SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE February 20, 1998 9:08 a.m. MEMBERS PRESENT Senator Gary Wilken, Chairman Senator Loren Leman, Vice-Chairman Senator Lyda Green Senator Jerry Ward Senator Johnny Ellis MEMBERS ABSENT None COMMITTEE CALENDAR PRESENTATION BY THE MIKE KELLY, PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA BOARD OF REGENTS SENATE BILL NO. 203 "An Act requiring that phonics be taught in kindergarten through third grades in the public school system." PREVIOUS SENATE COMMITTEE ACTION SB 203 - No previous Senate committee action. WITNESS REGISTER Mr. Michael P. Kelly, President University of Alaska Board of Regents P.O. Box 71249 Fairbanks, Alaska 99707 Jake Poole University of Alaska Fairbanks Alumni Assn. P.O. Box 750126 Fairbanks, Alaska 99775 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on President Kelly's remarks Senator Robin Taylor Alaska State Capitol Juneau, Alaska 99801-1182 POSITION STATEMENT: Sponsor of SB 203 Mr. Jim Kirkpatrick Coordinator of Community Programs & Advisor of Reading and Reading Disabilities University of Texas at Austin Charles A. Dana Center 1723 Westheimer Road Houston, TX 77098 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on SB 203 Eldo William Bergman Jr., M.D. Executive Director Texas Reading Institute 11271 Richmond, Suite 101 Houston, TX 77082 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 203 Ms. Kathy Hughes Curriculum Director Fairbanks North Star Borough School District 520 5th Avenue Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on CSSB 203 Ms. Terri Morrison Fairbanks North Star Borough School District 520 5th Avenue Fairbanks, Alaska 99701 POSITION STATEMENT: Commented on CSSB 203 Ms. Molli Sipe, Director Bilingual Programs Fairbanks North Star Borough School District 520 5th Avenue Fairbanks, Alaska POSITION STATEMENT: Expressed concerns about phrases in CSSB 203 Pamela Jensen P.O. Box 681 Petersburg, Alaska 99835 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 203 Donna Marsh Petersburg, Alaska 99835 POSITION STATEMENT: Supports SB 203 ACTION NARRATIVE TAPE 98-13, SIDE A Number 001 CHAIRMAN WILKEN called the Senate Health, Education and Social Services (HESS) Committee to order at 9:08 a.m. Present were Senators Wilken, Leman, Ward and Green. CHAIRMAN WILKEN announced the first order of business would be a presentation by Mr. Mike Kelly, the President of the University of Alaska Board of Regents, and then the committee would take testimony on SB 203. MR. MICHAEL P. KELLY, President of the University of Alaska (UA) Board of Regents, gave the following briefing on the status of the University of Alaska. UA needs full funding of its budget. It has experienced a $60 million decline since 1986. During that time tuition has doubled and enrollment has increased by about 15 percent. The cost of business has increased dramatically due to a myriad of reasons, some of which are code upgrades and ADA compliance. Aside from the tuition increases, UA is doing a much better job at recovery of federal overheads and is leveraging its dollars better than it used to. He warned that anymore budget cuts to the university system will do damage, and like any capital intensive entity, the damage will not be apparent until after it has occurred. PRESIDENT KELLY said the Board of Regents was established by the Constitution to run the University for a reason; that reason being to separate the University from things like the fluctuating price of oil. UA recently conducted a survey for the purpose of gathering baseline data on Alaskans' position in regard to the University system. The constituency among the UA family is large; the survey revealed that three out of four households contain either an alumni or current student, and two out of three respondents said they would like to see an increase in funding for the University. PRESIDENT KELLY stated the Board of Regents has consistently received three directives from the Legislature. The first is that the UA system needs to become more efficient. He believes the University is doing so and the Board of Regents wants the University to be accountable as well as efficient. The Board of Regents recently passed a resolution to capture another $10 million in administrative savings. PRESIDENT KELLY said the Legislature has repeatedly told the Board of Regents that it wants to hear Alaskans say increased funding for UA is a priority for them. He believes the survey responses send that message. The Board of Regents recently authorized a $200,000 campaign to tell the story of the value of UA to Alaskans, as the social, economic, spiritual, and educational impact UA has on this state is tremendous. The University's economic impact is so great it makes the economic impact of projects like the Fort Knox mine look like a tiny marble game. PRESIDENT KELLY noted the Legislature's third concern is that the University cannot be everything to everyone. He explained that compared to peer states such as Wyoming, UA offers one-third to one-half fewer courses so it is not all things to all people. He believes UA needs to improve its course offerings but to do so in an environment of continued budget cuts is very difficult. PRESIDENT KELLY maintained that UA is a great institution; the survey shows how Alaskans feel about it. Eighty-three percent of the alumni believe they received a good to excellent education. In the household survey, many people said they will be sending their students to UA. SENATOR WARD commented that he has household members who attend the University of Alaska. He informed President Kelly that many constituents have contacted him about the slow sinking of the University system because of budget reductions. He asked what thought has been given to eliminating all of the smaller campuses and maintaining only the Anchorage and Fairbanks campuses. He also asked whether the Board of Regents has considered privatizing some services of the university system to avoid sinking. PRESIDENT KELLY responded the Board of Regents is often asked that question. SENATOR WARD interjected there were proposals to reduce the University budget even further last year, and that he would just as soon not lose services if some campuses can be consolidated. PRESIDENT KELLY pointed out that some legislators want another campus on the Kenai Peninsula. SENATOR WARD agreed that he wants another campus but does not want the whole system to fail because of it. He said he is willing to look at those issues and asked President Kelly if he was. PRESIDENT KELLY said he believes that when one looks at the total economic expense, the regional centers, which serve the smaller villages by distance delivery, were built up over a period of time, one building at a time by the Legislature, in response to educational needs in communities. The University's delivery system is very good but because of Alaska's size, it will never be the most efficient thing on the block. He said every Regent believes that because of problems in outlying areas such as unemployment, high suicide rates, and alcohol, substance, and domestic abuse, pulling the University out will cost the state, in dollars, much more than maintaining those campuses will. He emphasized that the University system was built over time and that rather than kill it, it is time it be considered a funding priority. SENATOR WARD commented that President Kelly will then be sharing in the sinking of the boat because the Legislature is looking at consolidating departments and other unpleasant changes. Unless the Legislature wants to dig into savings accounts to fund the University, the funds simply are not at the level everyone would like to see. SENATOR WARD thought the land base would solve a lot of UA's problems and he stated he would like to see that issue revisited. SENATOR WARD noted he supports all of the other areas, but does not want to see his daughter, who attends UAA, suffer as the boat sinks. He stated the Kotzebue campus was created because of political maneuvering by people from that area. He repeated his belief that the Board of Regents is trying to keep too big of a boat afloat right now. PRESIDENT KELLY said 75 percent of Alaskans believe that education is a top priority, and many legislators say the same thing when campaigning. Alaska is sending fewer students to college than any of the western states that it compares with. He stated he is trying to convince the Legislature that education is a priority and that this economic engine, the University of Alaska, needs enough rocket fuel to keep it going. If the Board of Regents starts eliminating rural campuses, the University will become divided and the economic costs to the state will increase. He stated he understands Senator Ward's concerns, but he affirmed the Board of Regents' mission at this time is solidly behind the rural campuses. SENATOR WARD clarified he believes the Board of Regents should be and added he was referring to Southeast campuses as well when he referred to rural campuses. He advised that the University will probably receive flat funding this year, but as oil prices decline, the Board of Regents is going to have to step up to the plate with the Legislature and figure out how to keep the University whole. PRESIDENT KELLY responded that the term "flat funding" upsets him because in reality, it means a large cut to the University. When the Board of Regents approves conservative salary increases negotiated with employees, $4 million has to be pried from the system, plus the normal fixed cost increases associated with one and one-half to two percent inflation, which totals a $7 million decrease. He supports salary increases because the University has to pay market price, especially when tuition increases occur. He asked legislators to support the Governor's budget, which only amounts to half of what the University needs. SENATOR WARD repeated he believes the Board of Regents is going to have to look at consolidating as other states have done. Number 286 SENATOR LEMAN expressed concern that President Kelly's presentation almost implied that the Legislature wants to cut the University's budget, when in reality the Legislature has held the University, as well as K-12 education, essentially harmless from reductions. He explained that while the Legislature cut the overall state budget by about $130 million over the past two years, the University's funding actually increased last year. The general fund component decreased slightly, but the increased authorization of student fees and tuition and an increase in federal funds resulted in an overall increase. Compared to other parts of the budget, the University has actually fared better. Agencies have taken an inordinate hit, and the formula programs have not been reduced proportionately. The Legislature's challenge is big; with oil at $12 per barrel the state could be facing a $1 billion deficit. SENATOR LEMAN believed that in order for the University to survive, alternate income sources, such as the land grant, need to be found. Had one of the proposals been adopted several years ago, the University would have had the income stream to make a significant difference by this year. He stated the tax credit program has been in place for 10 years and needs to be expanded, and that although UA believes no more tuition increases should occur, tuition only accounts for about 18 percent of the University's revenues. PRESIDENT KELLY clarified tuition accounts for over 20 percent of revenues. SENATOR LEMAN commented that the Legislature does not enjoy decimating the University and that the two need to work together to formulate a solution that fits within a plan. PRESIDENT KELLY maintained the Board of Regents is, and has been, working hard to generate outside sources, but has tapped the ones that make a dramatic enough difference. He repeated that he honestly believes if tuition is raised beyond the Higher Education Price Index amount, UA will price itself out of the market. UA has lost 150 employees through the Retirement Incentive Program (RIP) and if the University takes another budget cut, it will not be able to backfill those positions. He believes it was a mistake to send some of UA's brightest and best professionals down the road and replace them with newcomers. He fears UA may not be able to replace them at all. Number 364 SENATOR GREEN stated her constituents most frequently ask about land disposal and land grant status: what that means and what the University is doing to fulfill it. Her constituents have also expressed concern about the University's lack of attention to, and turning away from, resource development and equitable funding for those programs. This situation has been exacerbated by the lack of a particular resource appointment to the search committee. She noted the University's policies in turn produce students who are non-progressive in their resource development orientation, and are more conservation oriented. She asked what is required to maintain standing with the land grant for a university. PRESIDENT KELLY replied he does not have the technical answer. He said in regard to the Alaska Cooperative Extension, many positions are vacant due to the RIP program, and those positions could not be replaced quickly enough to maintain the same level of service. President Kelly acknowledged he shares Senator Green's concerns as he is also a resource person, and that the survey results demonstrate that people want training for resource development jobs. He believed the University is moving toward a resource development orientation. The Board of Regents has agreed to appoint a new president who knows resources and does not necessarily have to be an academic, although the candidate will have to garner the respect of the academy. SENATOR GREEN asked President Kelly to provide his statement in writing so that she can respond to people who have expressed concern about impacts to the auxiliary programs that continue to support agriculture. SENATOR GREEN then stated, "...and what I think was really compelling in the Cooperative Extension debate, or the discussion, was last year we changed its description in the budget and put in its own unit so it would not be diluted so it's effectiveness would stay for Cooperative Extension, but then there was the assessment of over 25 percent to that where others were not receiving 26 percent assessments. That just does not play well for people who are your alums -- I mean they're just angry how specific programs that maybe a little less, there's no student ratio, there's no graduates you can count to, but reliable programs that support resource issues in the state -- and I think if we go back to the mission of your University we have to continue that and I cannot state that -- I just can't state it strongly enough." CHAIRMAN WILKEN noted Senator Ellis had joined the committee. CHAIRMAN WILKEN said he hopes the Board of Regents conducts the presidential search with an open mind, and that they find the best person available, and that person is an Alaskan. CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked committee members if they received a copy of the UA questionnaire. All members noted they did. CHAIRMAN WILKEN stated Representative Kelly has introduced a resolution that pertains to the land grant status. He said he is willing to carry the ball for the University when it comes time to get more land. Other committee members offered their support. PRESIDENT KELLY referred to Senator Green's statement about a natural resource development orientation, and commented that two land bills have come before the Legislature but neither was supported by the Governor. The Board of Regents is trying the federal route but there is some contention about a state match. While he has been on the Board, that fund has increased from $3 million to $40 million. He repeated the Board of Regents continues to try to find as many alternative sources of funding as possible and has done well so far. SENATOR TAYLOR asked why the Administration is opposed to Senator Murkowski's legislation when UA needs to have a foundation based in the wealth of this state. Other major universities' endowments are generated through their land holdings and land management policies, providing them with a sustainable economic base. He explained Senator Murkowski's bill would offer about 500,000 acres of federal land and require the state to provide about a 250,000 acre match. PRESIDENT KELLY commented that the optional match is the source of contention in Senator Murkowski's bill. SENATOR TAYLOR questioned why Alaska cannot donate 250,000 acres to the University to use as part of its land base when the state received about 103 million acres at the time of Statehood. He pointed out if someone could identify where the resistance is coming from, the Legislature could work with those people and address their concerns. PRESIDENT KELLY indicated the Board of Regents needs the Senate's support of Representative Kelly's resolution as it sends a message to Congress. SENATOR GREEN questioned whether the assessment fee is higher than normal on the amount of money that comes in for resource research through the USDA and other programs. She also asked if that money is going to its intended location under its federal mandate. PRESIDENT KELLY replied "We're clean as a hounds tooth on that -- the Stanford issue -- on overheads and that sort of thing." Number 500 CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked President Kelly to validate information contained in a letter distributed February 2, 1998 that pertained to the declining number of Alaskans attending UA. He added that last year it was painfully clear that legislators were not speaking to the Regents, and vice versa, and he stated he believes President Kelly needs to help legislators understand the university system to improve it. He thanked President Kelly for attending the meeting. MR. JAKE POOLE, Executive Director of the University of Alaska Fairbanks Alumni Association, made the following statements on behalf of all University alumni. In the last two years the Board of Regents and the University administration have made successful efforts to organize and become more fiscally responsible. One of his jobs is to educate the alumni as quickly as possible about what is going on because they are concerned about the impact the level of funding received over the past few years is having on the University. He is concerned that the University has reached the point where budget cuts have gone beyond the fat and muscle and are now into the bone, and the result will be that class size will increase and the number of programs will decrease. In the past, University administrations worked hard to keep the programs intact and other activities suffered as a result but the bottom line was to provide a quality education for the students. MR. POOLE believed it is going to be very difficult to replace the instructors and staff who retired as the result of the RIP. He stated one of the Regents is an alumni who is on the Evaluation Committee to hire the new president. That committee is working to find a leader who will lead the University with the moral conviction to ensure that Alaska has a top quality University. He said that the alumni support legislation to increase the land base because although Alaska is one of the largest states, it has one of the smallest land grant universities. MR. POOLE offered to send committee members copies of a videotape made by the University's outreach working group that shows a number of activities occurring outside of the campus that support K-12 schools, industry and commerce. He concluded by saying the alumni understand what it means to have a balanced budget, but they want to ensure that students receive a quality education and that their alma mater continues to be a quality school. CHAIRMAN WILKEN announced the committee would take a brief at-ease. SB 203 - PHONICS CURRICULUM SENATOR TAYLOR, sponsor of SB 203, asked the committee to adopt the proposed committee in lieu of the original bill. SENATOR LEMAN moved to adopt CSSB 203 (version H). SENATOR ELLIS objected for the purpose of an explanation. SENATOR TAYLOR stated the crucial element of the bill is twofold. First it makes the statement that Alaskans want to make certain that our children know how to read and that this be done in a specific way that has been proven through 30 years of test results. SB 203 provides a method to ensure that Alaskans know how our children are doing by testing them for the first three years. To identify the 25 percent of students who score below average, Alaska should give nationally-normed tests to students in grades 1-3, and then provide individualized instruction in whatever method works best for each child identified. If the results of those tests, which are conveyed to parents and to the school administration, show that a child is having difficulty, then that child will receive special attention at an early age to avoid the tragedy of being pushed through a system handicapped by his/her inability. SENATOR TAYLOR informed committee members that paragraph (c) was not included in the committee substitute. That section would have required all teachers to receive phonics training in order to be retained in the profession. He removed that provision because he believed it would cause a serious reaction. [NOTE: ACCORDING TO SENATOR TAYLOR'S STAFF, PARAGRAPH (C) WAS IN A DRAFT VERSION OF SB 203, THEREFORE THAT PROVISION WAS NOT IN SB 203 OR CSSB 203.] CHAIRMAN WILKEN asked if Senator Taylor's explanation applied to the difference between the original version and version H. SENATOR TAYLOR said it did. SENATOR ELLIS removed his objection to the adoption of the committee substitute. SENATOR TAYLOR read the following sponsor statement. "The purpose of SB 203 is to provide foundation blocks and tools necessary for good reading skills; phonic awareness, decoding skills, and word attack skills. It is the goal of this legislation that every child should be reading at their grade level by the end of the third grade or earlier, if possible. All other subject matter taught in our schools is dependent upon the student's ability to read and write. According to the National Right to Read Foundation, at the beginning of the 20th Century, the literacy rate was almost 100 percent for those who had attended school. You think back to your grandfather's or grandparents' generation. Many of those people had fourth grade, fifth grade, eighth grade educations. That was all they were able to obtain. Everyone of them could read. About thirty years ago the whole language approach was introduced into our public school systems. The results have been devastating. Reading skills have gradually deteriorated to the point where 50 percent of kids are reading below grade level in the fourth grade, and it doesn't get any better as they advance through the system. We need a balanced approach, not eliminating literature, but need to add intensive, systemic phonics. Early assessment and intensive one-on-one instruction at first and second grade levels for those in the lower 25 percent will have dramatic results. Intensive one-on-one instruction in the first grade will usually require for that lower 25 percent about 40 hours of actual work. At the end of that time, they usually have brought up those young people to their full grade level. If you wait to do this, and wait to identify these young people until they are in the fourth grade, national studies have shown that even with one-on-one instruction it then takes 80 hours, or twice the amount of resources time and effort to bring that same child up to that grade level. Teachers are not the problem, they want to do a good job and they want kids to learn to read. They just need to have the right tools available to them. Many teachers in our system today do not know or really understand phonics. They will need some help and they'll need some training. Phonics works, and if you have any question, look at page 4 of the material -- the backup material, under the National Right to Read Foundation, and the National Institute of Health Research Studies show that systemic required phonics instruction results in more favorable outcomes in reading than does a context-emphasis approach. On page 7 you'll find national statistics that are very disturbing and Alaska is part of those statistics. Several other states have already passed legislation reintroducing intensive systemic phonics instruction back into their school systems and there are excerpts that can be found on page 19 of your backup material on those states. I'd like to call your attention to an article on page 23 from the Seattle Times, dated February 15, which states 'This much is decided. The question is no longer whether to teach phonics but how often and how much.' Also on page 26 of your backup material there's an article about the use of the MRI in determining how the brain works. The scientists, lead by Yale physicians, have identified the parts of the brain used in reading. By observing the flow of oxygen rich blood to working brain cells, they have found that people who know how to sound out words can rapidly process what they see. The Dallas Morning News, January 23 this year, notes that Texas is spending $79.12 million on remedial reading classes for its Texas high school graduates that are entering their university system. According to the University of Alaska Vice President Wendy Redman, 40 percent of Alaska students entering our university system are enrolled in remedial reading classes. We don't have the cost figures yet on what that truly is, but think of the cost in lost opportunity. We're only talking about the kids that are actually enrolling in college. What about those that have such poor reading skills they know they can't go to college and don't even want to try -- that came out of our educational system. Shouldn't we better spend this money up front in those first three years when the kids are going through their educational process and learning the skill, not the art, of reading. A good example of what intensive systemic phonics instruction can do is a school in Skamania County, Washington, who scored in the 20th percentile in reading on their test scores. That school was almost closed over that result. Instead they hired a half-time teacher to teach first, second, third, and fourth grade teachers. They brought in a mentor to teach the teachers how to teach reading. Test scores went to 84.4 percentile. They were the top reading school in the entire State of Washington. Skamania --I've been there, it's a little town down in the South end of the State, down next to the Columbia. They went to the top school in the State by hiring a half-time teacher to instruct their instructors on how to teach reading. Thank God they did. What were they doing with those kids before that? Since we are somewhat limited on time, I'd like to have the committee hear testimony from the two expert witnesses who are on line with us this morning. The first is Dr. Eldo Bergman, Executive Director of the Texas Reading Institute in Houston. Dr. Bergman is also a consultant in child neurology and developmental medicine in Houston. He was the recipient of the prestigious Jefferson Award in recognition of outstanding public service, presented by the American Institute for Public Service, Washington, D.C., in 1991. Dr. Bergman has an impressive curriculum vitae which is part of your back-up, page 32. Also on line is Mr. Jimmy Kirkpatrick who was the Coordinator of Community Programs and Advisor for Reading and Reading Disabilities for the University of Texas at Austin. These two gentlemen have been working with states around the nation on this problem and are well versed in the subject and I would commend them to you." DR. ELDO BERGMAN, testifying via teleconference from Houston, Texas, stated his support for SB 203. He informed the committee he is a child neurologist who became interested in this area when his second son was having difficulty learning to read in the first grade. At the age of 23 his son reached an adult level of reading, after a personal struggle of some magnitude. For the last 15 years, Dr. Bergman pointed out he has been involved with two non- profit organizations as a non-paid executive director: the Foundation for Independent Learning, and the Texas Reading Institute. In Texas 85 percent of high school seniors pass the state proficiency test, yet 54 percent of students enrolling in four year Texas universities need to take classes in remedial reading, writing or math. In the community college system, the percentage is about 73 or 74 percent. DR. BERGMAN indicated that over the last ten years there has been a growing consensus among professionals about what is needed within the child to have reading instruction stick. Available data is so outstanding now that studies show that approximately 95 percent of our general population could be reading at grade level; some of those children would require 40 to 80 hours of one-on-one work. He is optimistic that the internet and computer technology will become more sophisticated and available to people who generally are not in a position to pay much and might provide the intensity of instruction that will be available to between 20 and 25 percent of the population. He stated he has been involved in using talking computers as an aid in the classroom to teachers to increase the amount of personalized instruction. DR. BERGMAN believes the underlying problem in about 85 percent of children who read poorly is that they have problems with rapid sound processing. There is no ambiguity on that point in the international literature. Because of that, when children begin to try to learn to read, they cannot develop the instinct to recognize what sounds are in words and what letters might represent those sounds. To a beginning reader, every new word is a nonsense word until it is decoded and meaning is attached to it. The ability to read nonsense words is the most predictive factor of how well a child is going to decode words. Decoding is the biggest single factor in comprehension. At the first grade level, decoding explains 82 percent of a first grader's comprehension, while it explains 35 percent of a ninth grader's comprehension. It is now known that there are differences within children that really count, and those differences must be addressed. If the differences can be found and measured, teachers can structure their instruction so that the end result is a balanced development of decoding skills and comprehension skills. DR. BERGMAN stated the question is not how to get the job done, it is how many children do we want to be reading at grade level. The level that is chosen will dictate how much engineering needs to be done to support the teachers, campuses and families to collectively do what needs to be done. The components include phonemic awareness, letter-sound correspondences, the more sophisticated word attack skills, spelling, and vocabulary. Children vary tremendously in the amount of controlled practice they need to develop fluency. Comprehension strategies are much easier to teach if a child can decode the words. DR. BERGMAN informed committee members that he just learned that the State of Alabama is going in the direction that Section 3(b) of CSSB 203 mandates, that is toward assessment and including some of the instruments that are worth considering. Discussions on reading often devolve to methodology. Methodology depends upon a sensitive, well-trained teacher working with the individual child. There is no one method that will work for every child, however, if we measure the right things, the instruction can be tailored to meet the child's needs. DR. BERGMAN thought the approach to identifying reading impaired children as set out in Section 2(b) to be a good one. The first nationally normed test will identify the reading impaired children. The second individually-administered test will evaluate a student's skills in the following areas: word attack; word identification ; vocabulary; and reading comprehension. The problem with group administered tests is that word attack skills and phonemic awareness cannot be effectively tested in a group. DR. BERGMAN stated he recently administered the Stanford Achievement Test to students in the Houston Independent School District. The average performance in first grade is at the 49th percentile. The average performance in second grade is at the 40th percentile, and the percentile drops to the 30th percentile for middle school students. Those scores show that the first graders are reading at grade level and are at national average. It also shows that by the time students reach the fourth grade, almost 40 percent of the students are reading at the bottom 16th percentile of the national norms. Ten years ago the Houston Independent School District administered the Metropolitan Achievement Test, the last standardized test given other than the criterion referenced test provided by the state. The first graders scored at the national norm. The scores declined as the grade level rose, so that by sixth grade the students scored a full year below the national average. A group administered test will identify, in general, weak and strong readers but teachers need the kind of information that will allow them to focus on a particular student's area of weakness. That information can be provided in the second tier of testing. DR. BERGMAN expressed concern that Section 2(c) speaks to the fact that teachers should get at least one course on the language basis of reading. Two years ago only four universities out of 1100 teachers colleges provided a one semester course like that. Teachers are working with what they have, but we have learned a lot in the last 30 years, and especially in the last 10 years. DR. BERGMAN stated he believes assessment is the critical issue. One needs a clear way to identify the goal he/she was trying to seek to ensure that the methodology worked. Predictive factors that can be measured and tell whether a child will be able to read well are word level, word identification decoding skills, and vocabulary. Assessing those factors in kindergartners will identify 90 percent of the students who will struggle with reading. If those children get appropriate instruction in first, second or third grade, that instruction will be much less costly than it will be in fourth, eighth, or twelfth grade. JIMMY KIRKPATRICK, Advisor in Reading and Reading Disabilities at the University of Texas at Austin, testified via teleconference and made the following comments on his own behalf. There has been much attention being placed on the poor non-reading ability of children. Alaska is not exempt from this national crisis. According to the published results of the California Achievement Test, 45 percent of fourth grade students in Alaska have below average basic reading and language skills. Adding the numbers in special education and limited English proficiency, these numbers far exceed 55 percent. What does the future hold for these students in the State of Alaska? For the fortunate ones who make it through by shear determination and willpower, what does college mean for them to taxpayers? Let's examine the number of students required to take remedial classes in junior colleges and universities in both reading and math. Texas alone spends nearly $100 million on remedial courses each year. This number will increase greatly in the years to come. I make this ominous prediction for what the education system and the taxpayers of Alaska are looking forward to in coming years if changes are not made. The numbers referred for special education, involving reading, spelling, and writing disabilities, will grow at uncontrollable rates. For example, Houston Independent School District, a district of 217,000 students, is the seventh largest district in the nation, and is seeing an increase of one percent a year in the special education numbers. My own district, an upper middle district of 50,000 students, has seen an increase of 125 percent in the last two years for special education. This is causing them an additional $1 million per year in the budget. As parents become more aware of the current research in reading and reading disabilities, these numbers will continue a steep incline. Let's remember that the majority students with reading problems were not identified throughout their school years. The numbers of dropouts are increasing along with the children and their ability to learn to read. MR. KIRKPATRICK pointed out that data from the Alaska Department of Education shows that $104 million was spent on special education in 1996, and a little over $107 million in 1997. There can be a potential savings within three years of over $50 million to the state in local districts, as well as the families these programs effect. This is taking into account a conservative figure of $2,000 per year spent above the normal cost of regular education per child. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development showed that 50 percent of children in special education have learning disabilities and that disability covers reading, spelling and writing failure. Reducing the numbers of students with reading failure in the early elementary grades is an obtainable goal for the state. The Learning First Alliance, made up of 12 national education organizations, including the Association for Colleges for Teacher Education, school administrators, school boards, elementary and secondary principals, Federation of Teachers, National Education Association, Chief States School Officers, PTA, Education Commissions of the States, and the Association for Curriculum and Supervisors, has developed an action plan for reading. This national action plan - every child a reader - is a giant step forward by this outstanding organization. They state that reading must be grounded in research and that unfortunately, it is also in first grade where common instructional practices are probably most inconsistent with research findings. By providing a reassessment and accountability, the much needed fuel for the engines of change can occur in Alaska. This will enable parents, teachers, districts and the state to see how well the students are doing. The additional testing for the bottom 25 percent will also provide the type of information that teachers need to be able to provide the needed intervention early. With these changes occurring, a literate society will grow and prosper well into the 21st Century. SENATOR TAYLOR found it incredible that people feel threatened by SB 203, and that teachers feel the bill is an attempt to affect their professionalism or the choices available to them. SB 203 merely asks for a system that will have some accountability and that will actually produce a result that has been proven time again across the United States by testing at all levels. Number 221 SENATOR GREEN asked Senator Taylor if he considered that she and he might have one idea of what phonics instruction is, while teachers might have preferred a broader definition. She said one does not have to get into a discussion on phonics very far to be into one particular method, which on the whole could be considered a phonics program but is not named as such. She also asked if he contacted the University to determine what courses it is offering within the state to fulfill the course requirement. CHAIRMAN WILKEN interrupted to accommodate the five people waiting to give testimony via teleconference. He announced the committee would schedule another hearing on this bill next week to take additional testimony that cannot be accommodated today. KATHY HUGHES, Curriculum Director for the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District, stated that Fairbanks went through a recent curriculum revision and decided to go with a more balanced approach. For the last ten years, the school district has been focused on a whole language approach. The new curriculum advocates phonics, spelling, and vocabulary, and reading has been divided into three types of components: experiencing literature, word analysis which includes phonics, and comprehension. The school district is also discussing the kind of staff development it will need for successful implementation. The district is concerned that the Legislature may mandate a particular program that requires specific materials outside of the district's designed curriculum. Ms. Hughes noted she spoke with Dr. Nick Stayrook, the District's Evaluation Director, about the section on testing in SB 203. He informed her that in Fairbanks, the school board did away with normed testing on first graders, based on the testimony of first grade teachers. Those teachers felt that tests like the CAT and ITBIS were inappropriate for first graders. The Governor's Quality Schools bill is proposing a comprehensive assessment system which has benchmarks at ages 5 through 7 which might accomplish the same goal. She added the increased cost of testing at a time schools are tightening budgets will be difficult to absorb. TERRI MORRISON, a teacher with the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District Special Programs Title 1 Office, made the following comments. CSSB 203 contains explicit language that can be interpreted in different ways and will affect ongoing instruction that is effective. There are many reasons why children struggle to acquire reading skills: readiness, oral language skills, listening skills, vocabulary, and word recognition problems. One unifying factor that most people agree upon is that children have to learn to read with that voice in their head. They have to know when they do not understand. Some children have memory or tracking problems, use inappropriate substitutions, and sometimes children do not get the individual attention they need. Most special programs require students to fall behind grade level a certain number of years or months before any intervention can be provided. Appropriate diagnostic information is not always provided through nationally normed or standardized tests. Regarding specific teacher training, maybe the focus should be on how to use the data teachers collect everyday from students while performing in the classroom. There are very few shared understandings among large groups of educators and parents as to exactly what phonics is. The same is true of whole language, although she was trained to view whole language as a philosophy rather than a method. Most people who talk about phonics are talking about specific methods. However, no program, including phonics, will teach itself. Emphasis has to be placed on how teachers deliver instruction, which must be consistent and interactive. She expressed concern about the phrase in SB 203 that requires teachers to provide explicit systematic instruction because a lot of people might view that as a focus on lectures and worksheets, rather than on involvement with the student during instruction. All learning styles must be addressed: all children are not visual and all children do not learn through auditory processes which many phonics programs focus on. She referred to the phrase in the bill "incidental instruction" and expressed concern that although it occurs, it is not the same as teaching in context. She asked what data was used to determine the statement in the bill that "most instruction teaches phonics only incidentally." SENATOR TAYLOR asked that the witnesses who just testified receive copies of the backup materials provided to committee members. SENATOR GREEN commented that if the Legislature succeeds in rewriting the foundation formula, there may be greater flexibility in how student assessments occur and in how assistance is given, because the choice would be with the districts. SENATOR TAYLOR asked what prompted the Fairbanks North Star Borough School District to restructure its curriculum after using a whole language approach for ten years. CHAIRMAN WILKEN said he did not know. SENATOR TAYLOR stated that he would be willing to look at any research studies that show phonics is not the preferred method of teaching reading skills to 70 percent of young students. He noted that learning to read is not an art form, it is a skill that needs to be learned through training. MS. PAMELA JENSEN, a parent, testified via teleconference from Petersburg, and stated she agrees strongly with the content of CSSB 203. She indicated she submitted written testimony to committee members. TAPE 98-14, SIDE A MOLLI SIPE, a member of the Alaska Association for Bilingual Education, stated some objections to the language contained in CSSB 203, particularly the phrase that refers to the English language as the common language of the United States of America. The question of whether English is the official language has made it to the State ballot, but it has not yet been decided. She believes this phrase comes a little too close and should not be in a bill at this time. MS. SIPE pointed out Alaska has many bilingual two-way immersion programs; CSSB 203 does not address those programs. She also expressed concern that, from her background in applied linguistics, that English was described as a language based on the principle of the alphabet. English is not equal to the sum of its parts; English is more than phonics. DONNA MARSH, testifying via teleconference from Petersburg, stated she is a concerned parent who supports SB 203 because if we fail to teach our students the skills they need to decipher words, we are doing them a great disservice. The whole language philosophy or method does not focus on a lot of the basics. She noted she will submit written testimony to committee members. CHAIRMAN WILKEN announced that there was no further teleconference testimony at this time and that CSSB 203 would be scheduled again on Monday, February 23, at 9:00 a.m., to take testimony from participants who had signed up to testify today. He adjourned the meeting at 10:49 a.m.