement and that the state had been caught up in the excitement of it; however, in 10 years, it had not solved the problem. He pointed out that it was important that students that were in school this year knew that they had to take the exit exam. The issue was far from being resolved and students would still be taking the exam in the current year; if students failed the exam, they would have the opportunity to take it over and over again. He pointed to the bill and noted that exam would still be in effect till June 30, 2017 if the legislation passed. He noted that should the bill pass, students who failed the test this year would have 6 opportunities to retake the text before it was abolished. Senator Dunleavy inquired if there had ever been a study or a look regarding how many employers had asked to see if a student had passed all 3 parts of the high school qualifying exam. Senator Stevens replied that he was unsure, but that it represented a good question that would be nice to know. He deferred further answer to the administration. Senator Olson inquired if Senator Stevens was saying that the high school qualifying exam was totally ineffective and that there had not been increases in SAT scores or other college exams; he found it hard to believe that it did not stimulate some students. Senator Stevens replied that there were some changes, but that his youngest daughter had taken the test her sophomore year in high school and had thought it was sort of silly. He opined that some students saw the exit exam as pretty much a waste of time. Mr. Lamkin stated that there was information in members' packets from DEED that showed test results of the full lifespan of the exit exam from spring of 2004 to the last test results in the spring 2013(copy on file); during that time period, reading proficiency had raised from 70 percent to 84 percent. During the same period, efficiency in writing had dropped from 86 percent to 72 percent; the biggest change during the exit exam was perhaps in mathematics where proficiency increased from 67 percent to 77 percent. Senator Stevens noted that there were some changes that took place over the 10 years that the exit exam had been in place. Senator Olson wondered if the sponsors viewed the 10 percent increase in math, as well as the other increases as a positive thing. Senator Stevens replied that it was absolutely a positive for the districts, but that exam did not fit into the new standards that had been approved by the governor or the commissioner of DEED that were based on the new common core standards. He added that the exit exam did not align with what the current goal was for children in Alaska. 10:37:54 AM Co-Chair Meyer supported the bill and thought that it was something that should have been done several years prior. He expressed appreciation for the positive fiscal note and thought that there should be more bills like it. He thought that the bill would save the school districts a substantial amount of money by eliminating the administration and preparation for the test. Senator Stevens replied that the money that would be saved, as well as putting 6 days back in the classroom was a real positive thing. Senator Stevens pointed out that repealing the exit exam was part of the governor's omnibus bill and assumed that it would be the vehicle for the effort; however, should that legislation falter along the way, SB 111 would be there. Co-Chair Meyer agreed that repealing the exit exam would probably be part of the omnibus bill, but that the issue was important enough that the committee would want it to go as a stand-alone bill if necessary. TODD POAGE, SUPERINTENDENT, ALASKA GATEWAY SCHOOL DISTRICT, TOK (via teleconference), spoke in support of SB 111. He pointed out that he had supported the exit exam because it brought attention to a level of academic proficiency that each student needed to obtain to receive a high school diploma; students took the assessment seriously because of the consequences associated with not passing. He reported that the exit exam was no longer relevant since the new Alaska academic standards had been reformed in math and language arts. He related that if another high stakes assessment tool was developed, the Alaska Gateway School District supported one that incorporated essential skills required for college and intertwined work-force readiness skills. The district also supported the development and implementation of an online assessment tool to increase testing efficiency, so student answers were submitted and results were received in a timelier manner. He concluded that a new high-stakes test did not have to be a requirement for graduation, but could be an inserted emblem on a diploma that contained a designated score that indicated readiness for college classes. He thought that a new exam could designate levels of eligibility for Alaska Performance Scholarships. 10:42:53 AM Senator Dunleavy inquired what kind of feedback the department had received over the years regarding the exit exams and colleges. He inquired if colleges and employers looked at the exit exam. Mr. Morse responded that an employer looked for if a student had a diploma or not and that passing the exit exam was required for a diploma. He reported that the only true feedback was from people at the university that the exam did not provide the level of information needed to be able to tell if a student had the required math skills because of the minimum competency approach. He added that many employers asked for and required a high school diploma. 10:44:24 AM Senator Dunleavy inquired if there was any feedback from employers that they were focusing on the high school qualifying exam as a crucial part of that overall portfolio of graduation. Mr. Morse replied in the negative. ERNIE MANZIE, SELF, FAIRBANKS (via teleconference), testified in favor of SB 111. He pointed out that it had been asserted that repealing the exam took away an accountability aspect, but that he did not agree with that. He strongly supported the other assessments such as the SAT and ACT. He strongly supported WorkKeys and opined that it was a wonderful assessment that targeted students that possibly were not going on to a 4-year college; it targeted students that were looking for technical colleges or careers in the trades. He recalled serving on the Governor's Council on Disabilities and Special Education and pointed out that students on Individualized Education Programs (IEP) had difficulties with having the exit exam placed on them. He pointed out that he was a parent of child that was on an IEP all through elementary, middle, and most of high school and that his son had passed his writing exam on this last chance. The qualifying exam had not told his family anything it did not already know, which was that his son was a poor writer; how they addressed his son's poor writing was through his IEP and working with high school staff. He did not think that a qualified exam in itself should serve as a barrier to a diploma. He expressed appreciation for the comments of Co-Chair Kelly regarding what to do with students who met all of the other requirements but had not passed the exit exam and therefore, did not receive a diploma. In response to an earlier question by Senator Dunleavy, Mr. Manzie thought that employers looked at whether someone had a high school diploma or not. He added that he had never heard of employers asking questions about whether someone had passed the exit exam. SB 111 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. 10:49:12 AM Co-Chair Meyer discussed the following meeting's agenda.