SENATE BILL REPORT
SB 5919
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS, MARCH 11, 1991
Brief Description: Adopting the bringing education home act.
SPONSORS:Senators Bailey, Anderson, Erwin, Oke, L. Smith, Johnson, Barr, Bluechel, von Reichbauer, Roach, Metcalf, Thorsness and McCaslin.
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5919 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.
Signed by Senators Bailey, Chairman; Erwin, Vice Chairman; Anderson, Craswell, Metcalf, and Oke.
Minority Report: Do not pass.
Signed by Senators Murray, Pelz, Rinehart, A. Smith, and Talmadge.
Staff: Larry Davis (786‑7422)
Hearing Dates:March 4, 1991; March 5, 1991
SENATE COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS
Majority Report: That Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 5919 be substituted therefor, and the second substitute bill do pass.
Signed by Senators McDonald, Chairman; Craswell, Vice Chairman; Bailey, Bluechel, Cantu, Hayner, Johnson, Matson, Metcalf, Saling, L. Smith, and West.
Minority Report: That it not be second substituted and do not pass.
Signed by: Senators Bauer, Gaspard, L. Kreidler, Murray, Niemi, Owen, Rinehart, Talmadge, Williams, and Wojahn.
Staff: Bill Freund (786-7715)
Hearing Dates:March 8, 1991; March 11, 1991
BACKGROUND:
Since enactment of the Basic Education Act in 1977, the state has established a number of programs and requirements over the ensuing years, with the intent of enhancing the quality of education in the common schools. During the same period, a number of national and state reports were published on educational reform. As the 21st century approaches, efforts continue to explore ways to further improve the educational experience for Washington students.
It is suggested to increase student performance and accountability of the state's education system, comprehensive educational reform should focus on: defining parents' rights and responsibilities regarding the education of their children; promoting greater parent and community involvement in schools by encouraging the creation of school site-based councils; providing parents and the public with annual reports on the performance of schools and students; expanding the broad powers and authority of school boards; encouraging building and classroom level restructuring by providing funds for schools to plan and implement building-determined educational goals and outcomes, and additional funds to reward schools for progress toward meeting their goals; student achievement testing; compensation for educators, including optional performance pay; alternative teacher certification and testing teachers prior to granting initial certificates; extending the probation period for new teachers; providing counseling and related prevention and intervention services at the elementary grade level to meet students' special needs and enhance the educational experience for students and educators; encouraging innovations in technology and vocational education programs, integrating vocational and academic programs, and improving vocational equipment; and giving communities additional authority to raise local funds to support educational restructuring initiatives in response to local needs.
SUMMARY:
PART I - PARENTS' RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES
Parents have the right to know what their child is being taught and are encouraged to exercise their responsibility to participate in their child's education.
School districts shall adopt policies which make educational materials and programs available for inspection by parents.
Districts are encouraged to seek participation from parents and the community in the development of experimental or pilot education programs. Prior to implementation of any new programs, districts must consult and communicate with parents regarding the proposed program. Districts may not place a student in an experimental or pilot program without prior written notification to the parents. A site-based council may veto implementation of an experimental or pilot program adopted by the district if at least 75 percent of the members of the council support the action.
Districts are prohibited from performing psychological testing of a student without the written permission of the parents.
School boards are required to adopt policies assuring parents access to their child's classroom. Collective bargaining and the requirement for each school board to cooperate with teacher and parent organizations in adopting the classroom access policy are removed.
By May 30 annually, each school board must establish the schedule of student attendance days for the following school year. A public hearing must be held prior to the board adopting the student school calendar. Student attendance days are designated employee work days and are removed from collective bargaining. Employee work days beyond student attendance days may be subject to collective bargaining.
Effective September 1, 1992, each school board shall publish annually a school district accountability report. A copy must be available for public inspection at each school in the district, at the district office, and in public libraries. The report must be published at least once each school year in a newspaper of general circulation in the county where the district is located.
Information in the report is delineated, including: mission of the district, student enrollment and demographic data, annual expenditures per pupil and the average compensation for teachers, student scores on mandated tests and college entrance exams, student dropout-absenteeism-graduation rates, and budget information.
PART II - SCHOOL SITE-BASED COUNCILS
School district boards of directors may adopt policies establishing school site-based councils. The school district board of directors has the final authority to determine the powers and duties of the site-based council. Districts may not delegate site-based councils the authority to make personnel decisions. Any budget authority delegated to site-based councils is limited to one-year periods and to decisions at the building level.
The policies adopted by the school board may include: procedures for forming a council, membership of the council-with a majority of the council parents, designation of activities, and authority to adopt bylaws and a charter. Boards establishing site-based councils are required to adopt plans for attendance policies, consistent with requirements of any desegregation plan, that promote stability for the schools.
Any modifications to collective bargaining agreements necessary to implement site-based councils shall be clearly stated in written agreements between the district and the bargaining representative.
Schools with site-based councils are eligible to apply for funds from the Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) to help support restructuring efforts. Schools receiving these funds shall report on the use of those funds to the SPI. The Superintendent of Public Instruction may provide technical assistance and may share information about programs through the state clearinghouse for educational information and assistance.
PART III - SCHOOL BOARD POWERS
School boards are given broad discretionary power to adopt policies that provide for the development and implementation of programs and practices that benefit the education, health or safety of citizens, and promote the effective, efficient, or safe maintenance and operation of school district programs, activities, services, or practices. School boards must give prior notice before adopting policies, in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act, and provide reasonable opportunity for public written or oral comment.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction adopts rules allowing districts, to the extent possible to still receive federal funds, to blend funds for the following programs: basic education, learning assistance, special education, and transitional bilingual education.
PART IV - PLANNING AND IMPLEMENTATION GRANTS FOR RESTRUCTURING
The State Board of Education (SBE) establishes the REACH FOR EXCELLENCE grant program to assist schools and school districts in local efforts to improve student learning and skills through improvements in curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Participation in the program is voluntary. REACH projects may last up to six years.
The State Board is responsible for final decisions regarding selection and funding levels of projects, assessing the progress of projects to determine their eligibility for REACH achievement awards, and for determining the manner in which REACH achievement awards will be distributed. The SBE establishes a working committee to assist the Board. The Superintendent of Public Instruction (SPI) is responsible for administration of the program once projects and funding levels have been determined by the State Board.
Schools or school districts are eligible to apply for participation in the REACH program to implement or enhance an existing educational excellence project. Schools or districts selected for participation in the REACH program are required to match the state funds at 100 percent. Grant applications must include specified information, including:
oIdentification of target educational outcomes for basic academic skills, workplace skills, and life and family skills;
oBenchmark data for the target educational outcomes;
oBenchmark data for context and process indicators;
oA description of how the funds will be used;
oIdentification of the evaluation and accountability procedures to be used to assess progress toward the target educational outcomes, including the development or use of a measure other than standardized tests to assess student performance.
Grant applications are not subject to collective bargaining but procedures are defined if collective bargaining provisions need to be modified to submit an application for the REACH FOR EXCELLENCE program. Joint applications are permitted.
The statutory requirements relating to teacher contact hours, basic education program hours offerings, student learning objectives, school building self-study, and commingling of funds appropriated for certain categorical programs may be waived for projects selected for the REACH FOR EXCELLENCE program.
Selected projects receive REACH FOR EXCELLENCE program grant funds in two steps:
1.A grant is awarded for planning activities relating to implementation of the REACH project (including planning, staff development, purchase of materials, supplies, and resources, and development of new assessment measures), and for initial implementation of the project.
2.A REACH achievement award is provided based on "performance" eligibility. Annual eligibility and the amount of the award are based on the project's progress toward the target educational outcomes for the identified skills.
It is the responsibility of the school staff to determine how the REACH achievement award will be used and to determine, if applicable to the project, how much each staff member will receive.
REACH achievement awards may be used for the same purposes as the first grant, as well as for stipends or salary and compensation increases for staff through supplemental contracts. Stipends are not applied against the district's salary schedule and are not an ongoing obligation of the state.
Planning and initial implementation grants are for the 1991-92 and 1992-93 school years. Commencing with the end of the 1993-94 school year, and each school year thereafter, REACH projects are evaluated by the State Board to determine their eligibility for a REACH achievement award.
Reporting requirements are established for the projects and the State Board. The SBE report due December 1, 1996, must:
oIndicate the most common basic academic, workplace, and life and family skills and accompanying target educational outcomes identified by the REACH projects;
oIndicate the development or use of measures to assess student performance other than standardized tests;
oInclude recommendations on the feasibility of implementing statewide basic academic, workplace, and life and family skills, educational outcomes, and context and process indicators; and
oComment on or recommend how the salary allocation schedule developed by the Legislative Evaluation and Accountability Program (LEAP) Committee might reflect a school performance assessment model based on basic academic, workplace, and life and family skills, educational outcomes, and context and process indicators.
Timelines are established for the program: Initial applications must be received by March 15, 1992; initial projects are selected by the State Board by May 31, 1992; and initial implementation of projects, following planning, begins no later than September 1, 1993. The REACH FOR EXCELLENCE grant program expires December 31, 1998.
Upon request, the SPI or educational service district must provide technical assistance with development of grant applications and with development of performance assessment measures other than standardized test scores.
PART V - STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
The statewide standardized achievement test in grade four is amended to include assessing students' skills in writing, science, history, and geography.
The statewide eighth grade assessment is amended to include information about students' current academic proficiencies in writing, science, economics, history, and geography.
The statewide eleventh grade assessment may include measurements of students' skills in reading, writing, mathematics, language, history, geography, economics, and science and technology.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction is directed to prepare and administer an annual assessment of all students in grade twelve. The purpose of the assessment is to determine student competence in reading, writing, mathematics, language, science and technology, economics, history, geography, and reasoning and thinking skills.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes standards for successful completion of the grades 4, 8, 11, and 12 tests. Districts are required to notify each student's parents of the student's performance on the tests.
Districts may not advance a student beyond grades 4, 8, and 11 unless the student has successfully completed the statewide test for that grade. The student may be advanced if the educational interests of the student would best be served by advancement, but a student cannot be advanced by the district if the student's parents object in writing.
After October 1, 1997, no student may graduate from high school who has not successfully passed the statewide grade twelve assessment.
Districts must offer additional educational opportunities for students who fail any of the statewide tests to prepare them to retake all or part of the test.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Compensation Studies
The Department of Personnel, in consultation with identified groups, conducts a study of total compensation for educational employees. The study takes into consideration the relationship between total compensation for educational employees and identified statutory programs and provisions, as well as salaries paid in other states and in other professions. The study includes a review of the relationship between staffing and compensation levels for certificated and classified staff. The Department, based on the study findings, submits to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 1991, a plan to bring salaries to among the top ten states by the 1997-98 school year, and a plan to maintain salaries at that level. The Department of Personnel also studies and recommends to the Legislature and the Governor by December 1, 1991, a plan to maintain salaries at the levels established under the PART II plan.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Optional, Performance-Based Salary Enhancement
A voluntary, performance-based salary enhancement program is created. Funds appropriated for the program are separate from and in addition to funds appropriated for salary increases for certificated staff. The funds are appropriated on a grant basis and must be matched 100 percent by the school or district.
A majority vote of the certificated staff in a school building is required for participation in the voluntary, performance-based salary enhancement program. Participating buildings are required to establish a committee to adopt a performance-based salary enhancement. The committee's size, membership and terms are determined in accordance with school board guidelines, but must include at least one teacher, the principal, and a parent.
The plan must identify the criteria used to evaluate the performance of participating staff, the levels of salary enhancement that can be earned, and the person(s) responsible for evaluating staff performance. Prior to adoption, the plan must be presented in a public hearing with prior public notice, and provide annual written evaluations of each certificated staff person based on established criteria.
The building committee, if at least 75 percent of the members support the motion, may adopt a performance-based salary enhancement plan that results in uniform across-the-board salary increases. Salary enhancements awarded under the voluntary program are provided through supplemental contracts and do not become an ongoing obligation of the state.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Alternative Certification - Conditional Certificate
The State Board of Education is required to establish a conditional certificate. The local school district or educational service district must apply for the certificate for a person; the person must meet SBE age, good moral character and personal fitness requirements; the person is highly qualified and experienced in the subject matter to be taught; no person with regular certification in the field to be taught is available; and certification is for a limited assignment and responsibility in a specified activity or field.
Persons with a conditional certificate shall: have primary responsibility for planning, conducting and evaluating instructional activities with the direct assistance of a mentor; be oriented and prepared for the specified assignment, including development of a written plan of assistance within 20 working days from the start of the assignment; complete within the first 60 days, 60 clock hours or six quarter hours or four semester hours of coursework in pedagogy and child or adolescent development.
The conditional certificate is valid for two years or less and only for the activity specified. The certificate may be reissued for subsequent two years or less periods, if the certificate holder has completed the 60 hours of coursework since the issuance of the most recent conditional certificate.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Alternative Certification - Instructional Specialist Certificate
The State Board of Education is required to establish an instructional specialist certificate. The local school district or educational service district must apply for the certificate for a person; the person must meet SBE age, good moral character and personal fitness requirements; the person has unusual distinction or exceptional talent that is demonstrable through public records of accomplishments or awards; and the person is being certificated for a limited assignment and responsibility in a specified activity or field.
Applications for the instructional specialist certificate are reviewed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and approved by the State Board of Education.
Persons with an instructional specialist certificate shall: have primary responsibility for planning, conducting and evaluating instructional activities with the direct assistance of a mentor; be oriented and prepared for the specified assignment, including development of a written plan of assistance within 20 working days from the start of the assignment; complete within the first 60 days, 60 clock hours or six quarter hours or four semester hours of coursework in pedagogy and child or adolescent development.
The instructional specialist certificate is valid for two years or less and only for the activity specified. The certificate may be reissued for subsequent two years or less, if the certificate holder has completed the 60 hours of coursework since the issuance of the most recent conditional certificate.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Alternative Certification - Teaching Internship Certificate Pilot Program
The State Board of Education (SBE) is directed to establish a teaching internship certificate pilot program. Candidates for participation in the pilot program must possess: (a) a master's degree and have a minimum of 45 quarter or 30 semester hours in an endorsement area, or (b) a bachelor's degree, have a minimum of 45 quarter or 30 semester hours in an endorsement area, and have at least five years of relevant work experience subsequent to the bachelor's degree. Candidates must be admitted to a state approved teacher preparation program.
The college or university approved internship program must include enrollment of at least ten students at the time the program begins and the students proceed through as a cohort group and be developed jointly by at least one college/university and a school district. The program is a minimum of 45 quarter or 30 semester hours of upper division or graduate study as follows:
1.Before beginning teaching, the intern completes a minimum of 15 quarter/10 semester hours of study in pedagogy and shall include 40 hours of observation of school students in learning situations;
2.During each quarter or semester of the school year, the intern participates in a college/university three-hour weekly seminar; and
3.The intern completes 15 quarter/10 semester hours of study in the summer following the first year of teaching.
The college/university must assign a college supervisor to work with each intern and the school district must assign a staff member to serve as a mentor for each intern.
The internship certificate allows the holder full authority to serve full or part-time as a teacher and the holder is subject to the local school district's evaluation procedures. The internship certificate is valid for one year and may be renewed once for one year under certain conditions.
The teaching intern certificate pilot program expires August 31, 1995, unless the State Board extends or revises the program.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Entry-to-Practice Examination for Initial Teacher Certification
Effective August 31, 1993, teacher certification candidates completing teacher preparation programs must pass an exit examination to receive initial teacher certification. The exit exam requires candidates to be tested on their knowledge and competence in instructional skills, classroom management, and student behavior and development. The exam is primarily essay questions.
The exit examination is renamed an entry-to-practice examination. The exam is expanded to include candidates' subject knowledge in the candidate's appropriate endorsement areas. Candidates must pass both the subject matter and pedagogy parts of the exam to receive initial certification. However, if a candidate passes only the pedagogy part, the candidate shall receive an initial certificate but may teach only one year and must retake the subject matter part of the exam at least once every six months while teaching.
PART VI - ENHANCING THE TEACHING PROFESSION - Probationary Period for New Teachers
The period of nonrenewal of employment contract for teachers and other nonsupervisory certificated personnel is extended from one to three years during the person's first three years of employment with the district. This does not apply to persons who have completed at least three years of certificated employment in another district in Washington, in which case the period of nonrenewal of employment contract in the new district is limited to one year.
PART VII - PRIMARY GRADES SPECIAL EMPHASIS GRANT PROGRAM
The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes a voluntary grant program to assist school districts in providing prevention and intervention programs and services for children in preschool through grade six. The name of the program is FAIR START.
The Superintendent distributes funds equitably to all school districts based on the district's enrollment in grades kindergarten through six. Districts are required to provide services to children under the FAIR START program on a priority basis determined by need as defined locally. Districts report their definitions of need to the OSPI and the OSPI reports this information to the Legislature and the Governor.
Districts may use FAIR START funds to supplant funds from other sources only if the other funding source is lost for reasons beyond the control of the district.
Districts accepting FAIR START allocations must match the allocation 100 percent. The district match may consist of identified state or federal funds, local funds; contributions of services, materials, supplies, or physical facilities including services provided by child intervention specialists employed by the state, and district funds currently used for prevention and intervention services.
School and educational service districts accepting FAIR START funds are required to establish formal agreements for coordinated case management with lead mental health agencies or other public or private social service agencies that are present in the community. Districts may contract with governmental or nongovernmental organizations or community-based professional health care providers for services under the local FAIR START program.
Districts use FAIR START funds to implement or enhance an elementary grades' prevention and intervention program using child intervention specialists: school counselors, school psychologists, school nurses, school social workers, mental health professionals, child psychiatrists, children's mental health specialists, or appropriate public or private providers of professional health care.
Districts are required to emphasize the delivery of services using child intervention specialists who are school counselors, school psychologists, school nurses, or school social workers.
Districts may incorporate, as part of the local FAIR START program, a primary intervention program model. The OSPI and DSHS are required to adopt rules which provide for appropriate coordination between the Primary Intervention Program (PIP) and FAIR START programs.
Districts must submit to the Superintendent of Public Instruction certain information prior to receiving the FAIR START allocation, including: the district's policy on prevention and intervention services or commitment to adopt such a policy; district goals, referral and notification procedures; program evaluation procedures, how child intervention specialists will be used, and how grant funds will be used for related in‑service purposes.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction develops specific measures to evaluate the success of the projects and the FAIR START program. The Superintendent reports biennially to the Legislature and the Governor on the FAIR START program. The first report is due December 1, 1992.
PART VIII - WORKPLACE SKILLS GRANT PROGRAM - Voc Ed Works 2000 Program
The VOC ED WORKS 2000 Program is created to allow selected schools and school districts, educational service districts, interdistrict cooperatives, public vocational‑technical institutes, skills centers, and community colleges to develop innovative programs by encouraging the integration of vocational and academic programs and encouraging collaboration. Waivers of some statutes and rules are authorized. The process for selecting grant recipients is developed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction in consultation with the State Board of Education and the State Board for Community College Education. The Superintendent of Public Instruction administers the program.
Pilot projects receive funding for two years, but may be extended by the Superintendent of Public Instruction for up to six years. Annual reports to the Superintendent are required. Up to 21 projects are selected by the Superintendent each biennium. Initial projects will be implemented during the 1991-92 school year.
The Higher Education Coordinating Board will review entrance requirements for the state's colleges and universities and may waive certain entrance requirements and establish course equivalencies.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction reports to the Legislature by January 15, 1993, and every two years thereafter. The program ends June 30, 1999.
PART VIII - WORKPLACE SKILLS GRANT PROGRAM - Extended Vocational Contracts
The Superintendent of Public Instruction shall adopt by rule general program approval standards for secondary vocational programs. The standards shall include provisions regarding the use of extended or supplemental contracts for certificated vocational education instructors.
PART VIII - WORKPLACE SKILLS GRANT PROGRAM - Local Planning for Vocational Education Including Purchase of Equipment
To be eligible to receive state funds for secondary vocational education programs, local school districts, skills centers, educational service districts, and public vocational technical institutes shall consult with local advisory councils on vocational education. Local advisory councils shall be composed of members representative of the local community.
The local advisory council shall provide advice, support, and assistance on vocational education programs and assist in the development of vocational education program improvement plans. School districts are eligible to apply to the Superintendent of Public Instruction for funds to update equipment for secondary vocational education programs if they have developed program improvement plans. The plans must be revised every two years. The plans shall be part of the current vocational education planning process. Funds shall be used to upgrade equipment.
PART VIII - WORKPLACE SKILLS GRANT PROGRAM - Vocational Agricultural Education
Each vocational agriculture education service area shall encourage greater knowledge about environmentally sensitive agricultural and landscaping practices.
PART VIII - WORKPLACE SKILLS GRANT PROGRAM - Integrating Vocational and Academic Education
The Higher Education Coordinating Board and each four-year institution of higher education are required to recognize the value and importance of vocational education courses in developing admission standards. Efforts shall be made to designate applicable vocational education courses as course equivalencies.
The Higher Education Coordinating Board, by November 1, 1992, develops recommendations for eliminating or modifying university and college entrance requirements that inhibit schools from adopting strategies designed to ensure students achieve essential knowledge, skills and attitudes.
State Board of Education shall recognize the relevance of instruction in work force skills through vocational education and allow such courses to fulfill in whole or in part the courses required for high school graduation.
The Superintendent of Public Instruction is directed to develop and make available to school districts a model curriculum integrating vocational and academic education at the secondary level.
Districts receiving state funds for the VOC ED WORKS 2000 Program, for updating vocational equipment, or for increasing the number of teachers to vocational education students are required to match the state funds 100 percent.
PART IX - URBAN SCHOOLS GRANTS
An urban schools grant program is established to provide the school districts of Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane, Yakima, and Pasco with an opportunity for additional state funds to meet their needs. The grant funds must be matched 100 percent by the districts. The program does not become part of the state's basic education obligation.
Districts submit a grant application to the Superintendent of Public Instruction which must identify budgeted expenditures; a description of the services, programs, or activities to be funded; and a description of how the use of the grant funds will be evaluated for effectiveness. Districts must document that at least one public hearing was held regarding the proposed application.
Districts must submit a biennial report to the Superintendent of Public Instruction on the use of the funds. The Superintendent must report to the Legislature biennially on the urban schools grant program, beginning December 15, 1992.
PART X - SMALL SCHOOLS GRANTS
The Superintendent of Public Instruction establishes a grant program to assist eligible small school districts in meeting their special needs. The grant funds must be matched 100 percent by the districts. The grant funds and new or existing programs enhanced by the funds do not become part of the state's basic program of education.
Second class school districts are eligible to apply for funds if the following criteria are met: income is below state average median household income; unemployment above the statewide average; number of persons receiving Aid to Families with Dependent Children is above the statewide average; assessed valuation of property would require a $2/$1,000 rate or higher to raise a 10 percent levy; receipt of federal forest moneys does not exceed the district's basic education allocation; and receipt of federal impact aid does not exceed the maximum amount the district could raise with a 10 percent levy. Districts submit a grant application which must identify budgeted expenditures; a description of the services, programs, or activities to be funded; and a description of how the use of the grant funds will be evaluated for effectiveness. Districts must document that at least one public hearing was held regarding the proposed application.
Districts must submit a biennial report to the Superintendent of Public Instruction on the use of the funds. The Superintendent must report to the Legislature biennially on the grant program. The first report is due December 1, 1992.
PART XI - FUNDING MATCHING REQUIREMENTS
Districts may use the following funding sources to meet the 100 percent matching requirement for the programs under the BRINGING EDUCATION HOME ACT: block grant, the 5 percent special levy authority, a district's regular levy, municipal funds, other nonstate funds, any combination of the listed fund sources.
PART XII - SPECIAL 5 PERCENT LEVY AUTHORITY
In addition to other excess levies authorized by law, school districts may request from their voters a special 5 percent levy. This special levy may be used only for the following programs: planning and implementation grants (REACH FOR EXCELLENCE), primary grades special emphasis grants (FAIR START), workplace skills grants (VOC ED WORKS 2000, vocational equipment update, enhancing vocational staffing ratios), optional performance-based salary enhancement grants, and urban and small schools grants.
Similar to but separate from the state local effort assistance program (levy equalization), the 5 percent special levy is fully equalized by the state for qualifying districts, effective January 1, 1992.
PART XIII - COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
The following items are not subject to collective bargaining: School districts' policies assuring parental access to classrooms; optional, performance-based salary enhancement grants; and the schedule of days for students to attend school.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE:
Parents' Rights and Responsibilities. Certain information is deleted from the annual school district accountability report, the requirement that the report be published annually in a newspaper is deleted, and student absenteeism rates is added to the report.
Districts are prohibited from charging nonresident students tuition if the student is attending school in the nonresident district because of the school's proximity to child care.
School Site-Based Councils. The school district policy authorizing site-based councils is not subject to collective bargaining.
Student Achievement Tests. The statewide eleventh grade assessment shall measure students' skills in reading, writing, mathematics, language, history, geography, economics, and science and technology.
Optional, Performance-Based Salary Enhancement Program. The building-level committee responsible for developing the performance-based salary enhancement plan shall be a school site-based council.
Alternative Certification. Language placing into statute State Board of Education rules relating to alternative certification is deleted. In its place, (the provisions of SB 5640 are inserted), the State Board is directed to develop and adopt standards for an alternative teacher certification program. The eligibility requirement that candidates have at least ten year's work experience is deleted. The State Board determines the minimum number of years of occupational experience required of candidates as one eligibility requirement.
Testing Teachers for Initial Certification. In addition to graduates of state approved teacher preparation programs, persons who receive an alternate teacher certificate are required, beginning August 31, 1993, to pass the entry-to-practice examination to receive initial certification.
Primary Grades Special Emphasis Grant Program (Fair Start). Language is added to clarify that the FAIR START program does not become part of the state's basic education funding obligation.
Districts are required to consider multiculturalism issues in developing prevention and intervention services and programs for elementary students.
Funding Matching Requirements. Districts or schools are allowed to use funds raised through the special five percent levy for local restructuring efforts and initiatives.
Other. The budgetary block grant program is established in statute.
Appropriations: $34 million to OSPI for planning and implementation grants (REACH FOR EXCELLENCE)
$100,000 to OSPI for the two compensation studies
$10 million to OSPI for optional, performance-based salary enhancement grants
$25 million to OSPI for primary grades special emphasis grants (FAIR START)
$10 million to OSPI for workplace skills grants (VOC ED WORKS 2000, vocational equipment update, vocational staffing ratios)
$10 million to OSPI for urban schools grants
$5.5 million to OSPI for small schools grants
$19 million to OSPI for equalization of the 5 percent special levy
$58 million to OSPI for local education program enhancement grants (block grant)
Revenue: none
Fiscal Note: requested March 4, 1991
Effective date: Those sections expanding school board powers, implementing the REACH FOR EXCELLENCE program, modifying the state fourth, eighth and eleventh grade tests, directing the Department of Personnel to conduct educator compensation studies, implementing the FAIR START program, implementing the VOC ED WORKS 2000 program, rules for extended vocational contracts, local planning for vocational education-including purchase of equipment, recognizing vocational education for college admissions purposes, implementing the urban and small schools grants, and authorizing a special 5 percent levy take effect immediately.
Effective October 1, 1997, students must pass the state grade twelve assessment in order to graduate from high school.
Effective September 1, 1992, districts must provide the annual school district accountability report.
Effective January 1, 1992, the state begins equalization of the 5 percent special levy.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE:
A section is deleted which states that enacting the provisions of the bill reaffirms the Legislature's constitutional mandate and paramount duty for education of the children of the state.
Expanded authority for school boards to implement policies which benefit the health or safety of citizens is deleted.
The intent section regarding compensation plans is deleted. References to "salaries" in the compensation improvement plan and compensation maintenance plan are replaced with "total compensation."
The intent section of the Fair Start Program is deleted.
Technical amendments are made regarding placement of language specifying permissible uses of the 5 percent levy.
The various appropriations are deleted and replaced with null and void clauses making each of these parts contingent on funding in the budget.
TESTIMONY FOR:
School Site-Based Councils. School site-based councils will help bring meaningful improvement to schools by helping people become involved in the system. The councils will help school communities work in a collaborative manner to achieve their goals. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5463]
School Board Powers. Broadening the powers of school boards is an important step, and allowing districts to commingle program funds will give districts additional flexibility in better coordinating services and programs for kids.
Planning and Implementation Grants for Restructuring (REACH FOR EXCELLENCE). Certain factors are important to successful restructuring: greater local flexibility for the use of time and developing curricular programs; multi-year planning and field testing; development of new measures to assess student performance; accountability tied to bonus funding only for documented improvements in student learning; focusing on results/targeted educational objectives rather than on process; providing incentives for participation and positive change. Top-down restructuring does not work. Bottom-up restructuring is more meaningful. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5234]
Teachers need to be part of restructuring efforts. They need the necessary time to be effective participants in restructuring and need to be compensated for that time. The state needs to establish a long-term/long-range salary policy for educators. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5234]
The development and use of student assessment measures other than standardized tests is important. There is more to education than learning the curricular material but that is what standardized tests are designed to measure. Standardized tests measure what the student knows, not whether the student can apply what they know. It is important that professional educators be involved in the development of new assessment measures and new standards of performance. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5234]
Districts should also be able to request a waiver from staffing ratio requirements.
Optional, Performance-Based Salary Enhancement Program. On a pilot basis, voluntary merit pay is okay.
Alternative Certification. Nationwide, teacher preparation programs are graduating only about one tenth the number of teachers that will be needed. The supply of graduates in the areas of math, science, and foreign language is especially low. Non-traditional certification paths have worked very well for some individuals. [From "testimony for" on SB 5640]
Teacher recruitment and training is worth some calculated risk taking. More than 15 states are experimenting with alternative certification. [From "testimony for" on SB 5640]
School boards have long supported alternative certification. This proposal is cautioned and cautious, and is close to what the State Board of Education is doing with its internship certificate pilot program. [From "testimony for" on SB 5640]
Three Year Probation for New Teachers. The extra time is needed to help retrain teachers.
Primary Grades Special Emphasis Grant Program (Fair Start). The need for prevention and intervention services is real. The initial funding for FAIR START has been important but there are many children who need services who are not receiving it. Early intervention does make a difference. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5235]
Workplace Skills Grant Program. This bill provides important enhancements for vocational-technical education. Vocational education is crucial for training and preparing the workforce of tomorrow. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5181]
The bill addresses the need for reform with the integration of vocational and academic education. Maintaining state of the art equipment is always a concern. Restoration of the 16.67 funding ratio is important and helps provide stability necessary for long range planning. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5181]
Extended learning experiences will help provide learning to students beyond the regular classroom time. Because of the anticipated teacher shortage, it is critical to bring individuals out of industry and train them to become teachers. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5181]
Vocational education is often competency based helping students learn how to meet expectations. The focus is to identify and teach core skills needed for students to become successful in any trade. [From "testimony for" on SSB 5181]
This is a good part of the bill. The state needs to do a better job of providing vocational educational opportunities and programs for students.
Urban Schools Grants. Too few dollars in total legitimizes the need to target the available dollars. This program is important to the needs of the eligible districts.
Special Five Percent Levy Authority. Many districts need additional levy authority in order to raise local dollars to support their local educational programs.
Collective Bargaining. Removing the setting of the school calendar from collective bargaining is a good idea.
Block Grant. Providing funding for the block grant program is critical because it is an important source of funds for staff development and in-service purposes.
TESTIMONY AGAINST:
Parents' Rights and Responsibilities. The bill assumes that all districts will have site-based councils when that is not the case. Requiring districts to publish the annual district accountability report in a newspaper is costly. Some information required in the report is not available.
School Site-Based Councils. Decentralization of authority will not improve education. There is no research to support the proposition that site-based councils will improve education. The appropriation is a misuse of state funds and punishes districts that do not establish site-based councils. [From "testimony against" on SSB 5463]
Do not allow school site-based councils to veto at the building level the implementation of an experimental or pilot educational program approved by the school board. There is no money in the bill to support site-based councils.
Planning and Implementation Grants for Restructuring (REACH FOR EXCELLENCE). The grant application requirements are too prescriptive.
Student Achievement Tests. There is no money in the bill to pay for the increased costs to the state testing program which will result from the bill. Do not increase the investment in standardized testing. Standardized tests are inadequate for purposes of supporting the development of new educational programs.
Optional, Performance-Based Salary Enhancement Program. Merit pay does not work. The state needs to first address salaries from a catch-up and keep up perspective. It is preferable to focus on building-based merit pay rather than individual merit pay.
Alternative Certification. The State Board of Education has met the intent of alternative certification proposals by adopting rules for an internship certificate pilot program. [From "testimony against" on SB 5640]
Requiring persons to complete 60 clock hours of coursework in 60 days is very burdensome. Do not codify the State Board's recently adopted rules. Let the State Board handle alternative certification issues.
Testing Teachers for Initial Certification. Expanding the scope of the test may exacerbate teacher supply and demand concerns.
Three Year Probation for New Teachers. Current statutory requirements are working well.
Funding Matching Requirements. The 100% matching requirement for many of the programs in the bill should be deleted.
Special Five Percent Levy Authority. The whole issue of levies needs to be reviewed.
Collective Bargaining. Let districts decide locally whether or not the items being suggested for removal from collective bargaining should be bargained locally.
Other. The bill requires many reports of the OSPI or the SBE, and requires the OSPI to disseminate information through the state clearinghouse of educational information within the agency, but no funds are provided in the bill to carry out these directives.
TESTIFIED (on SB 5919): Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals; Perry Keithley, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and the State Board of Education; Gordon Ensign, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction; Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators; Judy Hartmann, Washington Education Association; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association; John Kvamme, Tacoma Public Schools; Kathleen Preston, Washington Vocational Association
TESTIFIED FOR (on SSB 5181): Ronald Lemon, Seattle General Advisory Committee, Boeing and Industry; Stan W. McNaughten, Seattle School District Voc Ed and Lakewood School District; Dale A. Boose, Governor's Council on Investment in Human Capital; Fay Page, Washington State Parent Teacher Association; Kathleen Preston, Washington Vocational Association; Dennis Moroney, Washington Vocational Association; Buck Evans, OSPI; Tom Lopp, OSPI; Dennis Wallace, Yelm High School; Marilyn Baker, Higher Education Coordinating Board; Larry Stanley, Association of Washington Businesses, Advisory Committee on Investment in Human Capital; John Kvamme, Tacoma School District
TESTIFIED FOR (on SSB 5234): Vi Walls, Edmonds School District Board of Directors; Steve Nielsen and Phil Bussey, Washington Roundtable; Fay Page, Washington State PTA; Bob Maier, Washington Education Association; John Kvamme, Tacoma Public Schools; Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals; Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators; Norm Wisner, Superintendent, Tumwater School District; Roy "Tiny" Jorgensen, President, State Board of Education; Marcia Costello, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association
TESTIFIED FOR (on SSB 5235) (Education): Gary Ness, HARK Coalition; Donna Tucker-Smith, HARK/ Elementary School Principals Association of Washington; Paige Tangney, HARK/Washington State Association of School Psychologists; Norm Walker, HARK/Washington School Counselors Association; Gary Tollefsen, HARK/Washington State PTA; Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals; Dwayne Slate and Esther Stefaniw, Washington State School Directors' Association; John Kvamme, Tacoma Public Schools; Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators; Marcia Costello, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction; Barbara Myers, Pat Huggins, Pam Harrington and Shirley Roberts, Issaquah School District; Pat Thibaudeau, Washington Community Mental Health Council; Judy Hartmann, Washington Education Association
TESTIFIED FOR (on SSB 5235) (Ways & Means): Gary Ness, HARK Coalition; Karyn Clarke, Tacoma Public Schools; Earl Dedman, African-American Parent Council
TESTIFIED FOR (on SB 5640): Matt Ryan, Lynn Harsh, Mike Snodgrass, teachers; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association
TESTIFIED (on SB 5640): Ted Andrews, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction
TESTIFIED (Ways & Means): Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals; John Kvamme, Tacoma School District; Judy Hartmann, Washington Education Association; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association; Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators