HB 148-AK PERFORMANCE SCHOLARSHIP; ELIGIBILITY  8:14:48 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE announced that the first order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 148, "An Act relating to the Alaska performance scholarship program." CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE noted that at the House Education Standing Committee meeting on Monday, April 17, 2023, a motion had been made by Co-Chair Allard to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1 to HB 148, [with objection by Co-Chair Ruffridge], and this motion had been left pending. 8:15:37 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY moved to table [Conceptual Amendment 1]. There being no objection, Conceptual Amendment 1, pending with objection, was tabled. 8:16:04 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE entertained other amendments. 8:16:14 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 5 to HB 148. CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE explained that Conceptual Amendment 5 was initially drafted by Representative Allard. He asked whether there were any objections to the amendment. 8:16:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY objected to Conceptual Amendment 5. 8:16:46 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT Explained that Conceptual Amendment 5 opens the scholarship eligibility to students who either have a high score on the SAT or ACT, or a high GPA, providing flexibility to students who show their worthiness for the scholarship. 8:18:08 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY spoke to her objection. She expressed concern about the GPA and students not having to deal with the test. Additionally, she questioned the deletion of the word "academic" on page 2, line 30, because the academic requirements are not being deleted. 8:19:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT replied that she could not speak to the deletion of the word "academic," adding that a requirement is a requirement, whether it was academic or otherwise. She said she did not know why "academic" needed to be deleted, and shared her belief that it could stay. She added that there are many students with a low GPA that could pass a test, and those students should also be able to receive the performance scholarship. 8:20:06 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY pointed out that there are accountability measures in place, so if students do not keep their grades up, they will lose their scholarship. She noted that [the accountability measures] encourage students to work hard. 8:20:38 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY moved to adopt Conceptual Amendment 1 to Conceptual Amendment 5, to keep the word "academic". 8:21:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK objected. REPRESENTATIVE STORY stated that there are academic requirements, and emphasized the importance of keeping "academic" in the legislation. 8:22:09 AM SANA EFIRD, Executive Director, Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE), Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), joined the discussion on HB 148. She referenced the 10-year lookback, reporting that the curriculum and the academic success on the curriculum makes a difference for the students as they attend their post-secondary programs. Specifically with the university classes, students do not have to take remedial classes at the rate of others; however, keeping the curriculum and having an and/or is doable, she said. 8:24:07 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY drew attention to page 1 of the bill regarding the minimum GPA. CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE related that the focus needed to stay on the conceptual amendment to Conceptual Amendment 5, specifically the word "academic." REPRESENTATIVE STORY thanked Co-Chair Ruffridge for reminding the committee that the academic piece is important. 8:25:01 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether it was possible that the word "academic" was no longer applicable, and whether Career Technical Education (CTE) also required the word "academic." 8:25:25 AM MS. EFRID replied that "academic" was still in the curriculum requirement; she said she wasn sure whether the removal would affect the curriculum. 8:26:42 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY commented that she had been reminded of how rigorous CTE is for students. 8:27:18 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT stated that removing the word "academic" was suggested by the legal department, but she liked having it there. She confirmed her support for Conceptual Amendment 1 to Conceptual Amendment 5. 8:27:53 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK removed his objection to Conceptual Amendment 1 to Conceptual Amendment 5. There being no further objection, Conceptual Amendment 1 to Conceptual Amendment 5 was adopted. 8:28:37 AM The committee took a brief at-ease at 8:28 a.m. 8:29:08 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE returned the discussion to Conceptual Amendment 5, [as amended]. 8:29:22 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY directed attention to line 11 of Conceptual Amendment 5 and questioned what body should be setting minimum [GPA] requirements. Additionally, she asked which entity the language referred to. CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE reminded Representative Story that this language was already in statute on page 2, lines 11-13 of the bill. He added that Conceptual Amendment 5 was setting forth a repeal of the language. REPRESENTATIVE STORY noted that the directions were to "delete all material and insert." CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE pointed out that "insert" was capitalized and bolded, indicating that it would match the other sections as a repeal. 8:31:02 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:31 a.m. to 8:34 a.m. 8:34:59 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY confirmed that her questions were answered. 8:35:06 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE asked whether there were other questions or comments on Conceptual Amendment 5. REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT asked whether the conceptual amendment would open the scholarship to a broader range of students. 8:35:27 AM MS. EFIRD responded that her interpretation was yes, it would provide scholarship opportunities to students that have taken the curriculum laid out in the current statute, but for some reason, did not make a certain GPA. 8:36:12 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE asked whether Representative Story maintained her objection to Conceptual Amendment 5, [as amended], to HB 148. REPRESENTATIVE STORY removed her objection. There being no further objection, Conceptual Amendment 5 [as amended], was adopted. 8:36:30 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE moved to adopt Amendment 6 to HB 148, labeled 33-LS0624/B.7\Marx 4/18/23, which read: Page 3, lines 14 - 15: Delete "AS 14.43.825(g) and (h)" Insert "AS 14.43.825(g) - (i)" Page 4, lines 21 - 27: Delete all material and insert: "(g) Each time a student who is an award recipient completes two semesters of full-time enrollment at a qualified postsecondary institution in this state, the postsecondary institution shall review and notify the commission of the student's postsecondary institution grade-point average. If the student's grades qualify under (h) of this section, the commission shall increase the award level for the student as described in (h) of this section and notify the student of the increase. In this subsection, "full-time enrollment" means enrollment in a course of study that is not less than 15 credits." Page 4, line 28: Delete "university or college" Insert "postsecondary institution" Page 4, line 29, following "above,": Insert "or the equivalent established under (i) of this section," Page 4, line 31, following "above,": Insert "or the equivalent established under (i) of this section," Page 5, following line 1: Insert a new subsection to read: "(i) For qualified postsecondary institutions that do not award grades on a four-point scale, the commission shall establish by regulation the equivalent rating required to increase an award under (h) of this section." Reletter the following subsection accordingly. Page 5, lines 5 - 7: Delete all material and insert: "(2) "postsecondary institution grade-point average" means the average of all grades on a four- point scale, or the equivalent as established by the commission by regulation, obtained by a student at a qualified postsecondary institution in this state." 8:36:40 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY objected for the purpose of discussion. CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE explained that Amendment 6 would make several changes to ensure that the bill would encompass the most available students, make sure all post-secondary institutions in the state are covered rather than just universities or colleges, in addition to conforming changes. 8:37:22 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:37 a.m. to 8:42 a.m. 8:42:30 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE continued the discussion on Amendment 6. 8:42:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE STORY referred to page 1, lines 13-14 of Amendment 6, and expressed her concern about the 15 credit requirement, because many students are non-traditional students that work in addition to going to school. She asked for clarification on the determination made by the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE) on the number of credits. MS. EFIRD offered her understanding that there were both part time and full time awards for APS, which would cover the concern about nontraditional students who were unable to attend a full time program of 15 credits. REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether the student would get a portion of the scholarship. MS. EFIRD said she would check with her staff to clarify. REPRESENTATIVE STORY asked whether including "not less than 15 credits" would create parameters for the commission's flexibility. MS. EFIRD offered her belief that this is the way the program is currently set up for the full-time classes. She reiterated that she would talk with her staff on the number of credits otherwise. REPRESENTATIVE STORY opined that 15 credits was a high amount, and 4 classes, she said, could constitute "full time." 8:46:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT questioned whether the original APS language specified 15 hours and asked whether 15 was standard. MS. EFIRD offered her understanding that 15 credit hours was standard; however, there was an allowance for 12 credits in the first year under APS regulations. She offered to follow up with the requested information. 8:47:29 AM REPRESENTATIVE HIMSCHOOT opined that it was an overstep for the legislature to decide what full time is and that the ACPE could decide that. Quarters versus semesters, she said, could also change what full time is. She stated she would be more comfortable if full time enrollment were determined by the ACPE; however, she would not want that to create a burden. MS. EFIRD replied that ACPE would work through regulations, but she was unsure if they would work with an institution to determine what they would consider a full-time student. She understood that it is something ACPE could take on, and offered to talk with staff regarding the added administrative burden. 8:48:45 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE reminded the committee that the section currently under discussion started on page 4, line 20, in Section 6. He clarified that the amendment would change the language on line 22, and explained that the language on full- time enrollment is not indicative of the qualifications to receive the scholarship. Instead, the intent was to talk through what enrollment is necessary to receive the step-up provision. 8:49:54 AM The committee took an at-ease from 8:49 a.m. to 8:53 a.m. 8:53:07 AM CO-CHAIR RUFFRIDGE reminded the committee that the current focus is on the credit component in Amendment 6. REPRESENTATIVE STORY sought clarification as to the amount of credits in regulations. MS. EFIRD confirmed that for the first year, it is 12 credits. 8:53:55 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCKAY withdrew his objection to the motion to adopt Amendment 6 to HB 158. There being no further objection, Amendment 6 was adopted. REPRESENTATIVE STORY thanked Ms. Efird and ACPE for supporting this modernization, and thanked the committee for the bill. MS. EFIRD expressed her excitement towards the bill, and thanked the committee members for their engagement and enthusiasm. 8:56:20 AM REPRESENTATIVE MCCORMICK moved to report HB 148, as amended, out of committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes, and to authorize Legislative Legal Services to make technical and conforming changes, as needed. There being no objection, CSHB 148(EDC) was reported out of the House Education Standing Committee.