HB 367 - PART-TIME PUBLIC SCHOOL STUDENT ENROLLMENT Number 0293 CHAIRMAN BUNDE announced the next item on the calendar was HB 367, "An Act relating to part-time public school students; and providing for an effective date." He asked Representative Dyson to present HB 367. Number 0323 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON, sponsor, said last year the legislature passed HB 158 which clarified the state's position on part-time students. He quoted from Article 7, Section 1, Alaska State Constitution, "The legislature shall by general law establish and maintain a system of public schools open to all children of the state and may provide for other public educational institutions." He emphasized the word "all." From talking with constituents he found that most school districts in the state cheerfully accepted part-time students and accommodated them and the alternative educational opportunities that parents were choosing for their children. In fact, the Fairbanks and Mat-Su School Districts have gone to great lengths to accommodate part-time students. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON continued after passing HB 158 however, it appears there were two school districts who, while acceding to accepting part-time students were using a part of the school regulations, 4 AAC 05.035(b)(1), as an excuse for, in essence, putting the part-time students at the back of the line in terms of access, and sometimes for good reasons. He had expected the State Board of Education to bring the regulation into line with the anti- discrimination bill passed last year and may indeed do that at their March 23 meeting in Juneau. That issue is in doubt, so he is proposing to delete from the regulations, "after full-time public school students have had an opportunity to enroll." It is his opinion the part-time student should have no less access than a full-time student, just as if the student was a part of any other minority group. Number 0552 REPRESENTATIVE DYSON remarked that discussions with school administrators have raised the question of what happens when a senior needs a class to graduate, and there's a part-time in line ahead of the senior. Representative Dyson's position is the senior who needs the class to graduate gets preference, because there is a nondiscriminatory reason for giving it to the senior. The senior has a legitimate need to get the class, with no other option. He thought that school administrators were clearly within their rights in giving seniors preference over juniors, because the juniors have more chance to pick up the courses. He cited an example of an expensive, specialized course offered by the school and a flood of part-time students force the school to add another section of this very expensive class. His position is the school district should not treat that any different than if a flood of full-time students needed the course. If the demand for the course exists, and education should be consumer driven, then the school district should do what it can to put on another section of the course. If the district needs to exercise triage, it's first come, first served. If indeed the full-time student needs the course to fulfill graduation requirements and the part-time student doesn't, then the full-time student should be given the class and the part- time student can wait until the next term. Number 0713 CHAIRMAN BUNDE questioned a situation like a computer class, where it may not be possible to gear up and offer another class. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said the school should treat it the same as if it were full-time students and the school was not capable of accommodating everyone. It was his understanding that under the state constitution and HB 158, the state has no less responsibility to provide educational opportunities for the part-time student, the correspondence student, or the home schooled student than the full- time student. Number 0773 REPRESENTATIVE VEZEY said he is convinced that the nature of education has changed and will never be the same. When he first came to the legislature, distance learning programs were a very attractive prospect, but the technology hadn't quite gotten to where it needed to be, but it's available now. He stated, "I'm really starting to wonder when we now have the transparent school district boundaries, do we really want to increase our micro- management, which I avoid micro-management because I recognize that we can't use micro-management as an excuse to tolerate failure, but with the changes that are occurring, and we're still trying to address the old style education delivery system, are we putting in place any handicaps?" REPRESENTATIVE DYSON agreed with Representative Vezey and said it's a message that needs to be spread. Educational choices and alternatives within and without the public school system are happening and he believed it would drive fundamental changes that will lead to students and parents being more in control. Number 0917 CHAIRMAN BUNDE noted that school districts receive funding for full-time students. He asked Representative Dyson how a school would get compensated for part-time students. For example, if part-time students are being funded at one level as home schoolers and enroll as part-time students, is there a possibility of a double dipping situation. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said the regulations of the Department of Education have provided for full-time students for a long time and allow a student taking four hours to be considered full-time. He had been talking with Mr. Jeans just that morning, about limiting, if possible, the double dippers which was a minuscule number according the Department of Education. He noted that students enrolled in the Alyeska Correspondence Schools are reimbursed at a 65 percent equivalent. It's possible to have a situation whereby a student is going to school for four hours a day and that school receives the full-time equivalent. That same student is also taking correspondence courses, so now the state is paying 165 percent of the foundation formula for that student. He believed those cases were rare, however. Number 1027 CHAIRMAN BUNDE agreed that it probably wasn't a large amount of money, but the illusions are of concern for parents. He asked if there were any provisions in the legislation that would encourage full-time students to become part-time students. He noted that about 10 percentage of Valdez students are choosing to become part- time students, but the Valdez School District still gets to fund them as full-time students. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said he had met with the leadership from Valdez last week, and said the legislation passed last year may have impacted the Valdez situation, but he didn't think that bringing the legislation into conformity this year, would have any change at all. CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Eddy Jeans to testify at this time. Number 1124 EDDY JEANS, Manager, School Finance Section, Education Support Services, Department of Education, testified in opposition to HB 367. It is the department's position that students who attend school on a full-time basis should have preferential treatment over part-time students and that part-time students should be allowed to attend school on a space available basis. CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked Mr. Jeans to explain the reasoning behind the department's position. MR. JEANS stated the department believes it places additional stress on school districts when students are allowed to enroll for a particular class after the structure has already been set up for the year. CHAIRMAN BUNDE asked about the option of districts setting an enrollment deadline to avoid students enrolling for a particular class after the structure has been set up. For example, students planning on being enrolled in the fall semester would need to enroll the previous spring. MR. JEANS said he had learned that school districts around the state enroll students in many different ways and yes, some of the problems could be addressed in the enrollment system. CHAIRMAN BUNDE said he was not aware of a situation whereby a full- time student showing up in mid-semester or the day before school has failed to be accommodated; however, that student may not have a choice of classes. MR. JEANS commented that he was not aware of any student being displaced part way through the school year. One of the department's concerns is there are students enrolled in the public school system full-time who plan out their educational goals. He cited an example of an advanced mathematics class, structured for 20 students; 18 of the students enrolled are seniors and 2 are juniors, full-time students. Based on his understanding of this legislation, if there was a part-time senior who wanted to enroll, one of those juniors could be displaced because they would have the option to take the class the following year. It's the department's position that students have the right to take the class when they're ready to take the class, as they move through the system. Number 1300 REPRESENTATIVE BRICE asked given the vast diversity in enrollment procedures among school districts, would it be feasible to insert language to the effect that a part-time student may not be discriminated against if enrolled by a particular date. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON said it was his view that every school district is appropriately permitted to have spring enrollment for juniors attending school the next fall and they would have priority over any part-time senior coming in to enroll in the fall; it's first come, first served. He said, "I would argue that this is largely an academic problem because the part-time student who has been in correspondence school who comes and tries to make the case that he's got to have this course to graduate, you know. I would guess there's very few of the part-time student correspondence school curriculums, and that he wouldn't have another option. Because whatever program he was under - the state's Alyeska program, or something - would have the option to meet his graduation requirements. All we ask is that they not discriminate against that student simply because he is part-time." Number 1387 CHAIRMAN BUNDE said the committee would begin hearing testimony via teleconference. Number 1418 MELODY DOUGLAS, Director, Business and Finance, Kenai Peninsula School District, read a prepared statement from Patrick Hickey, Assistant Superintendent of Business and Operations: "I would like to speak against this amendment. I believe the argument for modification is inaccurate, the proposed change is improper and the effect on local school districts will result in an invasion of their ability to self govern. "Preferential treatment is not a discriminatory action as described in the proposed amendment. There is no preference made based upon race, creed, sex, disability or national original. The state of Alaska has a history of granting benefits to groups of people based upon their level of participation. New students are charged higher college tuition rates if they have not been full-time residents of the state. Tourists are charged higher fees than residents for fish and game licenses. Not all state residents are entitled for subsistence permits. Although in all these cases, some people receive preferential treatment, none of it is truly discriminatory because each individual has the same opportunity to qualify for the benefit. It is this personal choice which affords some benefits and excludes others. "Addition of the proposed language would actually generate another 'protected class' from which discrimination claims could be leveled against school districts. It is improper to create a 'protected class' for which inclusion is solely at the discretion of the individual. "School districts are charged with providing equal access to education. This is currently being accomplished. Those not choosing equal participation should not demand equal benefit. This bill will create the potential for a few anomalies in the education system: 1) a child can enroll in an out of district correspondence course, choose their own curriculum, and guarantee themselves a place in a highly desired elective course; 2) a student will be guaranteed the right to enroll in courses outside a defined attendance area by claiming 'part-time' status in both areas; and 3) students in private schools will be guaranteed seats in courses not normally available to them. "While I fully support the opportunity for all students to access the educational opportunities of the public school system, I do not support these opportunities at the expense of students fully enrolled in the system. I support the authority of the school board in setting enrollment policies and ask that you reject the amendment." Number 0544 GORDON TERPENING testified in support of HB 367 via teleconference from Homer. He is the parent of a junior at the Homer High School. It was determined last summer the best option for his son was to take some correspondence courses and some classes at the Homer High School. The reason for taking classes at the high school is because facilities are better for some classes such as chemistry, art, shop, Spanish, et cetera. On the other hand, it was thought he would get a better education with the correspondence courses and with the teachers for those classes he needed to graduate. He started working with the school district in July and was shocked when his son was put at the end of the list. In fact, his son was not allowed to the Homer High School for the first five days of school to ensure there was sufficient room in the classes he wanted to attend. CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Mr. Terpening for his testimony and asked Kathy Nielson to present her comments. Number 1625 KATHY NIELSON testified via teleconference from Valdez. She referred to the earlier discussion on micro-management and said in her opinion it was important in this situation that policy and law be set by the state level so that districts operate in the best interest of the students. She said HB 367 does just that. It was her belief that districts are using the enrollment policy to circumvent the intent and purpose of HB 158. She said that the availability of charter schools, vouchers, and the other alternative education options, will force the public education system into being more consumer responsive. Number 1762 CHAIRMAN BUNDE thanked Ms. Nielson for her testimony and noted there was no further public testimony. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON commented that while he admired Chairman Bunde's policy of not voting bills out of committee at the first hearing; however, in this case, HB 367 is merely a follow-up on the regulations from last year and requested the committee vote on HB 367 today. CHAIRMAN BUNDE commented he would like to check with the Anchorage School District. REPRESENTATIVE DYSON pointed out the Anchorage School District as well as the Eagle River School District have been the most recalcitrant on this issue. He pointed out there is a significant local contribution in both districts and every student in Anchorage that is not allowed in the public schools means less burden for the existing tax money, although he didn't believe that was a major factor in the district's resistance. The Anchorage School District has 42,000+ students and as of October 1997, there were 90 part- time students, so the impact is small. He is not aware of any rural or small communities that have a problem taking part-time students. CHAIRMAN BUNDE said that HB 367 would be held in committee and heard again at a later date.