Legislature(1999 - 2000)
04/18/2000 01:50 PM Senate HES
| Audio | Topic |
|---|
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 253-SCHOOL DISCIPLINARY AND SAFETY PROGRAM
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON, sponsor of HB 253, gave the following
testimony. Five years ago, he was working in a village in the
Interior and asked the principal if many children in the school
were victims of sexual abuse. The principal said of course, and
told him she reported a young boy as a victim three years ago;
now the boy is assaulting other children. She was not able to do
anything about it because the last teacher who reported it was
out of a job in six hours. Another upsetting incident occurred
when a friend of his with a double Ph.D. in education visited a
high school in Western Alaska and was stunned to hear students
address teachers using the "f" word on the average of four times
per hour. When she asked why the teachers put up with it, she
was told the administration would not back them up and they were
close to retirement. In yet another incident, a teacher turned a
student over to the principal after the student terrorized a
first period class with a mock handgun. The teacher protested
when the student arrived at the second period class. Her car
tires were slashed and the windows in her home were broken. She
left town as the State Troopers could not guarantee her safety.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said when he began working on this issue, he
was frustrated with districts and administrations that would not
back up teachers who were doing the right thing. HB 253 asks
school districts to go through some process to get input from the
communities to determine a district policy regarding behavior and
safety standards. He believes the Anchorage School District is
doing an excellent job and needs to do nothing different except
ask for input from the local PTAs. He believes the same is true
of Fairbanks.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON explained that finally, HB 253 says that an
administration or school board that penalizes a teacher who does
the right thing in the right way could be found guilty of a
violation. The bill originally set the penalty as a class B
misdemeanor but after school boards and administrators protested,
the penalty was reduced to a violation. He noted that
Representative Kerttula suggested amending the bill so that
before a school board could be charged, the school board would
have to intentionally punish the teacher, rather than knowingly
punish the teacher. He offered to answer questions.
CHAIRMAN MILLER announced that Senator Pearce had arrived.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON added that his school district's only
objection is having to go through the effort of soliciting input
from individual schools. He believes that with the base of what
the district has already done, that will be a minimal problem.
CHAIRMAN MILLER took public testimony.
Number 874
MS. DEE HUBBARD, an Anchorage resident, expressed her concerns as
follows. First, the bill contains no due process for students so
students have no recourse when a teacher is abusive. She has
watched teachers goad students into misbehavior and then nail
them. Standardization of policies is a good idea but Anchorage
has a district policy on discipline, a school policy on
discipline, and individual classroom teacher policies on
discipline. Some freshmen said it took them about three to four
months to learn all of the rules. She feels if standardization
is the goal, the bill should specify that the district policy is
the one to be adopted and followed.
MS. HUBBARD asked whether a district can be penalized if it
adopts a plan but does not implement it. She recounted that a
Fairbanks school has a crime stoppers-type program. She knew a
student who was the subject of a phone call report to that
program. His car, locker and clothing were searched, as well as
those of the two students he drove to school. He was accused of
drug-related activities and asked her what to do. She suggested
he listen to the tape but he was told the tape is erased every
day. The phone call was made to crime stoppers as a retaliatory
measure because this student had dated another student's
girlfriend. No drugs were involved. She asked committee members
to consider the students also. She noted that the PTA has not
always had the answers.
Number 1111
SENATOR ELTON thanked Ms. Hubbard for coming to Juneau to
testify. He noted that the process established in HB 253
essentially codifies standards so it should be of benefit not
only to teachers but also to students because they would know the
rules from the start. He thought HB 253 may also be helpful to
students because it may eliminate the ad hoc responses that Ms.
Hubbard referred to.
MS. HUBBARD agreed and said she was asking that if the discipline
policy is going to be standardized, that the bill not allow
classroom teachers or safety officers, etcetera, to add more to
the policy. She has always maintained that in the Anchorage
School District's Students Rights and Responsibilities document,
the only right a student has is the right to breathe.
Number 1218
MS. DEBBIE OSEANDER told committee members she has children in
the Anchorage public school system, has been an active volunteer
in that system for 15 years and is currently a school board
member. She expressed the following concerns about HB 253. Her
first priority is school safety and school discipline because
teachers cannot teach effectively or improve student achievement
unless both staff and students are totally secure in their
environment. Currently, the system for maintaining that
atmosphere is layered. The teacher has responsibilities but the
teacher is backed by the administration in each school and the
administration is backed at the district wide administrative
level. Beyond that, the school board sets discipline policies
that are further elaborated at each specific site.
MS. OSEANDER agreed with Ms. Hubbard that HB 253 raises questions
about due process. The layering system currently in place in the
Anchorage School District allows others to look at a problem and
offer a different perspective. It also allows a family who feels
it has been unjustly treated to appeal to the next layer to
express its concerns. The right to expel a child from the
academic classroom is the most serious sanction available to
schools. If a family feels unfairly treated, it needs to be able
to appeal to the principal. If that is not satisfactory, the
family needs the right to appeal to the administration and then
to the school board, if necessary. The Anchorage school board
regularly holds such hearings and routinely supports its teachers
in maintaining the security of the buildings.
MS. OSEANDER said the second area of concern is how HB 253
intersects with a district's ability to discipline a teacher if
necessary and that the legislative body of a school district
could be sanctioned for behavior that is many steps removed from
that body's responsibilities.
MS. KATHY GILLEPSIE, legislative co-chair of the Anchorage School
Board, stated the Anchorage School Board cannot support HB 253 as
written. The Board believes passage of this measure will make
its job to implement a consistent disciplinary program in a fair
and equitable manner throughout Anchorage schools difficult. She
agrees with Ms. Oseander's testimony and she informed committee
members that she provided committee members copies of proposed
amendments to make the bill more acceptable.
CHAIRMAN MILLER asked Ms. Gillespie to address the Anchorage
School Board's proposed amendments.
MS. GILLESPIE stated Amendment 1 is on page 1, line 13, and
deletes the words "understand and accepted." She explained that
to implement school discipline, the school board goes through a
public process, takes into consideration staff input, and adopts
a student's rights and responsibilities plan at a district wide
level. Those rights and responsibilities apply to all students
and can be changed to fit each school and classroom. The problem
with the words "understand and accepted" is that the school board
goes through a public process to adopt the school rules and
notify the students of the rules. If the students break the
rules, they are held accountable whether or not they understand
and accept them. She noted if that language is retained in the
bill, a student's lawyer will argue during an expulsion hearing
that the student did not understand and accept the rules.
MS. GILLESPIE said Amendment 2, on page 2 lines 13-14, would
delete the phrase "by each school district." The school board
has a process for putting forward district wide the community's
standards for school discipline. Some Anchorage schools have a
transient rate as high as 80 percent in any given year. It is
critical that the rules be consistent throughout the school
district. She pointed out that many of the students with the
most severe discipline problems are the students who are
transient within the Anchorage School District. Regarding the
discussion about codifying rules, she believes this bill will
have the opposite effect. It would require Anchorage's 87
schools to develop their own rules and make them fit the
district's standard. Right now, the rules regarding the major
issues in Anchorage are codified; they may differ in regard to
such things as a teacher allowing students to chew gum in a
classroom.
MS. GILLESPIE described Amendment 3, on page 3, line 6, as
addressing the Anchorage School Board's concern about being
unable to punish a teacher for lawful enforcement of an approved
school disciplinary and safety program. "Punished" is an
ambiguous word. Sometimes teachers are forced to teach difficult
students whom they do not want. She questioned whether a teacher
could consider being assigned a difficult student to be
punishment under HB 253.
MS. GILLESPIE stated Amendment 4 is on page 3, lines 14 through
16, and deletes the phrase, "observes a student committing a
crime shall report the crime to the local law enforcement
agency". The Anchorage School District has a chain of command in
which the teacher reports incidents to the principal and then
either the teacher or the principal can call the police. The
school board is ultimately responsible and liable for making sure
that all crimes are dealt with so the chain of command is
important.
MS. GILLESPIE noted Amendment 5 is on page 3, lines 17 through
21, and addresses violations given to school board members if
school board policy is upheld in classrooms. She noted Carl Rose
will speak to this issue but she explained that the implications
of this section of the bill are far reaching. The Anchorage
School Board has no idea who will issue the violation and it does
not know how school board members would appeal a violation. In
addition, how can she, as one member, be held accountable and
liable for a decision that she perhaps disagreed with that was
made by other members of the body.
MS. GILLESPIE noted Amendment 6, on page 3, line 29, would insert
after "AS 14.33.120" the words, "as long as the employee is
acting within the scope of assigned duties and responsibilities."
She explained if a teacher is enforcing rules within his or her
scope of responsibilities, that is fine, but if the teacher is
now enforcing rules and policies outside the scope of the job,
the school board would have concerns.
In conclusion, MS. GILLESPIE said the good parts of this bill are
already in state law. Other parts of the bill will make it much
more difficult for the Anchorage School Board to enforce and
maintain discipline in the Anchorage schools. She understands
everyone supports school safety but she asked committee members
to look at the unintended consequences of HB 253. She believes
it will have the opposite effect of the sponsor's intent.
Number 1780
SENATOR ELTON referred to Amendment 4 and told Ms. Gillespie
that nothing in the bill prohibits the local school board from
requiring that a chain of command be followed when reporting
crimes.
MS. GILLESPIE replied the school board could make staff
accountable for doing both. When she spoke to Carol Comeau, the
district superintendent, about this issue, Ms. Comeau interpreted
it to mean a teacher would be required to report a crime to a law
enforcement agency when the teacher observed it, which could be
after school. Ms. Comeau's other concern was whether a teacher
will be asked to testify if that teacher reports a crime. She
repeated the Anchorage School District already has a process in
place so, if a teacher feels that a crime has been committed in
the classroom, the teacher can directly call the police. This
bill broadens the scope of teachers' responsibilities.
Number 1841
MR. CARL ROSE, Executive Director of the Association of Alaska
School Boards (AASB), noted he submitted a written survey to the
committee on April 13 that contained four points. First, under 4
AAC 07.010, school boards are required to do many of the things
incorporated in HB 253. Second, regarding the issue of community
involvement, AASB advocates for children to the degree that it
established a community engagement project through its Building
Assets program for the purpose of helping children get what they
need to succeed. AASB already does many of these things, and
more. The survey shows that many school districts are already in
compliance with many of the provisions in HB 253. Regarding the
penalty of a violation, AASB is concerned about termination.
When HB 465 was debated several years ago, the evaluation process
and the establishment of areas and plans of improvement were
discussed. The idea was to improve the quality of education to
address performance, accountability and fairness. If schools
were not successful with the plan of improvement, termination
would be expedient. Schools were given choices. A formal non-
retention could occur in which the record would be used, or the
teacher could file a grievance. In either case, the issue of
termination would be expedient.
MR. ROSE pointed out when he looks at the issue of termination in
HB 253, if any teacher decided to discipline a child and was
later targeted for termination, the teacher might consider the
disciplinary action he or she took to be the reason for
termination and it would be incumbent upon the school district to
prove otherwise. Second, the word "punishment" is too ambiguous
and could include a letter in one's personnel file. Third, the
word "lawfully" should not be used in the bill because a teacher
could be incompetent or engage in unethical behavior yet be
acting legally. Fourth, regarding the issue of charging a member
of a legislative body with a violation, principles have been
established regarding immunity for public officials which this
bill moves away from. The chilling effect of that provision
could be that people will not want to volunteer for public
service. In conclusion, he stated that high profile examples
were used to demonstrate the need for this bill and he cannot
validate that any of those incidents occurred. He said, however,
the Hydaburg school board took stringent steps when it put a
superintendent on administrative leave with pay pending an
investigation. That superintendent is no longer employed by the
Hydaburg school district demonstrating that the system righted
itself. He noted he respectfully disagrees with the assertions
made that school boards persecute their employees.
MR. ROSE repeated that most provisions in the bill are already
addressed through regulations and that school boards exceed in
the areas of public engagement regarding safety, discipline, and
community support of schools. HB 253 goes farther than necessary
and may not reach its intended goal.
Number 2087
MR. JOHN CYR, President of the National Education Association -
Alaska (NEAA), said he is always amazed when he asks a legislator
to introduce a bill that he believes is relatively simple and
will make schools a better place and invite community discussion
- only to hear an uproar. He pointed out that HB 253 does not
allow abusive teachers to continue to be abusive; it does not
allow corporal punishment; and it does not take power away from
school boards to develop plans of improvement for teachers who
are acting improperly. He noted, as Mr. Rose said, HB 465
created a process to implement teacher plans of improvement not
only for disciplinary styles but for any inappropriate teacher
classroom behavior. HB 253 does not allow teachers to expel
students for no reason.
MR. CYR asserted that HB 253 talks about the implementation of
community based standards of school behavior. It asks school
boards to put in place a process by which communities can come
together and discuss the kind of discipline they want, how they
want students to be treated, and how they want students to treat
other children and adults in the school. NEAA believes that
process is critical. While he appreciates the fact that the
Anchorage School District has put that process into place, this
bill is about the entire State and school districts throughout
the State have problems with school discipline. Until
communities are engaged in this discussion, school districts will
have an overlay of rules enforced by some entity. HB 253 asks
communities to have that discussion.
MR. CYR maintained that HB 253 does not take power away from
school boards. Section 14.33.120 of the bill says that each
governing body shall adopt a written school disciplinary and
safety program. The governing body refers to the school board.
The bill then goes on to lay out some of the standards that
should be included. During his 25 years as a classroom teacher
in Alaska, he always assumed he had the right to remove a student
if that student was causing a disruption in the learning of other
children or if the student presented a safety problem. HB 253
puts that kind of action in writing for a community to review so
that everyone understands how it should work. He believes that
is positive.
MR. CYR referred to Section 5 of HB 253 and read, "policies must
comply with provisions of federal and state law including 20 USC
1400-1485, the Individual with Disabilities Act." He stated he
sees nothing in the bill that removes due process for students;
instead HB 253 clarifies it. If school boards create a process
that sets up standards that remove the due process rights of
students, the school boards will be challenged in a heartbeat.
He said he is aware of case after case in which, for example, a
school board member refused to allow his or her child to be
disciplined because that child applied for a scholarship even
though the child was drinking on the bus. He noted the effect of
those incidents is more damaging to education than anything else.
HB 253 looks at a way to preempt that and level the playing field
so that the entire community understands the rules.
MR. CYR said teachers who observe a crime are already expected to
report a crime to the local law enforcement agency. Teachers
have a duty to report child abuse. If the teacher reports to the
principal and the principal takes no action, the teacher is
charged. NEAA thinks people who work in schools should be
expected to report crimes when they see them. That is part of
what it means to be a citizen.
Regarding Amendment 5, proposed by Ms. Gillespie, MR. CYR said
the intent is not to punish a school board member for making a
decision with the information at hand. But, if a member of a
governing body improperly uses his or her office to harass,
punish, or terminate anyone who works with children, he believes
that member is guilty of a violation and that is what HB 253
tries to stop.
TAPE 00-19, SIDE B
Number 600
MR. CYR repeated that NEAA supports HB 253. NEAA believes that
although it is not the perfect discipline bill, it is a step in
the right direction.
SENATOR PETE KELLY said regarding Amendment 5 on page 3, the
teacher who follows procedure and is then fired will have a lot
more ammunition to go the civil route to get redress. If Section
(c) is removed, the bill will still have its intended impact but
it puts people on the line if they engage in any harassment. He
noted that he plans to move to remove Section (c) on page 3 later
in the meeting because he thinks the bill works without it.
CHAIRMAN MILLER pointed out that Senator Wilken plans to offer an
amendment that changes the word "knowingly" to "intentionally"
which will set a different standard.
Number 2323
SENATOR ELTON referred to Sec. 14.33.120 and remarked that it
requires the governing body to adopt a written school
disciplinary and safety program, yet it also requires that the
standards be developed and periodically revised by each school
and community members. He maintained that sets up dissidence for
a larger district that has many schools.
MR. CYR responded that the Mat-Su School District, which he is
most familiar with, has a set of standards for discipline that
have been adopted at the school board level. Those standards
were distributed to each school and each school decided how to
implement them in the school. He reads HB 253 in that way,
rather than the school submitting its standards to the school
board.
SENATOR ELTON said he could make a case that in his community,
the culture of a junior high school in one area may be much
different than a junior high school elsewhere. He said he
understands the issue of the governing body being an "umbrella"
but HB 253 works bottom-up because it tells the governing body it
must include standards developed at the local school level.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON indicated that is an excellent point. He
noted when he worked on the legislation he wanted large school
districts within a geographically diverse area to be able to have
different standards. Regarding dress codes, for example, some
schools are concerned about gang colors while other schools are
concerned about accommodating the dress of different religious
groups. He wanted each school and community to be able to
discuss those types of issues and submit their concerns to the
governing body who could customize the standards. He wanted to
ensure that the community's input was taken into account.
SENATOR ELTON suggested that HB 253 should read, "Each governing
body may adopt..." rather than "Each governing body shall
adopt..." so that school boards can take local desires into
account but are not required to.
MR. CYR thought that Senator Elton's concern was valid in one
aspect, but he believes that when the community of people
involved in the local schools have the discussion about
discipline, the discussion is more "real" and personal. He
believes that is the key to student discipline.
SENATOR ELTON expressed concern that the result will be that each
community will have a bunch of different standards. He asked Mr.
Cyr for his reaction to previous speakers who said that this bill
imposes a burden on teachers that they may not want in regard to
reporting crimes.
MR. CYR answered if he saw a student with a case of beer in his
pickup headed for a party, he would feel obligated to report
that, as he would if he saw a student throw a rock through a
store window. He said he would agree to specifying in the bill
that the crime was committed on school property but he thinks we
all have an obligation to report crimes because this bill is
about making communities a better place. He doubts any teachers
will object to reporting a crime if they see one.
Number 1999
SENATOR KELLY said the bill requires teachers only to report,
therefore it puts a burden on teachers that it does not put on
anyone else. He believes teachers would report whether required
to or not because of their training.
MR. CYR responded that this bill was heard by the House Judiciary
Committee which reviewed the legal aspects of the bill. He noted
this bill refers to what goes on in schools. He repeated the
bill could specify that the crime was committed in school.
CHAIRMAN MILLER said he agrees that as citizens we all have the
responsibility to report crimes if we see them being committed.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said he intended the bill to apply to
teachers reporting in the course of their duty and he believes
that is implied in the title of the bill. He said he was
concerned about a situation in which a teacher reported sexual
abuse of a student to the principal several times but the
principal never reported it to the authorities.
MR. JOHN WALDRON, representing the Yakutat School District,
thanked Representative Dyson for supporting school districts but
noted he cannot support HB 253 for several reasons. First,
teachers are already required by statute to report suspected
sexual abuse to DFYS as well as to school administrators.
Regarding disciplinary policies, he believes every school in
Alaska already has such a policy. He thinks this bill will take
that action away from the school boards. SB 36 required
community involvement. Students will lose some of their due
process rights if HB 253 passes because it allows teachers to
remove students from the classroom without going to the
administration. Teachers are not always consistent with their
discipline policies from one day to the next.
CHAIRMAN MILLER announced that with no further questions or
testimony, public testimony was closed. He noted that Senator
Wilken would not be offering Amendment 1.
SENATOR KELLY moved to adopt Amendment 2 which would add the
words, "in the course of duty" before the word "observes" on page
3, line 14.
SENATOR PEARCE asked if Amendment 2 is a conceptual amendment in
that the drafters might prefer to say, "in the course of their
assigned duties."
CHAIRMAN MILLER stated yes.
SENATOR ELTON asked if Amendment 2 essentially defines the
teachers' responsibilities by their duties rather than by where
the crime occurs.
SENATOR KELLY said it does.
There being no objection, CHAIRMAN MILLER announced that
Amendment 2 was adopted.
SENATOR KELLY moved to adopt Amendment 3 which would delete
subsection (c) on page 3, lines 17 through 21.
SENATOR ELTON objected because he thought there should be some
culpability for mistreating a teacher when, in the course of the
teacher's duties, the teacher did something he or she was
required to do.
SENATOR WILKEN stated his school district is not particularly
fond of HB 253 but it understands the bill is needed in some
areas of the State. His school district asked him to replace the
word "knowingly" with the word "intentionally" but he favors
Senator Kelly's amendment because it removes the entire paragraph
which is directed at a volunteer school board member.
SENATOR KELLY repeated that a number of civil avenues are
available to a teacher who was punished by the board for
violating the statutes.
SENATOR PEARCE asked Representative Dyson to address Amendment 3.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said he agrees with Senator Elton because it
is aimed at the intentional punishing of a teacher who did the
right thing.
Amendment 3 was adopted with Senators Kelly, Pearce, Wilken and
Miller voting "yea," and Senator Elton voting "nay."
SENATOR ELTON moved to adopt Amendment 4 which would replace the
word "must" with the word "may" on page 2, line 10. He stated he
is bothered by the fact that the bill institutes a system in
which every school's concerns must be included in a district
plan. He hopes that the process involves schools and students
but he is bothered by the fact that the result of this bill will
be that districts have a disparate number of plans.
CHAIRMAN MILLER objected to Amendment 4 because in his district
some of the community standards are different and he believes
district policies need room for some variance.
Number 1323
SENATOR ELTON said he agrees but he believes any good school
board will take that into account.
Amendment 4 failed with Senators Pearce, Wilken, Kelly and Miller
voting "nay" and Senator Elton voting "yea."
SENATOR PEARCE moved a conceptual amendment (Amendment 5) to
allow all schools in a district to have just one plan if they are
in the same community and if they choose to have one, but to also
have plans written for each town if schools are in separate towns
within a district. She stated in an area like the North Slope,
each community might want their own plan, but on the other hand,
Anchorage does not need 87 separate plans.
CHAIRMAN MILLER said he understands the intent of Senator
Pearce's amendment but in his community all of the Fairbanks
school plans might coincide but the Two Rivers and Salcha schools
might want their own plans but are not communities per se. He
said he understands that a separate plan is not necessary for
every school but he is not sure how to break it out.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said Senator Pearce could get at what she
wants, which is what he intended, if, at the end of line 15, the
colon was changed to a comma and the words, "and referred to the
governing body for modification or standardization and/or
approval" were added. That would allow the district to leave
each plan as is or standardize them all.
SENATOR WILKEN noted that Alaska used to have funding communities
but they did not work so it now has attendance areas which could
be used to differentiate interests within a school district. He
noted in Chairman Miller's district, Salcha and Two Rivers is an
attendance area, as is Fairbanks. He suggested striking the
words on page 3, lines 13 and 14, "by each school in the
district" and adding after the word "community" the words "each
attendance area,".
SENATOR PEARCE said she would accept that as a friendly
amendment. There being no objection to Amendment 5 as
conceptually stated by Senator Wilken, it was adopted.
SENATOR PEARCE moved to adopt Amendment 6 which would strike the
words "understood, accepted, and" on page 1, line 13.
SENATOR ELTON objected and said he is not arguing with the intent
of Amendment 6 but the word "upheld" presents the same problem
because a lawyer could argue that the standard was not upheld by
the student because the student violated it.
SENATOR PEARCE restated Amendment 6 to strike "understood,
accepted, and upheld" and insert "developed".
There being no objection, CHAIRMAN MILLER announced Amendment 6
was adopted.
SENATOR PEARCE asked Representative Dyson to comment on Ms.
Gillespie's opposition to the phrase "or otherwise punished" on
page 3, line 6.
REPRESENTATIVE DYSON responded that the Anchorage School District
is concerned that a teacher might be denied a promotion or
transfer.
MR. CYR added that the NEAA membership was concerned about
harassment or being denied transfer rights. He said it is making
the workplace untenable and six to seven teachers leave each year
for that reason.
SENATOR ELTON moved SCS CSSSHB 253(HES) from committee with
individual recommendations. There being no objection, the motion
carried.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|