Legislature(2021 - 2022)BUTROVICH 205
02/14/2022 09:00 AM Senate EDUCATION
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| Public School Funding Formula, Accountability, and Assessment Update | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| + | TELECONFERENCED | ||
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
ALASKA STATE LEGISLATURE
SENATE EDUCATION STANDING COMMITTEE
February 14, 2022
9:03 a.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT
Senator Roger Holland, Chair
Senator Shelley Hughes
Senator Tom Begich
MEMBERS ABSENT
Senator Gary Stevens, Vice Chair
Senator Peter Micciche
COMMITTEE CALENDAR
PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING FORMULA~ ACCOUNTABILITY~ AND ASSESSMENT
UPDATE
HEARD
PREVIOUS COMMITTEE ACTION
No previous action to record
WITNESS REGISTER
HEIDI TESHNER, Acting Deputy Commissioner
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an update on the public school
funding formula.
DEBORAH RIDDLE, Division Operations Manager
Division of Innovation and Education Excellence
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provided an update on public school
accountability.
KELLY MANNING, Deputy Director
Division of Innovation and Education Excellence
Department of Education and Early Development
Juneau, Alaska
POSITION STATEMENT: Provide an update on public school
assessment.
ACTION NARRATIVE
9:03:28 AM
CHAIR ROGER HOLLAND called the Senate Education Standing
Committee meeting to order at 9:03 a.m. Present at the call to
order were Senators Begich, Hughes, and Chair Holland.
^Public School Funding Formula, Accountability, and Assessment
Update
Public School Funding Formula, Accountability, and Assessment
Update
9:03:59 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND announced the consideration of a Department of
Education and Early Development (DEED) update on the public
school funding formula, accountability, and assessment.
9:04:23 AM
HEIDI TESHNER, Acting Deputy Commissioner, Department of
Education and Early Development, Juneau, Alaska, stated the
committee would provide an update on the public school funding
formula for 2022 2023 and other state-funded programs that are
affected by student counts. Accountability and assessments would
be presented by Deborah Riddle and Kelly Manning, respectively.
MS. TESHNER advanced to slide 4 and said the legislature
established the Public School Funding Formula in AS 14.17 for
use in funding school operational costs. It is commonly referred
to as the foundation formula. Adopted under Senate Bill 36 in
1998, it was implemented in 1999. Each school district's funding
is comprised of state aid, required local contribution, and
federal impact aid. Alaska's nineteen Regional Education
Attendance Areas (REAAs) do not have a required local
contribution. A school district is only eligible for foundation
funding as calculated under the formula and set out in the
statute. Determining the Average Daily Membership (ADM) for each
school is the first step in determining state aid for a
district.
MS. TESHNER stated the internet links on slide 4 lead to the
department's School Finance website, where information on
foundation funding and related information can be found. The
second link is for the document "The Public School Funding
Program Overview," which covers each formula step. The history
and changes made to the foundation formula were provided in
handout 2, "Alaska Public School Funding - Foundation Formula
History."
9:07:12 AM
MS. TESHNER said the ADM is the defined term for student count
data. It is the number of enrolled students through the 20-day
school count period that ends the fourth Friday of October. For
the FY 2021-2022 school year, the 20-day school count period
began on September 27 and ended on October 22, 2021. Districts
must submit school count data, ADM, to the department within two
weeks after the end of the count period per AS 14.17.6009(a).
MS. TESHNER moved to slide 6 and said the table shows actual,
projected, and Online Alaska Student Identification System
(OASIS) updates for FY 2021-2023 statewide school enrollment
counts. OASIS updates are reconciled to ensure no student is
counted more than once. The bottom of slide 6 provides
information on when the data was submitted and how it was used.
9:08:37 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked how the determination was made to use a 20-
day student count period instead of average attendance.
MS. TESHNER replied that she does not know why Alaska chose
membership over attendance for use in the formula.
SENATOR BEGICH said he looked ahead to slide 11 and saw a
projected decrease in student count. He asked if the projected
decline would mean an $18 million reduction in education
spending from FY 2022 to FY 2023.
MS. TESHNER replied yes, education spending would be $18 million
less based on the FY 2023 projected student counts provided to
the department by school districts.
9:10:38 AM
MS. TESHNER stated that there was an ADM decrease of 1842.96
between the FY 2022 projected and FY 2022 OASIS amounts.
Decimals indicate that part-time students were counted. There
was a decrease in the brick-and-mortar student count but an
increase in the student count for correspondence schools. The
projected OASIS for FY 2023 is an increased ADM for
correspondence schools but a decrease for brick-and-mortar with
an overall predicted decline in the state ADM. The total ADM for
the state was projected to be less in FY 2022 than in FY 2021.
However, the FY 2022 OASIS update revealed the ADM was more in
FY 2022, emphasizing that the projections are just estimates.
9:12:51 AM
MS. TESHNER reminded the committee that in 2008 House Bill 273
was enacted to hold harmless school districts that experience a
reduction in ADM at brick-and-mortar schools after adjustment
for school size in the foundation formula is calculated. Turning
to slide 7, she provided further details on the hold harmless
provision and its calculation.
9:14:17 AM
MS. TESHNER stated that slides 8 and 9 provide a high-level look
at the components of the Foundation Funding Formula. Once the
ADM is determined, it goes through a series of calculations,
including school size, district cost, special needs, vocation
education, special education intensives, and Correspondence ADM.
She noted that all are based on statute and that Correspondence
ADM is added at the end of the formula to avoid double counting.
The District Adjusted ADM is then used to calculate the Public
School Funding Formula found under AS 14.17.410. It is
multiplied by the Base Student Allocation (BSA) under AS
14.17.470, and the result is Basic Need. The amount of State Aid
is determined by deducting the required local contribution and
deductible Impact Aid from the Basic Need. The Quality Schools
Grant is then added to State Aid to determine the total amount
of State Aid entitlement. The last increase in the BSA occurred
in FY 2017. Funding from outside the foundation formula has
happened ten times. The last amount received was in FY 2020 for
$30 million. The governor's veto of $30 million that was outside
the funding formula is not on the graph.
9:17:58 AM
SENATOR BEGICH clarified that the governor vetoed FY 2021 and FY
2022, each was $30 million. He stated that in 2014 one
legislative action led to a multiple-year increase.
MS. TESHNER replied that was correct.
MS. TESHNER stated that the last column's bottom line shows a
decrease of $18,914.5 million in the FY 2023 projected funding
formula versus FY 2022, which is a 1.6 percent decrease.
9:19:04 AM
SENATOR BEGICH added that when Governor Dunleavy vetoed the $30
million in outside funds, he had stated that he would not
support outside resources without a reading bill. It is
important to understand the context of the governor's vetoes.
The governor acknowledged the committee's work, the need for a
reads bill, and that outside money was likely to be vetoed until
a reading bill passed. With a decrease in population, there will
be a decrease in the amount of money obligated to education and,
consequently, an opportunity to address the Reads Bill, SB 111,
which the committee has worked on for months.
CHAIR HOLLAND added that the legislature has worked on it for
years.
9:20:23 AM
MS. TESHNER stated that FY 2022 OASIS ADM compared to FY 2022
Projected ADM was an increase of $11,637.4 million to the
current budget. There was less brick and mortar but more
correspondence enrollment than initially projected.
9:21:01 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if the combined total is close to a $39
million reduction over the present year or is the $18 million a
projection over the present year.
MS. TESHNER replied that the governor's FY 2023 budget shows an
$18.9 million decrease based on the student counts reported by
school districts. FY 2022's projection in the current budget is
considered authorized, so in Leg Finance alone, there is an
$18.9 million decrease. FY 2022 OASIS and FY 2022 Projected are
in the current year, so based on what the department was
authorized, compared to what is required by statute to pay
school districts, there is an $11.6 million decrease.
She stated she did not compare FY 2023 Projected to OASIS, but
overall it would be a slight dollarwise decrease.
9:22:33 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if there were other reasons for the decrease
in projection besides the 75 percent that resulted from the Hold
Harmless provision.
MS. TESHNER replied that the primary factor for the change was
the Hold Harmless provision. Districts that received the school
size ADM adjustment at 75 percent last year are now stepping
down to a school size ADM difference calculated at 50 percent.
9:23:32 AM
MS. TESHNER stated slide 12 addressed additional state-funded
programs affected by the student count period. The Pupil
Transportation Program is based on the statutory formula AS
14.09.010. Only brick and mortar students are funded in the
calculation. The FY 2022 appropriation was $71.4 million, the
Estimated Actuals were $71.1 million, and the FY2023 Projected
Appropriation amount was $71.8 million. It is fully funded based
on statutory calculation and is a $367,100 increase over FY 2022
appropriation.
9:24:39 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if the Pupil Transportation Program adjusts
for the price of fuel or miles driven.
MS. TESHNER stated that the formula for the Pupil Transportation
Program was determined based on actual costs in 2013 and
implemented in 2015. Since then, it has changed a couple of
times due to the consumer price index increases.
9:26:04 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked when the Pupil Transportation formula was
last adjusted for inflation.
MS. TESHNER answered that the costs that determine the per-
student amounts were based on 2013 actuals. She will get back to
the committee on CPI increase dates.
9:26:33 AM
MS. TESHNER stated that the Residential Schools Program is based
on statutory formula AS 14.16.200. The funding formula at the
bottom of slide 12 is used for Alaska's nine approved
residential school programs. It contains a formula for a
residential stipend and a one-time per-student round-trip
transportation reimbursement. The FY 2022 appropriation amount
was $8.2 million. The estimated actuals were approximately $4.8
million, a decrease of $3.4 million. Eight districts operate the
nine programs, but only seven were operational in FY 2022.
Bering Strait and North Slope were not operational due to the
ongoing COVID pandemic. This contributed to the reduction in
actuals. The Projected Appropriation in FY 2023 is just over
$8.4 million, a $228,000 increase over FY 2022. The increase is
for the Lower Yukon Career and Technical Residential Program to
increase its bed count from 50 to 70 students. Students would
reside at the facility and attend Alaska's middle college for
the school year in partnership with the University of Alaska.
9:28:40 AM
MS.TESHNER concluded her presentation and asked that attention
be turned to the handout "State-Funded Program Funding Changes
Due to Enrollment Fluctuations." The left three columns provide
changes by district and how much they are estimated to receive
for foundation, pupil transportation, and residential school
funding. The handout also provides the total amount of COVID
relief money to be spent as of Jan 26, 2022, and FY 2022
unreserved fund balances. The far-right column is the net total
by district. Tanana, the only district to predict an overall
decrease, was down by $78,104. The asterisk represents the 26
school districts that reported more than a 10 percent fund
balance. HB 76 waived the 10 percent limit through June 30,
2025. This allowed districts to carry over more than 10 percent
and was made possible through COVID relief funds. It enables
districts the flexibility to spend COVID federal funds and state
money.
9:30:19 AM
DEBORAH RIDDLE, Division Operations Manager, Division of
Innovation and Education Excellence, Department of Education and
Early Development, Juneau, Alaska, stated she would discuss
DEED's accountability system, called the System for School
Success. The Every School Succeeds Act was passed into law in
2015. Every state was required to create a plan that addressed
accountability. Developing the plan required stakeholder
engagement and the identification of success indicators. Some
indicators were provided by the US Department of Education,
while the state established others. The plan also consisted of
school identification, exit strategies, and improved integration
with standards and assessments. Title programs' use of funds,
activities, monitoring systems, and technical assistance were
also addressed. The plan was amended in March 2019 to address
exit criteria for English language learners and long-term goals
for interim progress. The plan was submitted to the US
Department of Education and approved.
9:32:50 AM
MS. RIDDLE advanced to slide 15 and stated there are four school
designations within Alaska's school accountability system:
1. Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI)
Lowest 5 percent
When ranked according to their accountability
index value, the lowest-performing 5 percent of
all Title I schools.
2. Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) -
Graduation Rate
The four-year graduation rate for a school,
including grade 12, is less than or equal to 66
2/3 percent.
3. Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI)
A school has one or more subgroups whose index
value is less than or equal to the index value of
the lowest 5 percent of Title I schools.
9:34:13 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if a school can have more than one
designation.
MS. RIDDLE replied that a school only receives one designation.
9:34:35 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked what department response does each school
designation trigger.
MS. RIDDLE replied that if a school is designated as
Comprehensive Support Lowest 5 percent it receives $50,000 per
year. Schools that are Graduation Rate or Targeted Support
receive $25,000 per year. Other assistance offered is coaching,
technical support and webinars. The school improvement system is
being revamped to be more targeted.
9:35:48 AM
SENATOR HUGHES stated she understands the concept of giving more
money and support to lower-performing schools but asked if there
was anything in the system that was more of a stick than a
carrot.
MS. RIDDLE replied that more training and incentives would be
included in the changes.
9:36:40 AM
SENATOR HUGHES stated she would be interested in seeing what
develops because the changes are to increase student
performance. If money and staff are being provided, but student
improvement does not occur, then schools need to be motivated
not to fall into the lower designations.
MS. RIDDLE responded that two programs would be offered in
Spring. Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports would be
offered to the CSI Lowest 5 percent. A math and reading
symposium would be provided to CSI and TSI schools.
9:38:14 AM
SENATOR BEGICH stated that if schools are receiving department
resources, they should be required to attend. He commented that
the Reads Act, SB 111, requires an entity that benefits from the
department's resources to meet associated outcomes. Departmental
employees are placed to assist schools, which provides
accountability measures. Throwing cash at a problem does not fix
the problem. He stated he wants to see the department and school
districts respond to failing schools in a way that improves
student outcomes, such as learning to read.
SENATOR HUGHES said she agreed that requiring funded
participation would be reasonable and beneficial to student
improvement.
9:41:44 AM
MS. RIDDLE returned to slide 15 and provided the last school
designation:
4. Universal Support
Schools that have an index value higher than the
lowest 5 percent, a graduation rate over 66 2/3
percent, and an index value for subgroups higher
than the lowest 5 percent of Title I Schools.
MS. RIDDLE added that Universal Support schools receive
basic technical and monitoring assistance.
9:42:14 AM
MS. RIDDLE stated that the indicators for the accountability
system have two grade spans. Both grades K-3 and 7-12 indicators
include:
• Academic Achievement for English language and math based on
school level summit of assessment proficiency rates.
• Academic Growth based on the percent of students that meet
their growth target set the previous year.
• English Learner Progress measured by the percentage of
students meeting the growth criteria on the Axis 2.0 English
Language Proficiency Assessment
• Chronic Absentee Indicator based on identified students that
miss 10 percent or more of enrollment days.
MS. RIDDLES said there is an additional graduation rate
accountability indicator for students in the grade nine cohort
that graduate in four to five years. She said it lags by one
year for the accountability system. There is also an
accountability indicator for Grade 3 English Language Arts
proficiency.
9:43:26 AM
MS. RIDDLE stated that each indicator is weighted. Both age
spans give 40 percent to the growth indicator and 10 percent to
chronic absenteeism. Academic achievement is 30 percent for
grades K-6 and 20 percent for grades 7-12. English language
progress is 15 percent for K-6 and 10 percent for grades 7-12.
The grade 3 proficiency assessment indicator is weighted at 5
percent, while the graduation rate indicator is rated at 20
percent.
MS. RIDDLE moved to slide 18 and said each indicator is assigned
a point value based on students actual scores and the
indicator's weight. Point values range from a low of 0 to a high
of 100. The results are done internally and checked by an
outside contractor that verifies the results.
9:44:58 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if all school designations are measured and
what happens when a school moves up in designation.
MS. RIDDLE explained that a school's designation is for three
years, except for the graduation rate indicator. The three-year
period is to give the department time to offer support and the
school to improve its designation status. Every school's
improvement plan has goals, assessments, and action steps.
Schools must determine how success is measured and determined.
9:46:02 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked what happens if a school status does not
improve.
MS. RIDDLE responded that the school is redesignated. Schools
can stay at the CSI status, but if the school were designated as
Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI), it would be placed in a
CSI designation after three years with no improvement.
9:46:26 AM
SENATOR BEGICH said part of the Moore settlement concerned
litigation due to the department's inability to provide adequate
targeted support to failing schools. Outcomes need to be
achieved when resources are applied. Reporting and maintaining
what is not working is not sound planning. Graduated sanctions
refer to using a modest penalty with the knowledge that a higher
penalty will be imposed when there is no forward progress. He
asked the department's approach if a district school continues
to be on a designated list. He asked the department for a plan
that would move schools off the designated list.
9:48:25 AM
MS. RIDDLE replied that the department is working with Region 16
Comprehensive Center to address changes to Alaska's school
improvement plan. A group of districts was selected to work with
an empowerment specialist who will guide employees through
strategic analysis of programs and resources and help create
action steps. Reports would then be given to the department.
Districts would also need to submit school improvement plans to
school boards and department staff. The department intends for
the plans to be more transparent with more stakeholder
engagement.
9:50:17 AM
SENATOR BEGICH suggested the department look at the public
elements incorporated into the Reads Act. It focuses on
department accountability and gives communities access so school
boards can be held accountable. He stated he was pleased that
changes to the plan were being made.
CHAIR HOLLAND commented that the department's presentation
concerns Alaska's development of an accountability program that
conforms with the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) passed in
2015. He asked whether the plan had been put into play or
received appropriate evaluation due to the COVID pandemic.
MS. RIDDLE replied that the department enacted its plan in 2017-
2018. The most recent evaluation was in 2018-2019. The
department received a waiver from the US Department of Education
to hold the designations since an assessment was not done in
2019-2020, and most states' participation in 2021 was low.
Alaska enacted the plan and has designations and indicators.
9:52:17 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if schools were receiving coaches.
MS. RIDDLE responded yes and provided Alaska's highest index
value as 99.41 and its lowest as 8.33.
9:52:39 AM
SENATOR HUGHES suggested that future presentations include data
and what the department has done to help designated schools
progress. It sounds like the data was not good, so the
department is changing its plan. She asked if the department is
looking to other states for examples of improving accountability
in Alaska.
9:54:10 AM
MS. RIDDLE replied that the department has looked at SB 111 and
what other states are doing. In addition to working with Region
16, the department is working with the Academic Development
Institute (ADI), an organization of experts on the science of
reading and school improvement.
MS. RIDDLE advanced to slide 19 and stated that data for each
subgroup is provided to the US Department of Education. Each
subgroup's accountability system generates an index score that
determines whether a school is designated TSI. If a subgroup's
index score is the same or less than the cutoff for CSI Lowest 5
percent designation, then a school is identified as a TSI for
that subgroup.
9:55:54 AM
MS. RIDDLE said that Alaska has schools with minimal student
populations, so to maintain student confidentiality, an asterisk
or blank space may be on DEED's accountability systems webpage.
Data is also suppressed whenever a minimum size is less than ten
students. For indicators where the value is between 0-20, the
value will appear as 0. If it is between 80-100, it will appear
as 100. This also keeps a student from being identified and is
called the 80/20 Rule. It often appears on accountability
indicators for smaller schools where it is common to see a score
for one subject but not another.
9:57:19 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked for verification that the department knows
student scores internally.
MS. RIDDLE replied yes, and added that for small schools, where
it is not possible to do a complete accountability study, the
department conferences with the principals, students, and
families to determine needs.
9:58:01 AM
MS. RIDDLE turned to slide 21 and said the department looks at
long-term goals and measures of interim progress as part of
accountability indicators. The department is required to look at
how far away a school is from proficiency, take half that amount
and establish benchmarks towards proficiency within ten years.
This is done to establish growth indicators for every district.
9:59:20 AM
MS. RIDDLE stated that overall index value indicators are
established using October 1 enrollment calculations.
There must be at least two indicators, and one must be selected
from the following:
• Academic achievement in ELA or Mathematics,
• Growth in ELA or Mathematics
• Four-year or five-year graduation rate, or
• English Learner progress.
MS. RIDDLE said the department is working with an external
contractor for help in calculating 2022 policy designations. The
department cannot calculate growth because it does not have two
years of data since there was no assessment in 2019-2020 and low
participation 2020-2021. There will be a new assessment and data
in Spring 2022. Therefore, a methodology needs to be developed
to calculate growth.
10:00:42 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked if the new and old assessments are too
different to be compared and whether it would take a couple of
years to acquire the necessary data.
MS. RIDDLE stated that there is a desire to know what progress
districts have made. The department is working with a team of
national experts from the Technical Advisory Committee, the US
Department of Education, and an outside contractor to determine
a way to assess progress and assign designation.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if fiscal support comes from federal grants.
MS. RIDDLE replied that district funding for school improvements
and designations are part of Title 10003(a). Growth indicators
and calculations come from the general fund.
10:01:57 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if schools with low participation rates
would continue with the same funding from the previous year.
10:02:13 AM
MS. RIDDLE responded yes, funding would be through school
improvement grants, which is part of Title 1 part a, 10003(a)
funds.
10:02:26 AM
MS. RIDDLE said DEED is trying to figure out district
accountability and how to designate districts as outlined in SB
111. It is considering two options. One option would be to take
the percentage of schools in a district receiving CSI or TSI
designations and develop an index value. The other would be to
take an average of all the school index scores within a
district.
10:03:03 AM
SENATOR HUGHES asked what happens once a means of scoring is
established.
MS. RIDDLE explained that school improvement in Alaska is based
on each school's performance. Therefore, the primary focus of
the state's improvement plan is individual schools.
As the second phase of school improvement, the state would look
at data and determine which districts have a high percentage of
CSI and TSI schools. The plan would be to work with those
districts to create teams that promote positive group behavior
and intervention supports (PGBIS) and the science of reading.
The state has begun involving school boards in reviewing school
improvement plans as a first step.
10:04:30 AM
SENATOR HUGHES commented that districts that have CSI and TSI
schools should have to meet requirements like individual
schools. The administration needs to be motivated to work harder
if low school scores are pervasive within a district. She stated
she was talking sticks, not carrots.
SENATOR BEGICH stated he agrees that there needs to be
accountability measures. He opined that DEED's school
improvement plan is similar to rapid-cycle testing in that the
state, districts, and school board identify concerns, take
action, and evaluate quickly. If improvement does not occur,
alternative solutions are tried until one produces positive
change. He asked if this describes the type of robust action the
department plans to take.
10:06:22 AM
MS. RIDDLE replied yes.
10:06:40 AM
KELLY MANNING, Deputy Director, Division of Innovation and
Education Excellence, Department of Education and Early
Development, Juneau, Alaska, stated she would provide a history
of the Performance Evaluation for Alaska's Schools assessment
(PEAKS) and the direction the department is taking with the new
assessment Alaska's System of Academic Readiness (AK STAR).
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if Alaska would continue to participate in
NAEP.
MS. MANNING answered that Alaska would continue to participate
in NAEP, but she would not be presenting information about it.
10:08:22 AM
MS. MANNING turned to slide 26 and said the statewide summative
assessment has three parts. It is a tool for measuring knowledge
and abilities. It indicates the knowledgeability of a student in
particular areas of Alaska's educational standards, and it helps
provide excellence in education by measuring the effectiveness
of curriculum and instruction.
MS. MANNING moved to slide 27 and said statewide assessments
inform families, teachers, administrators, and community leaders
of students' performance across the state. The information helps
guide policy decisions, curriculum updates, professional
development, instructional decisions, and parent support
recommendations. Summative assessment is end-of-the-year data
that reveals the previous year performance and is useful at
the district, school, and state policy levels. Other types of
assessments, like screeners, interim assessments, benchmarks,
and unit assessments, can be combined with summative data to
give a more holistic picture of an individual student's
performance.
10:09:55 AM
Since 2017 the department of education has implemented the
Performance Evaluation of Alaska's Schools (PEAKS). It is
statewide and standards-based for grades 3-9. It assesses
students' understanding of English language arts (ELA) and math.
Its results are used to inform statewide decisions on
accountability, school report cards, and other policy decisions
within the education department.
10:11:08 AM
MS. MANNING turned to slide 29 and stated that the PEAKS
performance data had a participation rate of approximately 91
percent, which was historical much higher than the most recent
assessment year. Proficiency at the statewide level was 39
percent for ELA and almost 36 percent for math.
10:11:48 AM
SENATOR BEGICH asked if DEED has a target for statewide advanced
proficiency.
MS. MANNING replied that the goal of the assessment is to
determine Alaska students' proficiency. She is not aware of a
statewide target.
MS. MANNING reiterated that in 2019-2020 there was no assessment
data due to the pandemic. In 2020-2021 assessment participation
was low because accountability was waived. This gave districts
the flexibility to address ongoing challenges from the pandemic.
While the 2020-2021 assessment provides some data, its
usefulness is limited.
SENATOR HUGHES asked that the commissioner's statewide target
for proficiency be provided to the committee, and if there is
not one, there should be.
10:13:32 AM
SENATOR BEGICH stated that the assessments from 2018-2019 and
2019-2020 are not comparable, and the department should not use
the data without explanation.
SENATOR HUGHES pointed out that DEED addressed this concern in
slide 31.
MS. MANNING said DEED cautions comparing 2021 PEAKS data to
previous years at the statewide level. Results from the
assessment still have value at the school and individual levels.
The gap provides an opportunity to approach student performance
in a systematically new way. The AK STAR is a new balanced
assessment system that DEED is in the process of implementing.
10:15:57 AM
MS. MANNING moved to slide 33 and stated that the objective
goals of the new assessment are:
• Align standards, assessment, and instruction
• Improve student growth outcomes
• Educators and stakeholders understand how to use data to
inform instruction
• Educators have a deep understanding of assessment, its
purpose and when and how to use it.
10:16:31 AM
MS. MANNING advanced to slide 34 and said that DEED has
contracted with Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) to
develop Alaska's new assessment. NWEA's Measures of Academic
Progress (MAP) test has been used by 50 out of 54 Alaska school
districts to determine interim growth for several years. The
interim assessment checks student progress periodically. It
provides instructional data that indicates progress in student
knowledge, national norm comparisons, and areas for targeted
instruction. The new assessment will be an innovative three-year
balanced system that threads MAP growth testing with the new
statewide summative assessment. This system will also reduce
testing time by having the Spring assessment serve multiple
functions.
MS. MANNING turned to slide 35 and stated that the assessment
will appear similar to now for the first year of implementation.
By the second year, the assessment will be in place. A MAP test
will be given in Fall and Winter. Both tests will provide
projected proficiency scores for the summative assessment. The
summative assessment will be given in Spring and provide a
student's level of proficiency. A Rasch Unit (RIT) score will
also be provided for each assessment to aid districts in
determining how well students are doing.
10:19:47 AM
MS. MANNING moved to slide 36 and stated that Spring 2022 will
be the first summative administration of AK STAR. It will not
have a linked score. After the assessment, there will be a
standard setting, linking, and alignment study. In the 2022-2023
school year the system will begin as mapped on slide 35.
10:20:37 AM
MS. MANNING stated that DEED works closely with NWEA on
assessment literacy training. For many years the department has
provided training on conducting effective assessments and using
informed decision making. Districts will continue to receive
this training. The department is adding robust assessment
literacy training that will specifically address what the
information tells a teacher and how it can be used. Teachers are
offered literacy assessment and instruction training to help
them know how to drill down the data and use it for informed
instruction.
10:21:37 AM
MS. MANNING advanced to slide 38 and stated that professional
learning provided by DEED has three components. One component is
live remote training. Educators throughout the state have access
to live online training. Teachers also have access to the second
component of self-directed online learning. The third component
will be certified facilitator (CF) training. Each district will
have a facilitator who receives in-depth professional learning
to act as a training resource within their district. Teachers
also can earn professional learning credits.
SENATOR BEGICH said he was impressed by the presentation and
especially liked that local people would be receiving training
to become trainers.
10:23:40 AM
CHAIR HOLLAND asked what grade levels are the focus of the PEAK
assessment.
MS. MANNING replied grades three thru nine.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if AK STAR is administered at the same grade
levels as PEAKS.
MS. MANNING replied yes.
CHAIR HOLLAND asked if NAEP is administered in grades four and
eight.
MS. MANNING replied yes.
10:24:46 AM
There being no further business to come before the committee,
Chair Holland adjourned the Senate Education Standing Committee
meeting at 10:24 a.m.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| 2.14.2022 (S)EDC DEED Presentation.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2022 9:00:00 AM |
|
| DEED Handout #1 - Public School Funding Program Overview.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2022 9:00:00 AM |
|
| DEED Handout #2 - Alaska Public School Funding - Foundation Formula History.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2022 9:00:00 AM |
|
| DEED Handout #3 - FY2022 State Funded Program Changes by District 1.26.2022.pdf |
SEDC 2/14/2022 9:00:00 AM |