House Education Committee
Video
Transcript
Bills discussed (4)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1262
· 2 mentions in transcript, chapter
Matched: “We have a special order of business, House Bill 1262, Representative Eubanks. If you would be so kind to make yo…”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1017
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1017”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1252
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1252”
|
Pre-2017 bill | ||
|
HB1270
· 1 mention in chapter
Matched: “HB1270”
|
Pre-2017 bill |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- Whisper
- Model
- ggml-large-v3-turbo.bin RTX5060
- Processing date
- October 3, 2026
Representative James McLean
Unverified
0:00
Take their seats. And once again, we thank everybody for being here today. And please avail yourself of our coffee, the best coffee in the capital. And please make yourself at home. We do have a few bills that are on our agenda today, but first off, in our continuing effort
to try to expose our committee to people who have expert-level opinions in education, who have important opinions about education, and who have things to share that are important in the decision-making process when it comes to education policy, we have some folks from from the Advanced Initiative for Math and Science, and this is a group that's focusing on STEM curriculum, science, technology, engineering, and math.
Miss Tommy Sue Anthony, who is the president of the AAIMS, along with Mr. Greg Fleishner, who is the chief program officer on a national level, and also we have Miss Ann Biggers, who is a program manager for the AI, excuse me, AAIMS. And we are very, very glad that they're here today to share with us some details about their program, what they are doing, and how they are trying to advance STEM curriculum here in the state of Arkansas.
And with that, Ms. Anthony and Mr. Fleischer, if
Speaker 5
1:44
you would be so kind to introduce yourself, and you may proceed
Speaker 7
1:52
with your program. Thank you. Tommy Anthony, President of Arkansas Advanced Initiative for
Speaker 9
1:58
Math and Science. Greg Fleischer, Chief Program Officer, National Math and Science
Speaker 7
2:05
Initiative. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, representatives, for allowing us to come today and present some findings that we
actually presented last October to the Joint Education Committee, but most of you weren't there yet, yet, or many of you were not on the Education Committee at that time, so I'm very pleased to be able to present these again. First of all, I want to thank the legislature for their support in helping us over the years. I want to thank you for your support with Advanced Placement, and then I want to thank you for your support two years ago with general improvement funds that were allocated to Ames.
Historically, Arkansas has had, I guess, three challenges. And I've been around a long time, and these challenges have been there ever since I can remember, and they're still somewhat here today. We're a rural state, and someone said we're getting even more rural here lately. We're a rural state, and by and large, we're a poor state. If you look at our state, you will find that there's a few pockets of prosperity, and then the rest of the state is relatively poor.
We've had trouble accessing higher education. Many of our students have said, I can't go away to college, and we have somewhat fixed that with the lottery. But historically, we've had trouble accessing higher ed, and we've had low college graduation rates. So we've solved the college access issue, But we still need to improve our college graduation rates, and we still need to deal with the poverty issue.
We know, all of us in here know, that a poorly educated workforce will not attract high-paying jobs. We've all heard the governor talk about, when he was talking to people, they'd say, how many engineers do you graduate in your state? So we know in order to attract the jobs that pay well to improve the state's economy, we have to have a well-educated workforce. So while we're a STEM initiative, we deal with advanced placement,
and we think as an initiative we are actually dealing with preparing students to do well in college, which in turn will help generate a better educated workforce. We are part of the National Math and Science Initiative. That initiative was formed in 2007 as a response to a national report that came out that said America is falling further and further behind in math and science. And if we don't address this issue, then it's going to jeopardize our national economy and probably our national security.
So the National Math and Science Initiative was formed. They issued a call for all the states to apply to be a part of the program. Arkansas applied, and we were one of six states selected for the grant. The grant was $13.2 million, and it was to spend it on advanced placement. Now, NIMSY, that's what we affectionately call it. NMSE chose advanced placement because the research is very clear, whether it's in this state or nationally. Students who do well in advanced placement, or AP, math and science and English, graduate at two and a half times greater rate than students without it.
They graduate from college, and they tend to go into STEM careers. So it was a very firm commitment that this is what we want to do. We're replicating a model that's been around over 20 years that started in Texas, and it works. Six states were chosen originally, Arkansas, Massachusetts, Connecticut, Virginia, Kentucky, and Alabama. And so we've all been replicating this model.
We're now into our fifth year. And if you look at our charts, we've all had exactly the same results. And this is the same results that are found in other states that are now replicating it. Also the U.S. Department of Defense, two years ago now, decided that this is a good enough model, and this is something that the legislature is also dealing with this session, that they
want all the military-based schools to have an even education as students' parents are transferred from one base to the other. So many of the military-based schools now in the country are also implementing this model. I want to start very quickly as I mentioned why AP because we focus on advanced placement math science and English well why AP this state is mandated that every high school have
four AP classes in the state the legislature passed that law several years ago so we're ahead as a state but why well the people who originally passed that legislation knew that it would help ultimately in college graduation rates, and I think you've seen a steady growth. It's slow, but it's a steady growth in college graduation. But we've had some research. I can remember talking about AP and how it helps, and someone said to me,
Speaker 11
7:59
yeah, but you're looking at research from other states. That ain't Arkansas. Well,
Speaker 7
8:04
we've looked at Arkansas. There's a group called the Arkansas Research Center that's part of state government. And Dr. Neal Gibson there has done quite a bit of research for us. So in your packet, you will see Arkansas Advanced Placement and College Outcomes. Let me share with you a few things he's learned. He looked specifically in this particular piece of study at the freshman class of 2009.
13,030 students entered college, Arkansas colleges, in 2009. And here's what he learned. There were quite a few students who had no AP. The vast majority had no AP, or 53%. 47% did have AP. And if you look at the first chart, you'll see that of that class, the students who had no AP their freshman year in college in Arkansas averaged achieving 17.6 hours of credit.
They had a 2.1 GPA, and 64% of them were having to be remediated. Students who took AP simply took AP, averaged achieving 28 hours of credit for their freshman year, they had a 2.8, and only 28% of those students had to be in remedial courses. And then he looked at does it make a difference whether they make, and with AP scores they're graded on one through five.
A three through five is considered a proficient, a one or two not proficient. So he looked at that. Again if they had no AP, they achieved the 17.6 hours of credit, had a 2.1 GPA. If they took AP but didn't make a 3 or better, they had 27 hours of credit and a 2.7 GPA. And if they made 1, 3 or better on one AP exam, 31.8 hours of credit for their freshman
year, a 3.19 and a 13.4 had to be remediated. So you can see AP is making a difference. If you look at the second page of this, he looked at the difference math, science, and English makes and what he learned is for students who take an AP math science and English exam only thirty percent have to be remediated if they make a three or better only eleven percent have to be remediated so clearly clearly it's
making a difference now I want to share with you a PowerPoint very quickly to show you our results. We have now been in schools, as of last spring, four years. Each year we brought in schools, and so last year we were in 39 high schools, in 35 school districts, and they're scattered all over the state. When we started this grant, we said we want to select schools that look like Arkansas
schools and I believe eight of you on this committee have schools that are in our program so we went statewide we have big schools and really small schools we have really poor schools we have some that are not quite so poor but all have at least a 35% free and reduced lunch rate we have urban schools suburban schools and very rural schools we wanted to prove that this model will work in
any school that chooses to do so and so schools apply and they are selected the main criteria for selection is do they want to really do this if they're going to keep on doing things the way they've always done them then they'll keep on having the same level of success. If they're willing to use our model and really try, then they will be successful. So the model is very clear. It's very
simple. You have a support for students and the big thing there is let's make sure that everything is well done. Let's make sure that they have what they need, that the labs are equipped you can't do AP science if you can't do labs and they need to be wet labs so let's make sure the labs are equipped let's have Saturday study sessions three for each content and yes we have kids show up at a university to do calculus all day Saturday and they do it in in large
numbers or they come and do chemistry all day we bring in outside experts so So we have student support, we manage the program, we've had awards, financial awards, that's what the money, the ExxonMobil money went to, and we have strong teacher support. One of the things we've done, and this maybe is the magic of the program, is we know you can't wait until kids are in high school to take AP. You have to start kids in junior high or middle school, and you have to get them in the pipeline.
said how have you been so successful with poor kids and minority kids that's because we grabbed them in fifth or sixth grade and we said you can do this and we'll support you and we got them in the pipeline to take these advanced courses we also worked with the teachers all the way down to sixth grade in in a training program called laying the foundation here's our first schools These were the first ten, the pioneer schools who entered in, and they've been with us all the way through.
Here's their success. What I want you to note very quickly, 2007-2008 is before they came into the program. What we required is that they increase enrollment, and their scores improved dramatically, too. The big question was, can they continue to increase every year? Can they continue to increase enrollment? And the answer is, yes, they can, because we've started with the students in middle school, and they're feeding through.
And they've had incredible success. You can see they've had a 105% increase in scores over the time. Here's our group two schools. Representative Lampkin, you've got several in this category. Same pattern. They've had a 110% increase in qualifying scores and a 156% increase in students taking advanced placement, math, science, and English. I'll always remember in Hamburg, when we handed out the awards, a young woman came up and she had a baby,
and I mean a very young baby, in an infant carrier. And we gave her her award for AP Calculus. She had made a five on the calculus exam. And the young man with her, I'm going to call him a boy, really. He looked about 15. I hope he was 18, but he was pretty young. The teacher told me later that she had the baby the day before the calculus exam. She showed up the next day and sat for a three-hour calculus exam,
made her five, and went right on to college. That provided an opportunity for her. that she probably wouldn't have had otherwise she's still in school by the way group 3 schools same pattern dramatically increases enrollment dramatically increases scores group 4 schools last year was their first year and now let me qualify here two of our schools in group 4
are in school improvement. They're on that list of lowest performing high schools in the state of Arkansas. So we knew we were taking on a challenge. What I want you to notice is in those schools before we came in they had a sum total of 89 scores of 3, 4, and 5 in Mass, Science, English. Their first year in, that 89 jumped to 188 scores of 3, 4, and 5. So we, again, are showing any school can do this when they want to.
So here we are statewide. Yes, there are still a lot of holes. The commissioner's office sent out an e-mail statewide, and I already have schools calling me, we want in, we want to continue this. This is our last year of our grant, so we don't know if we're going forward, but they want in if we go forward. I polled all of my existing schools. They want to continue. So last year, we had 39 high schools, 35 districts, 10,248 students, 275 teachers, 300 courses,
and I have to tell you that my content consultants were in with all 275 teachers each month. They're in the classroom providing support to the teachers. That's part of the magic of the program. Now, here's our big results. Those 39 schools made up 17% of the high schools in the state of Arkansas, and yet they produced 43% of the state's scores in math, science, English.
They produced 51% of all the scores in the state in science, 43% in math, and 40% in English. Go back and look at your map. You'll see that while we have some large schools, we don't have the state's largest schools in our numbers. We have the little schools, the rural schools, the poor schools. and here's what I'm even more proud of
those 39 schools just 17% of the schools in the state produced 55% of all of the scores of 3, 4, and 5 produced by African American and Hispanic students they produced 65% of all of the AP science scores by these groups 54% of all the math scores and 53% of all of the English scores. So that 17% of the schools
produce the majority of the scores for the state and for minority students. And we're really, really proud of that because we see this is a model that is helping reduce the achievement gap between majority and minority students. And there are not many models out there that have the data to show they're really doing this. I wanted to know, have we made a difference? And so if you look, this breaks out our schools and when they join the program.
Dark blue is the rest of the state. Light blue is our schools. And you can see it reduces as they enter the program. Red is when they enter the program. What you can see is that the state's making progress. But our progress was very dramatic when they jumped. And then if you look at this one, and you have to study these for a while, and you can see exactly the same thing for minority. But particularly, I want you to note, the state as a whole is not doing well
in bringing in African American and Hispanic students into AP. Again, why not? They're not getting them in middle school like we are. They're not starting them in the pipeline. We say we go out and recruit kids, we do call the parents and say your child should be enrolled in this class. So we're very pleased with what we're doing. Again, our research, here's on time college graduation rate, and that's in that research packet. No AP, AP a score of three or better.
You can see the AP clearly makes a difference. And so today, we've created a dramatic increase in students taking the classes, and this will help college readiness. We've increased the scores in AP, and again, this helps college preparedness. We can account for the majority of the minority scores in the state. The correlation between AP and college success is very obvious.
We are a STEM model that works, and we're making a difference for Arkansas students. I'll be happy
Representative James McLean
Unverified
21:35
to take any questions. Well, we appreciate this very much. This is very exciting to me, the identification of talent and getting them involved with rigorous curriculum and then really unleashing the talent and the potential and through these These types of programs and these types of initiatives, this is going to get us where
we need to go as a state in terms of being competitive economically. And thank you so much for being here. I do believe we have a couple of questions. Rep. Deffenbaugh, you have a
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
22:13
question, sir? MR. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Ms. Anthony, I want to say I appreciate you and I really enjoyed the visit, gave me a a little bit of insight in what you're doing. And I'm really high on AP courses anyway. I just got to thank you on your honor statistics.
The Arkansas Research Center examined 13,030, you know, 2009 Arkansas grads.
Now, you may have said this. I'm just curious. Did you break
that down between the AP students that are in your program or just is that all AP in general? That's what I'm curious about.
Speaker 7
22:51
This particular study does not. He's done multiple studies and is actually doing another one for me just on our schools. We have broken it down that first year with those first ten schools,
but we haven't tracked it down. He felt like because we are now producing such a huge percentage of the AP students in the state of Arkansas, that it was probably more valid to look at AP across the state. So this particular study does not deal just with our schools. It's statewide. Okay. I appreciate that. I know it's a good program. I appreciate you.
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
23:29
Well, we thank you all for being here very many.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
23:36
Well, I want to just thank Representative Douglas, who kind of helped get you all here today. Thank you very much. And Representative Douglas, do you
Speaker 31
23:49
have a question before we let him go? As an AP biology teacher and anatomy and physiology, I've sat in her programs, and what impressed me about that is that I know our AP biology book had 50 monster chapters in it. The book looked like a budget report, and the overwhelming state of a teacher being assigned
to an AP Biology class, what they do is address how you break that down into chunks, how you manage it, you know, how you create a syllabus, stay on task, and get the kids to the test on time. And just the overwhelming amount of material that you have to teach in an AP class, you know, what they're doing is amazing. They don't take the creativity out for the teacher.
You still have room to put your own personality and creativity in it, but they give you a great bones for structuring the class and success for the students. So I appreciate what they've done and benefited myself from that and pass that on to my students. So thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much, Ms.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
25:04
Anthony, Mr. Fischer, Ms. Biggers. Thank you all for being here today. We very, very much appreciate your program. Thank you. Okay, committee, we're going to go into our agenda now.
We have a special order of business, House Bill 1262, Representative Eubanks. If you would be so kind to make your way to the end of the table. And when you are ready, sir, you are recognized to present
Speaker 36
25:35
your bill. MR. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Committee. Mr. Chair, with your permission, I'd like to
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
25:40
ask Dr. Abernathy to join me at the end of the table. We also have another large group of folks that are available to answer questions and
testify on this bill if necessary. They include the Department of Education, Rural Educators, School Board Association, the AASCD, and the AACIA. And I don't think there's enough room at the end of the table for all of them to come up. But if they have any input or wish to testify or if the committee has any questions for them, they are available.
Okay. I've known Dr. Abernathy for a number of years right now. We had the opportunity to work together in Paris when I was on the school board and he was superintendent. I know his commitment to education. We have a common goal. We don't always agree on how we get there, but we usually can talk through them. He approached me about sponsoring this bill. It's something that AAEA has been working on since August. They've put a lot of time into it.
They've tried to get input from all the pertinent groups, teachers and state board and that sort of thing. I'm just going to briefly give you some of the high points of this bill. One of the things that I think is very important about it is that it affords some flexibility to teachers and administrators on how they earn their professional development. I think one of the big things is that it rotates the requirements for mandated professional
development, and those include scholarship awareness, mandated reporter, parental involvement, teen suicide awareness, and Arkansas history. If you go to Section 8 on the bottom of page 5 of the bill, you'll see how that rotating schedule takes place, and if you have any other questions about that, I think it's pretty straightforward on how they do that on a four-year rotating schedule dealing with these particular subjects.
It also allows for the Department of Education to develop the curriculum that is needed for consistent training across the state. It also makes sure that potential teachers and administrators have this training before they receive their license. Like I said, there's people that are more knowledgeable on this subject. If the committee has any questions, they are here and ready to answer those questions. With that, Mr. Chair.
Speaker 40
28:25
Dr. Abernathy, do you have anything to add, sir? Thank you, Mr. Chair, and Mr. Eubanks, and Mr. Speaker, if you don't mind, I'd like to ask these people to come on to the end of the table because they have spent an enormous amount of time working on this legislation. Like Representative Eubanks said,
Speaker 42
28:45
we've been working on this issue since August. So with your pleasure, if they would come on
Representative James McLean
Unverified
28:51
up, I'd appreciate that. What we'll probably do is if the committee has any questions at this point,
we're going to go ahead and let the committee ask some questions, and then we have several folks who are with you all who are going to speak
Speaker 43
29:03
for the bill. So we'll get everybody taken care of. Representative Winterman, you have
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
29:09
a question, sir? Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am a co-sponsor on this bill, so I'm definitely in favor of it. We had three fiscal impacts that were done, and all of them alluded to the fact that there would be a savings to the local school districts. I really have two questions. One of them is, did we get a firm figure, John, as representative?
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
29:28
Sorry. Actually, no, we didn't get a number. But they said that there was a potential savings to the school districts because of the ability
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
29:42
to restructure how this takes place. Okay. Okay, and this may be for someone else, but on page 7, line 3, how may a local school district be approved to conduct some of their own professional development? That particular place alludes to the fact that the professional development has to be given by,
it cannot be given by a local school district, but it seemed to indicate that there is an avenue
Speaker 40
30:12
by which they could be approved. That particular section deals with before a teacher administrator obtained their license. And we have worked, part of the partnership that we've been working with is Act 222 committee, and that includes the deans of education from public and private schools and also multiple other groups. But what we're asking to do with this particular piece is that before someone receives their license,
they already have training in teen suicide awareness, for example. And so that would become part of their licensure process. Okay. Thank you.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
30:48
Thank you, Mr. Chair. MR. Thank you, Representative Linderman. Do we have
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
30:56
anybody else that has any questions from the committee? Representative Catlett. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP. REP.
REP. REP. REP. One of the things, sir, that I realized in my endeavor to be a politician is talking to teachers. And I remember so many times teachers look at me and say, not one more thing do we need to do. They're covered up. And I applaud you for making it simpler, Representative Eubanks, and hopefully the teachers will get some relief for this. Is this the objective, is this?
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
31:37
Well, I think the objective is just to make them the best possible teachers they can be and give them some flexibility on how they get to that point. The whole purpose is just to enhance their abilities and student achievement.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
31:54
Well, I applaud you for this. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Do we have any other questions for the committee? Okay.
Speaker 59
32:07
Representative Douglas. The new teacher test that
Speaker 31
32:09
they have to take, if you could address where that's going to fit in the professional development
and how that's going to replace the chunk that you're
Speaker 40
32:21
taking out. Actually, I'm glad you asked that. And I'm going to back up just a little bit and give a little broader background. Beckham, Norton, and Pikes was here in 2003 conducting the initial adequacy study. multiple areas were addressed but one of the things that they brought up back in 2003 was effective professional development is defined as professional development that produces changes in classroom based instructional practices which can be
linked to student achievement student learning. That was back in 2003 they said the single most important thing we can do to help our teachers is provide them high quality professional development then we move on to 2006 with Arkansas recalibration report And they said improving teacher effectiveness through high-quality professional development is as if not more important than any other resource strategy identified. That's in 2006. Move on to 2012. The advocacy committee asked the Bureau of Legislative Research to conduct a study on a professional development.
Many of you said throughout that meeting, Dr. Brent Benda presented the presentation to you. He had several things that lined out from research, and then also when they went out and conducted surveys of schools, teachers, administrators, et cetera, what was currently happening. And one of the things they found or suggested was that instead of requiring so many of the same units every year, thought to be necessary, could be staggered over some interval of years. That's coming from the Bureau of Legislative Research. Something else they indicated was some PD units present redundant material from one year to another,
and some units are not even relevant to instruction in the classroom. Representative Linderman asked me the question that one of the comments he hears is that teachers have the same in-service over and over and over, and all of us, if you've been out there, you've heard that comment. And our answer to that comment was you're exactly right because it is professional development that has been mandated by the legislature for us to conduct over and over and over. We conduct some of that professional development, and it is boring, boring, boring.
And so part of this bill, working with all these different groups, is how can we reduce that, still give our teachers relevant professional development, but allow them more time to work and focus on instructional strategies, such as tests that's coming up. That's going to be 21 hours of training that our teachers will have to take that has not been part of the 60 hours. and using the report from Dr. Benden in BLR about rotating some of these professional development strategies around. And so that's what this bill is attempting to do.
So any legislation that's required by law, required by rule, or meets the criteria would count towards their minimum of 60 hours of professional development because we don't think it's fair to require something for teacher administrators and then not cover it under their contract. You shouldn't just have to go get something on your own time just because you're graceful enough to teach i mean they need to be compensated for so we think that's important but the other thing we need to allow them some flexibility some time to where they can focus on things that's going to improve instruction that's that's the whole goal of it and throughout this bill and work with
different people in different groups i mean this is what really we have come up with to try to resolve that issue and get back to focusing on instructional strategies in the classroom that's It's actually going to improve student achievement, as Oden and Pike has suggested back in 2003. That's the premise of this bill, if that helps you any. Representative Douglas. But you're putting 12 hours back in. 12 hours back in. For the
Speaker 59
35:51
test, is that? It would be in the 60 hours.
Speaker 31
36:00
Right. But I'm just worried that the 12 you're putting back in are going to create the same situation we've got now with the 12 you're maybe taking out. Okay. Well, let me be sure
Speaker 61
36:13
and I'm clear. We're not taking out anything. You're allowing them to rotate
Speaker 40
36:20
it. It is still 60 hours. I mean, that's what the latest lecture has compensated teachers for in school districts, and so that remains the same. Right. What this bill does is some of those 60 hours are mandated legislatively for you to do every single year.
Speaker 64
36:34
And what we're doing, instead of doing that every
Speaker 31
36:38
year, let's rotate it. Yeah, I see that. I was just saying that we're putting 12 in this year for the test, right? And that falls under the PD? Well, and I think it's more like
Speaker 40
36:52
21. I'm just saying we've still got a problem. We still have a big problem. And I'll tell you something else that's coming. There are many, many bills out there in the legislation that requires additional training for whatever. Folks, we have a problem with professional development, and this is what we worked on since August,
what we knew at that time would try to alleviate that problem. And I
Speaker 31
37:12
think this is a great step. I support this. I think it's a great step. But then when we're putting that 21 hours back in, I just wondered. I agree. Twenty-one hours, in
Speaker 40
37:21
my understanding, of course, the department can speak for themselves, but once they receive the training, then they don't, it's not 21 hours every year. One time. It's just one time. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank
Speaker 43
37:35
you, Representative Douglas. Do we have any other questions from the committee?
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
37:39
Okay, Representative Hobbs. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Dr. Abernathy, we have talked about this before, and, you know, you said we still have problems. Yes, ma'am. And I'm wondering if the reason you're not trying to address them all at once is that because you think they won't pass all at once. You're exactly right. And I hate to put you on the spot, but. No, that's very accurate. Have you considered writing such a bill that you think
would really be what is needed for our teachers and for our students,
and then just seeing if this committee would buy into it? I
Speaker 40
38:21
think we could probably draft one fairly quick because what is needed, in my opinion, to enhance and improve student achievement is addressed with an act you passed last year dealing with teacher evaluation. Exactly. And those evaluation plans of those teachers say that half of their professional development should be towards their needs, their identified needs. And then if they're on a certain, I forgot the exact terminology, but improvement, then all of it should be based on their identified needs.
To me, all of it should be based on their identified needs. And if it's not identified as a need, then why are you sitting through it? But also understand political reality. You have school safety issues that are coming up that requires training. dyslexia bills out there requires training i mean we can go on and on and bottom line we think we hope that we can get this passed does it solve our issue
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
39:14
from this point forward no ma'am okay well
and again i've been on the parental involvement committees and i feel like okay
we've done that now we can check it off and to me education is to be more than a checklist And so I would be very interested in seeing what you think, because when school districts are succeeding and we have evidence they are succeeding, to me they know what they're doing. And, you know, if they want to advance from that, then
they should have the flexibility to do so. Do you agree? Yes, ma'am, I do. And as a matter
Speaker 40
39:50
of fact, we have put together another bill that I think will be of very interest of you,
and that's our innovation bill, which will allow school districts who are achieving to do exactly what you're talking about.
Speaker 93
40:02
Thank you. Thank you for your work. Yes, ma'am. Thank you,
Chair
Unverified
40:06
Mr. Chair. Thank you, Representative Hollins. Representative Catlett. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I make a motion
Representative James McLean
Unverified
40:13
to pass. Okay. We have some people. We'll take that a little bit later. We do have a lot of folks here who have signed up to speak for the bill. and against the bill. If there are no other questions, we are going to go to the audience. I will just add that brevity is the soul of wit.
We have a lot of people who are signed up to speak. So we are going to begin with Mr. Rich Nagel, and he is going to be speaking against the bill. Mr. Nagel, if you would be so kind to go to the end of
Speaker 1
40:53
the table, and when you are ready, sir, you may proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker 99
41:03
I'm Rich Nagel with the Arkansas Education Association, and let me begin by saying even though I'm going to speak against the bill, the Arkansas Education Association agrees in large with what the bill is trying to do, and that is to kind of simplify and not require some of this professional development to be done every
Speaker 100
41:31
single year. So my first concern with the bill is on page two in section two, lines 19 through 23.
Speaker 99
41:47
The bill actually does reduce the number of hours required around professional development And as it relates to parental involvement, and our belief is that real meaningful school reform and improvement requires even more parental involvement and parental engagement
and community support. And we do think that at the school site is the best place for that to occur. Next
Speaker 100
42:33
concern is on page 3, lines 21 and 22. This sets forth a definition of professional development.
Speaker 99
42:52
And because of all the ors that are listed, it's required either by the statute or the department, or meets the criteria set forth in lines 20 through 31. And it seems to say to us that if your professional development meets those criteria that are listed, then it doesn't need to meet what's required in statute and it doesn't need to
meet what's required under the department rules. This is a very significant change that we think needs to be made.
Speaker 100
43:40
Also in lines 25 and 27, kind of a technical point, one is that
Speaker 99
43:48
professional development It is to improve the knowledge and skills and effectiveness of teachers. But for administrators and para-professionals, it only needs to address their knowledge.
We think those should both be the same, either both improve or both address. Our preference would be both improve.
Speaker 99
44:21
this is a change from even the current legislation, but I think in line 10 we should give very serious consideration to substituting may
and putting in its place shall. The reasoning there is so many of our students with either disabilities or because of cultural influences, and I include poverty as part of a culture, I think all of our professional development should in some way, especially if it's content-based professional development,
teachers with a deeper understanding of how to reach or how to teach students with disabilities, including students with autism, and what kind of challenges there are in terms of teaching culturally diverse groups. I'm not saying that all of the professional development needs to be about that, but I think if we look at where our students are not succeeding and
which students are not succeeding, that part of all professional development should at least include something about how to do this with students with disabilities or autism and other cultural factors that might be barriers
Speaker 99
46:10
page six, lines 26 through 28.
We have no problem with the requirement for six hours of technology, but it's not clear whether those six hours of technology required, if they're required by the Department, can be used to satisfy the 60-hour requirement. And we do fully support the 60-hour requirement. On the top of page seven, and I don't think this was intentional, but I think there needs
to be some clarification around the use of subsection in line two. As I understand subsection, it refers to all the professional development that's offered in the code. And this section E1 is a prohibition against school districts providing professional development and leaves the responsibility for the professional development to the
department to the institutions and to other providers and if subsection which we do think it means refers to the entire section on professional development this would actually bar school districts from providing other professional development that concludes our comments be happy to answer any
Representative James McLean
Unverified
47:56
questions thank you mr. Nigel um have you had any has the AEA had any dialogue with the sponsor of the bill yes but far too limited okay okay thank you do we Do we have any questions from the committee? Oh, and let me add. Yes, sir. It's not their
Speaker 99
48:11
limitation. It's my limitation. I understand. Thank you for that clarification. Oh, and, yeah. Okay. Representative Hobbs. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
48:26
Do you know what our colleges of education already include when they are educating our teachers as far as these professional development hours, I mean, are required? In other words, if you go through the College of Education, are you taught about, you know, identifying or at least maybe being aware of, you know, teen suicide and child abuse
and some of these things that
Speaker 99
49:01
are required here? I would not think so. Otherwise, we wouldn't be saying that now they should be, because as I read this, those areas that are listed are to be done by
Speaker 109
49:19
these other providers. I understand that,
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
49:22
but I guess my point is it seems to me that our colleges of education
already covering a lot of the information in professional development days. And,
you know, when Dr. Abernathy referred to the repetitiveness, I would think, I mean, I don't know, but I would think teachers would be taught use of technology. And I would also hope that if a school has teachers that do not know that they would see that they do learn that, whether it's, you know, they might learn it one hour,
it might take six hours for some. But I guess that was my first question, is I think, you
know, again, it goes back to that checklist. Why not
see what the need is and then meet that need rather than us sitting in this room, who a lot of us haven't been in the classroom in a long time, some have, and I think give us great insight. However, we're making those decisions, and I would hope that our superintendents and teachers would ask for what they need and would see to it.
But another question I have, you talked about the parental involvement piece. Are charter schools mandated to have professional development days? Yes. Are they mandated to have the parental involvement piece? Do we mandate that, or are they given flexibility? Well, they're public
Speaker 99
50:52
schools and they're public school teachers, and I think they're required to have the same professional development. MS. Even
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
51:00
though they're chartering, I thought charter was to give that flexibility. MR. Yeah, but I think they've got a
Speaker 99
51:06
phase of professional development that's built into
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
51:09
their contracts. MS. The same 60? Okay. And I guess, again, my question is just because,
you know, if the state doesn't say you have to have parental involvement, do you not believe that
teachers still will get their parents involved if it's
Speaker 99
51:38
I think there's a lot of different ways to provide parental involvement and encourage
parents to participate, and one of the problems is we can't always get enough parents to be involved and engaged in the professional development. Let me say that it's not in this bill, it's in the code currently, but teachers have a there are effective mechanisms for them to determine and be involved in professional development. The current law, and this bill doesn't change that, requires that teachers be involved,
not just teachers, but administrators and classified employees, that they all be involved in the design, the development, and the implementation and the evaluation of the professional development. And the evaluation is to be done in writing, and those evaluation results are supposed to be used in planning future professional development. It's been in the code for, I'm going to say, at least eight to ten years.
So the mechanisms are there for people to be involved in the professional development in terms of what is offered. Getting back to your question about do the colleges and universities, there are a lot of them, as you know, and I think their curriculums are somewhat different, although there's a lot of similarities, so I don't profess to know what all the colleges
Speaker 116
53:17
and universities provide. MS. Thank you. MR.
Thank you, Mr. Nagel. We're now going to recognize a couple of folks who are going to speak for the bill, Dr. Mary Gunter and Dr. Matt McClure.
Speaker 99
53:28
If you would. MR. One final comment. We'll continue to work with the sponsors of the bill and the other education
Speaker 110
53:36
groups to fix the things that at least we raised today. MR.
Speaker 77
53:42
Thank you. Dr. Gunter and Dr. McClure, you are recognized.
Mary Gunter
Unverified
53:54
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My name is Mary Gunter, and I am the Executive
Speaker 119
53:59
Director of Arkansas Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. We are a professional organization that is made up of a diverse population of educator members. people from the teaching classroom environment. We have our school leaders, our superintendents, our curriculum directors, state agency representatives. We have community members, and we have representatives from the higher ed community. We have been long proponents of professional development
quality and sustained over time. As Dr. Abernathy brought us the history of where we've been Even with professional development, Arkansas ISCD had presented resolutions to the House Committee numerous times, as well as communities, to help us realize the need to increase from 30 hours to 60. And so we applauded that movement when it took place. Those 60 hours are very precious to us in our business. It's something that keeps us well-trained and well-focused on the multitude of agendas
that we are given year in and year out. And with the changing times, we find that the flexibility we need with those 60 hours becomes very important to us. What we want to say in support of this bill is the continued flexibility that we give to rotate those things that we find mandated through law and those things that we know we are going to have to meet, whether it be training for Common Core, for the test program
that you're talking about, for child maltreatment, whatever it might be, that we have some local control to be able to utilize those hours to best serve our schools, our development and our needs. We've prepared a resolution, and this resolution is something we think can bring conversation not just today, but in the future as we look at what professional development is and how it can move forward. The question as far as higher ed, another part of my role is I am a professor of education
at Arkansas Tech University, and we do have curriculums that meet many of these areas that are prescribed by law as we introduce our students to the field of teaching or leadership. We have standards of accreditation where you will find that we must comply with helping our students understand parent involvement strategies, work diversity of population, and we have a law that requires us to actually do the child maltreatment training prior to
them leaving. What this piece of legislation does is even strengthens that among the universities. So we are really excited about having a comprehensive bill like this that although there may be other areas we'd like to move forward on, we think a first step will be very beneficial. I'd like to introduce Dr. Matt McClure, who is the legislative chair for Arkansas ASCD. You also have a fact sheet that we've distributed that will give you some information about our organization.
We have members of our board, if they might stand briefly, so you can identify them to help you have a point of contact of people that are very knowledgeable in this area and ready to serve you and answer those questions. To the sponsor, we certainly appreciate you and all that have signed on to this bill. And if Dr. McClure would take a minute to share the resolution concept. Dr. Yes. Thank
Speaker 121
57:29
you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. At this time, I would direct you to look
Speaker 122
57:35
on the second page of the resolution. I think it's important that we look at all of the people that have adopted this resolution, obviously the Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators, Arkansas Rural School Association, the School Board Association, Arkansas Professors of Ed Leadership, Arkansas Leadership Academy, Arkansas Center for Executive Leadership, and Arkansas Education Deans Association. So I think Dr. Abernathy and Representative Eubanks did an excellent job of kind of pointing
out the issues that we have right now with professional development. Right now, we're at a critical period in education. We talked about, Representative Douglas asked the question about tests. We also have common core state standards. And committee members, we're at a point right now, both of these programs or initiatives were designed to fundamentally change what it is that we're doing in the classroom. It was to take the teacher from being in front of the class, almost operating it like you
would operate a faucet, that when they thought it was the time to let the knowledge out, to slowly give that out to the students, then students give it back on some kind of rote memorization. And so what we're talking about is we're talking about moving that to where they're more of a facilitator in the classroom. And kids are not just learning things from a rote memorization standpoint, but they're actually learning in a way that's relevant. They're applying that learning. It's real-world situations in the classroom. And so when we look at that and we look at the charge that we have ahead of us,
this resolution is asking you to consider three things. The first one is that you resist any attempt to decrease the overall 60 hours. And the sentiment that I'm getting from the committee listening today and talking with several of you individually is that you support that. The second one is to resist any additional mandated professional development within those 60 hours. And as Dr. Abernathy spoke earlier, that's going to be critical because there are going to be important things that come before you,
that when you look at it isolated, you say, this is something that we need to do for teachers, But what this resolution hopefully will do is it will keep reminding you of the bigger picture. And the last one is support the expectation that within those 60 hours, you're only going to support things that actually drive teacher effectiveness and ultimately student achievement in the classroom. And with that, I would conclude with Dr. Gunner that Argosal ASED fully supports this bill,
And we would hope that any time that additional bills come before you this session, they have training in
Speaker 124
1:00:31
it that you will consider and look at it through this filter or this lens. Thank
Speaker 3
1:00:37
you, Dr. Gunter and Dr. McClure. Representative Douglas, do you have
Speaker 31
1:00:43
a question? Yes, I'm just looking at the members of your board, your board of directors. Do you have a slot
Speaker 121
1:00:50
there for classroom teachers? Yes, ma'am, we do.
Speaker 119
1:00:52
Amy Covey was our classroom teacher that was elected to the board,
and then about 30 days after that
Mary Gunter
Unverified
1:00:59
she was moved into a curriculum administrator role. So you
Speaker 31
1:01:02
have one classroom teacher on the board that's looking at policy for professional development? We have a
Speaker 119
1:01:09
new leader teacher organization that's a subset of this. That sits in advisement to this board. I would
Speaker 31
1:01:17
just suggest that that might be something you would want to get some more feedback from boots on the ground, as I would call it, and it might give you a little bit different perspective.
Speaker 122
1:01:33
I think one of the things that we do is, obviously, we're a member organization made up of teachers all the way through superintendents. But they're not on your board. Right, but one of the critical issues is getting feedback from your membership. And we do that through e-mails asking for input. You know, we run a blog of what's going on in the legislative session, things like that. So we're still reaching out to them. One of the issues that we've run into the past with teachers on the board is them getting the leave time to attend meetings and things like that.
I don't think it's an excuse, but at the same time, you know, that we are
Speaker 31
1:02:10
striving for. So administrators don't have trouble getting release time from the district, but the
Speaker 122
1:02:16
teachers do? I don't know that I would agree with that, but I'm saying that in this situation, administrators sometimes control their situation about being out of the building to go to a meeting, and a teacher is going to have to ask someone else for that permission to leave. Okay.
Speaker 74
1:02:34
Thank you very much, Dr. Dean Douglas.
Chair
Unverified
1:02:37
We're getting to the point where my good friend Representative John Burris likes to say we're wallowing the possum bear. So what we're going to do is, do we have anybody in the audience who wishes to speak against the bill? And the folks that
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:02:52
we have remaining who want to speak for the bill, is there anything dynamic and unique that we need to add to what's already been said? If not, okay, very good.
Speaker 116
1:03:03
Representative Ratliff, do you have a quick question? Okay, you got it.
Do we have any other, do we
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
1:03:19
have, Reverend Biviano? Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like Dr. Aprenapty to have an opportunity to respond to Mr. Nagel's comments earlier about some issues within the bill. Perhaps you could just kind of give us your opinion, and you said there was some discussion, but I think we could respond. We have an immediate
Speaker 116
1:03:36
consideration. Motion, all in favor? Aye. Okay, very well. So I'm sorry about that, Reverend Viviano, but I think we're going to be okay on this one.
What is the pleasure of the committee
Chair
Unverified
1:03:49
in regard to House Bill 1262? Rep. Trinidad Catley, do you have a motion? Yes, sir. I move. Do pass. We have a do pass motion on House Bill 1262. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much for your time and consideration today. Thank you, Rep. Trinidad Eubanks. Thank you, Mr. Chair, committee. Okay, now, members, we're going to move on to House Bill 1252. There is an amendment to House Bill 1252 which will be presented by Representative Edwards.
And, sir, if you'd be so kind to make your way to the end of the table, you
Speaker 135
1:04:32
may proceed with your amendment to House Bill 1252. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The first thing
Representative John Charles Edwards
Unverified
1:04:38
I want to do is thank Representative Viviano for his leadership on this issue and for working with me on this amendment. What this amendment does is it makes any department created under this bill
subject to the Freedom of Information Act to the same degree as any other law enforcement agency. If you're going to be working with public police departments, it just provides some consistency and oversight, and I think it makes an improvement for the public safety of these campuses. That's it, sir. Members, the amendment has
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:05:15
been published. It should be on your tablets. If not, we will make sure that you receive a hard copy of the amendment.
Do we have any questions from the committee in regard to the amendment to House Bill 1252? If not, do we have anyone from the audience who wishes to speak against the amendment? Do we have anyone who wishes to speak for the amendment? If not, excuse me, sir, do you wish to speak for or against the amendment? Okay. I believe you're testifying for the bill. Okay, we will make sure that you're recognized when we get to that.
Chair
Unverified
1:05:57
What's the pleasure of the committee in regard to the amendment? Representative Linderman? Move, do pass. We have a do pass on the amendment to House Bill 1252. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? The amendment is adopted. Representative Biviano, you are now recognized to present House Bill 1252 as
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
1:06:13
amended. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With your permission, I would ask Mr. Craig Russell from Harding University and Mr. Curtis Johnson from Arkansas Baptist to join me at the table. They're recognized. Members, a little history.
I actually passed this bill in the last session with a unanimous vote. We was at the very end of the session. We got kind of stalled in the Senate. So two years has really told us that this bill really needs to be passed. On Tuesday in this committee, we heard some testimony, We passed a bill regarding carrying guns on universities in certain situations and arming people that, well, have some training, don't always necessarily have the limited number of hours in training that certified police officers have in our society.
It may come to surprise you that in the state of Arkansas, only in public universities can a police officer, A certified police officer has arrest powers or detention powers and investigative powers. And our several private universities across our state, we do not allow that, which is a little surprising to me because, as you heard in testimony on Tuesday, there's a tremendous amount of violence and criminal activity that's going on.
And believe me, our private universities are not excluded from that. In fact, you know, the criminals are pretty smart. They understand and they realize that public safety offices in our private university do not have these detention powers, arrest powers, and in many cases they've actually been targeted. So I would ask you, that's what this bill does. This gives the power within our private universities, universities like Harding and Arkansas Baptist, It's the ability to hire certified police officers that have gone through the academy
that are trained just like normal police officers, give them the ability to stop, detain, arrest, and investigate those with any criminal activity that's occurring on their campus. I would hope when my daughter attends one of these private universities next year that I have a little more comfort and safety and ease of mind knowing that if, for some reason, she's a victim of a crime, that we've given them every tool possible in order to deter this.
Chair
Unverified
1:08:50
And with that, I'll open it up for questions. MR. Representative Bibiano,
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:08:55
thank you for that. Do Mr. Russell or Mr. Johnson have anything to add
Craig Russell
Unverified
1:09:01
to your testimony? MR. My name is Craig Russell. I'm the Public Safety Director for Harding University, and thank you, Mr. Chair and the committee for considering this. My primary job is to make sure that the students at my university are safe. And we have about 7,000 students and about 1,000 employees on our campus. So we are the size of a medium-sized city here in Arkansas.
And because of the way that the current law is structured, we simply do not have the tools that all of the public universities here in the state and many private universities and surrounding states have to provide that safety to our universities. So we're simply asking for the exact same tools that the state has already deemed proper and necessary for the public universities, and, again, many states around us have said is needed for private universities as well. Thank you.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:09:54
MR. Representative Lenderman, do we have anything else to add in testimony?
Speaker 142
1:09:58
MR. Mr. Johnson, if you want to say anything. MR. Mr. Johnson, if you
Curtis Johnson
Unverified
1:10:04
have anything to add, please. Mr. Johnson, if you have anything to add, please feel free. Yes, Mr. Chairman, real simply put. My name is Curtis Johnson. I'm the director of campus safety for Arkansas Baptist College. Though my campus is a little bit more unique than where Craig's location is in Searcy, Arkansas, mine is just eight blocks south of the state capitol. And in recent news, you guys are well aware of some of the shooting incidents that I've had on my campus where I lost a young man on the 27th of September.
My primary concern is that there are resources that are available to public schools that we don't have access to. And if we were simply were given the same playing field as those institutions, we could greatly impact the numbers that we're dealing with now. And I'll give you a prime example. My crime rate is down 70 percent around my educational institution based solely on our individual effort. If you give us the opportunity to become law enforcement agencies, we can greatly reduce the crime rate even further. you very much for your
Speaker 60
1:11:00
time. Thank you, sir. Representative Lindemann, you have a question,
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
1:11:03
sir? Yes, I do. First thing, Representative Viviano, I want you to know I support this effort. I do have a question. Actually, on page one, lines 35 and 36 indicates that a law enforcement officer is permitted to attend the Law Enforcement Training Academy. Is there a requirement on all of our college campuses that those people that serve as law enforcement officers must have completed law
Speaker 143
1:11:29
enforcement training. There's currently a mixture amongst the public schools and the public schools.
If they have security departments, they can get those guys licensed through Act 429. But primarily, if
Curtis Johnson
Unverified
1:11:39
you're a sworn officer, you go through the Lita Academy, either in Camden or Little Rock. Thank you. Thank you.
Speaker 43
1:11:49
Thank you, Representative Linderman. Do we have any other questions?
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:11:52
If not, Representative Carnot? Here we have a motion do pass as amended. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes as amended. Thank you very much. Thank you to the
Chair
Unverified
1:12:05
committee. Okay, members, we are now going to take up House Bill 1270. Representative Catlett, if you'd be so kind to make your way at the end of the table,
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:12:24
and when you are ready, sir, you may proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Members, I would like to ask Dr. Joe Bates to join me,
please. And also, Attorney Robert Birch. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, members, you probably asked yourself, what's Catlett know about tuberculosis?
And in my past lifetime, I know that if you want to prove the point, you better bring your witnesses with you. So I'm proud and pleased to introduce you to a fellow Arkansan that's a world-renowned expert in tuberculosis. And what we are trying to do is to repeal the requirement for tuberculosis screening for public schools and employees and volunteers. And simply put, it's not needed anymore.
And I would like for my guest to introduce himself and maybe respond on that. Thank you. And let me just add that
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:13:28
Dr. Bates is a world-renowned expert in tuberculosis. here in the state of Arkansas and our committee today. So I thank you so much for being here. Appreciate your service to the state of
Speaker 36
1:13:41
Arkansas. Honored that you're here. Dr. Bates, you may proceed. Thank you, sir.
Speaker 150
1:13:48
I don't know that I have specific things to add. Just to review briefly, this first act was passed in 1930 that required these things. And at that time, tuberculosis was one of the leading causes of death in Arkansas. We had the largest tuberculosis sanatorium in the United States at Boonville. We had 1,000 beds there. It was a big, big problem, and screening teachers and a lot of other people was necessary.
Arkansas led the nation usually in case rates for tuberculosis. Now we're lower than the national average. We had 4,000 or 5,000 cases a year in the 30s. We're down to 80, 80 cases a year now. So screening a lot of populations that were important in the past is no longer necessary. I'm sure the teachers will be glad to get out of this requirement, and it'll save the state about a half million dollars a year.
So it's pretty no-brainer to me to stop doing this. Well, Dr. Bates,
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:15:00
I think you had us at hello. And with that,
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:15:06
audience? Excuse me, does the committee have any questions? Okay, Mr. Birch, do you have anything to answer? Not behind Dr. Bates. Okay, yeah. Very good. But does anyone in the audience wish to speak against the bill, for the bill?
If not, what is the pleasure of the committee? We
Chair
Unverified
1:15:30
have a do pass. Motion. Representative Hobbs, all in favor? All opposed? Motion passes. Thank
Speaker 116
1:15:42
you, gentlemen, very much. Okay. Committee, we are going to now hear House Bill 1017.
Chair
Unverified
1:15:47
Representative Altus you are recognized to present your bill thank you mr. chair
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:15:55
Wanda can you do that pass out the handout we have okay my bill is real
simple it changes absolutely nothing I passed it out of the house last session and they killed it in the Senate. So since then, I've amended it so that on the last page, the third page, you'll see no rules, no changes in rules or regulations are required. We're teaching the Bible now in five Little Rock high schools. I think Cabot, Gentry or Gravit or somewhere up there.
It's being taught in Arkansas schools now. So the only thing I want to do is codify what we're presently doing, the present practice, so that hopefully nothing will be changed in the future. Appreciate a good vote. You can read the little handout that I have. I'd be glad to
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:17:05
answer any questions. Thank you, Representative Altus. Do we have any questions from the committee? Representative Armstrong, you're recognized.
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:17:14
This is an elective, right? Yes, everything's voluntary. There's nothing mandatory about it. Everything is optional. It's an elective. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative Douglas.
Speaker 135
1:17:26
What are the requirements for teaching the class?
Speaker 31
1:17:30
Volunteer. Do you think we need to set some requirements for that? MR. Everything is in place now. Oh, okay.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:17:45
Thank you, Mr. Chair. MR. Okay. Do we have anyone, any other questions from the committee? Do we have anyone who wishes to speak against the bill? Dr.
Speaker 135
1:18:03
Kimbrell? Okay. Why are you bringing them up? Does anybody from the AG's office have anything to add? Very well.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:18:10
Does anyone wish to speak for the bill? If not, what is the pleasure of the committee?
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:18:17
I have a question. What pleasure? I would like to hear from the Attorney General's office on this issue, what his views. Is
Speaker 167
1:18:34
that okay? That's proper, yes. Good morning, Representative Altus. Good morning, committee. Scott Richardson from the Attorney General's Office. I think the question on everybody's mind is the Establishment Clause of the Federal Constitution and whether or not this bill would entangle the state into potential Establishment Clause
problems. I assume that's where we're going. If I'm incorrect, you all please interrupt me and ask something else. But I think that potential is there. The bill is written fairly carefully to try and avoid establishment clause problems. I know it's being
Speaker 170
1:19:14
done in other states. But it is focused on one religion, one text from one religion, one that I happen to adhere to and believe in.
uh but there is a problem there is um you know the government is required to be neutral as to religion under the federal establishment clause and this does open the door to i mean the school districts that have chosen to do this i don't know what how they've implemented it how they've done it or how this bill would relate to the what they're doing right now But they have chosen to take that risk.
And we don't have anyone from the school district suggesting that they have a problem in having these classes or if there's any need for this legislation. So to my mind, we're sort of opening ourselves up to the state being pulled into that kind of litigation without any real need. I'm not necessarily here to oppose the bill because I think it is carefully written.
I think there is an argument that it should survive constitutional scrutiny, but I can also see an argument that it should not and that it would enshrine in state statutes a practice that is constitutionally questionable, whether or not we agree with the merits of the bill or the merits of teaching an academic study of the Bible.
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
1:20:57
thank you i i have a question have we had schools and representative altus this may be for you if
we had schools that have requested the opportunity to teach this in their curriculum there's eight seven or eight schools now okay and uh and an answer you made while ago this would this would It would be taught by a regular classroom teacher that is a history teacher or this wouldn't be a volunteer coming in and teaching a class. Okay. And the next question, if a school applied to teach this, would the, I'm sure the Department of Ed would have to approve the curriculum.
Would the Attorney General's Office give an opinion on that curriculum at that time or would they be asked
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:21:47
to? I'm sorry. My bill doesn't change anything. We presently have the application forms here where a school can apply to teach a different curriculum, and those are the same forms for any other different curriculum you want to teach. really doesn't, like I said, my bill doesn't change anything.
If I could refer to what he was saying, the U.S. Supreme Court has clearly stated, oh, if you would read this real quickly, I've underlined a few things. The U.S. Supreme Court has clearly stated the Bible, this is the quote, the Supreme Court quote, the Bible may constitutionally be used in an appropriate study of history, civilization, ethics, comparative religion, or the like. The U.S. Supreme Court, Stone v. Graham, 449, whatever that means, 39-42-1980.
Also, the Supreme Court further stated in Abington v. Schimp that it certainly may be said that the Bible is worthy of study for its literary and historic qualities. Nothing we have said here indicates that such a study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as a part of a secular public school program or education, may not be affected consistently with the First Amendment. So there's 38 states. You can read down here at the bottom of this little page.
There's 38 states teaching the Bible, 687 school districts, over 2,300 high schools. Over a half a million students have taken the course. It's a voluntary elective course for study. And like I said, my bill doesn't do anything. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Eddie L. Armstrong
Unverified
1:23:35
you're talking about teaching the Bible what if some other religions religion would come in Scott how would that affect
if I had some other Judaism or something like that that book how would that affect
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:23:51
I don't know I think it's in the 7th grade I'm not on the education committee for a reason But I think in the seventh grade there's a course called World Religions or Comparative World Religions or something. You know more about this than I do. But anyway, they teach, you know, a lot of the Bible.
I don't know what all they teach, Koran, other different religions. And I've talked to a couple of – I've got a person in my church that has talked to me about it, and they teach a lot of different things, but they do teach a lot of the
Speaker 78
1:24:32
Bible I think it's in the seventh grade. MR. Good afternoon. You have Hobbs. MS. Thank you,
Speaker 167
1:24:38
Mr. Chair. Mr. Richardson, do you believe this bill is defensible in court? MR. There's a fine line here. And then to Representative Armstrong's question,
Speaker 170
1:24:45
one of the issues would be that it sets up
the courses for just one book, and the government is required to be neutral as to religion. I mean, there are reasons to look strongly at that book. I mean, I happen to agree it has a significant effect on history. But if you're going to allow it as to one, then you're going to have to allow it as to others as well. And this bill doesn't necessarily do that. It doesn't prohibit it. So that could, Representative
Speaker 167
1:25:16
Armstrong has a point here, that could be a problem for the bill.
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
1:25:21
um and and again the fact that it is an elective course would that not affect a
Speaker 170
1:25:34
court's decision as would how the course is implemented in the local school district and then you would have a question of did the state statute foster that um you know if the if the course turns into more be doctrinal or proselytizing type of course, then you're going to have real problems.
Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. Okay. If it stayed as a pure academic study, for instance, like the course that Representative Altis referred to, which is a broad-based world of religions course that's going to look at all of the religions, I mean, that's certainly the most constitutionally defensible. if the book comes up. And what the quote from the case that he referred to is referring to is, in the course of studying history, if the Bible comes up, that's fine.
But a course focused solely on the Bible becomes much more problematic. And I can't give you an opinion that this is constitutionally defensible. I can't give you an opinion that it would fail a constitutional challenge either. However, if it did end up in court, you would defend it and make those
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
1:26:46
arguments according to the defense, correct? That is my job. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Chair. Thank you. Representative Douglas.
Speaker 31
1:27:00
Just again in reference to just coming out of the classroom, I know teachers are, you know, we're free to discuss a lot of things in the classroom, but, you know, our religious beliefs or a question about the Bible or a question about what we believe is we're almost scared to say something about that. And, you know, in God we trust. It's on all of our, it's on our money.
It's a core part of our belief system in this country. And I feel like if we do not have the freedom to discuss and have a class about the Bible, which is a historical book and has much history in it, much good in it, then I think that's going to send a, you know, a scare tactic almost to teachers that we can't say anything about these things in the classroom.
We need to have the freedom to do that. So, you know, I think this would be good to have in the curriculum in schools because it would open up conversations for kids that are scared to say things or teachers that are scared to say things. I think it would be a good thing for teachers and students. Well,
Speaker 170
1:28:24
now I didn't write the rules on all this either, but I'm here to inform you of them. And what you're talking about is kind of a slippery slope towards what would be prohibited.
Yes. You know, whether or not we agree with those rules, those are the rules. One thing I think ought to be clear, and I think the representative has done that, this bill doesn't change the current practice. School districts are free to do this if they want to. The current elective rules allow them to do this, and they can adopt other courses that are similar in nature. So this bill really doesn't add anything to the equation. doesn't advance the cause all it does is involve the state more directly in it
which you know it given the the fine constitutional line being walked here I think it'd be advisable to let the school districts if they want to have engage in this let them do that and they have that ability they go to the state board they can they can do all of this right now but we don't have to entangle the state in that. So let me just, kind
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:29:37
of for my own clarification, we kind of can do what we want to do now
without the legal entanglements or less of them, but if we kind of move forward with this, potentially we're looking at liability. Is that kind of what I'm getting here? No difference in the
Speaker 185
1:29:58
liability. I would agree with your statement, Representative McLean. Mr. Chairman.
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
1:30:05
Okay. Okay. Representative Viviano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In light of that comment, it says in this information that 38 states currently teach this curriculum
and that there's been no challenges, legal challenges. And I understand the risk that you have outlined. What's your opinion on the fact that there's been no legal challenges in any one of those 38 states, which some of them are obviously outside the Bible Belt and maybe even California, who knows? What would be your opinion on that?
Speaker 170
1:30:36
It sort of reminds me of what financial planners tell us, past performance is not a predictor of future success. So
Speaker 167
1:30:46
I really can't draw any conclusions from that.
What I have to do is look at the
Speaker 191
1:30:52
cases and see what they say and give you the best advice that I can, you know. And
Speaker 170
1:30:59
that's what I'm saying. And I'm not saying either way whether this would fail a constitutional test or a pass constitutional muster. It's a fine line. I think this
Speaker 191
1:31:08
bill tries to walk that. School districts are free to do that on their
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
1:31:13
own now. That's pretty common for the legal profession to always quote case law, previous case law.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:31:24
yes, sir. Thank you. Okay. It's just for the benefit of the committee because you are a sterling legal mind and we rely on you just for me and hopefully some others. School districts can do this now unimpeded, and any school district in the state can incorporate this into their curriculum now, no problem.
Speaker 170
1:31:51
And they are doing that. That situation does exist,
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:31:55
yes. Okay. Okay. And this would essentially – how – and Representative Valtis, maybe this is more a question to you. What are we exactly changing from what we're doing now? We're not
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:32:08
changing anything. We're just codifying the present practice so that hopefully in the future nothing changes.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:32:15
Okay. Thank you, Representative Valtis. Representative Deffenbaugh, do you have
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
1:32:19
a question? Yes, sir. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Representative Altus, this
states that the first part of your sheet here, let me read it, National Council on Bible Curriculum are in public schools. They're pretty well a proven entity, aren't they? I've kept up with this. They've
been at it. Do you have any idea how long they have done this?
Speaker 159
1:32:46
Now, many years, Dr. Bill Bright's on their
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
1:32:51
board, D. James Kennedy, David Barton, Chuck Norris, I don't know, John Hagee, you know, a lot of people are on the board that are recognizable. And, you know, they've got a lot of lawyers on their board. this little sheet says the American Family Association will defend anything that any lawsuit free of charge
and there's never been a court challenge one other thing you know
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
1:33:26
teachers are I do have a question but teachers are mandated to teach everything else integrity, cooperativeness, truth sometimes you have the word of the week word of the month and so on And so I don't see the problem with putting some Bible in there. If they want
it, we're not forcing them to take it. It's not required to get a diploma, are we?
Speaker 24
1:33:51
Right. It's an elective. Thanks. Do we have any other questions from the
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
1:34:03
committee? Representative Catlett. I'd like to make a motion to table
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:34:09
this bill. with that is a proper motion we have a motion from that of cat with to table this bill all in favor %uh
Speaker 36
1:34:19
let's try that one more time all in favor of what was in with Catlett's motion
to table this bill %uh all opposed
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:34:34
I'll motion fails I'm at this point Do we have anyone who wishes to speak for the bill? Anyone who wishes to speak against the bill? If not, what is the pleasure of the committee? Representative Kozak?
Speaker 116
1:34:56
Motion due pass. We have a motion due pass. All in favor? Aye.
Representative James McLean
Unverified
1:35:02
All opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Representative Valtas. Thank you very much.
Speaker 116
1:35:09
Okay, members, I believe that this wraps up our agenda for today. We appreciate you being here very much. One announcement before we go. There will be a luncheon of the military coalition today at 1130 at Capitol View. So if you run over there real quick, you can probably make it.
Unknown speaker
1:35:27
Adjournment motion. Meeting adjourned.
Agenda
PRESENTATION REGARDING THE ARKANSAS ADVANCED INITIATIVE FOR MATH AND SCIENCE (AAIMS)
HB1262
HB1252
HB1270
HB1017
Documents
No documents posted.
Speakers
Representative James McLean
Unverified
Speaker 5
Speaker 7
Speaker 9
Speaker 11
Representative Gary Deffenbaugh
Unverified
Speaker 31
Speaker 36
Representative Jon S. Eubanks
Unverified
Speaker 40
Speaker 42
Speaker 43
Representative Homer Lenderman
Unverified
Representative John Catlett
Unverified
Speaker 59
Speaker 61
Speaker 64
Representative Debra M. Hobbs
Unverified
Speaker 93
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 1
Speaker 99
Speaker 100
Speaker 109
Speaker 112
Speaker 116
Speaker 110
Speaker 77
Mary Gunter
Unverified
Speaker 119
Speaker 121
Speaker 122
Speaker 124
Speaker 3
Speaker 74
Representative Mark Biviano
Unverified
Speaker 135
Representative John Charles Edwards
Unverified
Craig Russell
Unverified
Speaker 142
Curtis Johnson
Unverified
Speaker 60
Speaker 143
Speaker 150
Speaker 152
Representative Denny Altes
Unverified
Speaker 167
Speaker 170
Representative Eddie L. Armstrong
Unverified
Speaker 78
Speaker 185
Speaker 191
Speaker 190
Speaker 159
Speaker 24