SENATE BILL REPORT
SB 5306
AS REPORTED BY COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS, MARCH 12, 1993
Brief Description: Reforming education.
SPONSORS: Senators Pelz, Gaspard, Moyer, Rinehart, McAuliffe, Spanel, A. Smith, Winsley, Skratek and Drew; by request of Council on Education Reform and Funding
SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5306 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.
Signed by Senators Pelz, Chairman; McAuliffe, Vice Chairman; Gaspard, M. Rasmussen, Rinehart, Skratek, A. Smith, and Winsley.
Staff: Larry Davis (786‑7422)
Hearing Dates: February 15, 1993; February 17, 1993; February 19, 1993; February 22, 1993; February 24, 1993; February 26, 1993
SENATE COMMITTEE ON WAYS & MEANS
Majority Report: That Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 5306 be substituted therefor, and the second substitute bill do pass.
Signed by Senators Rinehart, Chairman; Spanel, Vice Chairman; Bauer, Gaspard, Hargrove, Jesernig, Moyer, Owen, Pelz, Snyder, Sutherland, Williams, and Wojahn.
Staff: Bill Freund (786-7441)
Hearing Dates: March 12, 1993
BACKGROUND:
In 1992, the Legislature passed SSB 5953 (Chapter 141, Laws of 1992 PV) and established a process for the development and implementation of new student assessment and school accountability systems for the state's public schools. Key to this legislation was creation of the Commission on Student Learning. The commission has specific responsibility for developing the new assessment and accountability systems, as well as responsibility to take other actions as may be necessary to move the common schools toward a "performance-based" system.
In May 1991, Governor Gardner created the Governor's Council on Education Reform and Funding. The council developed a series of recommendations to build upon SSB 5953 and contribute further toward improving the education system. The council's legislative recommendations are included in its December 1992 final report and are incorporated into SB 5306.
SUMMARY:
Student Learning Goals. The following student learning goals are established: "schools, together with parents and communities, shall help all students develop the knowledge, skills, and attributes essential to:
(1) Communicate effectively and responsibly in a variety of ways and settings;
(2) Know and apply the core concepts and principles of mathematics; social, physical, and life sciences; arts; humanities; and health and fitness;
(3) Think critically and creatively and integrate experience and knowledge to form reasoned judgments and solve problems;
(4) Function as caring and responsible individuals and contributing members of families, work groups, and communities."
The State Board of Education shall adopt the goals, and accompanying outcomes recommended by the Governor's Council on Education Reform and Funding in rule and update both at least every ten years.
Commission on Student Learning Duties/Responsibilities That Are Repealed:
Legislative Oversight: The provisions in current law stating that the elementary and secondary assessments will go into effect "... unless the legislature takes action to delay or prevent implementation of the assessment system and essential academic learning requirements."
Technical Advisory Committees: Provisions requiring the commission to establish technical advisory committees and that the committees include state and school district personnel.
Secondary Assessment System Changes: The authority for the State Board and the State Superintendent to modify the secondary assessment system as needed in subsequent years, following the first year of implementation.
Time, Support and Resources: The requirement that the commission develop recommendations for the Legislature on the time, support, and resources needed by schools and districts to help students achieve the essential academic learning requirements, and the cost of implementing the assessment systems in the 1995-97 biennium and beyond.
Strategies to Assist Educators: The requirement that the commission develop strategies to assist educators help students master the essential academic learning requirements.
Quality Schools Center: The requirement that the commission develop a quality schools center which would plan, implement, and evaluate a high quality professional development process.
Commission Duties/Responsibilities That Are Modified:
Membership: The commission is expanded from nine to 11 members. The Governor shall appoint the two additional members, appoint the chair of the commission, and fill any vacancies that may occur.
Commission Report to Legislature: The commission reports to the Legislature biennially rather than annually.
Elementary Assessment System Changes: The authority for the State Board and the State Superintendent to modify the elementary assessment system as needed in subsequent years, following the first year of implementation, is changed to require these agencies to review and modify the elementary assessment system every ten years.
Certificate of Mastery: Language is added to specify that the Certificate of Mastery shall occur "at about age sixteen."
System Accountability: More specificity is provided regarding what criteria shall be used by the commission in evaluating the performance of local districts and schools in assisting students to achieve the essential learning requirements. The commission is directed to monitor the performance of districts and schools that demonstrate performance gaps based on students' racial and ethnic minority status.
Assistance Program: More specificity is provided regarding steps the commission is to recommend to the Legislature to assist districts and schools in which learning is significantly below expected levels of performance. The criteria to be used in determining which districts and schools need assistance shall be the same as the criteria to be used by the commission in evaluating the performance of local districts and schools in assisting students to achieve the essential learning requirements.
Deregulation: More specificity is provided in how the commission is to review state laws. The laws shall be reviewed using a specific timetable starting in 1993. To the maximum extent possible, all laws and rules inhibiting increased student performance shall be repealed by July 1, 1998. After the effective date of the act, the rule-making authority for the State Superintendent and the State Board is limited to rules that emphasize outcomes instead of inputs.
Staffing: The Superintendent of Public Instruction, instead of the Office of Financial Management, is given administrative oversight and shall serve as the fiscal agent for the commission.
Commission Duties/Responsibilities That Are Added:
Educator Certification: The commission develops standards for what certificated staff should know and be able to do to assist students achieve mastery of the essential learning requirements. The standards for elementary schools are to be developed by the 1995-96 school year, and by the 1996-97 school year for secondary schools.
Educator Preparation Program Approval: The commission develops a new individual performance-based assessment system of certification to replace the State Board's current program approval certification process used for higher education institutions.
Professional Development Grant Program/Site Councils: A staff development grant program for local districts and schools is created to provide additional resources for nonstudent days for schools for staff development, planning, and implementation activities related to moving toward a performance-based system. Grants shall be for two years for activities related to restructuring.
Annual allocations of $54 million beginning in the 1993-94 school year, and $108 million annually beginning in the 1995-96 school year are provided. Grants are based on the number of certificated and classified staff in each building. In the 1993-94 school year, allocations shall be based on five days for certificated and classified staff. In 1995 and beyond, grant allocations shall be based on ten days.
To be eligible for annual staff development program grants, districts must submit an application to the commission to develop a broad-based strategic restructuring plan. The plan shall involve participation by everyone with a stake in the outcome and shall include identified elements and site-based decision-making. Site-based decision-making shall be site councils of parents, staff, community members, and age-appropriate students who are responsible for some aspects of school operations.
In addition to the staff development grants, $1000 per year per school shall be available to support the site-based decision-making process. Each site council shall determine how this resource is spent.
Mentor Teacher Program: The current statutory teacher assistance program is repealed. The commission develops a program to provide full-time mentors to work with first‑year teachers. The ratio is one full-time mentor teacher to every fifteen first-year teachers. Mentor teachers are limited to three years of consecutive service and remain employees of their districts with the right to return to their previous or an equivalent teaching job when they have completed service.
Mentors also may be provided for educators who are identified as having difficulty performing their jobs at a satisfactory level. Mentors shall also work with principals and other instructional staff. Mentors may provide services in multi-district settings.
Incentive Program: The commission develops an incentive program to provide awards every two years to schools where a large percentage of students significantly exceed the essential learning requirements. Each school is assessed individually against its own baseline for the rewards program. Data shall not be used to compare one school against another. Incentives are based on the rate of percentage change of students achieving performance goals. School staff shall decide how to spend the reward.
Intervention Program: Before December 1, 1996, the commission develops a system to intervene in districts or schools that dramatically and persistently fail to meet performance goals.
Site-Based Performance Report: Beginning with the 1994‑95 school year, each public school publishes an annual performance report to the school board and the community. SPI compiles district data and reports annually to the Governor and the Legislature. Data and descriptive material included in both reports should enable parents, educators, and policy decision makers to determine whether students at the school are attaining mastery of the essential learning requirements and other important facts about the school's performance in assisting students to learn.
Other Provisions. Student Assistance: Students having difficulty obtaining a certificate of mastery standard shall be provided with alternative instructional opportunities and strategies designed to help them achieve this standard.
Certification Requirements: By the 1996-97 school year, the State Board of Education develops new certification requirements based on the commission standards of what certificated staff should know and be able to do. The new certification requirements must be based on an individually assessed demonstration of competency. All existing certificates are grandfathered. Advanced certification, which is voluntary, is provided by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards after the 1996-97 school year.
New Funding System: The Legislature, in consultation with several state-level organizations, designs a new student performance‑based funding system to be implemented beginning in the 1997-98 school year.
New Capital Construction Formula: A new capital construction formula shall be developed. The formula shall be consistent and integrated with the new funding formula developed for student learning.
School Expenditure Reporting: School expenditures shall be reported to the state and to local communities in a manner that demonstrates how expenditures support student achievement of the student learning goals.
Choice Tuition or Transfer Fees: Beginning with the 1993-94 school year, school districts are prohibited from establishing transfer fees or tuition for nonresident students enrolled under the educational "Choice" program.
Coordinated Social and Health Services: Beginning with the 1993-94 school year, SPI is allocated $5 million for pilot programs in ten counties to better meet the needs of children and families so that children can achieve in school.
Beginning with the 1994-95 school year, $20 million annually is allocated for statewide implementation for programs that assist children to achieve in school. To qualify for funds, local districts and schools, local service providers, local governments, state agencies, and persons organized for the purpose of designing and providing services for children and families, shall develop plans for enhancing the flexibility, coordination, and responsiveness of social and health services for students identified as most in need. Plans shall address the needs of children and families in a county or multi-county area. At a minimum, plans shall include 13 items of information.
The Family Policy Council reviews local plans by November 1, 1993, and the beginning of every school year thereafter. Funds shall be used only for those plans and services approved by the Family Policy Council. The Family Policy Council coordinates the provision of technical assistance to local communities for the development of coordinated services for students.
Technology: SPI shall: coordinate and develop a statewide integrated two‑way carrier system to tie together schools, districts, educational service districts, and institutions of higher education; develop a technology initiative to assist schools in integrating technology with planning, training, management, curriculum, and instruction; and distribute grants to local schools and districts for up to 50 percent of the cost of computers and phones. The 50 percent local match shall be adjusted based on the district's relative property tax wealth.
Deserving Student Scholarship Program: By December 1, 1998, the Higher Education Coordinating Board and the State Board for Community and Technical Colleges develop a two-year scholarship plan for deserving students who have achieved a certificate of mastery and have graduated from high school.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SUBSTITUTE:
The following items reflect provisions of the bill that have been deleted:
Ungraded Primaries. By December 1994, the commission develops alternatives for grade designations in elementary schools.
Student Assistance. Students having difficulty obtaining a certificate of mastery standard shall be provided with alternative instructional opportunities and strategies designed to help them achieve this standard. This language is moved to the intent section and reworded so as not to potentially increase the state's basic education obligation.
New Capital Construction Formula. A new capital construction formula shall be developed.
School Expenditure Reporting. School expenditures are reported to the state and to local communities in a manner that demonstrates how expenditures support student achievement of the student learning goals.
School Site Council Support. Providing $1,000 per school per year to support school site councils.
The following provisions reflect new elements added to the bill:
Community Selection of Local Education Program. Each school district board of directors may authorize a school or schools in the district to participate in the performance-based education system to be developed by the Commission on Student Learning. The school board must hold at least one public hearing before adopting a motion stating which school(s) may participate. School boards may repeal motions allowing schools in the district to participate. Schools authorized to participate in the performance-based education system are required to continue to use the state 4th, 8th, and 11th grade standardized achievement tests for at least five school years following the date of first participation in the performance-based education system.
Private School and Homeschool Exemption. Private schools and homeschooled children are not subject to the statewide student learning goals, the essential learning requirements, the performance-based assessment systems to be developed by the Commission on Student Learning, or the certificate of mastery. 1992 amendments to the private school law, effective in 1998, are repealed.
Joint Select Committee on Education Reform. A 12-member legislative joint select committee on education reform is created to monitor the work of the Commission on Student Learning and monitor the work of the State Board of Education in developing new certification requirements. The joint select committee reports annually to the Legislature.
School-to-Work Transitions. The academic and vocational integration program is renamed the school-to-work transitions program. The basic intent of the program remains the same: to combine academic and vocational education into a single instructional system that is responsive to the educational needs of all students. Projects are no longer limited to high schools only, but may also include middle and junior high schools. The State Superintendent and the State Board of Education are authorized to develop a process by which teacher preparation programs may apply to participate in the program.
Washington State Principal Internship Support Program. A principal internship program is created to provide up to 200 principal internships annually. The purpose of the program is to enhance the leadership training of prospective principals. A 25 percent local match is required.
Office of Educational Restructuring, Research and Technical Assistance. The clearinghouse of educational information within the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction is renamed and given a new focus. The new office will provide technical assistance to educators, using practitioners whenever possible, and disseminate information to the K-12 system about the work of the Commission on Student Learning. The Superintendent reports annually to the Commission on Student Learning on the activities of the office of educational restructuring, research and technical assistance.
Parent and Community Involvement. The State Superintendent appoints an eight-member parent and community advisory council. The council advises the Superintendent on: how to increase parent and community involvement in education; identify obstacles to greater involvement; and recommend strategies for helping parents and community members participate effectively in school site-based decision-making.
Annual State of Education Address. Beginning with the 1994 legislative session, the Superintendent of Public Instruction presents separately to the Senate and House of Representatives an annual state of education address.
The following provisions reflect changes to existing provisions of the bill:
Student Learning Goals. References to the outcomes related to the goals, recommended by the Governor's Council on Education Reform and Funding, are deleted. The scope of Goal #3 is expanded so that students' critical thinking ability is also applied to resolving conflicts. School boards may adopt procedures to permit parents to remove their children from courses offered primarily to meet Goal #4.
Commission on Student Learning/Duties and Responsibilities. Membership: The two additional members of the commission shall be appointed by July 1, 1993, rather than by February 1, 1993. The Governor shall fill vacancies of Governor appointed positions. The State Board shall fill vacancies of State Board appointed positions.
Legislative Oversight: Current law stating that the elementary and secondary assessments will go into effect "... unless the legislature takes action to delay or prevent implementation of the assessment system and essential academic learning requirements" is not repealed. Current law requiring the commission to report annually to the Legislature is reinserted.
Technical Advisory Committees: Current law requiring the commission to establish technical advisory committees, and that the committees include state and school district personnel, is not repealed.
Elementary Assessment System Changes: Current law authorizing the State Board and the State Superintendent to modify the elementary assessment system as needed in subsequent years, following the first year of implementation, is not changed. The commission must take into consideration the issue of disproportionality when developing the elementary assessment system.
Secondary Assessment System Changes: Current law authorizing the State Board and the State Superintendent to modify the secondary assessment system as needed in subsequent years, following the first year of implementation, is not repealed. The commission must take into consideration the issue of disproportionality when developing the secondary assessment system.
Certificate of Mastery: The certificate of mastery shall be based only on student learning goals #1 through #3.
Educator Certification Requirements/Educator Preparation Program Approval: Educator certification provisions are delegated to the State Board of Education rather than the Commission on Student Learning. The State Board is directed to adopt rules implementing the recommendations of the Board's joint study with the Governor's Council on Education Reform and Funding on certification requirements.
Time, Support and Resources: Current law requiring the commission to develop recommendations for the Legislature on the time, support, and resources needed by schools and districts to help students achieve the essential academic learning requirements, and the cost of implementing the assessment systems in the 1995-97 biennium and beyond, is not repealed.
Deregulation: The State Superintendent and the State Board of Education, rather than the Commission on Student Learning, are directed to review all K-12 laws. Language is deleted restricting these agencies after the effective date of the act to adopt rules that emphasize outcomes instead of inputs.
Mentor Teacher Program: All provisions in the bill pertaining to a new mentor teacher program to be developed by the Commission on Student Learning are repealed. The current statutory Teacher Assistance Program is not repealed and is fully funded to provide a mentor teacher for every beginning teacher and to fund in up to ten school districts up to 500 pairs of a mentor teacher to work with an experienced but struggling teacher.
Professional Development Grant Program/Site Councils. Grants are for an average of five additional days for certificated staff, classified instructional staff, and classified secretarial staff in each building. The program is funded at $54 million the second year of the biennium. School boards must adopt a policy authorizing school site-based councils in order to apply for the five nonstudent days of planning. The policy must address such issues as: district recognition of site councils; site council membership; and designation of activities with which site-based councils may become involved. The list of required information to be included in the school restructuring plan is shortened. Districts are required to hold at least one public hearing on all school restructuring plans before submitting a grant application. Grant applications are submitted to the State Board of Education rather than the Commission on Student Learning.
Site-Based Performance Report. Each school district, rather than each school, shall publish an annual performance report to the community, beginning with the 1994-95 school year. The report must be published in a format that is easily understood by persons who are not professional educators. The annual reports must show whether schools in the district are progressing over the course of years.
System Accountability. The listed criteria is incorporated into the annual school district performance report to the community.
Incentive Program. The State Superintendent administers the incentive and assistance programs to be developed by the Commission on Student Learning. School staff, in partnership with the school site council, decide how to spend the reward.
Intervention Program. The assistance program includes a process for the State Superintendent to intervene in the operation of districts or schools that dramatically and persistently fail to help students meet the essential learning requirements.
New Funding System. Language is deleted directing the Legislature to design a new student performance‑based funding system to be implemented beginning in the 1997-98 school year. Instead, an eight-member legislative fiscal study committee is created to study the state operating budget for the common school system, and other sections of the budget which have a direct or indirect impact on the school system. The committee reports to the full Legislature by January 16, 1995 with findings and any recommendations for a new funding model for the common school system.
Coordinated Social and Health Services. The program is funded at $20 million for the biennium rather than $25 million. In addition to counties, a municipality or municipalities may develop regional plans and apply for grants. The list of information that must be included in the plan is shortened. Educational services are added to the mix of services to be coordinated. The emphasis on services to be coordinated is shifted from remediation to prevention.
Technology. The State Superintendent is to establish an educational section within the agency and develop and implement a Washington State technology program that includes the following: grants and technical assistance to help districts integrate technology into the learning process; develop on-line information services, including staff support; expansion of statewide networks; and establishing educational technology centers in each educational service district. The 50 percent local match is reduced to 25 percent and the local match may be waived if the district's property wealth would prevent the district from applying for a grant.
Deserving Student Scholarship Program. By December 1, 1998, the Higher Education Coordinating Board only shall develop a two-year scholarship plan for deserving students who have achieved a certificate of mastery and have graduated from high school. A deserving student is defined as one whose family income is below the statewide median family income.
Other Changes. Language is modified in the intent section and in other sections to clarify that the state's basic education obligations are not expanded as a result of the bill. A number of other technical modifications are made.
EFFECT OF PROPOSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE:
The intent language requiring "ongoing" services to at-risk developmentally delayed or disabled students is deleted.
State funding for staff development grants is limited to state-funded certificated instructional staff and specified state-funded classified staff.
The requirement that staff development grants shall be for two years is deleted.
The sections pertaining to Parent and Community Involvement Program and the Office of Educational Restructuring, Research, and Technical Assistance in the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction are made contingent on funding in the budget.
The remainder of the appropriations are deleted.
Appropriation: none
Revenue: none
Fiscal Note: requested February 10, 1993
TESTIMONY FOR (on proposed substitute):
Local acceptance of reform is key to making reform work. Letting districts and schools opt into the new system is appropriate. Until the state knows whether or not the new performance-based system works, districts need flexibility and authority to pursue restructuring on their terms. Local control is celebrated and debate is required at the district and building level. Reform is not mandated in the proposed substitute but the components needed for successful reform are included in the bill. The proposed substitute strikes a balance between local control and state prescription on school site councils.
The student learning goals are good. Establishing the student learning goals in rule by the State Board of Education allows flexibility to change the goals as needed.
Making available nonstudent time for planning for restructuring is critical and an important element of restructuring. It takes time and resources to change. Funding is needed to develop people. Classified employees need professional development, too.
Mentoring new teachers is vital. Fully funding the Teacher Assistance Program is very important. Providing mentors for experienced but struggling teachers would be very helpful. We cannot throw away teachers anymore than we can throw away students.
Strengthening building leadership is critical to successful reform. The principal internship support program is an important element of the bill.
Supporting parent and community involvement in our schools is desired and needed. Establishing a parent and community advisory council will allow consistent input from parents and community members to the State Superintendent's office. Funds should be dedicated to support training of parents to be more effectively involved in education.
There is explicit recognition of the right to homeschool children or have children attend private schools.
The various responsibilities appropriately are delegated to more than one group. Keeping certification responsibilities with the State Board of Education is good given the Board's experience in this area. The focus of the Commission on Student Learning is kept on the development of standards and assessments. There is appropriate recognition of restructuring efforts already underway around the state and the commission should use the experience of districts and schools.
Student diversity is recognized. There needs to be a focus on the needs of children of color. The quality of society in the future will be reflected in the equity of opportunity provided for all children. There is recognition that students learn differently and at different rates. It is good that special education is given recognition.
Readiness requires collaboration and the proposed substitute fully recognizes and supports this. Making sure young students are ready to learn when they enter school is an important element of restructuring. It is important that the focus of readiness to learn be on prevention and early intervention.
The State Superintendent's office welcomes the renamed and redefined function of the office of educational restructuring, research, and technical assistance. The review of state K-12 laws by the agencies historically responsible for adopting them is appropriate. OSPI and the State Board have experience with those laws and rules which work best.
Technology is an important element of restructuring and is appropriately recognized in the bill.
TESTIMONY AGAINST (on proposed substitute):
This is bad legislation. It is state control of children. It is an experiment with our kids. The student learning goals are weak and vague. Parents are opposed to universal learning goals. There is a lack of focus on academics. 70 percent of the goals are attitudinal, 30 percent are academic. Parents do not understand or like the student learning goals. Where are the academics? How will the state implement and test family values, honesty, etc.? The bill defines "good" teaching as challenging the fixed beliefs of students.
Outcomes-based education is not supported by research. It has not been proven effective. It has failed in Chicago, Pasco, England and elsewhere. Outcomes-based education is an expensive experiment that doesn't work. The bill is an expensive proposition. Carry-forward costs are not addressed. Will there be funding in future years? The tax burden to implement the bill will break the people.
I don't like the Commission on Student Learning. What are the qualifications of the members appointed to serve on the Commission on Student Learning? The commission will drive everything. State accountability is questionable. Slow the process down and look at what has worked. Is this the latest "plan of the year"? Will there be another plan in two years? Reform fads have dumbed us down.
There has not been the kind of public dialogue change of this magnitude deserves. Take it to the public via referendum for a full discussion.
TESTIMONY (Other):
More legislative oversight is needed. The proposal for a legislative joint select committee on education reform is necessary. Private schools will be impacted and want to be participants and partners in the discussion of education reform.
The state Constitution is stronger than the federal Constitution regarding the separation of church and state. Private schools and homeschools need to be clearly excluded from the provisions of the bill. Return to pre-1992 statute governing private schools. We are concerned about what will or will not affect homeschoolers. The certificate of mastery should not be equivalent to or replace high school graduation requirements.
Don't mandate site-based decision-making. Local control is lost with appointed, unelected councils. Let districts develop their own models for site-based decision-making. We don't have hard evidence yet of improved student performance under outcomes-based education. It is premature to mandate outcomes-based education at this time.
Parents have the inherent right to be equal partners but they need help to become fully empowered. Higher education has an obligation to participate in education reform, particularly with respect to the training of new teachers. Standardized achievement tests must be retained until alternative assessments are validated. Funding for the program must be new, not in lieu of salary increases or pulling dollars from existing programs.
A school-to-work transitions program needs to be included in the bill. 75 percent of today's kindergartners will not complete a four-year degree program. We have to do more for the noncollege bound students.
Testified: PRO: Superintendent of Public Instruction Judith Billings; C.T. Purdom, Washington Education Association; Dwayne Slate, Washington State School Directors' Association; Cheryl Hawes, Washington State PTA; Walter Ball, Association of Washington School Principals; Norm Wisner, Washington Association of School Administrators; Candy Curl, member, State Board of Education; Sen. Emilio Cantu (on SB 5640, amended into SSB 5306); Marlene Coplen, Workforce Training and Education Coordinating Board; Lynn McKinnon, Public School Employees of Washington; Virginia DeForest, American Association of University Women; B. Candy Gamble, Arts Education Advisory Coalition; Elaine Jones, Higher Education Coordinating Board, Cynthia Flynn, Council of Presidents; Ron Crossland, State Board for Community and Technical Colleges
Testified: CON: Aubryn McCarrell, parent; Susy Armstrong, parent; Lynn Harsh, Evergreen Foundation; Richard Eastman, parent; Chris Shardelman, citizen; Kristi Rankin, teacher; Helen Belvin, Citizens Alliance for Responsible Education; Michele Smith, parent; Paul Bailey, parent; Barbara Riggs, parent
Testified: OTHER: James Kelly, Washington State African-American Affairs Commission; Ned Dolejsi, Washington State Catholic Conference and Washington Federation of Independent Schools; Douglas Bond, Tacoma Baptist Schools; Harvey Thomas, parent; David Mitchum, parent; Keith Easterly, Moses Lake School Board; Mary Roy (?), parent