Legislature(2013 - 2014)Wasilla LIO Conf Rm
06/03/2013 10:00 AM House EDUCATION
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Presentation: Common Core Outside of Alaska | |
| Presentation: Alaska Education Standards, the Smarter Balance, and the Common Core | |
| 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
Wasilla, Alaska
June 3, 2013
10:02 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Representative Lynn Gattis, Chair
Representative Lora Reinbold, Vice Chair
Representative Dan Saddler
Representative Paul Seaton
Representative Peggy Wilson
Representative Harriet Drummond
MEMBERS ABSENT
Representative Gabrielle LeDoux
OTHER LEGISLATORS PRESENT
Representative Tammie Wilson
Representative Wes Keller
Representative Shelley Hughes
Senator Mike Dunleavy
Senator Gary Stevens (via teleconference)
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PRESENTATION: COMMON CORE OUTSIDE OF ALASKA
- HEARD
PRESENTATION: ALASKA EDUCATION STANDARDS~ THE SMARTER BALANCED~
AND THE COMMON CORE
- HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
JOY PULLMAN, Education Research Fellow
Heartland Institute
Chicago, Illinois
POSITION STATEMENT: Gave a presentation on the Common Core
Outside of Alaska.
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner
Office of the Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Presented an overview of Alaska Education
Standards, the SMARTER Balanced, and the Common Core.
SUSAN MCCAULEY, Director
Teaching and Learning Support
Department of Education and Early Development (EED)
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified and answered questions during the
presentation on Alaska Education Standards, the SMARTER
Balanced, and the Common Core.
LORIE [KOPPENBERG]
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the presentation on Alaska
Education Standards.
JENNIE BETTINE
Wasilla, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the presentation on Alaska
Education Standards.
REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the presentation on Alaska
Education Standards.
BARBARA [CARTER]
Willow, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the presentation on Alaska
Education Standards.
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented and asked questions during the
presentation on Alaska education standards.
AMY [THOMAS]
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion of the
presentation on Alaska education standards.
WAYNE OZOSKY
Eagle River, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion on Alaska
Education Standards.
MIKE COONS
Palmer, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion on Alaska
Education Standards.
ANNIE REEL (ph)
(No address provided)
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion on Alaska
Education Standards.
REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES
Alaska State Legislature
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Commented and asked questions during the
presentation on Alaska Education Standards.
BARBARA HANEY
North Pole, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Testified during the discussion on Alaska
Education Standards.
ACTION NARRATIVE
10:02:17 AM
CHAIR LYNN GATTIS called the House Education Standing Committee
meeting to order at 10:02 a.m. Representatives Gattis, P.
Wilson, Seaton, Reinbold, and Saddler were present at the call
to order. Representative Drummond arrived as the meeting was in
progress. Also in attendance were Representatives T. Wilson,
Keller, and Hughes, and Senators Dunleavy and Stevens (via
teleconference).
^Presentation: Common Core Outside of Alaska
Presentation: Common Core Outside of Alaska
10:05:12 AM
CHAIR GATTIS announced that the first order of business would be
a presentation by the Heartland Institute on Common Core Outside
of Alaska.
JOY PULLMAN, Education Research Fellow, Heartland Institute,
explained that the Heartland Institute is a Chicago-based think
tank that focuses on state legislatures, whose goal is to
research and promote ideas that empower individuals. She
indicated she will outline the nationwide concerns about Common
Core state standards (CCSS), or Common Core, in general and the
[Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC)].
10:06:42 AM
MS. PULLMAN said that 16 of the 45 states that withdrew from
Common Core have reconsidered their decision. Some of the main
reasons to do so include the origin of the Common Core, the cost
it will impose on local schools, the academic quality of the
standards, its connection to data-mining students, and a loss of
state and local control. She explained that the Common Core,
which is often referred to as "state-led", does not usually mean
what people think of as "state-led." Instead the CCSS was
written by a set of committees that met behind closed doors and
were not subject to any open records or open meetings laws, with
no elected officials involved. She said it is very unclear "who
said what." She pointed out this is in clear contrast to the
typical way of making state law, which is open to the public and
requires transparency in many different ways. She stated that
cost concerns, in particular, are raised since Common Core
relates to almost everything related to education that happens
inside of schools. Thus standards determine what kids will and
will not learn and basically outline the content. Changes to
the standards would require replacing textbooks, classroom
materials, retraining teachers, and new technology. She stated
that all Common Core tests will have to be administered entirely
electronically by 2018. States that try to use paper and pencil
until then would need to pay more to employ that option. This
poses problems for many rural districts since it would require
upgrading systems to have sufficient bandwidth during the test
windows. She reported problems have been observed in Oklahoma,
Indiana, Florida, Kentucky, Minnesota, and Ohio with servers
crashing, student test information being lost and the quality of
testing compromised just with existing testing. Most states
have not been able to assess the impacts testing limited to
electronic Common Core that will be required by 2018. She
offered to provide a comparison of Alaska's new state standards
and the Common Core standards. She indicated a colleague
compared the math standards for K-3 for 100 percent Common Core
standards, with an additional 14 Alaska-only standards.
10:10:14 AM
MS. PULLMAN emphasized the importance for lawmakers and citizens
to understand what is happening in the state and to compare all
the standards for comparison between the state's standards and
the national Common Core standards. She said, "If they are
essentially the same, or essentially the same as all the other
states that are allowed to add 15 percent of Common Core, then
it is also as if the state has adopted the Common Core standards
and not just the testing."
MS. PULLMAN, referring to academic quality, which is the area in
which people have expressed the most concern, noted first, the
Common Core does not have any track record, but is based on
theories adopted by committees on what children should know.
Second, internationally recognized experts in math, English, and
early child development have questioned the academic quality of
the Common Core standards. For example, a Stanford University
math professor - the only mathematician who sat on the Common
Core committee - offered his belief that adopting Common Core
standards would disadvantage students such that they will lag
behind international peers by at least one grade level in
elementary school and two grade levels by high school. Dr.
Sandra Stotsky, who has written the best standards in the
country, said the English standards provide empty skill sets,
which would not be helpful for teachers or students. She
highlighted one problem with the SMARTER balanced testing that
Alaska students are set to face are the constructed response
questions. This shifts from multiple choice tests to more open-
ended essay types of questions that must be graded by hand. She
indicated that other states have experienced problems with
accuracy. For example, Kentucky has had the system in place for
several years and recently the system collapsed so the state
"threw out" all of the constructed response questions. So far
there hasn't been any evidence that the format is effective or
that it provides the type of information children need to learn.
She pointed out some concerns exist about data mining, which she
offered to discuss later.
MS. PULLMAN expressed concern with the loss of state and local
control. She said the Alaska Constitution gives the legislature
the right to establish and monitor public education. If the
state or legislature has "signed over" certain testing to
national testing groups, it removes the rights and
responsibilities given by the Alaska Constitution. In fact,
all of the states involved with SMARTER Balanced have signed a
memorandum of understanding (MOU). Alaska's MOU promises, that
the state will address areas in state law, statute, regulation,
and policy to implement the proposed assessment system and to
address any such barrier. Basically, the state has promised to
change state law, in accordance with the testing the consortium
thinks is necessary to implement those tests, but no definition
exists for what is necessary. This presents further problems
since Alaska has signed on an advisory state in SMARTER
Balanced, but does not have any vote in the consortia's
decisions. Thus, it is unknown what data SMARTER Balanced will
require of states or if any statutory or regulatory changes in
Alaska will be needed in order to comply with the agreement
because the tests are not final and have not yet been released.
However, some things SMARTER Balanced has said in its agreement
with the federal government includes that it may test students
for "self-management skills" such as time management, goal
setting, self-awareness, persistence, and study skills.
Generally, these are "softer" skills that many parents are
uncomfortable with having placed in their children's files.
MS. PULLMAN said the agreement with the federal government
indicates SMARTER Balanced will have full access to all the data
that it obtains from states. Further, the federal government
has currently been reviewing test items. Due to a recent
federal change in student privacy laws, the federal government
or any agency or any district can share information without
parental consent or knowledge. This provision ties into some of
the "data mining" that nationally parents have been concerned
about in terms of Common Core standards. Lastly, she said that
in violation of federal law, SMARTER Balanced is an entirely
federally-funded model curriculum for states to use with Common
Core, which has specifically been designed to influence daily
instruction.
10:16:14 AM
MS. PULLMAN said, specifically, SMARTER Balanced comes not just
with end of course tests, but tests are designed to be given
every couple of weeks under the federally-constructed
curriculum.
^Presentation: Alaska Education Standards, the SMARTER Balance,
and the Common Core
Presentation: Alaska Education Standards, the SMARTER Balanced,
and the Common Core
10:16:43 AM
CHAIR GATTIS announced that the final order of business would be
a presentation on Alaska Education Standards, the SMARTER
Balanced [Assessment Consortium], and the Common Core [State
Standards].
10:17:56 AM
MIKE HANLEY, Commissioner, Office of the Commissioner,
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), offered to
compare and contrast Alaska's standards to ones adopted in other
states throughout the country. He said Alaska is fortunate that
the governor has been willing to stand up for Alaskans' rights
and ability to control its educational system, resources, and
control our own destiny. He offered to share the same message
with the committee that the EED has used to brief stakeholders
around the state, including legislators, school districts, and
superintendents.
10:20:26 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY gave an overview of the state's education
standards. He compared the state's standards with respect to
the similarities of Common Core [State Standards] and the
current Alaska education standards. First, Alaska's new
education standards are similar to the Common Core [State
Standards] with respect to the expectation of students.
Certainly, Alaska's students need to be competitive, in the
state, the country, and globally to obtain jobs. The state has
that obligation and if students are not prepared they may not be
able to find jobs outside their own community. The new
standards [and Common Core State Standards] are similar for
students. For example, by the end of kindergarten, students
should know letter names and sounds; by the end of fourth grade
students should to be able to master capitalization and
punctuation of sentences; and by the eighth grade students
should understand algebraic concepts. Thus, the expectations
are similar, but the difference is the ownership of the
standards. The Common Core rules allow teachers to add up to 15
percent of [the curriculum]. He questioned who dictates this
and who will tell the state what Alaska will put in its
standards. In other words, the authority and ability to
determine the state's standards should occur in Alaska. The
Common Core "club" requires following the rules, which the EED
is not interested in; however, the EED is interested in making
certain students are competitive. In sum, there is a big
ownership difference between the Common Core [standards] in
states using them and Alaska's educational standards. In
particular, standards are designed to help make students
competitive and successful and both standards do this; however,
a vast difference occurs depending on who makes the decision
about what to include or exclude in the standards and who "owns"
the standards. Therefore, the department and governor are not
willing to grant this to the people who own the Common Core
standards. He said two organizations are credited with
developing the Common Core [State Standards]: the National
Governor's Association and the Council of Chief State School
Officers; however, some questions exist with respect to behind
the scenes decisions and who is making them. Again, he said
he's not willing to relinquish these decisions to other states'
commissioners. The EED has never hidden that the Alaska
educational standards are rigorous.
10:26:08 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained the significant difference between
standards and curriculum. Standards set the target while the
curriculum is up to local school districts via decisions made by
local school boards and superintendents. For example, by the
end of kindergarten a student should be able to know their
letters and sounds. The standard doesn't indicate any
methodology or pedagogical strategies or designate specific
textbooks. Another standard would be to indicate that in eighth
grade a student should know some algebraic concepts. While
schools may choose to use standards to set goals, the curriculum
is up to local school districts via decisions made by local
school boards and superintendents. He also offered some
regional examples. He clarified that lesson plans and
methodology of teaching are not part of standards, but standards
consist of targets to aim for.
10:28:40 AM
SUSAN MCCAULEY, Ph.D., Director, Teaching and Learning Support,
Department of Education and Early Development (EED), stated that
she came to the department in January, but prior to that time
held the position as principal of Birch Street School in the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District (MSBSD) for two and a
half years. She said that she and her staff spent last summer
working on the school's curriculum, being informed by the new
math and English standards. Certainly, teaching those standards
looked very different than any other school in the district;
however, the reason parents chose this charter school was to
obtain a different teaching style. She reported she taught 308
students and to attain math standards one method was to
incorporate knitting since it is a "big deal in a Waldorf method
school." She also determined what standards could be used to
incorporate art in the school; the point being that curriculum
and teaching methods vary between schools, but the same
standards are used. Again, the standards inform what kids
should know and be able to do and the school had complete
autonomy in the decision process of how to attain the Alaska
education standards.
10:30:12 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said that often the EED receives questions
about curriculum but parents are directed to the local school
board and decision-makers since they determine the school's
curriculum. Furthermore, the Alaska standards have been in
place for some time and although the standards have changed,
they are systemically the same. Again, local districts
determine how to address the current standards, he said.
10:30:55 AM
DR. MCCAULEY provided the background and history for adoption of
Alaska's new English language arts and math standards. She
reported the process took two years to review and develop.
During this time, stakeholders from around Alaska worked on
Alaska's standards, including representatives from K-12
teachers, the university, from career and technical education
labor, and industry - totaling 229 people. The process included
reviewing and identifying whether the current standards were as
rigorous as the Common Core standards. The aforementioned new
standards were sent out for public comment in December 2011. As
previously stated, the new Alaska education standards share
similarities to the Common Core standards, but differ in two
primary areas. First, Alaska's stakeholders added language to
the education standards to achieve clarity since the Common Core
standards were not found to be sufficiently clear in some areas.
Second, some standards were omitted by the Common Core standards
that the Alaska group felt should be retained, primarily in the
elementary grades in math measurement standards. An extended
public comment period was held for six-months with the comment
period ending in May 2012. She reported that 106 groups were
invited to review and comment, including universities, Rotary
clubs, Chambers of Commerce, and Native corporations. In the
spring 2012, community meetings were held. For example, the
Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District (MSBSD) meeting was
held on April 9, 2012. Meetings were also held in Fairbanks,
Bethel, and Juneau in February and March 2013. Subsequently
each state Board of Education member met with House Education
Standing Committee members. The original education standards
were changed using feedback from public comment. For example,
the original standards omitted English language arts standards
for social studies, science, and technical subjects, which are
included in the Common Core standards. However, public comment
overwhelmingly supported their inclusion so the new Alaska
standards were revised and subsequently approved by state Board
of Education and Early Development in June 2012. She added that
10 webinars were hosted by the EED that were disseminated via a
public newsletter, with 18 different notices to solicit public
comment. She characterized the process as a thorough local
process. Additionally, the process included a standard-by-
standard analysis of the rigor of the previous education
standards as compared to the new education standards. In fact,
the previous standards were far less rigorous than the new ones,
she said.
10:35:33 AM
DR. MCCAULEY said she recently reviewed the math standards for
grades 3-10, and found only found 68 of 358 standards were more
rigorous in the Common Core standard than Alaska's prior
educational standards; however, only 10 instances occurred in
which Alaska's standards were more rigorous. Additionally, 81
standards were taught at a lower grade level in Common Core
[standard] than in Alaska's prior standards. Further, Alaska
educators reviewing the prior Alaska standards strongly
supported changes. In fact, the educators felt that what had
been happening across the country was to embrace far more
rigorous standards and Alaska's educators felt something needed
to be done to raise the standards to an acceptable level for
Alaska's kids.
10:36:33 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said the new Alaska standards were submitted
to University of Alaska (UA) Institute of Social and Economic
Research (ISER), and were vetted and confirmed. He advised that
the UA has been a primary stakeholder that found kids were
typically not prepared for the university system. He reported
that 64 percent of students required at least one remediation
course, prior to taking college-level courses. Statistically,
the university has found that the more remediation courses
required, the more dramatically the chance for graduation also
declines. Employers, such as Red Dog Mine, have reported that
Alaska's kids still need to know more. The biggest comment from
educators has been that, "Wow, we are going to have to up our
game a little bit."
10:38:45 AM
DR. MCCAULEY reported one other thing that reviewers found were
that the standards were "first generation standards." The
standards were good to provide direction, but needed coherence
and clarity. The old standards were considered bulky and
inconsistent. Therefore, it wasn't just content, but the old
standards lacked clarity.
10:39:46 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said district adopted the new standards
about one year ago and these new Alaska standards were sent to
every teacher and administrator in all 53 school districts. He
characterized the scope as one that is currently being narrowed
and deepened. Specifically, the number of standards that should
be taught has been narrowed, with a better level of continuity.
For example, the standards require integration and application
of the knowledge, as well as analysis instead of memorization of
facts. While content knowledge is critical, more importantly,
how to use the knowledge has been incorporated. The EED has
been offering training for teachers and leaders to help them
change strategies in their classrooms. Further, five districts
have requested the EED provide additional training this fall
prior to school starting. He suggested that the department may
request additional funding from the legislature to provide
additional training. In Alaska, a few districts have adopted
the Common Core [standards] since these school districts thought
the current standards were not high enough, including Anchorage,
Copper River, and Juneau. He recently spoke to the
aforementioned districts and advised them that even though they
have adopted the Common Core standards these districts still
have the responsibility to meet state standards as per Alaska's
statutes and regulations. Again, all school districts must
adhere to the Alaska standards even if they differ from the
Common Core standards. He characterized the districts as being
in the mode of "shifting gears" with some seeking to modify
their current curriculum and change their strategies and make
adjustments from the old to the new standards.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY spoke about data mining. He characterized
this as a separate conversation, which has come up with respect
to SMARTER BALANCE, which he offered to touch on.
10:45:43 AM
DR. MCCAULEY stated that the current assessments are standards-
based assessments, which will be similar to new assessments.
She said the department worked with the Alaska Commission of
Postsecondary Education, the UA, and the Department of Labor &
Workforce Development around longitudinal data that helps the
department better understand how kids are doing when they leave
the K-12 system. She emphasized the importance of knowing
whether the system has adequately prepared students to work in
the workplace. Currently the department's data systems are not
effective in providing that information. She said the
department hears discussions with regard to remedial rates, but
the department has not been able to look at specific
contributing factors. In fact, the department does a lot of
guessing right now since the information on K-12, the university
system, and the workforce are completely disconnected systems.
When people question what has contributed to a high remedial
math and reading necessity for university freshman, the
department cannot provide any data. The EED has been working
with Alaska organizations to better assess when the educational
system is adequately preparing people for college and life.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY pointed to the Alaska performance
scholarships, which have been in place for several years. The
department has been interested in knowing if the kids who
qualify for the awards at the highest level are educated well
enough to be successful. One way to provide that analysis is for
the department to combine the data from the university and the
K-12 system in order to make that determination.
10:49:28 AM
DR. MCCAULEY referred to page 25 of the English language arts
standards, which indicate the foundational skills for K-5
classes. She stated that in grade 1, students should be able to
distinguish between long and short vowel sounds in spoken single
syllable words. Students should be able to decode regularly
spelled onesyllable words and know final e and common vowel team
conventions for representing long vowel sounds. In grade two
students should be able to decode words with common prefixes and
suffixes. She characterized these as very traditional and
extremely important early literacy skills for kids. Moving to
middle school, referring to page 46, she indicated that students
must understand the elements of literature.
10:50:57 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for the specific reference.
DR. MCCAULEY responded that she is on page 46 of the document in
members' packets entitled, "ALASKA ENGLISH/LANGUAGE ARTS AND
MATHEMATICS STANDARDS."
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said the standards Dr. McCauley has
referenced are the basic standards for learning to read.
10:52:04 AM
DR. MCCAULEY again referred to page 46. She provided an example
of middle school standards: Determine a theme or central idea
of a text and how it is conveyed through particular details;
restate and summarize main ideas or events, in correct sequence,
after reading a text. She said these are the elements of
literature. She indicated this builds in complexity from 7th
and 8th grade [as listed in columns 2 and 3]. She referred to
page 48-49 to the grades 9-10 and read the standard: "Analyze
how an author draws on and transforms source material in a
specific work [e.g., how Shakespeare treats a theme or topic
from Ovid or how a later author draws on a play by
Shakespeare]." She then referred to grades 11 and 12, and read
the standard: "Demonstrate knowledge of eighteenth, nineteenth
and early twentiethcentury foundational works of American
literature, including how two or more texts from the same period
treat similar themes or topics."
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said prior to developing the new Alaska
education standards, Alaska did not have any 11th or 12th grade
standards.
DR. MCCAULEY turned to math, noting that the kindergarten
standard speaks to adding and subtracting up to five and in
first grade adding and subtracting up to 10; the second grade
standard speak to adding and subtracting up to 20 and knowing
single-digit sums from memory. She indicated that the standards
have increased specificity of what a child should be able to do
at each level. She indicated that it is not random and is very
clear of what is expected at each grade level.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY pointed out that the means for teaching the
standards were left to the local districts. Instead, standards
set an expectation for the end of the grade.
10:55:31 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY provided background on state assessments.
To begin with, he said the department's responsibility as a
state is to establish and maintain a system of education for all
students. To accomplish this, the department has defined four
components. The first component sets standards for students.
The second component assesses students on their proficiency and
measures growth towards proficiency on the standards. The state
developed the standards-based assessment (SBA) to measure growth
on the previous standards. As the standards shift, the
department looks to find an assessment to compare to the new
standards. Typically, several options are available, including
that the state can develop its own assessment or it can review
other state assessments and seek one that aligns with the
standards and measures of what is being taught. For example,
the Iowa Basic Skills is a test the state used years ago, and
while some believed the test aligns with Alaska, the company
disagreed. Since the current tool did not align well with the
new standards the state was faced with either developing an
assessment or using an existing one. Certainly, the legislature
has indicated that it's important to be able to compare
students.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said currently, one assessment is used
biennially to test fourth and eighth grade students, the
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). While this
test doesn't align well, it is administered across the country.
Alaska's standards are similar to the Common Core standards.
Thus, the department decided the two assessments being used for
the Common Core standards would provide valid and reliable
results were the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for
College and Careers (PARCC) and SMARTER Balanced. He described
the difference between the two, such that one is based on
multiple exams on end of unit and the other is based on a summit
exam, given once a year. The department determined that SMARTER
Balanced was a better fit for Alaska so the state joined in
April as an advisory state. The department, the Board of
Education, and the governor signed a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU), which allows the state to obtain an ability to get
assessment for what is being developed, but the state has not
paid or received any funds. The state has not purchased the
scoring from SMARTER Balances, nor has it fully committed to the
consortium. Instead, the state will be committing to purchase
an assessment. He detailed that the assessment would provide
item development, test construction, and analysis of the item.
The state would receive an assessment, including an item bank
laid out in an adaptive format - either technology-based or
"paper and pencil" format. The assessment would provide a tool
to assess the growth of Alaska's students on the standards.
However, SMARTER Balanced provides an assessment, which does not
impact standards or curriculums - which is teaching. Instead,
the assessments measure how effective teaching has been. He
emphasized that the standards are separate, but the department
seeks measurements on the state standards.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY clarified that there is not any curriculum
tied to the standards since setting the curriculum is a local
decision. Again, the state has not fully committed to the
SMARTER Balanced consortium, although the department supports
its work. He reported that the MOU other states signed required
states to adopt the Common Core [standards]. However, Alaska
omitted or "crossed off" that provision when it signed the MOU.
The state indicated it will have adopted college and career
ready standards, which is the target for kids. Furthermore, the
state added a few sentences to the MOU unique to Alaska. He
referred to page 3 of MOU, under responsibilities of states in
the consortium, and read what was crossed out, "Each state
agrees to adopt college and career ready standards and to which
the consortium's assessment system will be aligned." However,
Alaska added a statement to indicate that Alaska did not adopt
the Common Core state standards, but has adopted new content
standards that are college and career ready and sufficiently
similar to the Common Core state standards that will provide
valid and reliable results. In response to a comment from an
unidentified person, he offered to speak to "Race to the Top"
later.
11:06:17
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated that noting in the MOU requires the
state to commit to any costs. However, the state spends $50.43
for assessment per student to operate the assessment system,
which totals about $4 million. He pointed out that to purchase
item development, test assessment, and analysis from SMARTER
Balanced [Assessment Consortium] ranges approximately $20 per
student; however, the department recognizes that it will need to
continue to provide project management and scoring. He
estimated the total cost of participating in SMARTER Balanced
[Assessment Consortium] will be about $49.24, for a $400,000 in
savings. He anticipated the need for a paper and pencil test
[in some districts], which would offset these savings. In fact,
the department did not request an increment since it anticipates
a wash.
11:08:24 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY explained that teachers can give less formal
tests to measure how well students are progressing towards the
end of the year tests. He advised that this information is for
teachers and is not reported to the department. He was unsure
of whether the district or the department would pay for these
tests. He indicated the reporting would not change. He
reported that the department currently uses a test company, Data
Recognition Corporation (DRC). He turned to the technology
component, noting one of the strengths of the SMARTER Balanced
[Assessment Consortium] is that it is adaptive test. He
predicted that if students know the answers, they will quickly
move through the exam. If the student misses a question, the
test will give a follow-up question for clarification of actual
knowledge. For example, on math exams the question will hone in
on the level of understanding of the basic math concept.
Currently, testing has been conducted statewide for 11th grade
students through WorkKeys. In short, the state has been able to
successfully do this; however, he anticipated some new
challenges. All states are moving to on-line testing and Alaska
will also need to do so. The state needs to recognize how to
accomplish this for all school districts, in particular, by
identifying bandwidth, speed and capacity in all districts. He
anticipated the department will know by the fall of 2013 which
districts will be able to do on-line testing and which ones will
continue to use paper and pencil tests. He questioned the
validity of any test that the state is not able to give to all
students. In fact, the state won't accept that and commit to
get an assessment which will reflect how kids are doing on the
standards, he said. He characterized this as the "bottom line"
and one reason the state has selected SMARTER Balanced
[Assessment Consortium], as well as to have insight in how the
testing is developed. The department may have a chance to field
test the assessment if districts are willing to do.
11:13:32 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY stated the state wants the best test
available. He acknowledged that many testing companies are
working on new tests, including ACT. He understood Alabama has
adopted the test and Alaska will continue to carefully monitor
it. He estimated that the ACT test would cost approximately $1
less than the SMARTER Balanced tests. However, Alaska has a
short window of time to give tests. He offered his belief that
since an on-line assessment is much quicker, the window would be
expanded, but bandwidth represents a challenge. He provided
some examples of how testing could occur using one computer lab
for various grades.
DR. MCCAULEY added that numerous districts use measures for
testing in math, in which a harder or easier question is given.
These types of on-line tests have been used effectively in rural
Alaska, including the Northwest Borough.
11:16:39 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY discussed the federal "Race to the Top
(RTT)" grants. One of the biggest "red flags" that emerged
during the first round tied Common Core to funding. First the
Common Core meant someone else would determine standards.
Secondly, the department envisioned federal funding would be
tied to the Common Core and the state said, "No thank you." In
the second round, recognition was given for college and career
ready standards and Alaska did not apply. In the third round,
with the Early Learning Challenge, the state again did not
apply. The state recognized that for significant amounts of
money, some very strong strings existed, which forced states to
take different directions. For example, the Early Learning
Challenge had some good ideas, but was not a direction for
state. Furthermore, the program required the state to implement
things it was not willing to implement, and once the funds were
depleted, Alaska would be committed to spend $10 million
annually. Therefore, the state did not apply for the "Race to
the Top" since the cost was too high with significant federal
overreach. He offered his belief the state is better off not
participating, which he viewed as "leveraging our souls" to
access federal funds.
11:19:30 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY pointed to significant stakeholder input.
He reported that he just returned from a conference and other
commissioners indicated they quickly applied for federal grants.
However, Alaska decided it was "not playing in your sandbox."
Instead, Alaska has chosen to work with its stakeholders. He
offered his belief that Alaska standards and expectations match
up very closely to those in the Lower 48. He said the biggest
difference is who will make the determination and content of the
standards. Furthermore, Alaska wanted an assessment without the
Common Core "strings". SMARTER Balanced [Assessment Consortium]
has no strings attached, which allows Alaska flexibility and
freedom, but uses Common Core [standards] as a tool to assess
students. He related that he has supported Alaska's position at
Lower 48 meetings and is now hearing some states express that
they wished they had vetted the standards before adopting them.
Thus, he is comfortable with the decision for Alaska in terms of
its standards. He predicted the new standards will be good for
the educational system.
11:23:37 AM
CHAIR GATTIS understood that the state did not adopt the Common
Core curriculum. Therefore the state did not receive any "Race
to the Top" funding attributed to adopting the Common Core
curriculum. She noted the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School
District (MSBSD) also did not adopt Common Core curriculum. She
asked whether the Anchorage school district has adopted the
Common Core curriculum.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said that the Anchorage School District
adopted the Common Core state standards. He pointed out that
there isn't any Common Core curriculum.
CHAIR GATTIS asked whether Anchorage school districts received
any money for adopting the Common Core standards. She further
asked for an explanation on the Anchorage School District's
status.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY answered that the department does not track
grants to school districts. However, he said that the "Race to
Top" funds were very competitive and only a few states received
funds. He offered his belief that he would have heard if
Anchorage had received the funds.
CHAIR GATTIS asked what advantages school districts obtain for
adopting the standards.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY responded that the original reason was that
some school districts adopted the Common Core standards before
the state adopted its new standards. The Anchorage School
District and the Juneau School Districts raised the bar over the
previous standards. He was unsure if the school districts
signed anything. He said that school districts have the
responsibility to meet the state standards that have been
adopted by the State Board of Education and in regulation. He
indicated that school districts can adopt other standards but
the districts must make certain the standards meet the minimum
state standards.
CHAIR GATTIS agreed that is what she heard at the beginning of
the testimony. She offered to summarize the commissioner's
testimony, such that the Alaska state standards are similar to
the Common Core standards; however, the curriculum is decided on
locally by school districts and school boards. She further
understood that the cost for assessment for the state for
SMARTER Balanced has not yet been formalized. She said, "We
haven't jumped off the cliff and connected our self with SMARTER
Balanced, where it just escalates and escalates." She
acknowledged cost over time is a concern. She related her
understanding that the state has not particularly agreed which
standards the state would adopt.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY clarified that Alaska has joined SMARTER
Balanced [Assessment Consortium], which he characterized as
being the "front runner" and the direction the EED is taking.
However, he indicated that the state will continue to monitor
other standards since the state has until 2015 to decide.
CHAIR GATTIS appreciated highlighting the distinction between
the standards and assessments and a briefing on the state's
decisions and directions on assessments to date.
11:29:53 AM
LORIE [KOPPENBERG] understood the commissioner to state that
Alaska has joined the SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium,
which means Alaska has given up its sovereign voice to a group
that is led by a Washington State group. She asked for an
analysis of the Common Core standards document entitled,
"Cooperative Agreement" which she identified as an agreement
between Alaska, Washington, and the EED. She further understood
the state is collectively a recipient of the "Race to the Top"
funding. This would require synchronizing the test between
(indisc.) which is illegal under the 10th Amendment. She
expressed concern about sharing data collected by these tests
and that any involvement with Common Core standards will allow
the federal government access to information in state and local
schools. She further expressed concern about the lack of
process [in adopting standards.]
COMMISSIONER HANLEY said that state had not given up anything.
He said the state has not accepted any "Race to the Top" funds,
which are being used to develop the assessments. He clarified
that Alaska has not paid for anything and SMARTER Balanced
[Education Consortium] does not have any access into Alaska
unless it purchases an assessment.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS indicated numerous parents have been
involved in the process and this will be an ongoing discussion.
She said she appreciated Commissioner Hanley being a part of
this process.
11:32:42 AM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, asked how
many states were advisory to the SMARTER Balanced [education]
consortium and how it works to only be partially committed. He
further asked if it would be possible to obtain statistically
relevant comparisons between Alaska's performance and other
states.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY responded that as advisory state, Alaska has
had a say in conversation, but not a vote. He did not know how
many states were advisory members versus members. He suggested
that the EED would need to examine the standards, but he
estimated that the state's new standards and the Common Core
standards are very close, probably 95 percent similar. He
anticipated that the test will be valid and will provide
accurate results.
11:34:56 AM
JENNIE BETTINE, who also serves as the President of the
Conservative Patriots Group of Alaska, began by asking about the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), which she said also is the
document that requests federal grant funds. She asked whether
Alaska is requesting federal funds by submitting the systems
grant application to implement the program. Additionally, she
understood the testing is limited to English and math, but does
not cover American history. She offered her belief that 24
states are now questioning whether their states should be
involved in Common Core standards, noting these are not proven
standards. She characterized this as "leaping to the federal
government" and while she heard testimony that Alaska is not
giving up any rights, she surmised that the curriculum would
ultimately be affected.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY answered that Alaska is not seeking federal
funding to implement the test. He said the EED's funding for
assessments is adequate to implement the standards.
DR. MCCAULEY, with respect to the comment that standards might
inappropriately drive local curriculum, responded that if the
expectation is that students will know their multiplication
facts by third grade, teachers will do what they can to make
sure kids know them. However, what doesn't happen is the
ability to dictate how that will occur. For example, she
recently worked with the North Slope Borough School District
(NSBSD), noting the NSBSD has a very integrated approach to
curriculum - which isn't happening anywhere else. The NSBSD's
curriculum has been driven by the content standards for English
language, arts, and math and the Inupiat learning framework,
which was locally developed and contains the concepts the
communities on the North Slope want their children to know and
perform. In particular, the curriculum has been influenced by
the local Inupiat culture. She said she reviewed the curriculum
map and the NSBSD's direction to teachers in the region to show
how the students will learn the content and meet the curriculum.
In fact, she has found that the local culturally informed
expectation and the curriculum is very different than any in the
country. She highlighted that her example emphasizes that
standards inform content and local control over curriculum.
Certainly, a local district may choose to adopt a textbook
series as a primary way to teach children, in part, to allow
mobility between schools in the district and consistency between
schools. However, she concluded that these decisions are local
decisions and local school boards make the decisions.
11:39:51 AM
REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER, Alaska State Legislature, asked how
much responsibility the EED has in terms of whether students
learn. He further asked whether the department receives money
to ensure that children learn. He suggested this issue is a
distraction since the standards have existed for a long time.
He recalled that National Assessment of Educational Progress
(NAEP) indicated students have a 35-percent proficiency level.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY acknowledged that the EED has the
responsibility, since the department sets the standards and
assessments for districts. He agreed the department has
responsibilities for support and oversight; however, he
cautioned that the department does not teach students.
DR. MCCAULEY said she spent time this past week with school
officials. She reported that school districts often request
more assistance from the department and she often must clarify
the department's role and statutory obligations. She also said
she works to outline the parameters to ensure stakeholders have
adequate input so they know how to proceed to ensure the outcome
based on local preferences.
COMMISSIONER HANLEY gave an anecdote, but also agreed that the
department cannot support one vendor over another.
11:43:22 AM
BARBARA [CARTER] said she attended a meeting on Common Core
training in Fairbanks that didn't make sense to her. She
expressed concern about Lower 48 money being spent to influence
education standards in Alaska. She stated that it seemed as
though the West End and University of Maine were involved.
11:46:09 AM
COMMISSIONER HANLEY recalled attending a department's meeting on
Common Core training that didn't make sense to him either. He
suggested that someone just put together a flyer and put Common
Core training on it. He asked Dr. McCauley to respond.
MS. CARTER asked whether the responsibility rests with the
commissioner and again, she expressed concern with Lower 48
funds in entities affecting Alaska's educational standards.
DR. MCCAULEY interjected that the Alaska Administrative Coaching
project is entirely an Alaska program that mentors principals
and superintendents during their first two or three years in
administrative positions in the state. She said there is no
affiliation with [any other organization]. It's affiliation
with the University of Maine [Center for Research and Evaluation
at the University of Maine has administered an annual evaluation
for the Alaska Administrator Coaching Project since 2008]. She
related that the university conducts a survey for $2,500 per
year given to participants in the coaching program to determine
the degree to which it is has or has not been helpful to
increase the skills they think are necessary as administrators
in Alaska. She reiterated that the AACP is entirely a State of
Alaska initiative similar to Alaska Statewide Mentor Project
that supports teachers during their early years in Alaska to
reduce turnover in Alaska. She then referred to the training in
Fairbanks and indicated the reason the flyers read Common Core
was because there were administrators from Anchorage present.
The initial advertisement said, "Alaska Standards/Common Core"
but when it came to the department's attention, it was
corrected. Finally, the program is an EED program and the
department feels no responsibility to be training people in
Alaska with respect to the Common Core standards; instead, the
department trains about its standards. The department has given
clear direction that EED sponsored events are not to reference
Common Core standards.
11:50:27 AM
REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD said the House Education Committee did
not adopt Common Core [state standards] and was not consulted on
it, nor does the committee have anything to do with SMARTER
Balanced [Assessment Consortium]. She expressed four concerns.
First, she was glad to see the state adopted Alaska standards
and not the Common Core standards. However, she is still a
skeptic regarding Common Core. She said that on February 20,
2013 a MOU between the Department of Administration (DOA) that
talks about federal content standards and gives the state the
ability to do the SMARTER Balanced; however, the funding was
through the U.S. Department of Education. She expressed concern
about federal overreach. She offered her belief that this
appears to be a massive federal undercurrent. She said the MOU
discussed aligning the assessments with the Common Core
standards. Additionally, she referred to page 6 of the
aforementioned MOU signed by the department and governor about
"becoming part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (ARRA), which is also a federal program. She referred to
page 8, which she said discusses Washington being the lead
state, which she found alarming. She recently attended the
National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) meeting. She
said she asked where the funds would be going and was advised
the University of California - Los Angeles (UCLA), which she
found to be a red flag. Finally, she said she attended a STEM
program last week. She expressed concern that too many red
flags are being raised that Alaska is not establishing its own
program. She asked for assurance not to lose state sovereignty
when the MOU says that each state agrees to identify any
existing barriers in state law, statutes, regulations, or policy
noting the barrier and how it will remove the barrier.
REPRESENTATIVE GATTIS asked to have the statement held in order
to take more questions.
11:53:33 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON directed attention to page 7, of the MOU,
which outlines the responsibilities of an advisory state. He
pointed out that the MOU was written for all participating
states, but the addendum outlines the responsibilities of an
advisory state. He asked members to review the MOU carefully
and look at the commitment to an advisory state with respect to
the commitments. He further asked how the new Alaska standards
narrowed the previous standards.
CHAIR GATTIS asked the department to hold its responses to allow
for public testimony [since time is short.]
11:55:29 AM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked about item development, which
SMARTER Balanced would assess. He next asked if EED would have
an additional assessment based on the 14 additional items for
comparison. Finally, he asked if there would be mini servers to
allow each of the school districts to increase their bandwidth
and participate.
11:57:40 AM
REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking
as the Chair of the Finance subcommittee on Education, said the
committee has been conducting its own test and test scores. She
said that the districts can adopt more rigorous standards. In
addition, school districts have the ability to apply for federal
funding without the blessing of the state. She related her
understanding that the department would be looking at a test
consistent with those in other states. Otherwise, she wondered
how the state will be able to compare Alaska's students to
students in other states. She further asked about the "cut
scores" and if they will be set by the consortium or the state.
11:59:35 AM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked specifically about any personal
questions on the test since parents don't necessarily want their
children to disclose personal information. She further asked
whether the state has any control over this.
12:00:28 PM
AMY [THOMAS] stated she is a grandmother who is very interested
in the educational system and she is a former teacher. She
offered her belief that the state is looking at the wrong
subject. She said the state already has standards and the
students haven't been meeting the lower standards so why would
the state move to higher standards. She questioned the reason
there isn't any discussion on why students can't meet the lower
standards. She hasn't heard anything about this from anyone.
12:01:13 PM
WAYNE OZOSKY said he was representing his daughter. He
understood the department supports the Common Core standards.
In response to a comment, he agreed it was the Common Core
curriculum. He asserted that the department is setting up
students and teachers to fail. He offered his belief that
teachers are being blocked from speaking publically about Common
Core standards and wondered why this is so since this isn't
Germany in 1933. In fact, teachers can't even discuss this. He
expressed concern that his daughter is not learning math. In
response to a question, he indicated his daughter is in the
Eagle River, which is the Anchorage School District.
CHAIR GATTIS understood his concern about the curriculum. She
clarified that there is a difference between standards and
curriculum, as previously stated by the commissioner. He
suggested that Mr. Ozosky talk to some of the Anchorage
legislators, such as Representative Drummond, who previously
served on the Anchorage School Board.
12:03:26 PM
REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON also understood Mr. Ozosky's concerns.
She said that some schools have been teaching subjects very
well, but others have not. She asked how the commissioner
ensures that the school district is doing what it is supposed to
do.
CHAIR GATTIS noted questions will be held for the commissioner.
12:04:27 PM
MIKE COONS asked about the elephant in the room. He said this
issue has been raised because Common Core which has been
compiled by leftists. He offered his belief kids are not more
intelligent now than previously, but some are "right brained" or
"left brained" and learn differently. He opined that these
ideas are coming from "leftists" including President Obama.
12:06:34 PM
ANNIE REEL (ph) stated she is from the Matanuska-Susitna valley
and does not have any children. She asked about the impact of
the program for the good of the country and students. She
expressed concern that the SMARTER Balanced and Common Core
[standards] don't contain education on history or the U.S.
Constitution. She said she thought it was scary. She has
listened to some of the SMARTER Balanced videos, which she found
sickening. She asked how this [decision on standards] will
affect students. She wondered about data mining and cautioned
against students answering personal questions. She indicated
she did not like the direction this is going in. She
appreciated the committee's efforts and while she understood
that the state is not yet committed she expressed her concern,
especially since this [SMARTER Balanced and Common Core] is
nationwide. She offered her belief that all of this needs to be
scrubbed and students need to be brought up to the standards,
noting the state has been failing in this regard.
12:10:03 PM
CHAIR GATTIS noted that many people had travelled to testify
since this is an important issue.
12:10:31 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SHELLEY HUGHES, Alaska State Legislature,
encouraged members to listen to the videos on the data being
given. She asked for clarification on the five percent
difference between the Alaska Education Standards and SMARTER
Balanced and Common Core standards. Secondly, she expressed
concern that [personal] student data will be revealed. Finally,
she expressed interest in whether the department has made any
commitment on scoring through SMARTER Balanced. In closing, she
reiterated her interest in what type of data will be released so
she can assure parents that information on their children won't
be released [to the public or federal government].
12:13:14 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER offered his belief that standards are
important. It's important for policymakers to establish where
Alaska [students are] in comparison to other states. He wanted
to validate the concerns people have had that standards become
curriculum, which becomes textbooks. He appreciated parents and
grandparents spending time to attend an education meeting during
the interim. He also commended Representative Keller on his
bill to teach constitutionalism in schools.
CHAIR GATTIS reminded testifiers that the department would not
have an opportunity to respond to questions today since the
committee is about out of time.
12:14:14 PM
BARBARA HANEY stated she is an economist and was previously an
educator at the state and university level in Alaska. She
expressed concern about the data that is available through the
EED. (Indisc.] The American Institute for Research (AIR), which
she has a copy of, is a company that has done a lot of work on
mental health, transgender education, and {indisc.) technology.
She was curious on the governor's (indisc.). (Indisc.) She
said it's been a problem in other states and she's deeply
troubled by it. She found some things to be incredibly
deceptive.
12:16:44 PM
MS. KOPPENBERG said she was a Matanuska-Susitna valley resident.
She asked who made the decision to start pursuing changes to the
Alaska Education Standards. She asked whether it was the
commissioner or from Governor Parnell. She understood that
Anchorage has adopted the Common Core standard. She also
understood that something was happening at the Matanuska-Susitna
School District level that will be implemented that is very
similar. She expressed concern and said parents could
participate and stop this.
CHAIR GATTIS asked for her question by e-mail so she could pass
it on to the Matanuska-Susitna Borough School District
superintendent.
12:18:04 PM
REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified that the Alaska State
Legislature and House Education Standing Committee determined
that Alaska Education Standards were not rigorous enough to
support teachers to challenge students, especially as compared
to other states. Thus the emphasis for change [in standards]
began with the legislature. Given the lack of a longitudinal
data base, elementary school student records did not follow
students to high school or to college. Further, many
administrations - not just Governor Parnell's administration -
have been trying to improve education in Alaska. In fact, the
Alaska legislature did not think education would be improved by
making standards weaker or by not using longitudinal data. He
indicated that Common Core is a group of standards developed in
part by the Governors' Associations in the Lower 48. However,
Alaska was already moving in the direction of creating a
longitudinal data base to assist students as well as working to
increase standards with the goal to prepare Alaska's students
once they leave school. He stated that the proposed changes are
not ones made by a single person, but represent changes to
standards that have evolved as Alaska has addressed improving
the educational system in Alaska. Finally, the committee has
held many hearings to tackle how to improve education.
12:21:37 PM
MS. KOPPENBERG stated that some personally identifiable
information has not been yet sent but has been formally
requested by several websites including the national data
collection model, the data quality campaign, and the common
educational data standards sites. She asked who will determine
at what point the Alaska will release personally identifiable
information, including names, social security numbers, health
and psychological information to the federal government. She
recalled that at a recent federal event it was said that Common
Core [standards] represents the glue that makes all the data
collection possible. She offered her belief that "rigorous"
also needs to be defined.
12:23:50 PM
REPRESENTATIVE HUGHES asked the department to examine the
political agenda so the legislature is informed if anything in
the Alaska Education Standards and whether it is coming through
to the curriculum chosen at the local level as opposed to the
standards.
12:24:25 PM
CHAIR GATTIS recalled discussions in other committees and asked
to "piggyback" on this. With respect to resource development,
she said that the legislature [and the state] acknowledges that
it is a resource development state so an anti-resource
development curriculum certainly goes against what many Alaskans
believe.
12:24:53 PM
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business before the committee, the House
Education Standing Committee meeting was adjourned at 12:24 p.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 4-5 Signed SBAC MOU (1).pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Smarter Balance Memorandum of Understanding |
| Leg Research Report.pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Common Core |
| Hanley Smarter Balance Letter.pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Common Core |
| EED letter to Chair Gattis June 18, 2013 With Answers.pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Common Core |
| Attachment to Q&A.pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Common Core |
| June 3 DEED submitted questions.pdf |
HEDC 6/3/2013 10:00:00 AM |
Common Core |