Legislature(2015 - 2016)CAPITOL 106
03/23/2016 08:00 AM House EDUCATION
Note: the audio and video recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
Download Mp3. <- Right click and save file as
* first hearing in first committee of referral
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
HB 156-SCHOOL ACCOUNTABILITY MEASURES; FED. LAW 9:11:20 AM CHAIR KELLER announced that the next order of business would be HOUSE BILL NO. 156, "An Act relating to compliance with federal education laws; relating to public school accountability; and providing for an effective date." [Before the committee, adopted as a work draft on 3/16/16, was the proposed committee substitute (CS) for HB 156, Version 29-LS0566\Y, Glover, 3/11/16.] 9:11:34 AM CHAIR KELLER passed the gavel to Vice Chair Vazquez. 9:11:40 AM CHAIR KELLER stated that the first component of the bill is a means to address the implementation of ESSA and proposes a two year hiatus for the transition period; effectively suspending the high stakes testing regimen required by the federal government. The second component addresses the state school board reporting requirements, which will be "tweaked" based on the adoption of the changes made in the first aspect of the bill. 9:14:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE COLVER moved to adopt Amendment 1, labeled 29- LS0566\Y.1, Glover, 3/16/16, which read: Page 3, line 13, following "demonstrates": Insert "(1)" Page 3, line 14, following "year": Insert "; or (2) maintenance of a proficient or high performance designation from the previous year" 9:14:47 AM CHAIR KELLER objected for purposes of discussion. 9:15:39 AM REPRESENTATIVE COLVER said the amendment addresses school district concerns to establish a bar for the purpose of high performance designations and comparisons. 9:17:20 AM CHAIR KELLER removed his objection. He explained that an annually updated, on-line report card, lists the designated, high performance schools. He opined that even top rated schools could be served instead via a performance indicator, with better results. Understanding the standard may be necessary, but the intent of the bill directs the board to establish considerations for determining school performance and consistent improvement, rather than focusing on maintaining proficiency. 9:19:27 AM CHAIR KELLER removed his objection. 9:19:32 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected. 9:19:46 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON asked if the current five star rating system will be effected or whether what is being proposed is in addition to what exists. An additional system may effectively double the school rating effort, he surmised, and asked how the department would align the two approaches. 9:21:21 AM MARGARET MACKINNON, Director, Assessment and Accountability, Department of Education and Early Development (EED) responded that the current Alaska School Performance Index uses a five- star rating base. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) flexibility waiver [implemented at the beginning of the 2013-14 school year] directed the department to maintain identification categories to include schools rated as the lowest performing, as well as the reward status facilities. The requirements also categorized high progress and high performance schools. The department is currently experiencing a "pause," in anticipation of the new assessment system. The passage of ESSA [ESEA/NCLB reauthorization], allows flexibility for creating an accountability system, and places the decision making in the hands of the state. Thus, the type of indicators for inclusion, and whether or not to continue the star rating method is yet to be decided. ESSA doesn't require a high performing designation, she pointed out. REPRESENTATIVE SEATON recalled the establishment of the current star system, which Alaska may have created to satisfy federal requirements. However, he said, the current accountability system, as written, may satisfy the proposed criteria, negating a need for Amendment 1. MS. MACKINNON answered that the current requirements for designating schools has not been changed. She explained that the existing designations are broad and, under the ESEA waiver, the star accountability system may meet all requirements. The provisions are general enough to allow the development of a modified, or new, state accountability system while recognizing schools that are improving. Once the high threshold for school performance is attained, however, it can become difficult to show continued improvement from year to year. The proposed amendment language will bolster both situations. 9:25:34 AM CHAIR KELLER commented that when a school's previous year's performance becomes the status quo, "it makes me uncomfortable." The amendment offered allows for an element of improvement. 9:26:09 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection, and with no further objection, Amendment 1 was adopted. 9:26:48 AM CHAIR KELLER moved to adopt Amendment 2, labeled 29-LS0566\Y.3, Glover, 3/18/16, which read: Page 6, line 18: Delete "2017" Insert "2016" Page 6, line 19: Delete "2019" Insert "2018" Page 7, line 12: Delete "2017" Insert "2016" 9:27:19 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON objected for discussion. 9:27:22 AM CHAIR KELLER said the intent of Amendment 2 is to address the department's request for an adjustment of the effective date, which will allow the necessary time for implementation. 9:28:08 AM REPRESENTATIVE COLVER clarified that the intent is to not require school districts to administer a statewide based assessment after July 1, 2016; a directive to the state school board. CHAIR KELLER concurred. 9:28:50 AM REPRESENTATIVE COLVER surmised that testing is being returned to local control, per ESSA, with the expectation that the department will develop a meaningful, measurable assessment system, in concert with local districts, which can be compared with other state's scores. He underscored the importance for rebuilding a new state assessment system from the ground-up. A collaboratively developed framework, with goals and objectives, would be the best approach, he opined. 9:30:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON reminded committee members that the federal government has expressed to EED that a two year waiver is not available, thus, putting the state's federal education funding at risk. He asked if that is the reason for the proposed date change. 9:31:40 AM CHAIR KELLER said the date change allows the department to get an earlier start for implementing the permissive elements of ESSA. 9:32:44 AM REPRESENTATIVE SPOHNHOLZ stated support for the concepts presented in the bill, and expressed concern for unintended consequences effecting currently enrolled senior students. Would lacking participation in an assessment them in jeopardy, as graduates, she asked. MS. MACKINNON responded no. 9:33:43 AM REPRESENTATIVE SEATON removed his objection, and with no further objection Amendment 2 was adopted. 9:34:13 AM REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ moved to report the proposed CS for HB 156, Version 29-LS0566\Y, Glover, 3/11/16, as amended, from committee with individual recommendations and the accompanying fiscal notes. There being no objection, CSHB 156(EDC), was reported from the House Education Standing Committee. 9:34:27 AM REPRESENTATIVE COLVER stated support for the bill and said it is important to retool the educational situation in the state. 9:35:06 AM The committee took a brief at-ease at 9:35 a.m. 9:35:24 AM REPRESENTATIVE VAZQUEZ returned the gavel to Chair Keller.
|HB298 Fiscal Note.pdf||
HEDC 3/23/2016 8:00:00 AM
HEDC 4/1/2016 8:00:00 AM
|CS HB156 Sponsor Statment.pdf||
HEDC 3/23/2016 8:00:00 AM