Legislature(2013 - 2014)CAPITOL 106
02/24/2014 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB220 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 220 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| += | HB 278 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 220-REPEAL SECONDARY SCHOOL EXIT EXAM
8:12:34 AM
CHAIR GATTIS announced that the first order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 220, "An Act repealing the secondary student
competency examination and related requirements; and providing
for an effective date."
8:13:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE PETE HIGGINS, Alaska State Legislature, reminded
the committee it had previously heard the sponsor statement in
support of HB 220. He said there are many different opinions on
education assessments at the end of a student's high school
career; however, there is overwhelming public support to repeal
the High School Graduation Qualifying Examination (HSGQE).
8:13:47 AM
CHAIR GATTIS, in response to Representative LeDoux, identified
the proposed work draft as CS for HB 220, 28-LS0947\U, Mischel,
2/6/14. She said it was important that the students presently
affected by the HSGQE know that they have a few more years to
qualify for their high school diplomas, although the HSGQE has
lost its expected value. In order to give the affected students
an opportunity to get their diploma in a cost-effective manner,
she suggested utilizing the General Educational Development
(GED) program during a time of transition versus "continuing
having everybody on hold ...."
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX opined that if it has been determined that
the HSGQE has no value, the legislature should allow diplomas to
be issued to all of the students that failed the HSGQE, up to a
certain date. She questioned the point of requiring students to
take an exam that has no value.
8:17:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS noted that there are many views to
consider, such as legality and the desire to get a diploma by
students who have graduated with a certificate of achievement.
He agreed that if the HSGQE is repealed, students who have met
the state standards should get a diploma. He said using the GED
as a qualifier will be addressed by the Department of Education
and Early Development (EED). A high school diploma can mean
acceptance into the military, trade schools, and some colleges.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON cautioned that issuing diplomas to
those who did not pass last year, or using the GED program for a
certain amount of time, is unfair to students in past or in
future years. However, the cost of administering the HSGQE is
ridiculous.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX clarified that if the legislature believes
that exit exams are not valuable, there should be a return to a
point in time before they were required, and students should
receive a diploma.
8:21:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated that eliminating the HSGQE could
provide the opportunity to replace it with exams that are more
aligned with the Common Core State Standards Initiative. She
questioned what would be used as a marker to ensure that
students are ready for college, technical school, or the job
market.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS agreed that assessments and benchmarks
should be developed to mark students' achievements, but they
should not be tied to the high school diploma that has been
earned by meeting the present standard. He agreed with issuing
diplomas retroactively to those who have met the state standard,
and thereby remove roadblocks that prevent children from moving
on in life. Representative Higgins acknowledged that the state
high school standards may change at some future date.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON observed that the state has raised its
standards in the last few years and has alleviated the need for
any type of exit exam.
8:25:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out that students who receive a
certificate of achievement have not met all of the standards for
graduation, which include the requirements for a minimum number
of units in certain classes and the passing of an exam. The
legislature could look at what was required in the past;
however, the present standards are known, and retroactively
changing them would cause confusion. In addition, the WorkKeys
assessment is currently required for every 11th grader, and the
level is recorded on a student's transcript that is available to
prospective employers. Representative Seaton agreed with the
need for a new standard, but not with issuing diplomas
retroactively.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS stressed that the basic question is how
to develop an exit exam that will be fair to students who have
graduated in the last two years with a Certificate of
Accomplishment, but who desire a diploma. Possibilities are:
extension [of the program] by three years; extension by one and
one-half years; extension to the end of the assessment contract;
use GED testing; or issue diplomas to those who have met the
standards except for passage of the exit exam.
8:30:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised that the exit exam is no longer
needed because the standards have been raised. She asked what
criterion is now used to ensure that students are competent in
certain core subjects.
REPRESENTATIVE HIGGINS deferred to the commissioner of EED.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD agreed that retroactive action would not
be appropriate. Further, if the HSGQE is not fulfilling its
intended role, she said she would support its repeal; however,
"there's tremendous red flags in regards to the Common Core."
8:33:21 AM
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner, Department of Education and Early
Development, in response to Chair Gattis, informed the committee
that the contract between EED and Data Recognition Corporation
(DRC) includes administering the HSGQE, standards-based
assessments (SBAs), and other tests. It is complex to switch
one component from one vendor to another; technically, contracts
will be renewed on 12/15/15, although renegotiations are
underway as the EED has contracted with another vendor for other
assessments.
CHAIR GATTIS asked specifically when the contract for
administering the HSGQE ends, so that the legislature can
establish a date for repealing the test.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that EED is currently extracting
the HSGQE component from the total comprehensive contract; in
fact, conversations with DRC regarding the extraction of the
HSGQE are ongoing.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked what proportion of the contract
covers the HSGQE.
8:36:07 AM
LES MORSE, Deputy Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner, EED,
responded that the high school component of the exam is
approximately $2.7 million. He estimated the total contract at
over $7 million.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the standard agreement form
for professional services between EED and DRC dated 6/26/13,
[provided in the committee packet] which indicated that the
contract term is 7/1/13 through 6/30/14, in the total amount of
$7,391,950.
MR. MORSE said that is the absolute answer, adding that the
contract is year-to-year, but renewable each year through
December, 2015, without engaging in a new procurement process.
CHAIR GATTIS asked what the effect would be of not renewing the
contract.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said not renewing the contract removes the
state's ability to provide both the mandatory assessments in
grades three through ten, and the HSGQE.
CHAIR GATTIS acknowledged the consequence would be to eliminate
the HSGQE and the standardized tests, but it would not eliminate
the testing done by teachers in the individual school districts.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY agreed. However, he cautioned that the
state would also lose a portion of the $233 million in federal
funds it receives annually. He said he was unsure of the exact
amount of federal funding that would be in jeopardy if the
assessments were not administered.
8:40:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON expressed his concern about the December
2015 date. He presumed that the ongoing contract negotiations
are for what is going to happen for the fiscal year 2015 (FY
15), and that those negotiations have not been finalized.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY confirmed that the contracts are updated
regularly without opening a new procurement process. He said,
"But I would really hate to see this conversation around
transition language based around the contract we have." It was
felt that because the governor's bill, HB 278, will permanently
remove the opportunity for a student to get a diploma, there
needed to be a transition period, and the administration chose a
period of three years. This decision was not driven by the
circumstances of a contract, but by a moral and legal
responsibility to offer that opportunity for a certain period of
time. Although EED is not "set" on three years, Commissioner
Hanley warned that offering the test once more may not provide a
sufficient transition opportunity for students to come back and
retest; furthermore, a shorter time period may be challenged in
court. He reminded the committee that this component carries an
overall negative fiscal note [identified as HB220-EED-SSA-01-31-
14], even though $2.7 million is removed.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked whether all federally-mandated
education requirements are fully funded by federal funds.
8:43:32 AM
MR. MORSE, addressing mandated assessments in particular,
informed the committee that assessment mandates are found in
federal and state statutes. The total amount of federal support
received by the state exceeds the cost of the assessments; in
fact, about $3.5 million in federal funds pays a portion of the
assessment costs.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD restated her question and requested a
later response to address all education requirements that are
mandated by the federal government. She then asked if EED's
support for the repeal of the HSGQE is motivated by the cost of
the new testing requirements for the "new Common Core Alaska
standards."
COMMISSIONER HANLEY assured the committee the motivation behind
the bill is to remove an assessment that has become a hurdle,
does not serve its original purpose, is duplicative, and is
costly.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed her understanding that the ACT
and the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) will be aligned to the
new Alaska Common Core standards. She said that if the HSGQE is
repealed, it will be replaced with other tests, and asked
whether EED has set specific benchmarks on ACT and SAT that
students must achieve in order to receive a diploma.
8:46:38 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said the state has always used assessments
to measure student progress on the state standards for the
purpose of informing students and parents on students'
progression toward proficiency, and to assess the education
system that provides opportunities for students. The Standards
Based Assessments (SBAs) that are currently given in grades
three through ten will be replaced by the state's new standards;
however, these assessments are unrelated to the HSGQE, as it is
a stand-alone assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD expressed her concern that if the HSGQE
is repealed, there will be no other standard to ensure that
students are ready for the workforce or college.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY acknowledged there will not be a "high
stakes assessment," but EED will replace the SBAs with testing
either at grades three through ten, or grades three through
eleven, to measure students' proficiency on the standards.
Additionally, after the passage of the proposed legislation,
students will have the opportunity at eleventh or twelfth grade
to take WorkKeys, ACT, or SAT to inform them of their status.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD asked for more information on the new
testing.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said the State Board of Education & Early
Development (State Board) adopted a new set of standards in
June, 2012, thus EED is responsible for finding a tool to
measure students' proficiency on those standards. The
department issued a request for proposal (RFP) to find an
assessment to accurately measure proficiency, and there were
five responses from vendors. Currently, EED is in the process
of negotiating with the successful vendor on a final contract
for the 2015 school year. The decision on whether the testing
will be for grades three through ten, or for grades three
through eleven, will be made by the State Board.
8:49:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked for clarification between the
terminology of a test and an assessment. He observed that a
test must be passed, but an assessment indicates where a student
stands on a continuum. The HSGQE is a test, but SBAs, ACT, SAT,
and WorkKeys are assessments.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that as the terms are being used
in this hearing, there is no distinction between test and
assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to the commissioner's comments
on the legality of eliminating the transition period, and asked
for the basis of his belief that no transition period is
unacceptable, but a transition period of one and one-half years
may be acceptable.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said he has discussed the matter with the
Department of Law (DOL), which advised that a transition period
of three years is legally defensible, but is not "a hard line in
the sand." He encouraged the committee to request a second
opinion from Legislative Legal Services. The question is
whether a diploma is a property right. He observed that a
transition period of three years provides flexibility [for a
student to obtain a diploma], and one more assessment may not
provide time enough to notify the general public of an upcoming
change.
8:52:00 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER expressed his interest in seeing a
written opinion, if available. He asked whether a diploma is a
property right, or the right to seek a diploma is a property
right.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY was unsure. In further response to
Representative Saddler, he said he did not know the amount of
federal funding at risk if the state failed to continue the
contract for mandated assessments. Every other state has
assessments in grades three through eight and once in high
school after ninth grade, which is the federal mandate that
remains unchallenged at this time.
CHAIR GATTIS suggested using the statewide longitudinal data
system (SLDS) testing that is already in place in many Alaska
schools, instead of standardized tests.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated the aforementioned test would not
qualify for EED's purposes, or for funding by the U.S.
Department of Education, as the test needs to be a standardized
assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER questioned whether terms could be
negotiated with DRC to allow for the elimination of $2.7 million
for the administration of the exit exam, while retaining $4.3
million in the remaining contract for the assessment of SBAs.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said yes; in fact, the aforementioned
negative fiscal note attached to HB 220 reflects removing $2.7
million [from the budget].
8:55:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX inquired as to how long a student who does
not pass the HSGQE is allowed to retake the test to obtain a
diploma.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said there is no limit to that opportunity.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX returned attention to SBAs, and asked
whether repeated low assessments would prevent a student from
graduating.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said assessments do not have a "high stakes
component."
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX assumed if there is no way to fail the
exam, a student could attend high school for four years without
success and graduate.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY clarified that a lack of a high stakes
component does not mean there are not consequences and measures
used throughout the school districts. In further response to
Representative LeDoux, he pointed out that year-end assessment
scores are sometimes received after the end of the school year
thus are provided to teachers the next year. He remarked:
Those scores are also comparable to what they're
receiving in their classes, so ... if there's a high
stakes component, it's the accountability the teachers
hold their students to in their courses for
understanding materials for those levels, and for
those standards that are expected to be taught in
those grades.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX asked whether a student can earn failing
grades throughout high school and still receive a diploma.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said, "Yes, people do flunk."
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX concluded that without standardized
testing, an employer cannot know whether a student knows basic
reading, writing, and arithmetic.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated that there is responsibility upon the
teachers to not pass a student who is not proficient.
8:59:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX requested statistics that indicate how
often students fail classes, and that reveal the grade point
averages for students who pass to the next grade.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY related EED has data gathered on
standardized assessments, but not on tests given by an
individual teacher at the end of a chapter or a quarter.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX understood that a standardized test is
indicative of how a student has done in a class. She asked for
statistics on whether students who do poorly on standardized
tests are held back, or are passed to the next grade.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that individual student data is
not gathered by EED but is held at the school level.
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON speculated that the need for remedial
courses offered at colleges indicates that students without
proficiency are passed to the next grade. She asked whether the
upcoming assessments will cost more or less than the current
assessments.
9:02:09 AM
MR. MORSE restated that the entire cost of the assessment
contract is about $7.3 million including SBAs for reading,
writing, math, and science in three grade levels, and the HSGQE
component. Of that total, $2.7 million is for the HSGQE. An
RFP was issued for a new contract and a vendor has been
selected. He pointed out that the new costs are within the
range of the existing contract, so there has not been a need to
request a budget increment to cover additional assessment costs,
as EED desires to manage the new contract within the current
allocation for assessments. However, the proposed legislation
would create "some form of a decrement."
9:03:23 AM
The committee took an at-ease from 9:03 a.m. to 9:07 a.m.
9:07:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked at what maximum age a student can
attend high school and graduate.
MR. MORSE said a student can be 19 years old to qualify for
funding. Special Education students may attend to age 21 and
qualify for funding; however, some districts have allowed adults
to attend.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON concluded that if a student did not pass
the HSGQE and received a certificate of achievement this year,
he/she could return next year to finish their "diploma work."
Because the proposed legislation takes effect in September,
2014, the student would not have to take the HSGQE next year and
could graduate with a diploma if they completed the required
number of courses.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that a student who graduated with
a certificate of achievement has graduated under those
guidelines. One could return and try to get a diploma, "but
they don't undo their graduation ...." A student who has not
completed course requirements and returns is a fifth-year
student.
9:10:02 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON provided a scenario in which a student who
may not have the required number of credits returned next year,
completed the course requirements, would not have to pass the
HSGQE, and would receive a diploma.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said "that could theoretically happen."
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON noted that not all options are closed to
those who wish to graduate high school but who are unable to
pass the HSGQE. He stressed that a number of credits are
required in order to graduate.
CHAIR GATTIS stated that state and district standards differ.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said he wanted to correct a misconception.
He remarked:
You have to pass a certain number of credits, so if
you fail those credits you do not graduate and you
have to come back. ... I think the public might have
been hearing us say, 'You could go through and get Ds
and Fs all the way through and you'd still graduate'
and that's not correct, because you would not have
fulfilled the graduation requirements that you have a
passing grade in a certain number of courses and in a
certain distribution of courses.
CHAIR GATTIS commented that, prior to the HSGQE, businesses and
communities were interested in the level of knowledge mastered
by high school graduates, and she understood the impetus for
high stakes testing. However, the conversation today is: Do we
trust our teachers? Do we trust the curriculum? And do we
trust the school district and our school boards?
9:14:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether a student with an F average
could graduate.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said no.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER then asked whether a student with a D
average could graduate.
MR. MORSE advised there is not a state mandated [minimum] grade
point average, but a local school district may have a policy.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER restated for clarification that it is
possible for a student to take advantage of the previously
described scenario to avoid the HSGQE and graduate with a
diploma next year.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said it would be unique, but is possible.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX surmised the proposed bill would pass and
the effective date would be for some time after graduation in
2014. She said it does not make sense that the legislation
cannot take effect earlier so that students graduating in 2014
do not have to pass the HSGQE.
CHAIR GATTIS agreed.
9:17:29 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY remarked:
... to me it's just a sensitivity around those
students, and taking away that opportunity to ever
have a diploma. ... I understand the fiscal
discussion, when I look at us reducing overall cost,
and I look at a spectrum of time, ... a transition
period of a year-and-a-half or two years seems
reasonable.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX said [changing the effective date] would
not take away the right of a student to return and meet the
requirements, but in the year the legislation is on its way to
passage, spending the time and money to "make certain kids fail
the test," this year - because the bill is going to be effective
two months after graduation - seems nonsensical. If the test is
to be stopped, she urged the committee to stop it now.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated EED would follow the law until the
legislation passes and becomes effective.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON gave a short history on the efforts to
eliminate the exit exam over the past six years. The final
outcome of the proposed legislation is unknown, and he cautioned
against advising students to act on a premise that may not
materialize.
9:21:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX suggested that schools provide two
opportunities to take the HSGQE: in April and in September, or
October. In this case, assuming that the bill passes and the
exit exam is eliminated, students that planned to take the fall
exam would pass.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY informed the committee that schools do not
have an option to choose the dates of the exam; the dates that
are set by the state are April for tenth graders, and twice per
year, every year, after that. In order to change the dates, the
contract would need to be renegotiated. However, if students
take the test in October, there still must be transition
language.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX pointed out that by October, the bill may
have passed and become effective, thus taking the exit exam is
moot.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that would only be an option for
tenth graders. In further response to Representative LeDoux, he
said seniors will be graduating under the current law, unless
the proposed legislation passes and is retroactive, and if they
have not passed the HSGQE in twelfth grade, they will not get a
diploma, and will have left high school.
9:24:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX reiterated the scenario, pointing out that
the two opportunities to take the test would be available to
seniors. Those who are unlikely to pass may defer taking the
test on the expectation that the proposed legislation will pass
and the exam will be eliminated.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said only seniors who have previously failed
the HSGQE take it again. If all the other credit requirements
are met for graduation, but the HSGQE was failed, a student
cannot receive a diploma.
9:26:38 AM
[Although not formally stated, public testimony was open on HB
220.]
9:26:46 AM
JERRY COVEY, Education Consultant, stated his support for the
repeal of the HSGQE. He appreciated the thorough review of the
bill and said the test has outlived its usefulness, therefore,
it is appropriate to replace it with other tests as previously
discussed.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER asked whether Mr. Covey meant replacing
the HSGQE with tests or assessments.
MR. COVEY suggested using ACT, SAT, ACCUPLACER, or WorkKeys. He
said "cut scores" do not exist on ACT, SAT, or WorkKeys, but
indicators give the students his/her performance levels in
specific areas. These indicators are available to employers,
parents, and [institutions of] higher education.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER opined ACT, SAT, and WorkKeys are useful
tools as assessments and not as tests.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON described the transition period proposed
in the bill and asked Mr. Covey for his opinion.
MR. COVEY said the transition period is a reasonable approach.
Students would graduate under the same system of requirements
that they started high school under, and EED should extend the
period somewhere near the original date, so that expectations
remain the same for entering freshmen.
CHAIR GATTIS questioned why the state would not save $1-$2.7
million by eliminating a test that some have agreed is not the
best assessment of student competence.
9:30:57 AM
MIKE COONS referred to earlier testimony given by EED that the
only seniors at risk are the 2014 students who didn't pass the
HSGQE in the tenth grade. He directed attention to the document
found in the committee packet entitled, "Statewide Spring 2013
HSGQE Grade 10 Statewide Results by Ethnicity, Gender and
Groups." For 2013, the number of students who did not pass was
2,456 for writing, 1,437, for reading, and 2,041 for
mathematics. Mr. Coons questioned whether the administration
believes that the only seniors at risk for not getting a diploma
at graduation in 2014 are the 2,456 who didn't pass in the tenth
grade. Referring to the suggestion that students obtain a GED,
he said students should not have to spend $125. Mr. Coons
recalled previous testimony before the Senate Standing Committee
on Education was that all end-of-year tests were to be
eliminated along with the HSGQE. He urged for the state to
refuse federal funding and regain state and individual
sovereignty. Finally, the administration's concerns about
potential lawsuits should be set aside.
CHAIR GATTIS explained her suggestion was that the GED could be
paid for by the state instead of $2.7 million for the exit exam.
9:34:26 AM
POSIE BOGGS said she was representing herself, the Literate
Nation Alaska Coalition, Dyslexia Alaska Branch, and Decoding
Dyslexia-Alaska. She thanked the committee for its commitment
to this difficult issue. Ms. Boggs related that in the State of
Washington, 4,000 students earned full credit at high school and
failed the qualifying exam for many of the same reasons Alaska
students fail. If they are failing math and reading, the
education system, must be doing them some harm. She agreed that
there is a lack of trust in the schools and in the education
system and relayed a personal story of how her family is going
to fund education for future generations. She urged for
improvements to how basic skills are taught in Alaska.
9:38:03 AM
MARY NANUWAK referred to the discussion about the high school
exit graduation requirements and assessments and stressed that
high school testing is one of the tools in assessing whether a
student is ready for graduation. She said the committee's
questions have not been answered or are being evaded.
9:40:06 AM
DAVID NEES pointed out that 80 percent of the students are
passing the [HSGQE] in tenth grade, and the remaining 20 percent
have two years to retake and pass the test. Also, a student
with an individual education plan (IEP) can get a waiver. The
bill is about eliminating a test that is successful for most
high school students. He said he was unable to determine how
many waivers were granted, thus it is unknown the exact number
affected; it may be only a couple hundred students, out of
10,000, who are unable to pass the test after multiple attempts.
He opined the high stakes test accurately measures, and has
proven to be effective. Elimination of the test saves money at
an unknown cost to the confidence of the school system and
parents.
9:41:52 AM
CHAIR GATTIS, after ascertaining that no one else wished to
testify, closed public testimony on HB 220.
9:41:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON made a motion to adopt Amendment 1,
identified as 28-LS0947\A.1 which read:
Page 4, following line 22:
Insert a new bill section to read:
"* Sec. 6. The uncodified law of the State of
Alaska is amended by adding a new section to read:
TRANSITION: STUDENT TESTING IN PROGRESS. Until
December 31, 2014, a school district shall continue to
administer the competency examination under former
AS 14.03.075, and the regulations adopted under former
AS 14.03.075 in effect on August 31, 2014, to a
student who seeks to qualify for a secondary school
diploma under former AS 14.03.075, as it read on
August 31, 2014."
Renumber the following bill section accordingly.
Page 4, line 23:
Delete "July 1"
Insert "September 1"
9:42:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER objected for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON explained that Amendment 1 shortens the
transition period. He said the Kenai Peninsula Borough School
District typically has two to three former students take the
test each year and the cost to the district is about $4,500 to
accommodate the testing, which is a high cost per student. He
then offered Amendment 1 to Amendment 1 to change the date of
the end of the transition period from December 31, 2014, to June
30, 2015.
9:43:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER objected to Amendment 1 to Amendment 1
for the purpose of discussion.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON explained that the assessment contract
ends on June 30th of each year and moving the date to June 30,
2015, will coincide with the contract. For example, if the
transition ends December 31, 2014, it would end in the first
half of the contract year, thus the extension includes the full
contract year and provides students one additional opportunity
to test.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX expressed her belief that the transition
period should extend longer or be retroactive so students do not
lose the opportunity to retest.
9:46:15 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER removed his objection.
9:46:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX objected. She restated her preference to
allow the students additional time to retest, as is defined in
the sponsors' bill and in the administration's bill.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON advised that the original bill directed
that the HSGQE would be terminated immediately. The committee
substitute included a long transition period at a cost of $1.3
million per year - which was not funded by the legislature - but
would come from each high school. All students have had five
chances to pass the test during high school, and Amendment 1 to
Amendment 1 provides two additional opportunities, one in
December and one in April.
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX reminded the committee the bill has a
negative fiscal note, and the rule that the students started
with in ninth grade was without limitation on retesting. The
proposed CS ends that opportunity in 2017, and she opposed
further curtailing their opportunity.
9:50:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX withdrew her objection to Amendment 1 to
Amendment 1.
9:50:37 AM
There being no further objection, Amendment 1 to Amendment 1 was
adopted.
9:50:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER maintained his objection to Amendment 1,
as amended. He expressed his belief that there is value in the
exit exam and in "cut" scores from a pass/fail test, not just
assessments, to give meaning to a diploma. A review reveals
that not enough students could pass the exit exam, so the cut
scores were lowered, and the education establishment has decided
that the exit exam is not a useful assessment. The department
has new standards based assessments and proposed additional
assessments such as ACT, SAT, and WorkKeys. Eliminating the
exit exam returns the school system to the status before
certainty was provided to the public and the business community
that 18- and 19-year-olds with a diploma have minimum standards
of competency. Representative Saddler said he was in favor of
the extended transition period to 2017, and then removed his
objection to Amendment 1.
9:52:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON, speaking to Amendment 1, said the
proposed legislation creates a long period of expenses to high
schools to administer an exam which is no longer in use. He
reviewed the five opportunities students have to take the test,
and another option that students have to receive a diploma.
Representative Seaton stressed the need to direct funds into the
classroom for the education of students, which is the purpose of
Amendment 1.
9:54:31 AM
REPRESENTATIVE LEDOUX restated her concern about eliminating the
exam. However, if that is the case, she supported leaving the
transition language unchanged. She then objected to Amendment
1.
9:56:07 AM
A roll call vote was taken. Representatives Saddler, Reinbold,
Seaton, P. Wilson, and Gattis voted in favor of Amendment 1.
Representative LeDoux voted against it. Therefore, Amendment 1
was adopted by a vote of 5-1.
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD stated her support for benchmark testing
to ensure that students achieve a certain level; however, she
cautioned that Common Core may be an experiment that has not
been proven, and that the new assessments may be very expensive.
9:57:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to report CSHB 220, Version 28-
LS0947\U, Mischel, 2/6/14, as amended, out of committee with
individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes.
There being no objection, CSHB 220(EDC) was reported from the
House Education Standing Committee.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|