Legislature(2011 - 2012)CAPITOL 106
02/02/2011 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation(s): School Superintendent | |
| Presentation(s): Higher Education Scholarship Funding Task Force | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
HOUSE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 2, 2011
8:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Alan Dick, Chair
Representative Lance Pruitt, Vice Chair
Representative Eric Feige
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Scott Kawasaki
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Sharon Cissna
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION(S): SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENT
- HEARD
PRESENTATION(S): HIGHER EDUCATION SCHOLARSHIP FUNDING TASK
FORCE
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
KENNETH STEPHEN BURNLEY, PhD, Superintendent
Mat-Su Borough School District (MSBSD)
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation on the Mat-Su
Borough School District (MSBSD).
EDDY JEANS, Education Policy Coordinator
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided a presentation on the Higher
Education Scholarship Funding Task Force, on behalf of the
Department of Education and Early Development (EED).
ACTION NARRATIVE
8:02:37 AM
CHAIR ALAN DICK called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 8:02 a.m. Present at the call to order were
Representatives Dick, Wilson, Seaton, Pruitt, and Kawasaki.
Representative Feige arrived while the meeting was in progress.
^PRESENTATION(S): School Superintendent
PRESENTATION(S): School Superintendent
8:02:37 AM
CHAIR DICK announced that the first order of business would be a
presentation from the superintendent of schools for the Mat-Su
Borough School District (MSBSD).
8:03:51 AM
KENNETH STEPHEN BURNLEY, PhD, Superintendent, Mat-Su Borough
School District (MSBSD), said the district has prioritized
educational transformation in order to ensure that students
exiting high school have gained a mastery of the required
subjects. Focus has been placed on building success, providing
transparent accountability, creating a relevant academic
structure, and producing students who are career, college,
workforce, and military ready. The Mat-Su is the second largest
district in the state, located 35 north of Anchorage, covering
25,000 square miles, and comprised of 44 schools. Enrollments
range from 11-1,247, for a district total of 17,098 students.
Every day 8,000 of the students are transported by buses, which
average 5,500 miles per day. Additionally, special education
buses transport 500 students approximately 2,500 miles on a
daily basis. The district offers a free/reduced lunch service,
which 39 percent of the students are eligible to receive.
8:07:32 AM
DR. BURNLEY said the school board established a strategic plan
comprised of a clear vision, clear mission, and beliefs,
supported by a set of core values and four definite goals. He
opined that the system works well because of the annual
objectives, which are assessed on a quarterly basis. He
directed attention to the slide titled "Second Quarter Summary
Data Through December 15, 2010," as an example of a quarterly
assessment and indicated how it provides tracking towards the
annual targets. These summary assessments are posted on the
internet for public access, along with the year-end reports.
Dr. Burnley indicated that the district has 20 elementary, 5
middle, and 6 high schools. In addition 6 charter schools are
located in the district. He said the district holds an open
enrollment policy, allowing parents a choice of the programmatic
options offered. Attention was drawn to the pie chart handout
to indicate the ethnicity percentages, and he pointed out that
Caucasian students represent the majority of students, with the
largest minority being [Alaska Native].
8:09:07 AM
DR. BURNLEY moved to the most important aspect of change that is
being implemented in the district; the slide titled "Educational
Transformation and Innovation-Stepping Into the Future, Mastery
versus Time." He explained that a student must demonstrate 80
percent mastery of a subject prior to advancement. The system
allows students who demonstrate scholastic competency to
complete high school in three years, while others may find it
necessary to continue studies for four and one half or five
years. The district policy of mastery/advancement begins in the
pre-school years and continues through all levels. The intent
is to hold a student accountable for learning, with some
exceptions made for special education students. To support the
students efforts towards these goals, several programs are
implemented. The Key Elements in Mathematic Success (KEMS)
introduces the algebraic concepts through a coaching model
provided in the middle school to prepare students for high
school level algebra. If a student has not received the benefit
of the KEMS program, the Elements of Algebra Success (KEAS) is
available in the high school. Additionally, he said the Science
Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) initiative, and
Health Academy courses are options. Grading is being
standardized across the district to ensure achievement levels.
The high school programs are underpinned by Response to
Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavioral Interventions and
Supports (PBIS), which provide learning and behavioral guidance
and standards. Finally, a college alignment program is in
place, including links to the Alaska Vocational Technical Center
(AVTEC).
8:17:00 AM
DR. BURNLEY provided a slide to illustrate an AdvancePath
Academics classroom makeover, contrasting the classic classroom
model and the AdvancePath office style layout. AdvancePath
creates a professional atmosphere, where students are treated
like adults; punching in and out, leaving their seat at will as
necessary, and forming focus groups. In this setting a student
completes one course at a time, achieving 80 percent mastery
before moving to the next course. In this way, a motivated
student could complete two years of class credits in one year.
Thus far, he said, this model has produced good results, and he
provided two examples of students who had failed the exit exam,
or dropped out; both returned, entered the program and earned
diplomas. Additionally, administrators have pursued other
students who have dropped out and invited them back to complete
a degree in this environment, to great success. AdvancePath is
a new program, serving 250 students, in three different
programs, and serves as an example for classroom of the future.
In closing he stated his belief that the Mat-Su school system is
achieving what EED, the legislature, and the federal government
have mandated: educational transformation and innovation,
mastery as the constant, transparent accountability, relevance
to student achievement and performance, substantial investment
into professional development, academic and employability
skills, and an outcome of career, college, workforce and
military ready graduates.
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the AdvancePath approach was
adopted from a national model.
DR. BURNLEY said yes, it has been successful in the lower forty-
eight states, and offered that the Mat-Su program could be used
as a demonstrative program for the state. He agreed to supply
background information on AdvancePath to the committee.
Finally, he said that student success is not about seat time,
but mastery of subject matter is essential.
^PRESENTATION(S): Higher Education Scholarship Funding Task
Force
PRESENTATION(S): Higher Education Scholarship Funding Task
Force
8:27:03 AM
CHAIR DICK announced that the next order of business would be a
presentation from the Higher Education Scholarship Funding Task
Force.
8:27:46 AM
EDDY JEANS, Education Policy Coordinator, Office of the
Commissioner, Department of Education and Early Development
(EED), briefed the committee regarding the house committee
substitute (HCS) for the committee substitute (CS) for SB
221(FIN), which passed the legislature in 2010. The bill
established a merit scholarship program for graduating high
school students. It specified that any graduate meeting the
criteria for rigorous course requirements, maintaining a good
grade point average (GPA), and scoring well on the American
College Testing (ACT) or Scholastic Achievement Test (SAT),
could qualify for three different levels of funding awards for
attendance to an in-state institution. The bill was structured
using Wyoming's Hathaway plan as a model, which in turn was
based on the Taylor Foundation plan out of Louisiana. A zero
fiscal note was passed, in 2010, as the graduating class of 2011
will be the first to receive entitlement. Thus, it will be
incumbent on the 27th legislature to allocate funding in the
2012 budget cycle, and the department has requested $8.2 million
to fund the first year. Because this is new ground for EED, the
funding request was based on estimates of eligibility. He
reported that EED has been developing regulations to implement
the program, and building in transition requirements, with the
understanding that the 2011 seniors may not have had the
opportunity to choose a course of study that would meet the
qualification standards. By 2013 the students will be required
to meet the full curricula established. The transition and full
requirements have been distributed to school district
counselors, superintendents, and principals. Directing
attention to the committee handout titled "Alaska Performance
Scholarship Requirements 2011, he indicated the award levels and
score requirements necessary to qualify: Level 1 Honors, awards
up to $4,755 per year to students maintaining a GPA of 3.5,
achieving an ACT score of 25, or SAT score of 1680 - a
career/technical scholarship requires a GPA of 3.5 and a
WorkKeys score of 5; Level 2 Achievement, awards up to $3,566
per year to students maintaining a GPA of 3.0, achieving an ACT
score of 23, or SAT score of 1560 - a career/technical
scholarship requires a GPA of 3.0 and a WorkKeys score of 5;
Level 3 Opportunity awards up to $2,378 per year to students
maintaining a GPA of 2.5, achieving an ACT score of 21, or SAT
score of 1450 - a career technical scholarship requires a GPA of
2.5 and a WorkKeys score of 5. Mr. Jeans provided a personal
anecdote, regarding the inability of his daughter, an upcoming
graduate, who has failed to meet minimum requirements for the
ACT/SAT scores, but maintains a high GPA. These standards may
serve to raise parental awareness of the competency skills which
are, or are not, being attained in the school system, he opined.
The legislation coming before the committee this session,
proposes a funding mechanism for long term support of the
scholarship program. The intent is to establish a fund that can
be capitalized and the interest income used for the scholarship
awards. The funding task force identified various means to
accomplish this task.
8:35:58 AM
REPRESENTATIVE FEIGE questioned the SAT score requirements.
MR. JEANS responded that the SAT cutoff scores were aligned with
the standards used in Wyoming and Louisiana. Further, he said
that when a student scores a 21, or above, on the ACT, the
chances for having to take remediation classes at the post
secondary level are minimal. The intent, he said is to require
rigorous study in high school and eliminate the need for
remedial classes in college. Following some committee
discussion of the ACT/SAT scoring requirements, Mr. Jeans added
that students in Alaska sometimes score above the ACT 25 rank,
but the GPA's don't necessarily support that type of brilliance.
A conclusion might be drawn that these students are not being
adequately challenged and the converse to that is the grade
inflation as previously mentioned regarding his daughter.
8:39:36 AM
CHAIR DICK opined that rural schools may find it difficult to
provide the required scholastic support for a student to qualify
under these standards.
MR. JEANS assured the committee that the issue of accessibility
was raised, when the standards were developed. Every
superintendent was contacted and EED received assurance that, by
the time the program is fully implemented, any student would be
able to receive the appropriate guidance to qualify; not
necessarily in every school but via alternative means. The
department is developing a virtual school, through a request for
proposal (RFP) recently awarded to the Southeast Regional
Resource Center (SERRC).
The committee took an at-ease from 8:41 a.m. to 8:42 a.m.
8:42:08 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI referred to the committee handout titled
"Scholarship Funding Task Force Report to the Legislature Fall
2010," to point out that it contains several bulleted
recommendations, and asked if any have been implemented into the
governor's current bill.
MR. JEANS reiterated that the 2011 bill focuses on the funding
structure. The listed recommendations will be addressed through
the regulatory process at EED; discussions are in progress. He
said if any recommendations cannot be handled via regulation,
the points will be brought before the legislature.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI noted that the assessment of the merit
component for the scholarship award has received criticism, and
he asked for comment; specifically is the intent to reward
students who do well, or provide an indicator of how a student
may perform at college. He reported that he excelled as a high
school student but struggled at the college level.
MR. JEANS said that the public notices describe the program as a
reward for anyone who steps up to the plate and performs well.
The intent is to have students better prepared for the next
chapter of their lives.
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI returned to the task force
recommendations, and asked what is being addressed regarding the
reintegration of a needs-based component.
MR. JEANS offered that EED does not support a program that is
based strictly on financial need. He explained that needs-based
does not incorporate academic preparedness, which is the intent
of the scholarship program. The current needs-based program is
AlaskAdvantage, which is underfunded but could be used as a
mechanism to supplement the merit performance scholarship. He
reported that AlaskAdvantage recipients often enter college,
become discouraged, and do not complete a course of study.
8:47:17 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON provided comments from student school
board members regarding the ability to qualify for the
scholarship, and said it is apparent that high schools vary in
graduation credit requirements.
MR. JEANS clarified that the current graduation requirement is
21 credits, as set by the state school board. The performance
scholarship program requires 16 credits in the areas of math,
science, language arts, and social studies. He pointed out that
many school districts have higher credit requirements, thus,
there is latitude for the students to achieve personal goals.
The committee took an at-ease from 8:49 a.m. to 8:51 a.m.
8:51:25 AM
REPRESENTATIVE KAWASAKI inquired about the progress EED is
making regarding distance delivery for the required courses.
MR. JEANS answered that the distance instruction is being
developed by SERRC in conjunction with the virtual school
program RFP.
8:52:37 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON returned attention to the committee packet
handout titled "Scholarship Funding Task Force, Report to the
Legislature, Fall 2010," and named the members of the task
force: Chair Kevin Meyers, Senators Johnny Ellis, Lyman
Hoffman, Gary Stevens, and Joe Thomas; Vice Chair Paul Seaton
and Representatives Peggy Wilson, Wes Keller, Anna Fairclough,
and Chris Tuck; Diane Barrans, Department of Education and Early
Development (EED), Eddy Jeans, EED, Karen Rehfield Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), Esther Cox, State Board of
Education and Early Development, and Saichi Oba University of
Alaska. The purpose of the task force was to work on the issues
that were raised when SB 221 passed the 26th Legislature. The
two primary areas to be addressed were: discovery of a funding
mechanism for the scholarship program, and recommendations for
programmatic changes.
8:54:49 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the Executive Summary, page
ii, to address the bulleted recommendations. It was determined
that the scholarship fund should be a self sufficient, self
sustaining program, independent of a fluctuating money source,
to ensure that all outstanding award contracts can be honored.
He reported that the expectation is to award approximately $40
million per year, thus the fund should be capitalized to a
minimum balance of $160 million. Given the scope of the
program, this is not an inflated number, he advised, and added
that students are a great resource, and it is important to
elevate this resource through appropriate investment. It was
determined that EED should specify the course requirements, not
specifically delineated in statute for each curricular subject
area and define the content requirements and standards for those
courses. Additionally, EED specifications were to include
options for the two career tracks being served by the awards;
academic or career/technical certification. The ability to
provide distance delivery was also reviewed to ensure that
remote schools will have the ability to access required course
work. The task force concurred with the decision by the
education committees, of both legislative branches, to provide a
needs-based component to directly support academically eligible
students who have limited financial resources. The component
meets the needs of traditional students; however, non-
traditional student populations also exist. Considering the
diminishing educational levels of the current workforce, it was
deemed important to continue and expand the existing grant
program known as AlaskAdvantage. He reported that the task
force recommends the supplemental scholarship and AlaskAdvantage
grant programs be programmatically separate, but share the same
funding mechanism, under a funding formula which ensures
adequate support for both. Representative Seaton said testimony
before the task force brought to the fore the practice of the
University of Alaska (UA) system to offer degree required
courses on a five year rotating basis; negating the ability of a
student to take appropriate advantage of the four year
scholarship program. Thus, two policy recommendations were
made: any institution which accepts scholarship awards should
integrate an advisor/advocate program to assist awardees in
expediting completion time; and institutions accepting awardees
should make a good faith effort to provide course delivery
structures that allow for two/four year certificate/degree
completion timelines. Implementation of these steps will
provide the opportunity for students to have a clear path, with
appropriately sequenced courses, while receiving the advisory
support that has proven to be a key element to student success.
9:09:19 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to page 5, and
paraphrased from the recommendation, which read [original
punctuation provided]:
In general, and as much as is practicable, the Task
Force recommends that sources of funding for the
Scholarship by positively identified, "funds-in"
revenue be affirmatively designated and General Funds
be used as necessary and in supplement only. In order
of preference, from "first place to go" to last, the
Task Force advises the Legislature to fund the
Scholarship Fund as follows:
Designating Interest from Specific, Existing Accounts
Designating Program Receipts and Dividends
Designating Revenues from Specific, External Sources
Re-appropriated Assets from Liquidated Accounts
General Funds
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON said that a stable funding source was
stressed in order to assure students that the program will
remain solvent. Several options were discussed, and he offered
examples of the reasoning that resulted in the five listed
approaches becoming the focus for recommendation. Finally, he
reported that when SB 221 passed, the legislative bodies held
differing view regarding class requirements. However, accord
remained for the bottom line goal, which is to eliminate the
need for remedial classes upon entry to college. As a result,
both pathway/requirement structures were retained.
9:16:39 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON provided final comments on the development
of SB 221, stating that a blank CS was used to incorporate
changes into the governor's bill. He explained the Amerada Hess
settlement, and why it was identified as a funding source for
the scholarship awards. It was determined that allocating the
Hess Fund to capitalize the scholarship program, and using the
annual interest of $22-$30 million to grant the awards, would be
appropriate and provide a solid financial base. Further, he
said it was deemed plausible to designate up to 15 percent of
the progressivity element of the oil tax to the scholarship
program as well.
9:21:24 AM
CHAIR DICK announced the upcoming meeting and thanked the
participants.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 9:24 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| DEED Reg - Effective 2_25_11.pdf |
HEDC 2/2/2011 8:00:00 AM |
|
| DEED Reg- Effective 11_4_2010.pdf |
HEDC 2/2/2011 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Legislation re Gov Merit Scholarship Program.pdf |
HEDC 2/2/2011 8:00:00 AM |
|
| Scholarship Funding Task Force - Final Report.pdf |
HEDC 2/2/2011 8:00:00 AM |