Legislature(2023 - 2024)SENATE FINANCE 532
04/16/2024 09:00 AM Senate 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 | |
| SB168 | |
| SB215 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | SB 168 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | SB 215 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
SENATE BILL NO. 215
"An Act relating to teacher incentive payments for
national board certification; and providing for an
effective date."
9:42:17 AM
Senator Jesse Bjorkman, Sponsor, explained that SB 215 was
designed to raise pay for the states most highly qualified
teachers and encourage other educators to engage in the
best professional development in their field and to become
nationally board certified. He cited studies that showed
that national board-certified teachers obtained better
educational outcomes and were better teachers after
completing the steps of the four-part certification
process. The National Board of Certified Teachers was a
board that required to undergo a rigorous and personal
training program.
Senator Bjorkman continued that teachers in the program
were required to demonstrate content knowledge and the
ability to teach to every student. He highlighted elements
of the program that included recordings and reflection for
improvement, submission of student work, and the provision
of video teaching samples. He thought that the process
showed teachers reflecting on teaching methods and success.
He emphasized the importance of teacher recruitment and
retention, and of improving educational outcomes.
9:44:22 AM
AT EASE
9:44:43 AM
RECONVENED
Co-Chair Stedman relayed that the director for the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS) would
give a presentation.
9:45:03 AM
SARAH PINSKY, SENIOR DIRECTOR, POLICY, NATIONAL BOARD FOR
PROFESSIONAL TEACHING STANDARDS (via teleconference),
relayed that NBPTS was an independent, non-profit
organization was founded more than 30 years ago and worked
to advance accomplished teaching. She discussed a
presentation entitled "Using National Board Certification
to Strengthen the Teaching Workforce" (copy on file).
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 2, What is National Board
Certification.
Ms. Pinsky read slide 3, By Teachers, For Teachers:
National Board Certification is a voluntary advanced
credential that signifies the teacher is an
instructional expert in their grade and subject level.
Ms. Pinsky noted that the certification was recognized as
the gold standard in teacher certification. She emphasized
that the professional expertise of educators was the
foundation of everything NBPTS did. She continued that the
standards that were the foundation of the certification
process were developed by panels of expert teacher
practitioners that came to consensus on what accomplished
teachers should know and be able to do in the certification
areas. There were 25 certification areas in each level.
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 4, "Peer-reviewed, Performance-
based":
This student-centered process requires teachers to
demonstrate evidence of the impact they have on
student learning through
?samples of student work,
?videos of their teaching, and
?deep reflection and analysis of their practice.
They must also demonstrate their understanding of
their grade-appropriate subjects through a content
knowledge exam.
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 5, "Maintenance of Certification:
?Maintenance of Certification (MOC) is the pathway for
National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) to keep
their certification active.
?Successfully meeting MOC requirements will extend an
NBCT's certificate five years.
?The process is designed to ensure that NBCTs continue
to grow professionally while substantially impacting
student learning.
9:47:34 AM
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 7, "Impact on Teaching":
Teachers who engage with the National Board standards
report making specific changes to their instructional
practice including:
• Adjusting lesson plans to meet the needs of
individual students
• Gaining and/or deepening knowledge in content areas
• Using data in new ways to assess student progress
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 8, "Impact on Students":
More than a decade of research from across the country
confirms that students taught by National Board
Certified Teachers (NBCTs) learn more than other
students.
?Estimates of the increase in learning are on the
order of an additional one to two months of
instruction.
?A 2017 Mississippi study found Kindergarten students
taught by an NBCT are 31% more likely to be proficient
on the Kindergarten Readiness Assessment (see image).
?Students of NBCTs demonstrate evidence of deeper
learning.
Ms. Pinsky showed slide 9, "Impact on the Teaching
Profession":
• National Board Certified Teachers remain in the
profession longer than their colleagues.
• National Board Certified Teachers are more likely to
host student teachers than other teachers.
• New teachers who are mentored by National Board
Certified Teachers exhibit improvement and generate
additional student learning
Ms. Pinsky cited that in the most recent year, the turnover
rate for board certified teachers was about one-third of
the average rate.
Ms. Pinsky looked at slide 11, "Leveraging Policy. She
relayed that she would discuss state policy approaches and
reasoned that policy could be a critical lever and could
create the right conditions for teachers to pursue and
achieve national board certification. She referenced three
kinds of policies: financial incentives, fee support, and
support programs for teachers pursuing certification. She
cited that certification cost approximately $1,900.
Ms. Pinsky looked at slide 12, which showed a national map
identifying 29 states that offered financial incentives for
certified teachers. She noted that states that were wildly
different with regard to population, size, and politics all
found the incentive to be worthwhile.
Ms. Pinsky turned to slide 13, "Salary Incentive
Structures":
Increase for all NBCTs
Example: North Carolina
NBCTs placed on salary schedule 12% above base
pay.
Example: Wyoming
NBCTs earn an annual $4,000 stipend.
Increase for NBCTs in high-need schools
Example: California
Both increase for all NBCTs and additional increase
for NBCTs in targeted schools
Example: Utah
9:52:53 AM
Ms. Pinsky reviewed slide 14, and addressed Delaware's
policy whereby board-certified teachers earned a stipend
equal to 12 percent of base salary. She cited that over
about four years there had been a significant increase in
the number of national board-certified teachers. She
anticipated further growth.
Ms. Pinski showed slide 15, which addressed program
highlights of Texas' financial incentives. The state
allocated between $3,000 and $9,000 for each national
board-certified teacher. Teachers could get closer to the
$9,000 by teaching at rural schools or schools with a high
percentage of low socio-economic students. The state also
reimbursed for the initial cost of certification as well as
the maintenance of certification that was needed every five
years. She identified a pattern similar to that of
Delaware.
Senator Bishop asked if Ms. Pinsky was aware of any state
universities that taught to the national certification,
whereby graduates would have the national board
certification.
Ms. Pinsky explained that the standards were somewhat
advanced for students that were pursuing completion of pre-
service preparation programs. She noted that programs
aligned standards or taught the baseline framework but was
not certain if Alaska had adopted standards for future
licensure. She noted that the standards were for
accomplished practitioners and were more aligned to those
with more expertise and experience than a teacher coming
right out of college.
Senator Bishop asked for Ms. Pinsky's professional opinion
regarding a timeline for new teachers to apply for national
certification.
Ms. Pinsky noted that previously teachers were required to
have three years of experience before beginning the board
certification process. Recently the rule had changed, and
teachers were allowed to start the process in the first
year of teaching, while still being required to have three
years of teaching experience to complete the certification.
9:58:18 AM
LISA PARADY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, ALASKA COUNCIL OF SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS, introduced herself and relayed that the
Alaska Council of School Administrators (ACSA) was in
support of the bill. The council felt that SB 215 was an
important policy bill for education. The council supported
the certification because it believed that every Alaskan
student deserved a qualified effective teacher, and
promoting national board certification was a proven pathway
to the goal. She referenced ACSAs joint position statement
(copy not on file) that listed priorities that education
leaders had identified. She noted that recruiting,
retaining, and preparing qualified educators was a top
priority.
Ms. Parady pointed out that research demonstrated that
teacher quality was the most effective school-based factor
in student achievement. She considered that the bill would
aid with the goal of student achievement. She referenced a
study by the Journal of Research on Education Effectiveness
that found that students with a board-certified teacher
produced gains of up to a month and a half to two months of
additional learning when compared to non-board-certified
teachers with similar experiences. She continued that
national board certification promoted teacher quality by
encouraging teachers to reach the highest available
benchmarks in the field.
Ms. Parady noted that as of January 20, 2022, Alaska ranked
44th in the nation, with only 200 (or 2.7 percent) of
teachers with national board certification. The council
believed the state should encourage teachers to pursue the
certification. She noted that a majority of states already
did so, and noted that once there were incentives, about 2
percent of teachers pursued the certification every year.
She highlighted that teachers with the certification took
on enhanced leadership roles and mentored new teachers,
which also improved new teacher quality.
10:01:46 AM
Ms. Parady discussed the significant cost of obtaining the
national certification, which was rigorous and took three
years to complete. She noted that the process required
taking examinations at an authorized testing site, which
was only available at 12 testing centers in the state. She
considered that by offering a bonus for teachers that had
completed the certification, the state could ensure that
certification was financially accessible to all teachers.
Ms. Parady emphasized that the incentive was a retention
mechanism. She relayed that ACSA and its members strongly
encouraged the development of a comprehensive statewide
program to prepare, attract, and retain high-quality
diverse educators and professionals. She thought increasing
the share of the states teachers with the certification
was a critical step to improve Alaskas school for all
students. She added that ACSA was especially appreciative
that the bonus would be a state-funded incentive available
to all districts, rather than relying on district budgets.
10:03:54 AM
Senator Bishop pondered why the state would not work with
the University system to incorporate the curriculum in
order to start the process of obtaining the certification.
Ms. Parady noted that Alaska used benchmarks in the
University to align with the certification. She thought
that it generally took a couple of years for teachers to
practice in the classroom before being ready to take on the
rigors of the program. She likened the certification to a
Ph.D. program and thought the University pre-service was
preparing students to teach at the highest levels, but that
board certification would add an additional layer of rigor
that teachers may not be ready for right from the start.
She agreed that elements of the certification should be
included in teacher education.
Senator Bishop asked if Ms. Parady knew of any Alaskan
districts that were currently offering the certification to
teachers.
Ms. Parady thought there some districts offering the
certification. She mentioned work on the North Slope, which
had the certification as part of its agreement. She thought
some districts offered the opportunity because of the
strong research that showed the impact on students. She
thought given the current financial situation in school
districts; the certification would not be the highest
priority for a district. She thoguht state funding would be
a high priority in being able to offer the certification to
all school districts.
10:08:42 AM
KELLY MANNING, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF INNOVATION AND
EDUCATION EXCELLENCE, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY
DEVELOPMENT, discussed a new fiscal note from the
Department of Education and Early Development, OMB
Component 2796. She identified that the CS had presented
additional costs. She continued that the note showed an
estimate of $1,456,000 for year one, with anticipated
growth over time. She identified that the bill provided for
an incentive payment of $5,000 for each teacher that held a
current and valid national board certification. In
addition, the bill noted costs incurred to achieve board
certification.
Ms. Manning continued that the board certification cost an
average of $1,900 per candidate, with $475 for each of the
four components. The amount could be higher if an educator
needed to retake any of the components. Additional costs to
achieve board certification may include supplies. She
referenced required videos and videography supplies. There
were retake fees for the certification components, and
there could be travel requirements. The assessment sites
for the state were mostly at the states universities. She
noted that there could be travel required to observe other
teachers. She mentioned registration fees. All the
components had an estimated average of about $10,000 for
full certification.
Ms. Manning noted that states with similar incentive
programs that covered the cost of certification were found
to have a 2 percent increase, which was factored into the
fiscal note.
10:12:19 AM
Ms. Manning continued to address the fiscal note. She made
note of an anticipation of $1,075,000 for grants in year
one to cover the incentivization of $5,000 per board-
certified teacher and $6,000 in legal fees. The amount
increased over each year based on the anticipated increases
in certified educators. She listed a cost of $375,000 in
year one for covering reimbursement of board certification
costs. She noted that the costs were estimates without
knowing the number of teachers that would pursue board
certification. The estimates were based on other states
that had funded the costs and incentives.
Co-Chair Stedman asked if the department supported the
program.
Ms. Manning relayed that the Teacher Recruitment and
Retention Working Group had determined that teacher
incentives was a potential avenue for increasing certified
teachers. She thought looking at different incentives was
an outflow of the working groups work.
Co-Chair Stedman considered that looking at something and
implementing it were two different things. He asked if the
department had a position.
Ms. Manning relayed that the department was neutral on the
particular approach in the bill, but definitely supported
incentivization of getting teachers in the door and getting
them to stay in positions.
Senator Wilson mentioned recertification for teachers every
five years. He asked if the national board certification
would qualify for recertification in lieu of professional
development classes, either for recertification or for pay
increases and bonuses.
Ms. Manning agreed to research Senator Wilson's question
and get back to the committee with the information.
Senator Kiehl mentioned a comment about an increase in
board certified teachers in states that funded the cost of
the certification. He asked if Ms. Manning had examples.
Ms. Manning noted that she did not have the information at
hand but would get back to the committee. She thought that
Maine was one of the states in question.
Senator Kiehl appreciated that the department had done
diligent work to see how much more effective the
legislation could be.
10:16:11 AM
Senator Bjorkman thought the committee had heard of the
many benefits, proven through research, that indicated
students who learned from national board-certified teachers
learned more and learned more effectively. He spoke to
Senator Bishop's questions pertaining to why the state did
not start training teachers on the material at the
university level. He explained that teachers in training
programs had much to learn about pedagogy and how to handle
the everyday rigors of teaching, which often involved more
than just instruction of students. He thought teachers
needed some on-the-job training to be ready for the level
of training involved in the board certification.
Senator Bjorkman discussed the in-depth content related to
certified subject areas, and the required teaching video to
reflect active teaching and demonstrate skills developed in
the first years of teaching. He asserted that the
certification being discussed was difficult and was for the
most skilled teachers. He emphasized that when the process
was incentivized and the state invested in the process, the
results would come. He discussed the benefits of teachers
going through the process together in job-alike groups to
become better together. He described collective teacher
efficacy, which he cited as the primary factor that made
teachers better as a team.
SB 215 was heard and HELD in Committee for further
consideration.
Co-Chair Stedman relayed that there would be no afternoon
meeting. He discussed the agenda for the following day.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SB168 Explanation of Changes Ver. A to Ver. R.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 168 |
| SB 168 Ver. R Sectional Analysis 3.27.24.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 168 |
| SB 168 Ver. R Sponsor Statement 3.27.24.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 168 |
| SB 215 NBCT Incentives by state 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Research LAUSD NBCT report 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Research NBCT Impact Brief 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Research NBCT Mississippi Reading Outcomes 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Research NBCT Retention Information 2020 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Research NBPTS Certification 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Sponsor Statement 02.07.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Summary of Changes Version S to Version U 02.26.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/26/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Testimony - Received as of 02.17.2024.pdf |
SEDC 2/19/2024 3:30:00 PM SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 Ver U Sectional Analysis 2.2.24.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 215 EDC EED SSA 041224.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 215 |
| SB 168 DFG DWC 941324.pdf |
SFIN 4/16/2024 9:00:00 AM |
SB 168 |