Legislature(2009 - 2010)CAPITOL 106
01/23/2009 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Overview(s): Department of Education, Teaching and Learning Support, Assessment and Accountability | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE STANDING COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
January 23, 2009
8:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Paul Seaton, Chair
Representative Cathy Engstrom Munoz, Vice Chair
Representative Bryce Edgmon
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Robert L. "Bob" Buch
Representative Berta Gardner
MEMBERS ABSENT
All members present
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
OVERVIEW(S): DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, TEACHING AND LEARNING
SUPPORT, ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
MARK LEWIS, Director
Administrative Services
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Offered information and responded to
questions during the overview from the department.
LES MORSE, Deputy Commissioner
Assessment and Accountability
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Responded to questions during the overview
from the department.
CYNTHIA CURRAN, Director
Teaching and Learning Support (TLS)
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an overview of the TLS program.
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:03:23 AM
CHAIR PAUL SEATON called the House Standing Committee on
Education meeting to order at 8:03 a.m. Representatives Seaton,
Munoz, Wilson, Edgmon, Keller, Buch, and Gardner were present at
the call to order.
^OVERVIEW(S): DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, TEACHING AND LEARNING
SUPPORT, ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY
8:03:48 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that the only order of business would be
an overview by the Department of Education regarding teaching
and learning support, and assessment and accountability.
8:04:21 AM
MARK LEWIS, Director, Administrative Services, Department of
Education and Early Development (EED), said he would address
questions previously submitted to the department by the
committee.
8:06:20 AM
MR. LEWIS turned to the first question, regarding the Unity
Project - the longitudinal data system. He reported that the
project was a U.S. [Department of Education] grant, the award
for which was $3.5 million. The project was scheduled to last
from October 2006, through October 2008. A one-year, non-
monetary extension was requested by the department because of
set-backs, and the extension was granted through October 2009.
Mr. Lewis said that in fiscal year 2009 (FY09), the department
received a general fund appropriation of $610 thousand from the
state to maintain the project, which he noted was a requirement
under the grant. Thus far, the department has spent $2.5
million, and has approximately $770,000 in federal and the
majority of the $610,000 state's general funds remaining. He
remarked that it is difficult to find qualified analyst
programmers within Alaska; the department has had to look for
contractors from the private sector, which has caused project
delays.
8:08:15 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked Mr. Lewis to summarize what is being done on
the program related to the longitudinal data set.
8:08:24 AM
MR. LEWIS reviewed that as information is received in the
department's assessment unit, the system helps by identifying
errors in the data. Once corrected, records are stored in a
data warehouse, at which point research can occur. Another
element of the program has to do with automating web portals,
which allows web access to people in the districts who have the
proper security access to do their own research. The ultimate
goal of the longitudinal data system, he said is to make quality
decisions based on the information over a period of time.
8:11:04 AM
MR. LEWIS, in response to Chair Seaton, said currently the
information is performance data related to student identifiers,
not budget data. However, he said it is anticipated in the
future that a budget element could be added.
8:11:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER inquired if this system will be ongoing.
MR. LEWIS confirmed that the intent of the department is for the
program to continue in a maintenance phase after the initial
system is set up. He noted that is the purpose of the general
funds the department received last year. In response to follow-
up questions, he clarified that there were issues related to the
department's infrastructure, which were resolved through the use
of Alaska vendors. The formal solicitation awarded the contract
to an out-of-state vendor through a competitive process. The
uniqueness of the project meant that there were only a certain
number of vendors who could compete; therefore it was
anticipated that there would be out-of-state vendors for the
large contract. He offered further explanation regarding the
difficulty in hiring from within the department, noting that
expertise and pay scale were two issues. He said the
administration is aware of the issue.
8:15:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER asked for further details regarding the
pilot program.
MR. LEWIS related that data was collected last fall from the
following districts: Juneau, Sitka, Kodiak, Delta-Greely,
Matanuska-Susitna, Anchorage, and Fairbanks. This spring, data
will be collected by means of the system, piloting with many of
the aforementioned, plus Northwest Arctic, Galena, Wrangell, and
Copper River. He deferred to Les Morse to supply the timeline
to fully implement the program.
8:16:04 AM
LES MORSE, Deputy Commissioner, Assessment and Accountability,
Department of Education and Early Development, explained that
the department will be working out the timeframe during the next
academic school year. In response to a follow-up question, he
said as the department rolls out new components, there will be
professional development. The department is trying to figure
out how to do professional development in a way that allows it
to "take advantage of distance education in many arenas."
8:19:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked about the department's hiring
process.
MR. LEWIS outlined the department's hiring process, noting that
the department uses a hiring tool called, "Workplace Alaska."
When recruitment fails, the Department of Administration (DOA)
tracks the information to determine the reason(s) for the
failure.
8:20:48 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER queried if the longitudinal data study
can sort and provide statistics for how a district, building,
teacher, or a specific student is performing. Is the system
sophisticated enough to generate such information.
MR. MORSE said the department is currently able to provide that
information, however, it is not easily generated, nor can anyone
at a district level access the information. The intent, behind
the longitudinal data system, is for full automation, and to
allow districts and researchers, with secure/authorized access,
to perform analyses. Regarding the concern for bandwidth, he
said it would not be a problem, because the files that come
across will be in a low profile, text format that can be
compressed to a zip file.
8:22:34 AM
MR. LEWIS moved on to name the core services for teaching and
learning support: to provide leadership and technical
assistance to schools related to state and federal education
requirements and strategies that will result in improved student
success; to provide assistance to parents, families, schools, to
achieve greater involvement in students' education; to
administer statewide testing and assessments; to provide
technical assistance to district staff and collect and analyze
data; to provide ongoing and daily technical assistance to
grantees related to increased student achievement, educational
improvement, school health, and safety; to administer and
provide technical assistance to schools, with options such as
statewide correspondence programs and charter schools; to issue
and administer state and federal grants, contracts, reimbursable
services agreements for the provision of direct student
instruction and professional development; to administer teacher
certification and accreditation of teacher education; to assure
quality of instate teacher administration programs; and to
administer to youth in detention and special schools.
8:24:09 AM
MR. LEWIS directed attention to page 2 of a handout in the
committee packet entitled, "FY2010 Operating & Capital Budget."
He highlighted the following agency operations listed on page 2:
Student and School Achievement, Statewide Mentoring Program,
Teacher Certification, Child Nutrition, and Early Learning
Coordination. The latter is where Head Start is housed. Mr.
Lewis noted the general, federal, and "other" funds that are
allocated to these operations, as shown on page 2. In response
to Chair Seaton, he confirmed that the budget for Child
Nutrition includes [$86,600] in general funds from the State of
Alaska and [$35,494,100] in federal funds.
8:26:49 AM
MR. LEWIS directed attention to a spread sheet on pages 9-10,
which outlines how resources are allocated within the Teaching &
Learning Support Component. In response to Chair Seaton, he
confirmed that, in regard to state assessments, there is nothing
listed under the federal column, while there is $3.7 million
listed under federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) column. He
explained that at one time NCLB was included in the federal
column, but it was broken out from that column when someone
requested the information on its own. He offered his
understanding that the money for NCLB is acquired directly from
the federal government to fulfill the program requirements.
8:29:05 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER pointed to the special education
component and noted that it receives federal funding. She asked
if the amount listed reflects the total funding for all children
holding an individual education program (IEP). She said her
question pertains to her desire to ascertain which children are
not graduating. She suggested that Alaska may have a
disproportionate number of special needs children due to
parental/student, drug/alcohol abuse, as well as encouragement
for military personnel to locate to Alaskan installations based
on the services available for a child with an IEP. Do our
schools meet these students' needs, and if not, would that not
skew the statistics for the state's low graduation rates.
8:31:25 AM
CHAIR SEATON announced that a future meeting may be covering
this line of questioning.
8:32:13 AM
MR. LEWIS offered his understanding that "within this program,"
the special education federal allocation is most likely directed
toward monitoring and compliance. He said he believes that the
special education funds to which Representative Gardner has
referred, flows through the Foundation Formula directly to the
school districts to implement their [special education] program.
8:32:47 AM
CHAIR SEATON specified that special education would be addressed
at Wednesday's meeting.
8:33:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON noted that the category of small Rural
School Achievement has an allocation of $170,000, while the
State Assessments category receives $3.7 million, and he said he
would like to know if these two entities combine to work
together.
8:34:11 AM
CYNTHIA CURRAN, Director, Teaching and Learning Support (TLS),
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), explained
that the small rural school achievement program is a federal
program that allows districts with small enrollments to combine
federal funding to use in other federal programs. She offered
an example of how Title IV funding could be combined with Title
I funding, to assist students. In response to a follow-up
question, she confirmed that there is no direct relationship
with state assessments program.
8:36:07 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ expressed concern for the low funding
allotted for counseling and suicide prevention.
MS. CURRAN offered her understanding that the department is
working with Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) to
address the issue, and she offered to provide further
information to the committee.
8:36:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUNOZ questioned what the line for Alaska Mineral
& Energy Resources Education Fund (AMEREF) relates to.
MR. LEWIS responded that AMEREF is a grant, from that board, to
fulfill contractual obligations for providing a curriculum to
children regarding mineral and energy resources within Alaska.
8:38:10 AM
MR. LEWIS, in response to a question from Representative Keller
regarding the Alaska Longitudinal Data System component,
explained that in the FY10 budget there will be no federal funds
associated with that program. He emphasized that the funding
shown on the chart us only an estimate and subject to
fluctuation.
8:39:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON commented on the mineral kits and AMEREF
lesson plans, for the benefit of committee members who are not
familiar with the program. She then asked whether there are
areas that suffered federal funding reductions when money was
directed to fulfill NCLB requirements.
8:41:24 AM
MR. LEWIS said he would provide information to the committee, as
to which areas may have lost funding, when NCLB was enacted, and
whether the state is offsetting the funding loss, or if the
schools are expected to make do with less funding.
8:41:38 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH offered his understanding that there was a
mandate to fund NCLB at a certain level, but that the reality is
that it has been funded at a lesser level.
8:43:03 AM
CHAIR SEATON suggested that the committee hear a separate
presentation on NCLB.
8:45:00 AM
MR. MORSE relayed that for the five years previous to his
current position as deputy commissioner, he served as the
director of the Assessment and Accountability Division, which is
why he will be speaking to the committee regarding that topic.
Further, he said he would discuss plans for the future. He
noted that the new director of the Assessment and Accountability
Division is Erik McCormick.
MR. MORSE listed the seven statewide assessments overseen by the
assessment portion of the Assessment and Accountability Division
as follows: the high school graduation qualifying exam, a
developmental profile, a standards-based assessment, a norm (ph)
reference test that is given yearly to two graduate levels
students, an English language proficiency assessment given to
approximately 18,000 students each year, an annual alternate
assessment for about 600 students with severe disabilities, and
a national assessment carried out each year with the federal
government to ascertain educational progress. He noted that the
standards-based assessment is the major test for accountability,
and the one the committee would likely hear the most about when
talking to schools regarding student assessments.
8:48:29 AM
MR. MORSE spoke about the work that has been done towards
creating effective/meaningful assessments. He said with the
current vendor, the department owns the assessment programs and
can build on them. State ownership has saved $1.4 million last
year. The vendor, called, "Data Recognition Corporation," has
won another bid to continue this work for EED. Additionally,
new services have been gained under this vendor.
8:52:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked when the students are tested in the
different subjects.
MR. MORSE responded that students are tested in reading,
writing, and mathematics, at grade levels 3-10, while students
are tested in science at levels 4, 8, and 10. He said testing
for science is only in its third year; it is required by NCLB,
not by state statute. He predicted that as educators begin to
receive, and review, data related to science, they will begin to
examine and modify existing curriculum to best meet student
needs.
8:56:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH expressed concern for the state to establish
a means to utilize information in a more effective and efficient
manner.
MR. LEWIS specified that in terms of "high-level, broad
perspective with technology in the State of Alaska," there is
some consolidation. He said Enterprise Technology Services
Davison, DOA, oversees "the backbone of the state system."
Within that purview, a state information technology plan is
submitted each year to DOA, and the Office of the Governor, to
demonstrate DHSS's intent is for the given year. The purpose of
that is not only to help the department plan, but also to take
advantage of any opportunities to consolidate services. Each
department has its own mission, and sometimes consolidation is
not an option.
8:59:28 AM
MR. MORSE, in response to Representative Keller, noted that in
addition to the state's standards-based assessment and the
nation's NATE (ph), which compares Alaska students to other
states and to the nation, there is one other test that shows how
Alaska's students are doing across the nation, and that is
called the Terra Nova. He said although the tests are for
different purposes, comparisons can be made between them. He
said it is important to ensure that school districts are looking
at those analyses in order to address student needs at the
classroom level. Last year, he noted, a vendor held a workshop
to assist in understanding the analyses of these tests for
practical application. Regarding the NATE, Mr. Morse said
Alaska is not at the top half, but is not at the bottom, in
terms of national performance. He said he does not think
Alaska's performance is that poor, because other indicators need
to be considered. For example, Alaska is one of the top three
states in terms of having the largest numbers of students, by
percent, who have limited English proficiency and participate in
that assessment. States have the right to exclude certain
students from the NATE, and Alaska has a low exclusion rate,
which should be factored when comparing Alaska to other states.
9:04:36 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked about students with limited English
proficiency, but who do not fit the profile for English as a
second language, and how these students are being met.
MR. MORSE answered that the department is now identifying those
students better than in the past because of the specific
assessments conducted. The information gathered determines
whether the student has difficulty in reading, writing,
speaking, and listening. He noted that a few years ago there
were 20,500 students, and students have been "exited from the
program." Targets are designated, but school districts find it
challenging to meet those targets.
9:08:50 AM
REPRESENTATIVE EDGMON requested further explanation of
assessments and identification of students whose aptitudes are
best suited for the vocational arena.
MR. MORSE said there is an eighth assessment that is not part of
the aforementioned seven, and it is called Work Keys; housed in
the Career and Technical Education Unit of TLS, and overseen by
Ms. Curran. The overall Work Keys program includes an
elementary, middle, and high school testing component, which
shows students' vocational skills in the areas of reading and
mathematics and provides valuable information to districts and
the state upon which to make curriculum and program changes.
The Work Keys assessment is in the pilot stage. A requirement
to have the work done on computer has been recommended and is
expected to be in place in the coming years. The rest of the
assessments have skills imbedded within them that address basic
mathematics, reading, and writing, which are also vocational
skills. Therefore, as people in the districts begin to receive
the data from those assessments, they can begin to
identify/address the skills that students lack.
9:11:25 AM
MR. MORSE addressed the role of the Assessment and
Accountability Division. He noted that in addition to
assessment, the division reports the data for school
accountability to federal and state agencies. He explained that
this incorporates student and teacher performance data: the
adequate yearly progress calculation, and the results of each
school examination, including dialogues with underperforming
schools.
9:13:53 AM
MR. MORSE described how along with the awards, data and surveys
are collected in order to better analyze school performance. He
acknowledged that some educators are not pleased with the award
program. He noted that some schools have performed well despite
incentives, and that the program has not created increased
learning. He reported that some principals make use of the
performance growth information, and he stated that EED would
continue to collect and distribute the data. He offered his
belief that the principals are the key players in the
performance incentive program.
9:17:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked if the same schools continue to be
eligible for awards.
MR. MORSE conveyed that the performance growth calculations are
done yearly for each school.
9:18:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER noted that there weren't many surprises
of the winning schools in her district, as those schools
received a lot of parent involvement.
9:18:36 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked if this is the first program that has tracked
individual growth vs. individual performance within each school.
9:19:51 AM
MR. MORSE replied that there was another more complicated
federal program. He recounted that the current assessment
system is comprehensible, and geared for educators to gauge
performance. He noted that previous assessment systems have
offered different assessments for different school years; not
allowing for comparison and analysis.
9:21:20 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered support for the current growth model system
to help increase performance.
9:23:11 AM
MR. MORSE confirmed for the committee, that the longitudinal
data system is a growth model, and reported that it also allows
school districts to review the data.
9:23:41 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH offered his belief that motivation,
incentive, and encouragement must come from within each
division.
9:24:54 AM
MR. MORSE reminded the committee that all of the aforementioned
is part of the Accountability and Assessment Unit. He called
attention to his current role as Deputy Commissioner for EED,
which identifies support for the districts/schools as a
department wide priority. He declared support for Senate Bill
285, which allocates funds for technical assistance and staffing
to support district needs. He reported that his position works
closely with the TLS division.
9:27:30 AM
MR. MORSE conveyed that distribution of the increased funding
for technical assistance will be his responsibility.
9:28:09 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked for an analysis of how anticipated annual
student growth is determined.
MR. MORSE said that he would provide the information.
9:29:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE MUÑOZ asked if local teachers are utilized as
mentors.
9:29:35 AM
MR. MORSE replied that mentors are hired from hub cities across
the state, and assigned 14 to 16 teachers. An effort is made to
make assignments close to the mentor's home city.
9:31:00 AM
MS. CURRAN explained TLS is primarily a federally funded
division. She pointed out that the staff is comprised of
certified teachers. She described the duties of TLS, which
includes analysis of: state and federal legislation,
educational trends, standards and assessment activities, school
improvement strategies, and research based programs to help
improve student achievement. She explained that TLS offers some
technical assistance to Alaska's school districts, conducts
conferences for goal attainment of state and federal
initiatives, writes grants for state and school district
funding, and collaborates with many other groups to create
programs for student achievement. She reported that TLS
processes teacher certification applications, issues grants, and
monitors school districts to ensure compliance with federal and
state requirements.
9:33:33 AM
CHAIR SEATON asked whether a school district receives progress
information only on request.
9:34:29 AM
MS. CURRAN said that all teachers and school districts in need
of help will receive the information.
9:35:11 AM
MS. CURRAN read the mission statement of the Title I NCLB
program, which includes equitable student access to high quality
education and increased student achievement through federal
resources. She explained the program process, and went on to
describe the programs within Title I: Title IA - funding for
low achievement students from low-income families; Title IC -
funding to assist migratory children; and Title ID - funding for
neglected, delinquent, and at risk students.
9:37:13 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked Ms. Curran which program addresses
drop-out prevention and delinquency issues.
MS. CURRAN responded Title I, Part D.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked how the low income, delinquent or at
risk children are identified.
MS. CURRAN replied that she would provide the committee with
that information.
CHAIR SEATON asked if delinquency was defined as children under
16 not in school.
MS. CURRAN explained that, being a federal program, the
definition may vary from state statute. To a follow-up
question, she agreed to provide both definitions to the
committee.
9:40:11 AM
MS. CURRAN called attention to Special Education, for which TLS
is also responsible, and pointed out that Alaska has
approximately 18,000 special needs students, between ages 3-21.
She reported the mission of Special Education was to improve
academic achievement as well as social and behavioral skill
development. In step with the nation, Alaska has a dearth of
Special Education teachers. She noted that the early learning
programs are a part of special education.
9:42:02 AM
MS. CURRAN explained the Title II program, noting each
component: Teacher Quality, Math and Science Partnerships,
Transition to Teaching, and Higher Education grants.
9:43:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked who the Transition to Teaching
program attracts.
MS. CURRAN replied that applicants come from all walks of life,
and, as the program provides on the job training, it is not
always necessary for a potential teacher to return to college.
CHAIR SEATON surmised that this program is more than
identification of trades people to teach vocational education.
MS. CURRAN conveyed that the state already has a program for
trade craftsman to receive a Type M teaching certification. She
clarified that the new program requires a person to have a
Baccalaureate (BA) degree.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked if age or other restrictions would
hamper entrance to the program.
MS. CURRAN responded that the program has no age limit attached;
however, it does require the BA, a background check, and passage
of a basic skills test in reading, writing, and mathematics. In
response to a committee member's request, she agreed to provide
requirement details for this program.
9:47:35 AM
MS. CURRAN explained how Title II, Part D, provides school
districts with professional development funds to update and
integrate existing technology into instructional format.
Further, she said, Part D provides "leadership and support to
local career and technical education programs that prepare
students for further education and that result in family
supporting careers." She relayed that this includes the Alaska
Career Ready initiative, which develops thousands of
occupational profiles and the necessary basic job skills for
career placement. The program allows students to self assess
their qualifications and provides lessons for further
preparation.
9:49:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH asked who developed the assessment.
MS. CURRAN stated that the assessment was developed by the
American College Testing (ACT) company. Although ACT is a
college testing program, it is understood that certain skills
are necessary for many professions that do not require a four
year degree.
9:51:15 AM
CHAIR SEATON reflected on a program that Mt. Edgecombe has
utilized, and asked if this program were similar.
MR. LEWIS replied that this was a new program.
9:51:52 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON clarified that the ACT program would
direct a student to the areas they need work, in order to attend
college or take another vocational direction.
MS. CURRAN emphasized that this is not a placement assessment,
but rather an informational program to encourage attainment of
skills for success in any chosen occupation. In response to
Chair Seaton, she offered to provide program access to committee
members for their review.
9:54:36 AM
CHAIR SEATON requested a demonstration of this program along
with the other aforementioned educational tools be scheduled for
a future committee meeting.
9:55:32 AM
MS. CURRAN continued to explain Part D, focusing on Child
Nutrition Services (CNS). She reported that CNS offers "USDA
meal programs to school districts, residential child care
institutions, family day care homes, child and adult day care
centers, and summer food programs." She pointed out that CNS
also distributes USDA Commodity Foods and provides emergency
food assistance statewide.
CHAIR SEATON acknowledged committee interest in the food program
and recommended an in-depth review at a future meeting.
9:57:27 AM
MS. CURRAN continued with the responsibility that TLS carries
for Grants and Contracts funding.
9:58:01 AM
REPRESENTATIVE GARDNER asked for an explanation of the 30
percent budget increase from FY09 to FY10.
MR. LEWIS directed the committee's attention to the budget
document titled "FY2010 Operating and Capital Budget, December
15, 2008 - Agency Budget," and explained that Page 3 only
represents the general fund, and page 4 reflects all of the
funding sources.
9:59:21 AM
MS. CURRAN continued with Title III, to explain that, under
English Language Acquisition, it provides grants and assistance
for limited English proficient students. She described Title IV
as a health group, which includes addressing means for students
to meet high standards outside of the school setting.
10:01:11 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if additional youth surveys would be
beneficial in efforts to garner federal aid.
MS. CURRAN replied that this group administers the youth risk
behavior survey. She agreed to provide the committee
information regarding the survey tie-in with federal funding.
REPRESENTATIVE WILSON asked if these were federal or state
grants.
MS. CURRAN responded that Title IV is a federal grant.
10:02:44 AM
MS. CURRAN specified that the Title IV curriculum includes
counseling for suicide prevention, HIV prevention, Fetal Alcohol
Syndrome (FAS) information, and at-risk students. Additionally,
it includes resources for charter school development. In
response to Chair Seaton, she clarified that the charter school
grants are for planning and start-up, not sustainability.
10:05:09 AM
MS. CURRAN discussed the Title V program that encompasses the
statewide correspondence programs.
10:05:25 AM
MS. CURRAN referred to the teacher certification program, which
accepts and analyzes certification applications, and then issues
certificates to qualified teachers, administrators and special
service providers.
10:06:26 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH expressed concern within his constituency
for a timely response regarding the teacher certification
process.
CHAIR SEATON requested more information regarding the timeliness
of the process in order to identify the issues.
MR. LEWIS responded that this information would be supplied to
the committee. He acknowledged that TLS has experienced
internal issues, which have caused past delays, and are being
corrected.
MS. CURRAN announced that a stakeholder meeting is scheduled,
where statute and process changes for streamlining the teacher
certification process, will be discussed.
10:12:04 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KELLER requested a pie chart that would allow the
committee a visual reference for the federal funding
distribution among the various Title programs.
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH added his interest in having a top down,
flow chart of the operations through each agency and to the
Alaska State Legislature.
10:14:05 AM
MS. CURRAN agreed to comply with both committee requests, and
concluded her presentation.
10:14:38 AM
CHAIR SEATON offered that he had received positive feed back on
the earlier mentioned Teacher Mentoring program.
10:15:20 AM
REPRESENTATIVE BUCH opined his view of how education has evolved
from the three basics of reading, writing, and arithmetic, to
what teachers are required to address in today's multi-layered
programs. Although it is positive progress to implement the
expanded requirements, it creates a funding dilemma for
sustainability. He advocated that basic education is a
requisite and that a part of the process should be to inform
parents of their role as their child's first teacher, and
stressed that schools should educate, not raise, children.
CHAIR SEATON noted no more comments, and adjourned the meeting.
10:17:02 AM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 10:17 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|