SB 104-EDUCATION CURRICULUM  4:29:19 PM CHAIR HUGHES announced the consideration of SB 104. SENATOR ANNA MACKINNON, Alaska State Legislature, speaking on behalf of the Senate Finance Committee, explained that SB 104 proposes to suspend curriculum adoption for schools for three years and allow time to work with DEED to find best practices and curriculum from other states and nations that have better outcomes than Alaska has, specifically for math and Language Arts 4:30:05 PM MS. HUTCHISON provided the sectional analysis: Section 1 AS 14.07  A) Adds a new section titled, "Curriculum Approval and Review". B) This section allows the State Board of Education (BOE) to approve of all curricula from the largest 5 school districts, based on the 2015-2016 ADM and 2 rural school districts, chosen by the BOE, and makes it available for all school districts to use, on a voluntary basis. C) The Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), in consultation with school districts, shall review curricula used in other states and other countries to find the best curricula and best practices in the areas of Math and English language arts. DEED has one year to complete this review. DEED shall then implement a way to test this new curricula, for a period of two years, to make sure that it is appropriate and then submit it to the State BOE for approval. D) DEED may submit the curriculum to the BOE for approval, after testing, if it meets the requirements of being: appropriate, incompliance with nondiscrimination standards, aligned with stat education standards, and result in improved academic achievement for students E) If the State BOE approves of the curriculum, they shall make it available for all school districts to use on a voluntary basis. F) The State BOE shall adopt standards for the approval of the curriculum and best practices. G) School districts do not have to have their math and English language arts curriculum go through the approval or review process for three years. After the three years, if a school district adopts the BOE's new approved curriculum for math and English language arts, they do not need that curriculum reviewed or approved. H) Defines School District as having the meaning given in AS 14.30.350. 4:31:13 PM CHAIR HUGHES asked if curriculum review will be an on-going task for DEED. MS. HUTCHISON said it would be a one-time provision. CHAIR HUGHES suggested considering that it may be needed more often. SENATOR MACKINNON reported that over a year ago she submitted a letter to the State Board of Education requesting that they take on the responsibility of finding curriculum appropriate for smaller districts. She said that DEED has lost most curriculum specialists, so a fiscal note might be warranted. If curriculum were to be adopted by the State Board as a matter of practice on a regular basis, then smaller school districts could choose to look to the State Board for curriculum review for possible cost savings. She concluded that it is not in the bill in perpetuity because she believes it is a State Board responsibility and they should work together with DEED and districts to see if there is interest and cost savings. 4:33:21 PM SENATOR BEGICH understood that the fiscal note would provide funding for DEED. He asked if the bill's intent is not to have a mandate for math and English, but to prepare the curriculum so that a local district may choose it. SENATOR MACKINNON said yes; it is an opt-in and has no mandate. She hoped the State Board would agree that it is of value to smaller school district. Many of the "big five" school districts are already using similar curriculum. Small districts may have more varied curriculum. SENATOR BEGICH commented on the great innovations happening in Copper River School District and in Chugach School District. He suggested curriculum for small districts might already be available. He wanted to ensure the power of the local school board. SENATOR MACKINNON said local control is mandated in the constitution and the bill tries to honor that. She agreed there are great performing districts in Alaska. 4:36:13 PM CHAIR HUGHES asked what it costs a district to review a K-12 curriculum. MS. HUTCHISON said DEED told her it cost about $323 per student to update curriculum. 4:37:05 PM CHAIR HUGHES stated she would hold SB 104 in committee. 4:37:24 PM SENATOR MACKINNON stated that they are not pre-assuming cost savings in districts in any amount. All provisions are on a volunteer basis. She noted it is an open dialogue and is a process. CHAIR HUGHES concluded that there could be savings by districts if they decided to go with some of the provisions in the bill. 4:38:26 PM JENNIFER MCNICHOL, Vice President, Sitka School Board, testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said they have no problems with the internet provisions in SB 102, however, they do have concerns about micromanagement and diverting funds from general education. She spoke to SB 104 and the provision against maintaining the APS. She pointed to successes due to the APS and students' choices to attend UAS because of it. There will be ripple effects from discontinuing the fund, such as students leaving the state for education and not returning. She recalled that APS was also on the block last year and students came to lobby for it. 4:42:06 PM MS. MCNICHOL spoke of concerns about the Innovative Grants being subject to legislative appropriation. There is no guarantee they will be available in future years. The district has been under budget constraints and has been trimming their budget, which has led to some wonderful innovations, such as collaboration with non-profits and using more grants. However, there are costs in administering grants. The overall feeling by the district is that they would rather have more general education funding than pursuing and competing for grants. 4:44:06 PM MS. MCNICHOL addressed the achievement gap and poor outcomes. She pointed out that in the past two to three years there has been no consistent statewide assessment. Things may have changed that have not been measured. MS. MCNICHOL voiced a concern in SB 104 regarding curriculum review. She liked the notion of fiscal support for DEED to develop math and English curriculum, however, a one-time review of curricula is a concern. Districts are mandated to review curricula every six years, which seems reasonable. They support best practices for curricula, but also highly value local control. Sitka is in the midst of implementing culturally responsive programming at every level in every class. She feared the pressure to adopt a statewide curriculum would jeopardize that effort. She was happy it was not mandated. She thanked committee members for their service. 4:47:18 PM PETE HOEPFNER, Superintendent, Cordova School District, testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. He said increasing bandwidth, as provided in SB 102, is a good idea, but they have concerns with SB 103 about the elimination of the APS and the rigorous course work it requires. Students have been focusing on a rigorous pathway in order to qualify for the APS. He questioned how long the innovation grants would be available. Regarding SB 104, he noted that Cordova has a six-year curriculum review schedule. 4:49:57 PM PENNY VADLA, Vice President, Kenai Peninsula School Board, testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said the district has not had enough time to thoroughly consider the bills. She commented that the broadband in SB 102 would be nice for schools who lack enough access. She spoke in favor of keeping the APS, not eliminating it as proposed in SB 103 because it helps so many students and keeps them in Alaska. She noted some issues with the Innovation Grant because KPBSD has been very good with innovation and has used efficiencies well. They have used Digital Incentive Grants for innovative purposes and already have new programs in place. They have a lot of knowledge and can share their curriculum with other districts. She did not think DEED needs to look out-of-state for innovative curricula. She stressed the importance of looking inward for innovation, making use of professional development to share it, and saving money. 4:53:21 PM MS. VADLA stated that curriculum review in KPBSD is happening currently in the areas of math and English. She stressed the importance of cultural inclusion in curriculum. She opined that some of the test results in Alaska are good, such as ACT in math and reading, which are above national norms. She encouraged the committee to believe that results aren't necessarily poor. She noted that districts are already partnering and sharing information. 4:56:09 PM CHAIR HUGHES agreed that Kenai was doing great things and said the committee was able to participate in a virtual classroom with them. 4:56:35 PM JEANNIE KITAYAMA, Member, Haines School Board, testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She said she is a newly retired teacher. She agreed with previous testimony by experienced school board members. She spoke in favor of increased broadband, and the retention of the APS. She thought innovation was a popular buzz word. She said charter schools were developed in order to try different ideas, taking successful ones into public schools. She commented that Alaska Schools are unique and diverse. She questioned whether a curriculum could be found that would fit every school. 4:58:37 PM CASS POOK, Member, Sitka School Board, testified on SB 102, SB 103, and SB 104. She spoke in opposition to doing away with the APS. She shared a personal story about her son who would be a beneficiary of the APS. She said the state would not need to be looking at the bills if there had been adequate funding for the past 8-10 years. She asked how they can work together to ensure that more things are not taken away. She thanked the committee for their work. 5:01:39 PM CHAIR HUGHES noted public testimony would continue tomorrow. CHAIR HUGHES held SB 104 in committee.