HOUSE BILL NO. 49 "An Act establishing in the Department of Education and Early Development a voluntary parent and early childhood education program for pre-elementary aged children." 9:08:12 AM REPRESENTATIVE CHRIS TUCK, SPONSOR, explained the legislation. He believed that quality education remained a challenge in the state. The state spent ample resources on remedial and special education and despite the effort the educational system was not producing results. He felt that a better method to provide students real educational opportunities and a new paradigm for learning was needed. He voiced that parents are a child's first and most important teachers. Research has proven that parental involvement in a child's early years was critical for development and success in school. Representative Tuck expounded that HB 49 was an early learning model to increase school readiness, family involvement, and create a culture of learning in Alaskan communities. The legislation allowed the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) to offer the "successful" Parents as Teachers early childhood learning system as an education option for families with children ages 0 to 5. He discussed the Parents as Teachers program. The program was completely voluntary. He related that the program succeeded by engaging families and communities, explaining children's brain development and how to create an appropriate learning environment. Parents as Teachers focused on how children learn not what they learn, and blended with any educational philosophy or language. The program increased school readiness and educational success into adulthood. The program employed a research based curriculum and assisted in early detection of impairments. Early detection and resolution provided cost savings by avoiding special and remedial education later on. He reported that estimated costs of a statewide program were $4 million annually; 80 percent of the funding was directed to the staff working with families. 9:11:59 AM DEBI BALDWIN, CHILD DEVELOPMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR, RURAL CAP (via teleconference), testified in support of the legislation. She believed in increased opportunity for parental involvement in a child's education. Well-informed parents that employed positive parental practices advocated and lead their child's educational experience, which resulted in success. The Parents as Teachers program was a key to school readiness. The legislation would provide increased access to the program. 9:14:19 AM AT EASE 9:14:49 AM RECONVENED MARK LEWIS, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT, testified that the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED) considered HB 131 a positive component to its efforts towards early childhood education and early learning coordination. He relayed that any early learning program approved by the legislature would be examined in the context of statewide budget priorities. The governor's budget included the pre-K pilot program and additional $ 600 thousand in the early learning component: $300 thousand appropriated for Best Beginnings and the remainder was appropriated to Rural Cap to support early learning in Tok, Seward, Stebbins, and Kodiak. Co-Chair Stoltze wondered what would happen to the smaller programs if a holistic approach to early learning was adopted. Mr. Lewis answered that HB 131 would provide a holistic solution to this type of approach to early learning. He noted that other programs would culminate in the event of a comprehensive early education system in the state. 9:18:43 AM Representative Neuman related personal experience with early learning as a parent. He asked how the funding would function and who would receive the funds. Mr. Lewis understood that DEED would develop a grant application and review process so that entities could participate. He did not know whether a business license would be required. Representative Neuman asked for clarification on how the program operated. Mr. Lewis answered that the grant could pay for materials, teachers, and coordinators. He believed in a collaborative model for early education and that each program would be unique to the community it served . Representative Neuman asked whether the program would reimburse existing programs such as Head Start. 9:22:42 AM Mr. Lewis answered that the program would not reimburse existing programs but provide support to parents willing to participate in the program and implement early learning guidelines per the department. The grant would provide the tools to make early learning effective. Representative Gara thought that Parents as Teachers was the least expensive way to provide early education. He did not believe the model would fit families with both parents working. He asked whether the legislation would offer an option but not the sole option for pre-K. Mr. Lewis agreed and stated that different models of Pre-K would exist. He pointed out that the cost of Parent as Teachers was per family. Multiple children in the same household would benefit from the base cost of $4 thousand per family. Representative Gara understood that a parent could decide to teach pre-K at home. The parent would meet with a coordinator to obtain the materials and training to teach the child. He asked if that was an accurate description of how the program worked. Mr. Lewis agreed. Co-Chair Thomas spoke in support of the program. He believed Parents as Teachers was a successful program. He listed multiple early childhood educational programs such as Head Start. He asked whether other early education programs showed measurable success in terms of graduation rates. Mr. Lewis answered that it will take a coordinated effort by DEED to collect the data. The programs were supposed to be research-based. Future funding decisions could be based on results. The department would compare the variety of early education models. 9:28:28 AM Co-Chair Thomas referred to testimony and thought part of the problem was the lack of DEED data and progress reports on early education. He noted DEED did not know how many years were necessary for Pre-K. It was difficult for the legislature to make decisions without data. He wanted to see a report on the success of pre-K programs. Mr. Lewis apologized for the lack of data and agreed that the department could do a better job at presenting the information required. He agreed to provide the information. Co-Chair Thomas relayed that no one from the villages in his district reported successes in pre-K programs. Representative Wilson referenced data from Legislative Research Services on early childhood education. The data did not include $8 million that the Department of Health and Social Services (DHSS) spent on early intervention. She asked whether the DEED report would include duplication of services to children. Mr. Lewis replied in the affirmative. He reported that DEED collaborated with DHSS and all of the early learning programs had to be considered. He did not want to duplicate services between agencies. 9:32:33 AM Mr. Lewis furthered that a comprehensive system that included data collection and accurate reporting was essential for decision making. Representative Wilson wanted a coordinated effort to determine what programs work. Representative Joule agreed that providing requested information to the legislature was very important. He believed that decisions were influenced by the lack of information. He encouraged the department to notify legislators when information was distributed. He cited the early education programs, Parents as Teachers and Best Beginnings. He liked the program being discussed. He shared concerns that pre-K children were "turned over" in programs with questionable performance. He characterized the system as "Give your kids to the government at an earlier age and we will raise them for you." He wondered what happened to the parent's responsibilities. When parents become teachers they instill the value of education in their children. The parents learn that their child's ability to learn was limitless. He opined that Best Beginnings in combination with Parents as Teachers would deliver a comprehensive public private model. He supported a system where parents were involved early in children's education and the community reinforced the family involvement. 9:37:10 AM Representative Joule added that the best system was when the public and private entities worked together. Representative Costello spoke in support of the legislation. She believed the program would empower parents in the development of their children. She pointed to research about children's brain development and growth from birth to age three. She thought the program would lay a positive foundation for the formative years. She like the community based nature of the program. She referred to research that listed the programs measured success. Representative Costello agreed with Representative Joule's concerns about government taking over the role of parents. She did not think the program would do that. Representative Edgmon spoke in support of the bill. He reported experience on the House Education Committee that taught him the value of early education. He felt that the program represented "spending on the front end to avoid spending on the back end." He noted the amount spent on the Department of Corrections ($269 million in general funds) in the state and wondered how that could be mitigated by early education. He complimented the department on their efforts in early education but did not think it was enough. 9:41:57 AM Co-Chair Stoltze did not believe that the issues with corrections and education should be linked. He felt it distorted both debates. Representative Tuck pointed out that Parents as Teachers had been in Alaska for 18 years, and that studies showed its success. The evidence demonstrated that the program kept parents engaged in their child's education over the years. He spoke to challenges to get parents more engaged. The earlier parents learn to engage resulted in more successful outcomes. He noted the flexibility of the program. He listed that public schools, non-profits, native associations, tribal council, and military bases were using the program. 9:45:35 AM Representative Tuck stated that the program was the most cost effective way to deliver early education in the state due to the geographic realities. Co-Chair Stoltze voiced that some parents do not want children assimilated at an earlier age and appreciated the emphasis on the voluntary nature of the program. Representative Tuck commented that often parents do not want take their children to a facility. He emphasized that the program had to be voluntary or the program would fail. Co-Chair Stoltze asserted that "charter schools were the ultimate parental involvement model" that was hugely successful. 9:48:44 AM Representative Tuck remarked that the charter school parents were involved parents. He anticipated that the program would foster the growth of charter schools. Representative Neuman stated that he liked the concept. He reported that he was a home school parent. He reported that 13,500 school children or 10 percent of the student population were home schooled in Alaska, by far the most in the country. He thought Alaska had a very transitional student body, migrating from school to school. He thought the program could set up a structure so that parent could move with the family as they transition from one community to another. Representative Tuck agreed. He explained that parents were required to meet once each month with other families in the program. The requirement was especially helpful on military bases to help ease transitions. HB 49 was HEARD and HELD in Committee for further consideration. 9:52:22 AM AT EASE 9:52:53 AM RECONVENED Co-Chair Stoltze