HOUSE BILL NO. 80 "An Act repealing the requirement for secondary students to take college and career readiness assessments." 10:01:10 AM REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS, SPONSOR, explained that HB 80 was a repeal of the mandate from the previous year's omnibus education bill, HB 278. School districts were required to facilitate the mandate for all secondary students to take the American College Testing (ACT), Scholarship Aptitude Test (SAT), or WorkKeys exam. Last session HB 278 had provisions for funding for the purchase of the exam within the Department of Education and Early Development (DEED). However, school districts were left with an unfunded mandate. She pointed out that testing took instruction time away between teachers and students and created an administrative burden for school districts to coordinate and provide testing. She argued that HB 80 would relieve school districts from an administrative obligation and would save DEED $525 thousand per year. School districts supported the elimination of all unfunded mandates due to the current budget crunch. The testing was an additional hurdle for students that had fulfilled all of the other criteria necessary to graduate. She pointed out that the packet she had distributed to members included several letters from school districts detailing the burden of providing the testing to students. She concluded that HB 80 would remove the new testing mandate before it became an expected tradition. 10:04:27 AM Representative Gara reported that he had been contacted by a number of school officials about the possibility of administering an annual exam once every four years. He could not recollect the name of the test. In changing the time between testing the state would save a significant amount of money. He wondered if Representative Gattis knew the name of the test. Representative Gattis believed he was speaking of the Alaska Measures of Progress (AMP) test which was not part of the current legislation. She had thought of including the AMP test in the bill and went so far as having a committee substitute drafted, but felt limited on time. There were other issues having to do with the AMP test including federal funding that needed to be thoroughly investigated which would take time. Therefore, she left it out of the bill. She added that the Senate had a bill currently being vetted regarding the AMP test. She summarized that HB 80 was limited to the ACT, the SAT, and the WorkKeys exam. 10:05:45 AM Representative Gara wanted to hear from DEED about the AMP test because of the potential cost savings. 10:06:12 AM Representative Wilson clarified the version of the bill for consideration. She asked about what happened to the test information once a student completed one of the three exams. Representative Gattis did not know but the department would be able to answer the question. Representative Wilson wanted to know the answer. She also wanted to know about any requirements in terms of providing exam locations. She wanted to know how the state benefited. Co-Chair Thompson relayed that Deena Paramo from the Matanuska Borough School District was available for questions as well as Les Morse with DEED available. 10:07:40 AM LES MORSE, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT, reiterated that the question was how the data was used. He stated that for the particular assessment the department received the data for the purpose of verifying student participation. The state also took the number of participating students and calculated the percentage of students participating within the state's school rating system to determine whether students were taking the assessment. The exam was the means of determining college career readiness and the state's school accountability system. 10:08:57 AM Representative Wilson asked if the state was grading its schools based on whether students participated in the assessment test rather than student performance. Mr. Morse responded that the exam was a participation requirement. He added that the state used other assessments for achievement and performance. The test was used to determine performance for the Alaska Performance Scholarship but not for state purposes of accountability. Representative Wilson wanted to hear from the Matsu superintendent. She relayed her personal experience taking the ACT. She wondered if the school districts were required to administer the test during the school day. DEENA PARAMO, SUPERINTENDENT, MATSU BOROUGH SCHOOL DISTRICT (via teleconference), indicated that the current discussion was what the district had evidenced in the current year. She pointed out some of the unintended consequences; additional work for counselors, lost instruction time in the classroom because of assessments being administered during school hours, and a significant amount of paperwork. The fact that students could choose one of three different tests also complicated the process. Another downside was that students were given one attempt. If, for example, a student was ill on the day of the exam, changing the date required completing a hurdle of paperwork. It also meant that a student would have to register on a weekend day on their own time. She added that ACT, SAT, and WorkKeys scores remained with a child's transcript. 10:11:15 AM Representative Wilson understood that the primary reason for the test was to satisfy a requirement for the Alaska Performance Scholarship. She thought the fee to take the test was minimal. She was concerned with the costs and the classroom time lost because of the test requirement. 10:11:50 AM Vice-Chair Saddler asked about the second repealer that repealed AS 14.03.75(b) regarding students that did not qualify for a diploma because of failing to take a college and career assessment. He wanted to know the practical result if the bill was amended and the statute repealed. He wanted to clarify that if a student did not take the test they could still receive a diploma. Representative Gattis stated that essentially the state mandated each student to take one of three tests, whether or not they passed it, in order to get a diploma. She emphasized that even if a student did all the required course work and passed all of the associated assessment measures, they could not receive a diploma unless they took the ACT, SAT, or WorkKeys exam. Simply stated, HB 80 allowed students who had completed their course work and received all of their credits to receive their diploma. 10:12:55 AM Representative Gara understood that the tests would become voluntary. He wanted to know why Representative Gattis removed the provision that the state or the school district could pay for the testing. Representative Gattis responded, "That is an interesting word, whether they can or they shall." Representative Gara clarified that currently it was "shall." Representative Gattis stated he was correct. She added, "It must. The state must pay for it. This is mandated." 10:13:48 AM Representative Gara asked Representative Gattis why she was deleting the provision for the state to pay for testing for students that wanted to go to college or to pursue higher education through vocational training. Representative Gattis responded that she deleted it so the state would not have to bear the cost of the testing. The student would pay to take one of the three exams rather than the state having to pay for it. She pointed out that there was a provision for students who could not afford to pay for the testing. Her staff would explain. 10:14:28 AM STEVE RICCI, STAFF, REPRESENTATIVE LYNN GATTIS, indicated that there was a provision for a waiver for low-income students. The College Board, the company that sells and distributes the ACT and SAT, reported that for students who received a waiver they would also receive additional benefits that were not available through the state. He suggested that, for instance, low-income students would receive four free college application waivers. He highlighted that low-income students benefited more by attaining the waiver from the College Board than receiving the testing from the state. 10:15:31 AM Representative Gara understood that free college application waivers were available. However, he wondered if a student could get a waiver for the fees associated with taking the ACT, SAT, or WorkKeys exam. He asked if there was a WorkKeys waiver. He also asked if there was an ACT and SAT waiver based on income. Representative Gattis stated there was a waiver for the ACT and SAT exams through the College Board. The WorkKeys test was available through the Department of Labor and Workforce Development (DOLWD). Representative Gara wondered why Representative Gattis removed the regulations for people with disabilities and referred to AS 14.07.165. Mr. Ricci asked Representative Gara to repeat his question. Representative Gara indicated that the statutes addressed regulations the department was allowed to adopt to assist students with disabilities. He wondered why the legislature would take away the power to grant assistance to students with disabilities. Mr. Ricci offered to do additional research. His interpretation was that people with disabilities would still have the ability to test, but it was not explicit that it was mandatory that the state provide the testing. 10:17:04 AM Representative Gara commented that it was not the way he read it but thought more information was necessary. He had one question for Ms. Paramo regarding the AMP test. He purported that it costed school districts a significant amount to provide the test on an annual basis. He asked for her thoughts on alternatively providing the test once every four years. He wondered if it would save her school district money. Ms. Paramo emphatically supported a four-year rotation for the AMP test. Additionally, the test provided similar information about schools rather than about individual children's learning. There were other assessments that were more informative that parents and teachers relied on as well as school districts in making daily decisions. She would also support eliminating the AMP test completely. Representative Gara asked about the potential savings from moving the test from an annual exam to a test administered once every four years. Ms. Paramo relayed that the state paid for the cost of testing materials. The school district spent approximately $15 Thousand per testing session for additional staffing to accommodate and process the assessment. 10:19:10 AM Representative Guttenberg wondered what the state would lose in terms of test scores. He suggested that the bill would change the demographics of students taking the test regardless of the availability to students who could not afford it. He wanted to know if there was something the state needed or required to determine a student's grade which the state would no longer have access to with the passing of HB 80. Representative Gattis verified that he was talking about the ACT and SAT exams versus the AMP test. Representative Guttenberg confirmed he was talking about the ACT and the SAT. Representative Gattis tried to paraphrase Representative Guttenberg's question about those students that did not take any of the tests. She clarified that in the current statute if a student did not take one of the three tests, they would not graduate. She wondered if Representative Guttenberg's question had to do with determining the purpose of the testing mandate. Representative Guttenberg responded in the negative. He discussed the ranking of states in terms of how they are doing in educating students. He suggested that by changing the way Alaska was doing its testing the numbers would be skewed one way or another. He wondered if Alaska would lose credibility with a scoring system. Representative Gattis remarked that because it was the first year there were no numbers to lose or gain. She was looking to eliminate the test before the state utilized the initial data. She was unaware of what the state would do with the testing numbers being a new mandate. Mr. Morse indicated that currently the state used the information to verify participation. He did not anticipate any loss of credibility with any ranking organization. All students chose to take one of three assessments. The legislation was brought forward to create a college or career readiness environment within schools. With the state covering the costs associated with the testing it broadened student access and helped students to meet requirements associated with the Alaska Performance Scholarship. He reiterated that waivers for the ACT and SAT exams were available to low-income students and helped to preserve student access to testing. Mr. Morse anticipated a loss in the number of testing sites. He relayed that without a state contract testing could not be conducted during school hours, thus, reducing the number of testing sites. He stressed that the main question was whether the test should be required to receive a diploma. He conveyed that DEED did not have a strong feeling about the issue one way or another. He confirmed that the department thought it was good to take the test. However, it also understood the current financial climate. Returning to Representative Guttenberg's question, he did not believe there would be a loss of credibility. 10:24:20 AM Representative Guttenberg asked if the waiver applied to the fee or having to take the test. Mr. Morse clarified that if students met a low-income requirement, the non-profit companies, ACT and the College Board, would give those students a fee waiver to allow them to take the test without cost. 10:24:54 AM Representative Munoz mentioned getting rid of the high stakes exam, the High School Graduation Qualifying Exam (HSGQE) in the previous year and replacing it with the three choices of exams. She wanted to make sure that students did not have to pass the exam to get a diploma, they simply had to take it. She asked if she was correct. Mr. Morse responded in the affirmative. He added that taking any of the three tests (ACT, SAT, or WorkKeys) would satisfy a student's participation requirement. Representative Munoz asked the sponsor about whether she had considered also removing the testing requirement for the Alaska Performance Scholarship (APS) and rather relying on a student's grade point average for qualification of the APS. Representative Gattis responded that she had not thought of Representative Munoz's idea. She reported that the feedback she received from different people was that they would find the funding for their children to take the exam. She spoke of her first two years as the Education Committee Chair. She had asked school districts to provide her with unfunded mandates so she could address them. In the current year schools were focused on eliminating unfunded mandates. She opined that the testing detracted from the state's main mission. She also offered that the testing results did not help the school districts teach kids adding that many kids were moving to different areas. She believed she had addressed and discussed the issue of folks not being able to afford an exam. She conveyed that if school districts had kids that could not afford the test but wanted to take one they would find a way to fund the testing. 10:27:06 AM Vice-Chair Saddler asked about the way in which students with disabilities were treated. He wanted to know whether students with disabilities who wanted to take career assessment tests, even in the absence of a mandate, would be able to do so. If so, he wondered if the schools would be required to accommodate disabled students with special needs by state policy. Representative Gattis relayed that schools already made accommodations for students on a daily basis as part of their Individualized Education Program (IEP). In terms of testing, schools would continue to make necessary accommodations. She stipulated that she was basing her answer on her own life experience. Vice-Chair Saddler specifically asked if schools would be mandated to accommodate disabled students. He restated his first question which was whether disabled students who wanted to take the assessments in the absence of the state mandate be allowed to do so. Mr. Morse responded in the affirmative. Vice-Chair Saddler asked if schools, by policy, would be obligated to accommodate the special needs of students with disabilities. Mr. Morse specified that if the testing was not state mandated the testing would not be administered during school hours. The testing would not be run by the schools but by either the non-profit for SAT [ACT] or College Board for SAT. Both assessments allowed for accommodations and were made available to students that needed them. 10:29:14 AM Vice-Chair Saddler clarified that schools would not have to make accommodations but the College Board or the ACT authority would make accommodations. Mr. Morse responded affirmatively. 10:29:26 AM Vice-Chair Saddler wanted to clarify a question asked by Representative Munoz. He wondered if it was correct that in order to qualify for the APS a student had to take one of the assessments. Mr. Morse responded positively. 10:29:42 AM Representative Gara referred to the disability provision in AS 14.07.165 (a)(5) and (b). Currently, for a student with a disability the department was required to adopt regulations that might address the conditions, criteria, procedure and scheduling of the assessment, things needed to accommodate someone with a disability and required to adopt regulation. He asked why it was no longer needed. Mr. Morse stated that the reason it would no longer be needed was that the schools would not be doing the assessment. The College Board and ACT would be responsible for conducting assessments and providing necessary accommodations provisions. He elaborated that the current statute was mandating schools to follow the same provisions laid out by ACT and SAT. He concluded that the world would not change for students with disabilities. 10:30:59 AM Representative Gara asked about WorkKeys. Mr. Morse's understanding was that WorkKeys was part of ACT and the same accommodations would be provided. However, WorkKeys was not conducted in the same type of setting where there were certain test days. Representative Gara asked what AMP stood for and where he would find it in the statutes. Mr. Morse answered that AMP stood for Assessment Measures of Progress. It was the standards-based assessment required in statute, also required under federal law, and was the assessment used for state accountability given in grades 3 through 10. 10:32:42 AM Representative Gara asked if the state would incur a federal penalty if the legislature decided to move the AMP to being administered every four years. Mr. Morse confirmed that there would be a federal penalty. He elaborated that the $97.5 million the state received for the elementary and secondary education act would be at risk. Co-Chair Thompson stated that HB 80 would be brought up again at 1:30 pm at which time public testimony would be heard.