HOUSE BILL NO. 31 "An Act requiring school districts to develop and require completion of a history of American constitutionalism curriculum segment; and providing for an effective date." 1:35:06 PM REPRESENTATIVE WES KELLER, SPONSOR, introduced the legislation. The bill would require school districts to create a curriculum segment on the history of American constitutionalism and would require students to complete the course prior to graduation. He acknowledged the potential challenge of voting for an unfunded curriculum mandate. He asserted that the bill represented a special case and would tweak the current American history course curriculum. He believed many schools were already in compliance with the proposed bill and that its implementation would not impose a significant burden on school districts. Representative Keller explained that the curriculum pertained to the values and documents that had been instrumental in forming the U.S. Constitution; the bill would require the course work to look at American constitutionalism as portrayed in the Declaration of Independence, first state constitutions, Article of Confederation, U.S. Constitution, federalist papers, and the Bill of Rights; the course requirements under the bill recognized the significance of the documents. He believed the documents were a great gift to mankind; American constitutionalism was a statement on human rights that had been used globally. He referred to the statement that all men are created equal and discussed rights including the freedom of speech. He noted that the rights tended to be taken for granted. Representative Keller continued that he had introduced the bill in 2011 shortly before the Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak had been removed from office. He recalled that multiple constitutions had been created in Egypt in recent years; he pointed to riots in the streets and the ongoing struggle. He stated that the values of American constitutionalism provided the ability to make decisions related to events occurring in other countries. He pointed to the contrast between a country such as Egypt where rights were determined by the military and the U.S. where rights were inherent. 1:39:18 PM Representative Keller continued to discuss rights under the U.S. constitution. He pointed to differences between the U.S. Constitution and the rights in other countries such as China. He elaborated that the people were in charge in the U.S. and authorized government authority. He discussed freedom of religion and expression in the U.S. compared to other countries. He communicated that the intent was not to speak against districts that were not currently teaching the curriculum. He read a quote by Thomas Jefferson: As we work together to advance cost-effective justice, we must remember that the greatest guarantee of a strong future for all three branches of government is a citizenry that understands and embraces the fundamental principles of democracy. Representative Keller referred to a past State of the Judiciary speech by Chief Justice Walter Carpeneti. He noted that Chief Justice Carpeneti spent a significant amount of time increasing student awareness. He discussed an online program created by Chief Justice O'Connor. He provided a quote by Chief Justice Carpeneti: "Join me in the effort to instill in our young people the same knowledge and respect for our laws and institutions of our country that we are all privileged to share." 1:43:02 PM STUART THOMPSON, SELF, MAT-SU (via teleconference), spoke in support of the legislation. He read a statement (copy on file): Per legislative rules, your committee's responsibility is to evaluate the fiscal efficacy of HB 31. The Education Committee has already evaluated and verified its educational efficacy. So is the American Constitutionalism History Literacy Act financially worth making law? I testify as follows that it is. The Legislature is charged with competently directing payment of Alaska government bills, and intelligently investing public money in constitutionally established avenues like education. Education is an investment because it can return many times the value of what's put into it. One of the greatest returns education delivers is the individual and cooperative ability to resolve problems that hinder quality of life. This bill addresses chronically unresolved problems of our state and nation by targeting the constitutional illiteracy and the lack of discipline at using our political heritage that propagates them. These problems include national bankruptcy; runaway national unemployment; national economic addiction to defense spending that makes military adventurism a necessity; a pathetic loss of ability to harness science to stimulate economic diversity; vulnerability to super-corporation bullying and blackmail because they are too big to truly enforce law on or to do without (like the oil companies in Alaska); mediocre skill development of America's people-making corporate, business and individual welfare a necessity; etc. , etc. Constitutionalism the multi-partisan discipline it engenders and our political heritage represent an overflowing vault of problem-solving riches. Yet this treasure is being treated by our state and nation- using Christ's analogy-like pearls cast before swine. Passing this bill will help create citizens and leaders who are truly capable of ensuring government of the People, by the People, and for the People shall not perish from this earth from the awful terrorism of ignorance. Thank you for your attention. On request, I can testify further about constitutional illiteracy and repudiation of our political heritage. Good luck on your deliberations. 1:46:23 PM Co-Chair Stoltze CLOSED public testimony. Representative Gara asked for verification that the curriculum would include every amendment to the Constitution that came subsequent to the original Bill of Rights. He mentioned women's suffrage and the right for 18 year-olds to vote. Representative Keller replied that all amendments under the Constitution would be covered. Representative Wilson asked which schools currently had the curriculum and which did not. Representative Keller did not know whether the information had been gathered. He pointed to page 2, line 17 specifying that superintendents would bring the proposal forward for approval by each school board. School boards would set the criteria used to determine whether a student had successfully completed the curriculum. He noted that the bill placed trust and respect in each district's abilities. Representative Wilson supported the concept, but believed it was important to know which schools were currently teaching the subject; she wanted to ensure the bill was necessary. She asked why the bill did not add the subject to the high school graduation test. Representative Keller replied that his intent was to leave the standards up to the individual school districts. 1:50:30 PM Representative Wilson agreed with leaving the standards up to districts if the bill only mandated adding the curriculum; however, the bill was tied to graduation and she believed there should be consistency. She asked for a walk through of the implementation including what tests would look like and the approval process. Representative Keller replied that each school district would have approval authority over the curriculum implementation; the Department of Education and Early Development was not required to monitor the standards. The bill placed trust in history teachers. He was not aware of any other legislative mandated curriculum segments that were a part of the graduation exam. Representative Costello expressed appreciation for the sponsor's attention to the subject. She communicated a concern related to content standards and read from a copy of the standards "A student who meets the content standard should understand the ideals of this nation as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution, and the Bill of Rights". She detailed that the standards mentioned various forms of government. She discussed that the subjects could be introduced to students at any age; some students had the opportunity to go to Washington D.C. to experience the governmental process first-hand. She observed that current content standards allowed teachers to teach at different stages based on the makeup of their classroom. She wondered if making the course a graduation requirement would cause teachers at earlier grade levels to discontinue any teachings on the subject, which would be the opposite of the bill's intention. Representative Keller answered that there was nothing in the bill that restricted when the course was taught; the superintendent or the school district had to be satisfied that a student had completed a curriculum segment as defined by each district. He believed the bill was complimentary to the current standards. 1:55:12 PM Representative Costello relayed that the current system was based on a Carnegie unit (students received Carnegie units for seat time). She wondered how the bill would affect students in high school. She believed that the high school exit exam should be addressed if districts were required to write and teach the material. Additionally, she believed teaching the material was currently required. Representative Keller responded that he had wanted the maximum amount of flexibility for local school boards. He did not see the necessary connection to the exit exam. Representative Costello believed the bill would affect schedules in high schools because class requirements would be added. She wondered whether the sponsor had spoken with high school administrators about the issue. Representative Keller answered that the intent was not to add additional time requirements to classes. The segment would be approved by the local school boards; if extra seat time was added it would be the school district's choice. Representative Costello asked if the sponsor had considered asking DEED to create the curriculum. She believed that requiring districts to create the curriculum could be inefficient and costly. She stated that the curriculum could be created or purchased and was an involved process. She provided an example of the replacement of the math program in Anchorage. Representative Keller understood the amount of work creating curriculum entailed. He believed some of the districts had adequate curriculum segments in place. He elaborated that the bill had been on the books since 2011 and he had received positive feedback from the school districts. He reminded the committee that there was a significant amount of curriculum that was already complete including the material promoted by Chief Justice Carpeneti and other. 1:59:21 PM Representative Kawasaki asked for the definition of curriculum segment. Representative Keller believed the key word was "syllabus," which included a measurement of a student's success. He detailed that the curriculum segments would be packages assembled by teachers to accomplish certain goals; teachers would build lesson plans based on their goals for students. Representative Kawasaki wondered whether the language in the bill was superfluous if schools already taught on the subject. Representative Keller replied that he had met numerous students who had not been educated on the subject. He noted that some students had not been taught the three branches of government. He believed the bill would raise attention to the importance of the values included in the founding documents. He clarified that Alaska's schools were not all teaching the subject; however, many of the engaged and good schools were. Representative Kawasaki asked if the sponsor knew of any specific school districts that did not teach the Articles of Confederation, the state constitution, Constitutional Congress, Declaration of Independence, and other. Representative Keller answered that his personal experience with students who had not received an education on the subject implied that some schools were not teaching the material. Representative Kawasaki discussed that the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District currently included constitutionalism in its content standards. He detailed that the standards highlighted the Articles of Confederation and writing and ratifying the new constitution. He added that the National Center for History in Schools specified that children were exposed to the Articles of Confederation in the fifth grade and how to assess accomplishments and failures of the first continental congress in seventh grade, etc. He believed much of the required material listed in the bill was included in current content standards. He added that the one problem was linking the teachings to the graduation requirement. 2:03:46 PM Representative Keller was not trying to rewrite content standards. He believed the bill was complimentary and would enhance the teaching of the values included in the founding documents. Co-Chair Austerman liked the idea of including something on the books that would guarantee the teaching of the U.S. Constitution; however, he was concerned that the bill only dealt with districts. He referred to the Kodiak school system and shared that in the past high school students had been allowed to turn in homework until the end of each quarter even though it had been required earlier in the quarter; he noted that the student would have failed in Anchorage or Mat-Su if they had not turned the homework in on time. He was concerned that without a set standard throughout the state students transferring from one community to another may not be adequately prepared. Apart from the concern he was supportive of the bill. Additionally, he wondered whether the subjects should be taught in conjunction with Alaska history. Representative Keller answered that including the subject requirement in statute would provide the opportunity to examine progress in the future. He asked Co-Chair Austerman to repeat the second question. Co-Chair Austerman reiterated his questions. Representative Keller replied that the bill did not address students moving from one community to another. He had considered including Alaska history in the requirement, but had elected to leave the language broad. He had not wanted to impose too many mandates. 2:07:27 PM Representative Gara asked for assurance that the bill would not prevent teachers from teaching "less proud" moments in U.S. history. He provided an example related to a time when the First Amendment had been interpreted to allow a person to be sent to jail for protesting World War I. Representative Wes Keller replied that the bill would not [prevent teachers from teaching all aspects of the country's constitutional history]. He stated that the values included in the constitution would provide students with guidelines for critical thinking on what was right and wrong in human government. Representative Gara pointed to page 2, line 25. He surmised that the subject would be taught in an American history or other similar course. He wondered how to measure whether a student completed the curriculum segment described in Section (a) on page 2 if they received a B grade in the overall course. He asked whether completion of the course would be sufficient. He asked whether there would be a separate disqualifying parameter from graduation based on the specific portion of the course. Representative Keller replied in the negative. He relayed that the implementation would be up to local school districts; the districts would make a determination on criteria defining a successful completion of the segment. He did not want the legislature to write the standards. Representative Gara asked whether the sponsor would have a problem with the addition of clarifying language specifying that a student had to complete the course in which the curriculum was contained. Representative Keller was opposed to the potential change in language. He believed that the language "completing a course" sounded like seat time; he believed that satisfactorily completing a curriculum was completely different. 2:11:28 PM Vice-Chair Neuman mentioned his shared fight for the rights of home school parents. He discussed that some programs allowed parents to choose their curriculum. He detailed that curriculum was bought based on the fact that it met certain grade level standards; however, parents had the right to choose the books they use. He thought the bill may require parents to have curriculum approved by school districts. Representative Keller answered that curriculum for the Home School Support program had to be approved by the local school board, which had been established in regulation. Vice-Chair Neuman stated that the IDEA [Interior Distance Education of Alaska] program was different than the Mat-Su program. He stated that the IDEA program was one of the largest home school programs in the state because it allowed parents to choose the curriculum; he did not believe that the school board approved the curriculum or books. He opined that the task would be time consuming. 2:14:39 PM Representative Keller replied that the task was large and believed the school boards did approve the home schooling curriculum. He shared that his grandchildren were currently enrolled in the IDEA program; the approval of curriculum was a process that was imposed on the local school districts. He recalled that in recent years there had been debate on the issue focused on how the school boards could approve curriculum that included religious books. He was confident there was currently a process in place that required school boards to approve home school curriculum. Co-Chair Stoltze relayed that members wanted to examine some issues related to the legislation. He asked members to work with his office on the bill. He was an advocate of better knowledge curriculums, but he understood that the legislature did not set curriculum; he felt strongly that it was the role of the school boards. He believed the concept would have passed easily if it had been a resolution to the State Board of Education. He believed the legislature had a shoddy record related to setting curriculum and micromanagement of the school boards. Representative Wilson asked the sponsor to look into which districts already had the curriculum. Co-Chair Stoltze reiterated his request for members to work with his office on anything related to the legislation. Representative Keller thanked the committee for its time. HB 31 was HEARD and HELD in committee for further consideration. 2:19:08 PM AT EASE 2:23:05 PM RECONVENED