HB 318-ANNUAL SCHOOL REPORT: MILITARY FAMILIES  CHAIR GATTIS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 318, "An Act relating to public school reports of students whose parents are members of the active duty military service." 9:15:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER, speaking as prime sponsor of HB 318, paraphrased from his sponsor statement. He said that military families in Alaska face special challenges. Many parents move every three or four years in and out of Alaska, noting the state's moving rates are three times the national average. One or more parents may deploy for up to a year or more on overseas duty. Students must transfer into and out of school districts from different states or even different nations. Students must adjust to different graduation curriculum requirements and face the social dislocations and the necessity of making new friends. All these factors can make it difficult and challenging for students to make normal progress toward graduation. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that while the impacts of these stresses on a military child's educational progress may be clear to the parents and the students, they are hidden from our local school districts, the state, and the federal government. He indicated that AS 14.03.120 already requires annual reports on school and student performance, including factors such as accreditation, achievement test scores, exit exam, retention, drop out and graduation rates, and enrollment changes due to transfers and other purposes. These are subdivided by gender, ethnicity, parents' economic status, the students' English language status, and whether the students are migrants. 9:17:15 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER reported that the state Department of Education and Early Development (EED) does not specifically count or track military students so there isn't any way of linking these important metrics with the students of military family status. He related that 37,000 military dependents live in Alaska, which means many are students that fall in the K-12 system. Currently the U.S. Department of Education Impact Aid Program collects data on military-connected students by school district with the primary purpose of helping the district qualify for impact aid. However, the DOE data does not include the academic performance of the students or the specific schools they attend, which reduces the utility of the information. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that HB 318 seeks to capture information on the academic performance statistics of students of active-duty military families. It would require local school districts to gather information on the number, attendance and performance of students enrolled in the school. It would also require the department to post this information on the website along with its published information. The families affected are those whose parents and guardians are on active duty in the armed forces of the United States - Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines, the United States Coast Guard, the Alaska National Guard, the Alaska Naval Militia, or the Alaska State Defense Force. 9:18:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER related that having the information on the number, attendance, and specific performance could have a number of benefits. This could help local districts see how well they do to assist military families, and help the department design programs to help address the challenges these students face. This should help improve the count of military students for the purpose of calculating impact aid and potentially increase the federal flow of funds to local school districts. It would also provide guidance to incoming Alaskans as military families consider where to live and which school their children will attend. It would also help the Department of Defense develop policies of its own to better prioritize funding to identify and provide necessary resources to help military families achieve better educational outcomes. 9:19:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER added some programs have aides for students in schools in which parents frequently deploy. He said this bill would also help the state fulfill its commitment to military children when the state signed on in 2009 to the Interstate Compact on the Education of Military Children, which he helped set up for the Boards and Commission's Office. He reported that Alaska and 38 other states are committed to help military students transition properly and the data is necessary. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said that many organizations nationally connected with military students' education support endorse identifying and tracking military student performance and are working on successful practices that can be replicated. He recalled a similar element was adopted in HB 278. He hoped that the committee would help get this important provision in law adopted and implemented. 9:20:31 AM REPRESENTATIVE KITO III related his understanding that the State of Alaska collects specific information during the student count period. He asked whether this bill will correlate information to the specific collection time or if the data collected would be continuously collected. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered yes to both. He was unsure how the department will gather information, but the fiscal note reflects the department's interest in spending time and resources in developing data collection techniques. He was unsure whether a "data dump" could occur between the personnel office of the Air National Guard to the EED or if it will need to be accomplished through questionnaires. He anticipated that it would be a combination, but the fiscal note spans three years of working on data collection techniques. 9:21:58 AM REPRESENTATIVE KITO III asked whether the intent of the legislation is to track performance on each individual or the overall performance of the military student as he/she moves through Alaska's system. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered that it would be more of a statistical aggregate report versus individual information to determine trends. 9:22:51 AM CHAIR GATTIS pointed out it could be helpful to have information follow the students as they transfer between states. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said Nevada and Texas are the two states requiring this data collection and five states collect information. He directed attention to state report cards that do not include statistics on schools with less than five of a cohort in attendance to avoid identifying a single individual student. 9:24:35 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 1, to the existing law which indicates that the information will be provided in a public meeting of parents, students, and community members. He pointed out the new language in paragraph 11, reads," (11)  information on the number, attendance, and performance of  students enrolled in the school whose parents or guardians are  ...." He asked how a report on the ten U.S. Coast Guard students attending a school in Homer would be made public. He questioned reporting this subset when the other categories speak to summary and evaluation of the curriculum and that type of information. He anticipated the department would be able to clarify this. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER referred to page 1 line 8, which requires reporting on the school's performance and the performance of the school's students. He deferred to the department to more fully respond. 9:27:32 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON pointed out the federal and state military are included in the bill. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER clarified that the legislative legal drafters included the Alaska State Defense Force in the bill. He said he would be amenable to an amendment since this branch is not a military force that is subject to deployment plus it has limited numbers. He would also be amendable to removing the Alaska Naval Militia from the bill. 9:28:51 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether the armed forces are separate from the US Coast Guard and the Alaska National Guard. CHAIR GATTIS requested a breakdown of the agencies. 9:29:25 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER responded that the department would report on the agencies for the various military families. REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked whether they could be included in as it creates a group as a whole. CHAIR GATTIS acknowledged that she didn't object to viewing it as a group. 9:30:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 2, line 26, to the language "parents or guardians are on active duty" if the family is in reserves versus active duty that the children would not be reported. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER deferred to the department to respond. 9:31:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for sponsor's intent. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER said the intent would be to collect the data, even for families whose parents are in the reserves. Some states may differentiate, but that is not the intent in HB 318. 9:32:53 AM MARK SAN SOUCI, Regional Liaison, State Liaison Office, U.S. Department of Defense (DOD), in response to Representative Seaton, said that the office seeks to distinguish between active duty and Alaska National Guard (ANG). He deferred to the sponsor, but his goal is to differentiate between students from active duty military families and the ANG. He reported that 17 school districts in Alaska receive impact aid for 11,000 students. He was aware of nearly 19,000 military connected active duty kids between the ages of 5-17, but the DOD doesn't know the specific location. MR. SAN SOUCI reported that DOD's Impact Aid Program contributed $1.6 million to Alaska's EED in the Delta Greely district in FY 2013. He acknowledged that the goal is to attempt to help facilitate data-driven decisions and improve the DOD's distribution of resources to schools that help and to help commanders. For example, in San Diego, it wasn't possible to compare the absentee rate for U.S. Navy families to other San Diego families due to lack of data. In North Carolina, questions arose as to the higher incidence of special education students in the military, which is conjecture without data. The DOD put $25 million in the FY 2014 budget to provide support to districts. In addition, reports would be important in all instances to help provide district support from the federal government. A school with fewer than five students in the aggregate may be collected but not reported, as the data could become useful for specific support. He named a number of associations, boards, and teacher organizations who support the collection of this information. Several other states are adopting codes to provide this information although it is too early to determine trends. He thanked the committee for taking up HB 318. 9:38:30 AM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD related that some students have military advisors. She asked whether the military advisors currently in the school will be the ones who will collect the data. MR. SAN SOUCI answered that the DOD has a sub-agency, the DOD Education Activity, who are the "drivers" in the states. This agency will work to collect the data, but he was unsure of how it will be collected in the schools. REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD acknowledged tight budget constraints which would require using current staff. She offered her belief the small fiscal note won't add more staff. She hoped the military advisors would be sustainable and that the state uses resources it already has in place. 9:40:34 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON asked about the 17,000 students receiving federal impact aid in Alaska. She asked for further clarification on the $1.6 million and if that is only to Delta/Greely School District or for the entire population of students. MR. SAN SOUCI answered that the EED received $1.57 million in federal Impact Aid in FY 13 and Delta/Greely School District received $48,000. He clarified the numbers previously stated. He reported that of 80,000 students 11,336 military students are in 17 school districts impacted by the military. He clarified that these districts are considered DOD Impact Aid for Military. The U.S. Department of Education has specific information on federal funding totaling $106 million from the EED and districts. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER detailed that federal funding arrives in Alaska via DOD Impact Aid to compensate communities for the loss of property taxes for students who live on tax-exempt military property but attend public schools. In addition, it helps to compensate the local economy for the loss of sales or taxes since military families shop at the commissary, which explains the $106 million. In addition, the DOD also provides federal Supplemental Impact Aid, which is additional funding to school districts with more than 20 percent military students. 9:43:37 AM CHAIR GATTIS asked whether the district provided any feedback, particularly since additional work may be imposed on existing staff. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered no. CHAIR GATTIS noted the importance of collecting data but as to where it is stored, how it is accessed and how it is disseminated for, the state has "a ways to go." The state needs to rise to the challenge. 9:44:33 AM REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER commented that Marty Lang, principal at Eagle River High School reported he received a federal grant to help him pay for accounting students for military families. He noted that it's been hard to get statewide information. 9:45:11 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to the portion of the bill requiring open reporting, and asked if the U.S. DOD intends to have the data reported in this manner. For example, would every school have a public meeting and identify the five students. MR. SAN SOUCI referred to [page 2, lines 25-28 to paragraph (11)] of HB 318. He indicated the DOD agrees with the reporting language. He stated the intention is to have access to data to develop trends. He deferred to the sponsor to comment on the remainder of the bill, which is current statute, noting that he doesn't wish to create any additional burden. He envisioned the data collection would be part of the routine information schools gather on students at the beginning of the year to capture the military connection. 9:47:33 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON clarified that the DOD's intention is to have access to the data and information, without publically broadcasting the data. MR. SAN SOUCI agreed. He said it is not the DOD's intent to expose individual students or subject military children to scrutiny. 9:48:16 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for further clarification on the Alaska National Guard, the Alaska Naval Militia, and the Alaska State Defense Force agencies. MR. SAN SOUCI answered that the DOD is most concerned with active duty military, including the U.S. Coast Guard, the Alaska National Guard, and any reserves, but not the Alaska Naval Militia and the Alaska State Defense Force, although he deferred to the sponsor. 9:49:36 AM CHAIR GATTIS asked for further clarification on the public meeting and disseminating information on less than five military students in a school. PAUL PRUSSING, Deputy Director, Teaching and Learning Support, Department of Education and Early Development (EED), explained that this would amend the report card to the public on the department's website. A person could click on a school and acquire information, such as how many Alaska Native and Caucasians or special education students are in a school. This bill would add a category in the subgroups listed to include military personnel. He described the data collection and indicated the source of information for the student report is the Online Alaska Student Information System (OASIS) and the complexity of the fiscal note is because it's more than a simple Excel spreadsheet being sent to the department, such as in HB 210. 9:50:58 AM CHAIR GATTIS asked for further clarification that if the information is uploaded in July it relates to the prior year data. She questioned the reasons parents fill out paperwork twice a year for schools. MR. PRUSSING answered that the fall and spring testing results and other information from the past year is reported. CHAIR GATTIS remarked that the information gathered could be used to allow parents to obtain tutoring for their children; however, she admitted it's just one of her pet peeves. 9:52:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE KITO III understood the data is collected via OASIS and published in July. He asked for further clarification on whether information on students of military families is collected and if it is time critical. MR. PRUSSING answered that data collection will be considered as part of fiscal note. He envisioned the department will need to reflect on the best way to collect data. It is envisioned currently to compile it via OASIS, the main data collection for all districts, but it's something that could evolve. 9:54:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON referred to page 1, lines 12-14, [paragraphs (2) and (3), which is the only place results of norm-referenced achievement tests and results of state standards-based assessments in reading, writing, and mathematics, is reported. Everything else in this section seems to relate to broader reporting on drop-out rates, achievement, or graduation rates. He expressed concern that this seems to require detailed performance reporting for the military subgroup, which would be different than other subgroup reporting. MR. PRUSSING answered that information is being gathered on the military students regarding attendance and performance, but having the confirmation that they are students of military families will not occur. He offered his belief that paragraph (11) just gathers one piece of information. 9:56:41 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON maintained concern that the data collection is for a subcategory for students of military families as a statutory requirement in HB 318, but the statutes don't indicate a parallel reporting standard for other student groups. CHAIR GATTIS asked whether the other subgroups reported on in this manner. MR. PRUSSING answered yes; part of the accountability system requires annual measureable objectives for each subgroup and each school reports this information. He said the department has not expressed concern. 9:58:46 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON recalled the "No Child Left Behind" (NCLB) program required this information, that it a source of pride for some schools and is included in their public website postings. She acknowledged that for certain small districts may have an issue but other areas find it helpful. 10:00:06 AM CHAIR GATTIS closed public testimony on HB 318. 10:00:16 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 4, on page 2, line 28, after "Guard," to delete "the Alaska Naval  Militia, or the Alaska State Defense Force." REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected for discussion purposes. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON deferred to the sponsor but said the DOD indicated interest in active duty military members. He offered his belief that including the state entities will detract from the target information. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER, as sponsor, agreed with Conceptual Amendment 4. 10:01:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE KITO III asked whether the amendment before the committee was Amendment 4 or if it should be Amendment 1. 10:01:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON withdrew Conceptual Amendment 4. REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD removed her objection to Conceptual Amendment 4. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1, on page 2, line 28, after "Guard," to delete "the Alaska Naval  Militia, or the Alaska State Defense Force." REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD objected for discussion purposes. REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER, as sponsor, agreed with Conceptual Amendment 1. 10:02:28 AM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD removed her objection. There being no further objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 was adopted. 10:02:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to report HB 318, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 318(EDC) was reported from the House Education Standing Committee.