Background: Instructional hours are statutorily defined as hours students are provided the opportunity to engage in educational activity planned by and under the direction of school district staff, inclusive of intermissions for class changes, recess, and teacher/parent-guardian conferences.

Revisions to the legislative definition of the Program of Basic Education adopted in 2009 require school districts to provide students with an increase in minimum instructional hours from a district-wide average of 1000 hours across all grades, to 1000 hours in each of grades one through six and 1080 hours in each of grades seven through 12. Initially this increase was to be implemented according to a schedule adopted by the Legislature. In 2011 the Legislature specified that the increase would not occur before the 2014-15 school year. The 2013-15 operating budget provides $97 million to implement the increase in instructional hours for students enrolled in grades seven through 12, beginning with the 2014-15 school year.

The State Board of Education (SBE) is authorized to adopt rules ensuring compliance with the Program of Basic Education requirements, including the minimum instructional hours.

Staff Summary of Public Testimony: PRO: Teachers and administrators agree that implementation of the 1080 hours will cause hardships. This bill maintains the date for implementation in the next school year but provides the schools flexibility to implement the increase. They need some time to implement so long as they are making progress. That progress would be determined by SBE which is already authorized to ensure compliance with program requirements. School districts appreciate the state funding provided for increasing instructional hours but it is not going to be used effectively. Increasing the instructional hours results in adding only a few minutes to each class period, which will not have any measurable impact on student achievement. Additionally, it will cause school districts to lose the time used for staff and teacher development. The funding would be better used for phasing in the 24-credit requirement for high school graduation. This will allow districts the ability to add teachers and offer more credits and classes to students. Another alternative would be to add instructional days to the school year; or the state could put some of the funding into materials, supplies, and operating costs for school districts, and some in professional development. It is important to include teacher collaboration in the count of the hours because our teachers need to work together to identify the needs of students. Also, the five days allowed for high school seniors should count.

CON: There are implementation concerns. But 80 additional hours is a significant increase of instructional hours; it is the equivalent of 15 five-hour days of instruction. We encourage the Legislature to not step back from improving high school instruction. Professional development time should not be counting as instructional hours because it is not instructional time. We do support the opportunity to increase the capacity for students to earn 24 course credits however that may be structured.

OTHER: Implementing the 24-credit requirement for high school graduation is a better use of the funding. However, the $97 million provided for implementing the additional instructional hours will not fully implement a 24-credit graduation requirement. The 2012 Joint Task Force on Education Funding reported that it would take $941 million for schools to implement the requirement for 24-credits for high school graduation.

Persons Testifying: PRO: Senator McCoy, prime sponsor; Gary Cohn, Holly Martinez, Everett School District; Tom Seigel, Superintendent, Bethel School District; Faith Chapel, Bainbridge Island School District.

CON: Ben Rarick, SBE; Tim Knue, WA Assn. for Career and Technical Education.

OTHER: Larry Francois, Northshore School District; Dan Steele, WA Assn. of School Administrators; Marcus Morgan, Superintendent, Reardan-Edwall School District.