E2SSB 5843

Sponsors: Senate Committee on Ways & Means (originally sponsored by Senators Oemig, Tom, Rockefeller, Zarelli and Keiser).

Committee Activity: Early Learning & K-12 Education: 2/15/07, 2/26/07 [DPS-WM, w/oRec].

Majority Report: That Substitute Senate Bill No. 5843 be substituted therefor, and the substitute bill do pass and be referred to Committee on Ways & Means.Signed by Senators McAuliffe, Chair; Tom, Vice Chair; Clements, Eide, Hewitt, Hobbs, Kauffman, Oemig, Rasmussen, Weinstein and Zarelli.

Minority Report: That it be referred without recommendation.Signed by Senators Holmquist, Ranking Minority Member; and Brandland.

Majority Report: That Second Substitute Senate Bill No. 5843 be substituted therefor, and the second substitute bill do pass.Signed by Senators Prentice, Chair; Fraser, Vice Chair, Capital Budget Chair; Pridemore, Vice Chair, Operating Budget; Zarelli, Ranking Minority Member; Brandland, Carrell, Fairley, Hatfield, Hewitt, Hobbs, Keiser, Kohl-Welles, Oemig, Parlette, Rasmussen, Regala, Roach, Rockefeller, Schoesler and Tom.

Minority Report: That it be referred without recommendation.Signed by Senator Honeyford.

Background: In 2002, the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) began developing the Core Student Record System (CSRS), which assigns each student a unique student identification number and collects demographic and other information to comply with the federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In the 2006 supplemental budget, OSPI received a $2.9 million appropriation along with a grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, to begin developing a statewide longitudinal data system.

CSRS is designed to reduce the number of data collections required annually and to respond to federal and state reporting requirements. OSPI annually collects various data from school districts through CSRS. The long-term goal of this system is for reliable information to be regularly submitted and available for analysis and use by school districts and others. The data will show student course-taking patterns, student transcripts, teacher qualifications and assignments, and other information. OSPI has completed a pilot phase of the new system with selected school districts and one Educational Service District (ESD).

Summary of Engrossed Second Substitute Bill: By November 1, 2008, the Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) is directed to conduct a feasibility study on establishing a longitudinal student-teacher data system.

The stated intent for this is to establish better linking of data on students, teachers, and student achievement aimed at providing better information regarding effective programs and interventions. The feasibility study will involve a piloting component in two school districts to assess the potential data collection impacts on schools. OSPI must consult a variety of research and education organizations in conducting the study.

The OSPI is authorized to share data for educational purposes and studies under certain circumstances. The circumstances include: educational studies authorized or mandated by the Legislature; studies initiated by other state educational authorities and authorized by the OSPI; studies initiated by other state agencies and authorized by the OSPI; and studies initiated by private study groups authorized by the OSPI. The sharing must be consistent with the Federal Family Educational Rights Privacy Act and other relevant state laws.

Effective Date: Ninety days after adjournment of session in which bill is passed.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony (Early Learning & K-12 Education): PRO: It is important to get real data from schools. Accepting electronic signatures is important in online applications for certifications. State policy makers do not have access to data to see if their decisions were the right decisions. The data center will allow more thorough studies. This bill starts the process of giving school districts the support needed to collect data. Currently, it is very difficult to have comprehensive studies because there is a lack of data.

CON: Collecting data is costly and the Legislature needs to consider whether the data collected is useful to teachers or just policy makers. If just for policy makers, then it would be hard to support this bill. There is a need to look at what is being asked for and whether it helps teachers.

OTHER: Requiring a unique identifier for certification candidates just adds one more layer of complexity. Graduates can be tracked so maybe using that number to track teachers throughout would be better.

Persons Testifying (Early Learning & K-12 Education): PRO: Nasue Nishida, Professional Educator Standards Board; Jeanne Harmon, Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession; Lucinda Young, Washington Education Association; Joe Egon, Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction.

CON: Allen Jones, Washington Association of School Business Officials.

OTHER: Bob Cooper, Washington Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony (Ways & Means): PRO: This is about developing ways to make the data collection less burdensome for school districts and schools, and at the same time to get information that we need to make informed public policy decisions. This will also allow schools to have better information to use in designing and implementing programs aimed at improving instruction. The teacher preparation programs should be consulted as part of the feasibility study.

OTHER: By funding a feasibility study first, this avoids creating an unfunded mandate on school districts. However, at the completion of the study, the state needs to be committed to providing the resources to cover the impact on school districts. The Washington Association of School Business Officials should be one of the organizations consulted during the feasibility study.

Persons Testifying (Ways & Means): PRO: Senator Oeming, prime sponsor, Bob Cooper, Washington Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.

OTHER: Mitch Denning, Alliance of Education Associations.

House Amendment(s): The amendment adopted by the House of Representatives clarifies the purpose of the statewide longitudinal student data system established in the underlying bill. It creates an Education Data Center (Center) in the Office of Financial Management (OFM) and requires OFM to work jointly with the Legislative Education and Accountability Program Committee (LEAP) in conducting collaborative analyses of early learning, K-12, and higher education programs and issues. The amendment directs state education agencies to work with the Center in developing data-sharing and research agreements, consistent with applicable security confidentiality requirements. The Center is also required to develop a reporting format for districts to submit data on student demographics disaggregated by distinct ethnic categories within racial subgroups.

No later than the beginning of the 2008-09 school year, school districts must submit specified data to OSPI: For each class offered in each school, school districts must submit the unique identifier associated with the teacher's certificate and the statewide student identifier of each student enrolled in or being provided services through the class.

The House amendment focuses the feasibility study and field testing from the underlying bill on identifying additional data elements under the statewide student data system. Among the data elements to be field tested will be course codes for a limited set of core high school mathematics courses, based on the classification of secondary school courses by the National Center for Education Statistics. In addition, the feasibility study must develop an implementation plan for coding secondary courses in addition to mathematics. Removed is the requirement that the feasibility study examine technical standards for school data systems and, instead, directs OSPI to develop such standards.

OSPI may accept applications for educator certification using an electronic signature from the applicant.