HR 9-DELAY IMPLEMENTATION OF ED STANDARDS  9:37:26 AM CHAIR GATTIS announced that the final order of business would be HOUSE RESOLUTION NO. 9, Urging the commissioner of education and early development and the state Board of Education and Early Development to delay implementation of statewide education standards. 9:37:52 AM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HR 9, labeled 28-LS1224\U, Mischel, 3/18/14, as the working document. 9:38:15 AM The committee took a brief at-ease. CHAIR GATTIS asked to have the motion restated, including the version. REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD moved to adopt the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HR 9, Version U, labeled 28-LS1224\U, Mischel, 3/18/14 as the working document. There being no objection, Version U was before the committee. 9:39:49 AM REPRESENTATIVE TAMMIE WILSON, Alaska State Legislature, as prime sponsor of HR 9, said this resolution came about as a result of frustration. The state considers the cost to the state when considering policy changes but it doesn't consider the cost to local municipalities or schools. She pointed out the significant changes ranging from teacher evaluations, standardized testing, and implementing new standards. These changes may adversely affect school districts depending on the curriculum the districts are currently using and how the new standards differ. The original version of HR 9 reflected her interest in just delaying or halting the process to allow districts time to evaluate costs. She reported that the task force contacted districts and initially found frustration mounting, but since then some adapting has occurred. Still, some districts expressed concern that they may not have enough time to get everything in place quickly enough. Thus, the proposed committee substitute, Version U, requests a cost analysis for implementing educational standards, noting that the costs will vary between districts. Secondly, Version U requests that the department and the State Board of Education help districts transition to the new requirements. This will help to assess whether districts can implement new curriculum and new methods of teaching so districts can accurately assess student levels rather than student scores reflecting that the districts didn't have enough time to change teaching methods, which were extensively revised. CHAIR GATTIS suggested the standards imposed may represent unfunded mandates. 9:43:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON said a major aspect is that teachers are being asked to teach at a higher standard and to have them do so means the department and districts must provide massive in-service teacher training. She expressed concern that teachers will not be sufficiently ready. Teacher training represents a high cost for the state and the department does not currently have the funding for this training. Further, she emphasized the importance of having the university provides training so new teachers will be using best practices. She suggested it might be good to have some delay in implementing the new standards. 9:45:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON added that it isn't just the more rigorous standards, but the student testing has also changed and is more in-depth testing so the analysis is different, too. She characterized it as being similar to changing from multiple choice tests to in-depth essays. In addition, techniques for teaching styles have also changed. She has received positive feedback on the changes, especially for teacher evaluation, but the time required for implementation is an issue. She suggested that perhaps delaying implementing new testing to allow for a transition year. She said, "We are teaching to the test." In a sense, the training in most professions leads to passing the test. She would like to ensure that the teachers and students have adequate time to make the changes. Finally, the state formula allows changes to occur every six years. She asked whether the districts have budgeted costs to change their curriculum. She maintained her concern on whether administrators have time to go through the process to make the changes. REPRESENTATIVE P. WILSON maintained interest in ensuring appropriate training for the teachers. 9:49:19 AM REPRESENTATIVE REINBOLD offered her belief that changes should be suspended pending broad community feedback. She suggested that the legislature should have a 10-year cost evaluation period, including costs for the waiver, implementation, aligning the curriculum to the CCSS, teacher training, assessment costs, and individual district impacts. In addition, she expressed interest in the classroom time necessary to implement the standards. She maintained her interest in delaying the changes for stated reasons and to obtain feedback on a national level. 9:51:37 AM CHAIR GATTIS opened public testimony on HR 9. 9:51:49 AM STEWART MCDONALD, Superintendent, Kodiak Island Borough School District (KIBSD), recalled a paper in which he has written an article about the changes being implemented today in schools and the effects that are experienced. He said patience is important, especially when student scores drop, due to transition. The drop is a necessary part of the forward movement. As teachers practice the new standards it can be sloppy and tough; however, delaying the progress will be hurtful, he said. Further, attaching performance to funding is a mistake. It is important to continue to move forward, he said. 9:55:19 AM PEGGY COWAN, Superintendent, North Slope Borough School District (NSBSD), said the district embraces the new national standards. The NSBSD has been committed to the rigor reflected in the new state standards. She acknowledged the intent is for students to be capable as students in other states so uniformity is important. She clarified that the NSBSD is not in favor of standardization. She emphasized that implementation will be applied in a relevant manner and context to North Slope students. She expressed concern about the costs, but stated the standards represent the foundation of reform. If the standards are delayed the teacher evaluations also will need to be delayed. Moving back would be demoralizing to the teachers who have spent years being trained and significant time developing units. Thus, it's important to continue the momentum in implementing the standards. She urged members to stay the course to ensure that Alaska's students are competitive in the state and in the nation. 9:59:13 AM SUNNY HILTS, President, Association of Alaska School Boards (AASB), expressed similar concerns, but said the district has been working for two years to realign the curriculum to meet the standards. Currently, districts face morale challenges due to the uncertainty of funding. She offered her belief that changing course right now on the standards would be further discouragement. Although shift was difficult, the teachers and the district were physically tested, and the process was costly, the district made it. Everyone made this effort to provide the best education for students. She emphasized that delay will not give them that best education, will mean returning to inferior standards, and create confusion. She hoped the committee will encourage districts across the state to move forward with the program and implement the new standards. She requested the state provide assistance to districts during this process. She concluded by saying that the [Kenai Peninsula Borough School District's] teachers are ready and they have been looking forward to this for several years. 10:01:03 AM MIKE COONS offered his belief that if students can't meet today's standards that there aren't assurances they have the ability to pass the new [statewide education performance standards, described as college and career readiness standards adopted by the State Board of Education]. He expressed concern about how this may affect children's self-esteem and ego, and said that teaching to the test is not a good practice. He considered the new standards to be another federal unfunded mandate. He stated that he fully endorses HR 9. CHAIR GATTIS closed public testimony on HR 9. 10:02:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE T. WILSON responded to comments by first pointing out the committee substitute [Version U] is before the committee. Initially, the intent of HR 9 was to delay implementation, but the committee substitute, Version U, calls for costs to districts to implement the changes and to ensure a smooth transition to allow all districts to implement the changes. Some smaller districts have more difficulty adopting the new performance standards due to limited resources and this will provide for transition time to ensure that students are tested on their knowledge, she said. 10:03:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked for further clarification on the length of the transition time. [HR 9 was held over.]