Education Committee - Joint
Video
Transcript
1 document
Bills discussed (9)
| Bill | Title | Sponsor | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
|
HB1512
Act 341
· 6 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…CODE AS THEY RELATE TO EDUCATION IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS. HB1512 M. Shepherd TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE … | M. Shepherd | Notification that HB1512 is now Act 341 |
|
HB1446
· 4 mentions in chapter, agenda, transcript
Matched: “HB1446 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WORKFORCE CHALLENGE SCHOLAR…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WORKFORCE CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. | Lundstrum | Died in House Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB246
Act 340
· 4 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…Nazarenko SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS Number Sponsor Subtitle SB246 J. Dismang TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND…”
|
TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE … | J. Dismang | Notification that SB246 is now Act 340 |
|
HB1451
Act 353
· 3 mentions in transcript, agenda, chapter
Matched: “those bills. See no questions. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. House Bill 1451. House Bill 1451. We have uh uh estimated cost for the scho…”
|
TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF A STUDENT UNDER THE ARKANSAS CONCURRENT CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. | Lundstrum | Notification that HB1451 is now Act 353 |
|
HB1480
· 3 mentions in agenda, chapter, transcript
Matched: “…NDER THE ARKANSAS CONCURRENT CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM. HB1480 Andrews TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS ACADEMIC CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHI…”
|
TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS ACADEMIC CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM; AND TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "APPROVED … | Andrews | WITHDRAWN BY AUTHOR |
|
SB216
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…E STATE OF ARKANSAS. REGULAR AGENDA Number Sponsor Subtitle SB216 J. Dotson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING POSTSECONDARY EDUCATI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS. | J. Dotson | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB232
Act 429
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…MEND THE LAW REGARDING LOTTERY-FUNDED SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMS. SB232 Hickey TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS SCHOLARS…”
|
TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS SCHOLARSHIP LOTTERY ACT; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY. | Hickey | Notification that SB232 is now Act 429 |
|
SB243
· 2 mentions in agenda, chapter
Matched: “…E DEFINITION OF "APPROVED INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION". SB243 Hickey TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING LOTTERY-FUNDED SCHOLARSHI…”
|
TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING LOTTERY-FUNDED SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMS. | Hickey | Died in Senate Committee at Sine Die adjournment. |
|
SB46
Act 25
· 1 mention in transcript
Matched: “…se um Those build numbers that I'm going through right now. Senate Bill 46 as we move here. to page number 4, page 1. I'll start in th…”
|
TO REFLECT A MERGER BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS AND EAST ARKANSAS COMMUNITY COLLEGE BY … | Caldwell | Notification that SB46 is now Act 25 |
Machine transcript
May contain errors. Verify important quotations against the official video.
About transcript accuracy
- Source
- SliQ live captions
- Model
- SliQ live ASR
- Processing date
- October 2, 2026
Cher she's decorum. Good morning. Joint education. Good morning, members of the public. Thank you for joining us today, uh, for the special order of business, uh, before we
get going, I'm gonna recognize Representative Bruce Cozart to start some prayer, if you would please stand with us. Be involved in this and and make
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
4:05
sure that it goes the right way. We thank you for your presence
in our meetings, Lord, thank you for your presence in us ourselves and the things we do in each and every day. We ask that you'll just go with us today, bless this meeting, bless the people here, and we
Speaker 16
4:23
give you the glory and praise. Thank you, Representative Cozart. So members
and, and guests just to give a a quick little overview of what our schedule will be today, specifically this morning, uh, so we have a special order of business for Arkansas access. We will begin because we do have lottery scholarship bills to be heard as
well, uh, which is the primary reason for meeting jointly. We will begin with Doctor Carlos Silva, who will present us the fiscal impact on the lottery bills, uh, Doctor Sil will be joined by members, uh, from the department and, uh, and then we will hear from ative Matthew Shepherd and Senator Jonathan dismaying to present Arkansas access, uh, and then we will move on throughout the day with uh those different agenda items, so to start us off this morning, uh, Doctor Color Silva, you are recognized, if you would please introduce yourself and bring whomever you
Speaker 18
5:11
need to to the table to begin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman Carlos Silva, legislative research, and I'll, I'll have with me the Department of Education, I believe, uh, Nick Fuller. on the side over here. Yes, sir. Nick,
Speaker 19
5:22
if you would, please introduce yourself for the record. Nick
Fuller, I'm assistant commissioner for the division of Higher Education.
Speaker 23
5:32
And you're recognized Doctor Sewell. Thank you. Uh, we'll start right now with the House bill
Speaker 26
5:44
to send a bill 246. House Bill 1512. Um, the impacts for all of those bills are posted online on each one of those um Those build numbers that I'm going through right now. Senate Bill 46 as we move here. to page number 4, page 1. I'll start in the beginning, so a lot of it is gonna be repetitive throughout some of those bills and at page number one, you're gonna see the net proceeds amount for um lotteries for the last 4 years, so start with 202023, 24 to 21.
Total amount of additional revenues available as and then we move to page number 2, how much has been going on to each one on the scholarships I could name scholarship, concurrent scholarships, and so on. And then, uh, the section number 4 comparison information parts 1 and part 3 is, is where you can add most of all those things there. All of this is based on ACA 685502 and that's how this is, is calculating why it's calculated this way. And then as we move to page.
To section number 5, here is the highest estimated cost for each one of those bills, and this is what is the the the the main calculation here and whatever the number comes out through to uh on section number 6, you're gonna have the difference between that and um. The highest amount on step number 3, which is 999,386, 600 and $657. So we look at the difference between those two numbers, what is going to be the
impact and the number if the number's positive, that means that that that could be something that the lottery could take without uh going through general revenue according to 685502. So, uh, with that in mind, I'm moving to section 54 Santabu 246, or House Bill 1512. And we're going to see here, uh. $22 million 659,000 dollars. And $8. Uh, what's going on here is the increase in academic
challenge, freshman award to $2000 so we move, we move in that to $2000 and sorry, the bill is moving that $2000. That's a governor scholars of uh. $5000 awards for a total of $5 million. That's a workforce, uh, challenge award level changes and the total there is gonna be around $9 billion 962,900 and $82 repeal the concurrent challenge which is was was used
at $3,875 974 and then there's the acceleration here uh the access to acceleration program with the $2000 per year maximum for a total of 15. $500 2000. And then has those, those, uh, academic challenge savings would take it out $11,750,000 for a total of $22,659 659 and $8. So as we move all the way to the end there, the difference between
The 99 million, as I have stated before, and the sum of this 22 plus the total amount from EUs with the highest amount of net procedures to fund the other scholarships is $3 million 857,490 which is, it's a positive number. So that is for Senate bill. 246 House Bill 1512. Would you like me to proceed to the next bill, uh, Mr. Chair, or? take some questions. Let's go ahead
and take questions on that. Members are the questions
on SB 246 fiscal impact or HB 1512. Going once,
going twice. See no questions, you recognize to move on, Doctor Silva.
Speaker 26
9:40
So as we move to uh send a bill to 16, uh, that is, there is no impact on, on, on that bill. Uh, we moved into House Bill 1446.
Uh, on House Bill 1446. We're gonna, we're gonna see here the um highest estimated cost for the B section 5, that is uh $10 million. And as we move down here to uh step 3 on section 6, we're gonna see that the difference there is still positive at $16 million. $516498 and that is this for House Bill 1446.
Members are the questions for Doctor Silva on
Speaker 26
10:34
those bills. See no questions. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. House Bill 1451. House Bill 1451. We have uh uh estimated cost for the scholarship of $250,000 on section 5 as we move to section 6 and step 3, we're gonna see the differences is also positive at 26 million $266,000498.
Members or the questions on that House bill? See no
Speaker 26
11:07
questions, you can proceed, Doctor Silva. How's Bill 1480, as we moved to House Bill 1480 section 5, we will see that there's no impact to the House bill at $0 and without taking any further questions with that bill. Any questions on House Bill 1480? Seeing down you recognize to proceed. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senate bill. 2:43, there's no impact on that bill as well.
And send a bill to 32. We open into the lottery section 5. We're gonna have also zero impact on that, on section 5 and still making positive value down that difference for section 6. Are there any questions for members? See a
nun, I believe that's all of them, correct? Yes, sir. Thank you, Doctor Silver. Thank you, Nick, for your time.
We now recognize Senator Jonathan dismaying and Representative Matthew Shepherd to present SB 246 and HB 1512. Senator dismaying with, I'm sorry, to present the amendment. Uh, we do have an amendment, so you recognize
first to present the amendment. For No, no, no Take a step back from that, you're not
recognized to present the amendment you recognized to present the bill. If you would please introduce yourself.
And those who are joining you at the table, please introduce yourself as well for the record, then you're
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
12:43
recognized. Senator Jonathan Dima District 18. Representative Matthew Shepherd, District 97. Jacob
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
12:48
Oliva, Secretary of Education. Ken War and commissioner, Arkansas
Speaker 45
12:54
Division Higher Education. recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, uh,
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
13:07
members of the committee, we appreciate, uh, each of you being here this morning, uh, for this important meeting, um, at the outset, uh, I want to thank Senator Dismaying, the governor's office and the department for their work on this bill. This has been a bill that has taken up a considerable amount of time and effort, uh, to bring the bill to you today, and I know that, uh, as I mentioned in the uh press conference a few weeks ago, I encouraged everybody to, to actually read the bill. it's fairly lengthy, uh, and
we've continued even after filing the bill, we continue to have dialogue. With uh stakeholders about what should be included in this bill? Were there changes that could be made improvements that could be made and as you're all aware, last week we um amended the bill, which has now been fully engrossed into the bills that are before you today to address some of those concerns and so I really feel like we made a, a good bill better uh with those amendments and we responded to
particular concerns and I know that uh my self-in centered dismaying have had conversations with many you to address concerns that maybe you had or questions that you had, uh, the response overwhelmingly has been very supportive, uh, but we also understand with any significant piece of legislation that there could be questions there could be, uh, those that would that would have issues and so we look forward to being able to present this bill to you today, uh, as the governor mentioned in her press conference, uh, the access bill that the the uh access
stands, uh, for a couple of different things, acceleration. common sense, cost, eligibility, scholarships and standardization and uh we're gonna try and hit on those high points, but we're really, uh, we anticipate that you'll have a number of questions and so we hope to move pretty quickly into the questions to to address any questions that you may have but to begin with with acceleration, uh, this acceleration piece is, is to ensure high school students have the necessary skills for higher education and
careers, you know, one of the things. that sometimes people have asked about is, well there's a lot of this bill that touches on K through 12 education and while that is the case in large part I would also point out that those that those uh changes, uh, primarily relate to uh concurrent credit accelerated learning and other opportunities that directly relate to higher education and in fact we're we're through this bill we're gonna provide additional pathways, additional.
ways in which individuals are students are able to uh receive accelerated learning opportunities receive weighted credit. We're gonna provide uh some additional pathways for those students as they move into, uh, their higher education experience, uh, additionally we have the common sense piece, uh, this is to provide an unbiased higher education learning environment. Um You know, in, in this day and age, I know that this section has drawn some attention but as I said a few weeks ago in the
press conference, I encourage everybody to read the bill. And I've to to this point as individuals have read the bill, I've not had anybody to point out to me something in here specifically that would be objectionable when it comes to this idea of providing providing an unbiased higher education environment and that I think this is actually something that we should all be able to to agree to, uh, we also provide for, uh, the designation of a
Purple Star campus, uh, which would allow some of our institutions, should they so choose, that have expressed an effort to support our military. It allows them that opportunity, uh, to receive this designation, then we move into the cost piece and uh this, this relates directly to reforming the productivity funding model. And this encourages a funding model or creates a funding model for non-degree cre credentials to encourage schools to adopt
these programs, some of these things, anytime you're undertaking a large overhaul or a big effort. Some of these things are not going to be done overnight and so we know that many of these things will have to be accomplished through rulemaking, but we are setting out the parameters for that. We're setting out the directions for that so that the department in conjunction with stakeholders will be. to, uh, work to accomplish these goals then the final thing before I turn over to Senator Dimay who will cover some of these other elements, I would, I
would, uh, want to point out that, uh, I think we've been very deliberate with this timeline, uh, it's been several weeks since we filed the bill, uh, we took that opportunity, as I said at the outset, to have a number of discussions and conversations we've now amended that bill on which that amendment was filed in the middle part of last week, as I recall so this bill has been out. there for some time and we wanted to give the committee, the public, the stakeholders the opportunity to fully vet that bill, but we're excited to be here today to have the
opportunity to discuss it with you and look forward to, uh, to getting into this
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
18:25
discussion. All right, thank you, uh, members, the E stands for eligibility, um, and that establish that's by establishing a more uniform and efficient emission, uh, policies, and we're going to expand the eligible admission exams for applicants to include not just the ACT and the SAT but also CLT, uh, additionally, it grants a provisional admission to students who meet higher education, uh, institutions
baseline admissions requirements and it creates a simple statewide universal college application. Program, uh, to also ease in the admissions process and lastly, it does offer in-state tuition to our Arkansas military families scholarships, it eliminates many of the barriers that we have in scholarships in total, it is going to make about $23 million of new scholarships available to Arkansas students, which is something that we could be very proud of, um, in, uh, to
be explicit, it's going to increase or double the first year award under the Arkansas Academic Challenge. ship from 1000 to 2000 for our freshmen. It establishes a governor higher ed transition scholarship program for disabled students. It expands our workforce challenge scholarship opportunities to serve more students and then lastly, it is going to establish scholarships for students who graduate with merit or distinction, uh, and lastly, it is, uh, the S is for standardization, uh, it gets students closer to graduation
through common sense course cre uh crediting, and it's standardizes our course number. ing across all state supported higher ed institutions, and that's going to allow for an ease of a transfer and students making sure that they're not losing credits when they transfer from one institution to another, and then lastly, it increases the number of Gened and CTE courses in the Arkansas Cos transfer system. Uh, with that, I think we're ready at this point to move on to questions and look forward to answering those. Thank you, Representative
Shepherd and Senator Dismay for your presentation. Members, we will take questions,
uh, in order. I'll try to alternate between House and Senate, uh, but, uh, we will go ahead and start with questions. Representative Dianne Vall, you recognized for a question.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
20:33
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks for being here, guys. Um, I have read the bill, um, just so you know, because that was said several different times. I'm wondering, like, um, it looks like we're taking away, if you go to page 2. the bill. I have several
questions, so I'll get out after a couple sir and let somebody else go, and then I'll come back. And we go from what appears to be a 17 member, uh, Bo down to a 5 member board. Um, can you explain why we're taking away all the extra voices out of Out of this. And do these people have term limits. Because it looks like, um, some of them will be coming off and on depending on who the Senate
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
21:25
committee, uh, on education is and the house and who they
appoint, if that makes sense. I can offer some general comments and then, uh, maybe the secretary or, or director could, could follow up. I think that with regard to some of these specific uh designations specific roles that are tied to other organizations, uh, I think what we've seen over the last number of years here in the legislature, it began first in agriculture where we began to move away from having these designations and these slots
that are specifically tied to, uh, an outside entity, uh, even on page two, I think it. is that other stakeholders can be involved, um, and so I think in my view, much of this is just a continuation of what was already begun in other areas, uh, of the Arkansas code previously and now that we're in a position to provide uh some additional, um, uh, revision when it comes to higher education or education as a whole, it was kind of the natural next step is to do that, uh, the secretary might can
speak to some specifics here. I, I do think that that actually one of the changes relates, I believe I've been told. relates to some requirements under the Constitution, uh, that some of those terms are had to be reworked, but I'll defer to the secretary. Sure,
Speaker 44
22:39
thank you. Um First, I think I want to be clear that nothing would preclude anybody from working with these organizations to
Speaker 67
22:45
establish a committee. In fact, that, that's the spirit of it. What happens is a lot of the committees that are being kind of rescinded haven't met in
years, and then the ones that we need to meet, when you have a person of like 17 people on it, it's really hard to get a quorum, and they can't get any work done because you're you're relying on representatives from organizations that may not put their best foot forward to be an
Speaker 68
23:09
active participant because they're busy too, so this would actually. allow us to find the individuals that are passionate about the work that reflect the different parts of the state and there's different organizations and be committed to showing up and making sure that we can get that work moving forward. I I appreciate that answer. I just wanted to make sure that
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
23:27
we're not precluding some of these people being able to have a voice at the table because I think that's important, especially in rural Arkansas that we have somebody at the table who is able to voice rural Arkansas concerns in education. Um, I did notice that we got rid of the council on post-secondary education and career readiness is, can we, can you tell me why
Speaker 72
23:58
we got rid of that committee. So in practice, that committee has not existed or
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
24:03
met in several years. OK. And one follow up and then I'll get out, sir, if that's OK. I want to go to concurrent, um, it looks like we're taking away all concurrent online, which is a lot of how rural Arkansas does concurrent is actually online, but it looks like we're phased that completely out. And now it looks as though the parent or the school is gonna have to pick up the dollars for that concurrent class instead of it
being how it has been in the past, um, I do think, Online concurrent classes is very, very important to rural Arkansas. So I'd like somebody to explain that to me while we're trying to take that away, and then I'll get out of
Speaker 68
24:42
the queue. So I want to be very clear. Online concurrent credit is not going away. So if, if that's a, a perception that's out there, I'm gonna make sure I'm very, very clear that option is an opportunity for some of our students. In fact, about 30%,
just under 30% of the students in the state of Arkansas participating in some sort of online concurrent credit and if that's the best platform that works best for the students. We want to make sure we're expanding pathways and opportunities, and that's what access is all about. I think the part that you're referring to is the rework of the concurrent credit scholarship that's been rebranded as the Axis for Acceleration scholarship that has some language that says that that scholarship would be to support in-person instruction.
And I, I wanna go back to um the comments that Speaker Shepherd mentioned about getting receptive feedback from relevant stakeholders when this bill was originally filed, the concurrent credit scholarship was complete. completely stricken out of the bill. Did not get any phone calls from a lot of people except from when we met with our superintendents in some of our colleges didn't hear from any legislators about that, but heard from our stakeholders said, hey, as we're transitioning, the goal is to
expand access to concurrent credit while in high school, um, why, why are we striking the scholarship to help offset those costs. This is something we need because in person instruction costs more. And they got a, um, whether they're putting the student on campus, they got to transport them. They're trying to feed them, whether they're offering courses on their campus, they got to clean those rooms, pay for the books, pay for utilities. So that provision was a direct conversation from meeting with relevant stakeholders to say, hey, you
took this pot of money completely away. Can you give some of that back to help us defer these costs. Now, I, I can tell you there are incidences where we could probably do better define what virtual instruction is. Because I was in a classroom this or last week where there is a teacher of record certified to teach that concurrent credit course, but that course was being delivered through a virtual program. That's different than a kid completely taking it autonomous on their
own, independently of any other um um supports. The question I also get is, well, what about rural Arkansas? They need access to um virtual concurrent credit. That's not going away. There, there's ways to support that, that's gonna be part of the articulation agreements between the superintendents and the school district, but I think our bigger question and our bigger challenge moving forward is how do we certify the teachers that are already on campus to meet the higher ed credentials. Part
of the pushback and wonder that I have is you can have a high school teacher that's red and certified to teach a AP calculus BC for college credit, but then hire it says they can't. teach college algebra. So this bill is gonna put these um colleges and school districts together to work out those details because it's gonna expand more access. Center flower she recognized. Thank you and good morning.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
28:04
I'll just ask her. Maybe 1 or 2 questions right now,
um. At the beginning of the bill on the school leadership council as the uh the representative just Uh, referred to Limiting the membership of this council. You know, I look back and So that That Counsel Was created by an act in 2009.
And the focus was evidence-based strategies to close achievement gap for student and adult learning. Also to increase the number of citizens with bachelor degrees. And the purpose was to coordinate leadership development. To devise a system of gathering data. A development of model evaluation of school administrators, and I'm concerned that with the deletions of the membership, particularly.
Uh, teachers. Um Executive director of Arkansas Association of Educational Administrators and a representative from an education service co op. Are being eliminated. And I just wanna know why because um. Through the years I've seen the education service co-ops providing. Uh, support
For, um, These strategies and to the administrators to get Uh, the achievement gap closed. I'd like to know what are we doing? How do we not have an achievement gap anymore. I know it used to be, and I think it still is in so much as we see school districts that have been taken over by the state.
Uh, for academic challenges, how, how can we are are we there yet? I mean is there not an achievement gap between students, particularly minority students in those districts where The state
has had control. I, I, I'll take that, and I, I think you're right, and I think that's part
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
30:28
of what's being addressed here. We've had a committee in place that had those, uh,
we still have an achievement gap. They have not done it successfully and if you
look at who's eliminated from this. These are entities that are not statutorily created, right? So they're not governmental entities. I mean, for instance, there's actually an incorporated entity that is being mandated to be a member of the board. At the end of the day, if it's not a statutorily created entity, they're being stricken without as Without bias and at the very end, other stakeholders, so there could be members from these existing organizations that can now be members and be recognized to be members in a, and uh nominated to be members
of the, uh, of the board. So, and that would be on page 2 on the Senate version it's gonna be 26 and 27 section 6, but it does not eliminate them from being engaged and what we want, we would want them to be, uh, engaged and encourage them to be, but again, without bias, if you're not. statutory entity, then you're being stricken from a mandated position on
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
31:35
the board. Well Seemingly the education service co-ops are state supported.
I don't know if it's by statute or what, but I would
think so, um, why are they being Uh, eliminate it. And Can you tell me more about how the achievement gap is going to be addressed. On achievement gap, probably
Speaker 91
32:04
best for y'all. So, this is why we passed
Speaker 68
32:13
Arkansas Les two years ago because we have achievement gaps, we have students that are not meeting grade level expectations and this legislature and our governor came together to say we're not doing good enough, and we reimagined all of early learning K-12 and transition in a post-secondary success. What we have done with with Arkansas learns is provided opportunities and pathways for students. We have empowered parents. We have double down our energy and resources to make sure that
Speaker 67
32:43
every kindergartner comes to school ready to learn and we're making sure that every 3rd grader is reading at or above grade level. We have provided high impact tutoring. We've invested in our educators, the number one indicator for approving overall student achievement is the teacher standing in front of that classroom. We've raised starting teacher salaries, put together a robust teacher merit pay program. We've,
Speaker 68
33:07
we've gone together to to lay that foundation to sit before you today to say, we have
to believe that all students can learn and reach their potential and what we're doing today and access is making sure that every child has that pathway that's built out for them and making sure that every school district is supported in meeting those expectations. Students learn when we have high standards, when we believe in our students and we believe that we can give them the right support and the right educational learning by. environment that best needs their meets their needs. They're not only going to just start
performing at or above grade level, they're going to excel. So that's why we've done a lot of
Speaker 67
33:49
work in this state. We have doubled down on our investment across the educational spectrum to say. We can do better and that's why we're sitting here before you today. I'll allow one more follow up, then we'll move on. You can
Speaker 93
34:04
get to the queue. the button, OK. So As it relates to
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
34:17
Schools districts that have been under state takeover. What kind of improvement in terms of achievement gaps, have you seen? I represent a district that's been under state control up until about a year or so ago and a lot of schools in my district have been consolidated or merged because of academic, uh, issues. What have you physically seen and what has been done to. To really make sure and follow up.
That students. are achieving So when it,
Speaker 44
34:55
when a district goes into state authority, it's not going to be one single reason why
Speaker 67
35:00
that happened. Typically you find that they have financial problems. They have governance problems, they lack leadership capacity. They lack professional development plans. They lacked the necessary supports for the teachers in the classroom and then sometimes they, they like um relationships within their own local city
government or municipalities. So what we have seen, especially on our schools and our state authority with the ability to work with getting a high qualified superintendent. We have seen those schools invest in licensed teachers because we've gone into some of these schools where they didn't even have one licensed teacher in a high school in core subject areas. And
Speaker 68
35:39
then we wonder why students are learning. Every one of those schools are working with educators to make sure that they're on a path to be
successful. We have seen aligned professional development to support those teachers on learning how to use the strategies that work best for their students and what we have seen because of learns and the implement ation of a unified coordinated progress monitoring system, we're able to catch students in real time that may be falling behind and give them high impact tutoring after school supports, summer supports to catch them up and what we are seeing is those students may not be quite at grade level yet, but we are seeing large learning gains in
Speaker 67
36:23
the students over the past few years because of the work in the foundation we have with Learns to start closing those, uh, achievement gaps. Students that are far below their peers need to have their learning gains almost twice as accelerated as what we would expect from gray level to gray level, which is why we have to continually invest in align resources on those best practices and strategies that we know work best for our
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
36:47
students. Well, so we'll. Remediation offered by colleges.
Be eliminated under this because what I see and I, like I said, I believe all students can learn. Um, But When you have students that come out of these systems that you speak of, where there is some lacking in administrative support or teachers that are not certified to teach a subject. Why are we gonna penalize these
students that come from these places because I've seen a lot of students, particularly out of the dolloway District. That uh was once even said to have a grade inflation achieve. And achieve great things of course they had to leave the state of Arkansas. But They had some foundation laid for them. But they did not have the. Certificate or the.
Whatever you call achievement here in this state. What about remediation. What will be available for
those students that still fall short. Yeah, so your first question is, would a,
Speaker 67
38:12
would a college be precluded from supporting a district with a remediation? Of course not. There, there isn't a school district in the state that's not gonna
Speaker 68
38:20
work with their higher education partners. And in fact, if, if you're looking at teachers that come to the classroom from a traditional pathway, that's, we want those
Speaker 67
38:30
teachers working, and maybe some of our most vulnerable schools with some of our most vulnerable students to help double up the amount of
Speaker 68
38:38
people that are paying attention, whether it's for remediation, whether it's for high impact tutor. Or for acceleration. The reality is, is we have to do what's in this bill, the support K-12 with opening up the pathways to acceleration at an early age. Our students can do it as zip code's not gonna define access to acceleration and if we can
align this system through um appropriations through standardization and course code directories through um unifying scholarships through, uh, looking at weighted credit, it's gonna make it easier for school districts to identify those students that are ready. Because I like to look at data, and there's a harsh reality. Our highest performing students in this state are far below their peers across the nation as a state, we graduated 117 students last year with their associate
in arts degree at the same time as our high school diploma. Now that's out of a cohort of 30, 35,000 students. That is ridiculously low. Two of those students came from Lee County. Because they're under state authority and we went to a dynamic superintendent said if we can help you work with your local college, do you think you can get some kids to earn their AA at the same time as her high school diploma, he said absolutely. He's got about 10 students that are on path to graduate this year. Because of his relationship with
our state who is supporting him with boots on the ground. We've got people in these schools every week and helping accept this vision that I don't care what your zip code is or your background. We believe in you, and if we build the right pathways in the systems, our students will not just meet those those opportunities, they will exceed them. Just to,
Speaker 104
40:23
just to follow up, uh, and Senator Flowers,
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
40:25
of course, uh, like yourself, I'm from South Arkansas and we know that there, we have some, uh, some challenges in South uh South
Arkansas, but I believe this bill is something that will help to address, uh, not just challenges in any particular section of the state, but across the state and it's gonna provide our students greater opportunities to, um, To receive the best education possible, uh, not just at the K through 12 level, but to also prepare them for whatever that next step is in life and I've heard, uh, I've heard that the commissioner and the secretary talk about, you know, we want people employed, enlisted, or
enrolled, right? Coming out of high school, this bill is going to take a significant step in that direction and I think this is something that's gonna be very good, uh, for Arkansas it's gonna be very good
for South Arkans. it's gonna be something that's gonna make a difference in the, in the lives of our
students. Representative Walker, you are recognized for a question.
Representative Steven Walker
Unverified
41:31
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I'm going to kind of piggyback off
of Representative Vo when she was talking about the concurrent
credit course. Um, my concern came with the amendment which added it to page 117 line 10 through 12, where the definition of a concurrent credit course is in person, on a pub uh on a public high school campus or an approved institution of higher education campus, so the language says that it has to be in person. Um, which leads to the funding, um, loss of the scholarships or whatever if you do virtual or anything along that line, and same concerns that
Representative Vo have, I've covered nothing but rural areas. And so if we ask our rural areas to bus kids to the, the closest college round trip, you're looking at 40 minutes plus. And so now we are putting kids on a seat in a school bus which is taking away from the academic time. It could be spent but um somewhere better. We also have maybe class size that ranges, um, for taking like a comp one concurrent class or a college
algebra as an example, it may be 5 kids, so financially, it's not feasible for the community college or whoever to send a teacher on site and the virtual courses still have cost, and they still have to pay for teachers and the system to, to put it in place. And so I don't. understand why we just went with. You can get the scholarship funding on site, but you get nothing for virtual instead of looking at something for virtual
to help cover all those costs, uh, and I'm just curious on it. Um, anything you can help me to understand.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
43:18
Thank you. Representative I, I share some of your concerns, uh, and one thing I just want to be very clear, that definition is only relating back to the scholarship section doesn't encompass anything else, so it's not changing the definition of what would qualify for concurrent credits with anything exception of the scholarship, uh, the reality is we should want to incentivize in in in person, um, instruction. I think it's important. I think
it's much more successful. Uh, we've all, I mean, that's, uh, those of us that have children, uh, you know, that were school age during the pandemic. know exactly what it means when they're not taught in person and the lack of learning that occurs and so I'm torn, uh, much maybe like you are on this particular issue because I also understand the needs of rural districts that may not have the ability to have a two-year institution or supporting institution, uh, in their backyard. Um, we do have an amendment that was actually addressed just shortly before because we were waiting on it to
be prepped, uh, if it's willing, you know, the committee's willing, we can pass that out and essentially what it is going to do is strike that. virtual poor person in the scholarship language, um, but I would hope that at some point we come back and revisit because we need to make sure we're incentivizing in a person teaching, uh, but with that it's up to the chairs. Um, uh, the amendment's an
Representative Steven Walker
Unverified
44:38
option. I'd rather see it before I have a follow-up because it may address my question if it.
Has that in there. Staffel, uh, passing out, I believe
Speaker 116
44:50
that the sponsors would have to sign the amendment first. I mean, I can go ahead and do
Representative Steven Walker
Unverified
45:01
a follow up while we're waiting. You recognized for follow-up. So,
I'm, I'm hoping that'll address it even if we looked at something where we were to take that out and Department of Ed or Department of Higher Ed, however
we wanted to do it, ruled it on an exceptional basis to where the rural areas that are out of reach from a college or university or whatever would have that leeway with virtual classes and a school district that's right next door to a college must attend in person. I mean, I'd be OK with language like that, but just to say across the board in person would not be accepted. able anymore. It's going to punish rural areas and I'll, I'll end it there until I get to see the amendment. What, and I think to also to be clear and the commissioner and the
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
45:46
secretary can correct me and, and maybe shed more
light on this, but the concurrent credit right now largely is a matter of negotiation between the, the institution, the institution of higher education in the school district, what we're doing in this bill is, number one, we're saying the student's not gonna have to pay for it, right? And then what this amendment, the, the previous amendment that we put on last week was to provide some flexibility. And to provide for some scholarship money that can be utilized to, um, to pay for the
concurrent credit, which is to the benefit of the K through 12 districts in terms of what changed between the original bill and this. And so I think we have to be really clear about to Senator Dismay's point that that definition, that language only concerned the scholarship piece which we put in by way of that amendment to provide a little more flexibility and to
provide some assistance to our, to our K through 12 district. in Walker, do you have additional questions? I'll look
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
46:49
at the amendment and get back in the queue in Mayberry, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, First of all, I have to say there's some really wonderful things in
this bill. The fact that freshmen, um, could get $2000 instead of $1000 with the scholarship, that's absolutely wonderful. I love the idea of that, um, application, you know, you apply one time and you can apply to a whole bunch of schools at once, wonderful,
wonderful things, um, but I, I do have some concerns. So, um, I'd, I'd like to go to page 25, which is section 16. And this deals with the school rating system. And it looks like we're eliminating just about everything other than the annual statewide student assessments and a graduation rate, and I'm, I'm, I'm kind of perplexed. Um, I think it's important to know
the academic growth of students with disabilities. Um, to me, that's, that's important in, and when we evaluate uh a school district and, and their writing. Um, again, in case I see some people still kind of looking for where I am. I'm on page 25, section 16 of the House bill. Let me, let me insert real quick, uh represent Bayberry, thank
you for doing that. Members, as you were asking questions, if you would please reference the section of
the bill so it's easy for members to take a look at recognized represent. OK.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
48:22
So again, section 16, I believe it's page 25 of the House bill that I printed off today. Um, you know, academic growth of students with disabilities, I, I, I firmly believe that should be part of a, um, a grading system for the, for the school. It also has in here, um, that we're, we're taking out the percentage of students who earn advanced placement credit or concurrent credit. That's what we're talking about, um, and we're taking out industry recognized.
certification that leads to, um, concurrent credit at a post-secondary institution, um, it also is removing the proportional percentage of qualified educators who hold a national board for professional teaching standards, certification or have advanced degrees beyond their bachelor's degree. And I just, I, I'm looking for some explanation as to why those things would not be important to the rating system of our, of our school districts.
Speaker 68
49:26
Sure, so first I wanna agree, reporting on all those categories is important and that's not going away. And in fact,
Speaker 67
49:33
if there's anything we have in education, it's a lot of data and um sometimes it, it gets confusing or nuanced in how we report that
Speaker 68
49:40
so we can make sure we get accurate data. Many of these categoricals are still required in our state as a plan for reporting to meet federal requirements as well that has not gone away. What we're doing in this section is clarifying what's important when
calculating a school grade and how can we better define that through the rulemaking process. So when I, when I first got here and we passed Les, I went around to every single educational cooperative. And I've met with just about every superintendent uh across the state. Without hesitation or regard when I would just meet with the superintendent, say, hey, what are the things we need to work on in state. Every single meeting, over 15 meetings every single meeting, one that didn't have anything to do with the
other. School grades was brought up, and I heard very consistently from school superintendents that they want us to get rid of the A through F letter system. Now, I'm a big believer in A through F, and I think most of our superintendents understand the value in that because it's easy to understand. Parents understand AF, communities understand legislators, we, we've businesses we've got to report on how well
Speaker 67
50:53
our schools are doing. What we have learned is that superintendents lost confidence that the current
Speaker 68
51:00
school grade system, the way all these metrics were aggregated to give a letter grade actually reflected the learning that was happening in school. So We've been working for the past year and a half with stakeholders all across the state to redefine how we want to report out and define letter grades, so all we're doing here is simplifying it so that you don't lose those headers like achievement rates, graduation rates, learning gains, and gives the ability to better define that in roles so we can have
confidence that when we say schools an A, they're an A. Or we can have confidence at a school that we say is an F is an F because I'm gonna tell you, I've walked through a lot of schools in this state. There's a lot of schools that have a big fat F on their front door that I do not feel should have that grade, because I saw students learning, I saw teachers working on the right
Speaker 67
51:50
work. The system, the confidence in our current system has waned, and this is gonna give us the ability to rebuild it and get it right.
Speaker 127
52:01
I guess I'm, I'm kind of curious why we can't have those things to find though,
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
52:07
so that we know we're all on the same page before we hand it over to others to define what that is. So could there be some language that could give some of those qualifying factors that you're
Speaker 44
52:19
referring to. Yeah, so those. those qualifications or quantifications would be defined in role that would come back to this legislative delegation. So
Speaker 67
52:28
if you don't like where we're headed with this, then it
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
52:32
wouldn't make it through the process. OK. Um, and, and if you don't mind, if I can have one more question cause I'm a little confused on the, um, amendment that was just passed out unless it I I, I'm just trying to understand because it says on page 117, delete lines 14 and 15, and unless I just have a really bad copy that I just printed today, um, That it says, uh, well, page
117, line 14 and 15, it just seems like that's not really the lines that we're trying
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
53:10
to delete version than the House version, and also we're also
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
53:13
changing, doesn't it say lines 11 and 12 as well. So there's, there's, there's two. And, and one thing I just like to say on
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
53:22
this, on the grades, uh, I mean, each one of your districts have had concerns about how that grading is occurring. This is going to open it up for new, new rulemaking, which I think is important and
in fact I would argue some of those things that are being eliminated are encompassed in a more overall statement of student growth and annual statewide assessment that can include how we look at and how we deal with us, you know, those subgroups that are then specifically stated again lower. Uh, the public is going to have the ability to participate in that we are going to have the ability to participate in that, not just with the public, but also, uh, when we go to the final approval process. So again, uh hopefully this is going to get us to a better
grading system that we have right now by allowing flexibility for more conversation that's occurring. OK. Thank you. Members part of the next question. I'm going to
go to Senator Davis for a motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that we adopt the amendment. We have
Julia Taylor
Unverified
54:21
a motion from the Senate, so we'll have to adopt the amendment separately because of
the differing lines. Uh, so we have a motion from the Senate to have a second on the Senate side. There's a second, all in favor
say aye, all opposed. Congratulations you jump, the amendment has been adopted on the Senate. Uh, now we move to Representative McKenzie for a motion. I make a motion we adopt the amendment. Representative McKenzie has made a motion to adopt the amendment. There's a discussion on the motion. See no discussion, all favorite
CI all opposed. Congratulations, you've adopted the amendment. Now we will move on to Representative Duke, you're recognized for a question. Thank you,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
55:05
Mr. Chair. So I had similar questions on the
concurrent credit, so I wanna probably just get some clarity now that we have adopted the amendment. So, um, The way I understand I'm just gonna go ahead and go through with what, what my questions were originally and then we can address them how the amendment maybe just changed them, OK? So, um, online schools online, the school's pay. Not the parents for the concurrent credit. But they will not receive funding from the state.
To pay for that course in person. If they do it in person, the state offers scholarships for that. My understanding now is that amendment has changed that, but I don't know if that is accurate or not. So if you could just give clarity on that one, that would be great because I'm sure the public as
well are kind of like where exactly are we on this concurrent piece right now. Yes, so that's, that's
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
56:01
correct. It's going to, so the scholarship then would be able to use for the virtual classes,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
56:10
um, at $65 a credit hour. Oh,
thank you. Um, follow up. Chair. OK, thank you, Madam chair, um, and thank you all for bringing, um, this amendment in particular, um, and for the work that you've done on this. I'm a big fan of on-site, but I do have a couple of questions in relationship to that as well. Could you explain the difference between what you're doing with the funding now with this scholarship and how it varied from what would be, what, what is the process right now within most school districts so that we can kind of compare and contrast
because not everybody has this obviously the same. of knowledge that you all have in that
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
56:45
I'll, I'll do my best and then the commissioner can correct me if I'm wrong or add to it.
Right now there is no set. Uh, uniform way in which concurrent credit is paid for. It's a matter of negotiation between the district and the institution of higher education in this bill we set up parameters that set forth what can be charged by the institution for concurrent credit. We essentially provide
that the student is not going to be responsible for payment, but then we do come back and provide for the opportunity to use scholarship money, uh, if it's a, you know, if, if it's awarded to the student, uh, then that money. Be available to offset the expense that otherwise would be, uh, uh, borne by the school district and the commissioner or secretary can add to or correct me if I'm wrong and to Speaker Shepherd's
Speaker 44
57:33
point, um, this is why we're bringing this together start standardizing it because it's all
Speaker 67
57:37
over the place. We, we've got some institution in
instances where the colleges are just absorbing the cost. We have some instances where districts are paying above the cost maybe above premium. We have some instances. Where
Speaker 68
57:52
we have school districts charging parents above and beyond to participate. So you can only imagine who, who that
Speaker 67
57:59
limits access to when you're looking at making sure we have opportunities for acceleration. So what, what we're doing here is saying let's start standardizing this by establishing a floor and a ceiling. We can still work with districts as we definitely heard
Speaker 68
58:15
that from version one, the the initial bill that was filed to where we are now is the districts and the schools still want an opportunity to collaborate. And I, I, I've heard incidents, especially in our small and rural areas like Walker's talking about where the school would just go to the local college and say, hey, I noticed you have a college algebra class happening at this. How many seats are available and they'll say, well, there's still 5 or 6 seats open. The school will figure out at a at a lower agreement to get them there. When, when you're looking at
concurrent credit in a school district for a person instruction. This is why it's, it's really hard to just say, this is how it's gonna look and this sounds be because there's so many different options and pathways. You, you have some options where students are going to class on campus, being taught by college faculty, full-time students. Yes, some instances where the college may be sending a professor to the campus and they've negotiated an adjunct fee or a cost for tuition. Then you have some incidences where
the teacher of record is a high school teacher that's met the college's qualifications to teach that class, whether it's concurrent or. Door, um, in that capacity. So it's, it's very nuanced. So what, what we're doing here is saying, we got to start standardizing this and the last thing we need to do is start charging parents above and beyond
Speaker 67
59:35
when I feel like the state makes a very strong investment and not only just K-12, but supporting that transition to higher ed as well. And, and I think that
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
59:43
there's, uh, just a couple of points
there that really stand out. I think it's gonna make it more readily available. To all of our, uh, high school students across the state. It's also going to provide, uh, probably for the utilization at more institutions of higher education because we're, we're putting some parameters on and moving towards some standardization, so, uh, essentially the, the arrangement in South Arkansas should be very similar to the arrangement that may be in Northwest Arkansas or central Arkansas or East
Arkansas, so that's ultimately beneficial, I think across the state. Um, and, and so that's that's another part of it. The other thing we heard in some of our discussions with higher education is that um, at least,
uh, we were told in one other state when they moved to something similar. Uh, actually districts figured out that, you know, in many instances it may make more sense for them to move some of their classes to concurrent credit because it makes, it makes
fiscal sense to, uh, if they have enough students, depending on what, what they're able to provide right now that they may be able to move into a concurrent arrangement that actually is gonna help them save money and it's gonna provide those students the opportunity to receive those
Speaker 165
1:01:03
concurrent credit hours. One more follow up if I
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:01:06
may, and I'll get back in. So, um, another question that I had received was,
is there any Type of cap on how many concurrent credits a student can do in a year. Um, so like.
If they do summer, if they want to do summer concurrent credits, are the school districts obligated to pay for that or do the parents have some responsibility at some point because there are some very high achieving students and families who would want to do that and, and is there any type of line there or ceiling for how many courses they can do. So we kept the uh
Speaker 171
1:01:42
impact of concurrent credit on that scholarship to 30 credit hours per year, which is a full-time student basically in higher
education. So, uh, the limit is 15 hours per semester or 30 hours a year. We have adjusted the year so that most all of our scholarships now include summer as this one, so we will look at, you know, that, but before it was, I think 2 classes per semester, about 6 credit hours per semester and we're going up to 15, so it's, it's much, much better. But
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:02:13
if they, but that's for the scholarship, correct? So if a, my understanding is that they're
not to pay for it at all, if they do it through high school. So if a parent comes to that school and says, well, I want to go on, and they've capped out the scholarship and they want to continue doing more concurrent classes. Is there anything that says, well, you're welcome to do that, but that will be at your cost, not at the district's cost because you have capped out on the scholarship piece. I mean, are the
districts. still on the hook if they want to go beyond the scholarship piece or if they don't receive that. So the scholarship follows the student.
Speaker 72
1:02:46
So where the student is taking the class, I think higher
Speaker 171
1:02:51
education, they're eligible for the scholarship at that institution. So if they had exceeded their 30, then that would be the cap, the scholarship, so they would be, you know, have to pay for that themselves, but if they're below the 30, uh, the, the class was endorsed or not through the, through the um. K-12 district. That they would be eligible for those scholarship dollars because the scholarships following the student. OK, I'll get, I'm not sure I'm I'm not
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:03:16
sure if we're on the same page on this question or
Speaker 171
1:03:22
not. Um, I, I, because I'm your question, I think you're trying to ask if a student takes more than 30 college credit hours in a year, would they get scholarship funds above that? Well,
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:03:31
not the scholarship funds. I understand from what you're saying they do not get the scholarship funds above that. My question is with the, the way this is worded. That the that the students will not pay, the parents will not pay for concurrent credit. If a parent comes to a district and says, I understand I've capped out at 30, but I've got a very high achieving child. We want to push our children to do a little bit more, and we do have
students like that across the, the state. Is that, is the district continued to be
on uh, are they gonna have to pay for that, the district, if they want to go above and
Speaker 72
1:04:07
beyond. So the way that it is in the bill is if they go above and beyond what they would. I get through being a full-time student, one or both, then that would be on the parents to pay. It would
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:04:19
definitely be on the, not the district. Thank you for that clarity. Appreciate that.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:04:24
And just because they've maximized the amount made available via scholarship, but 11 of the things, and I think this is uh Senator Flowers was talking about this. I mean this is one of the most exciting pieces that we have, I believe in the bill because of the. And increased pathway it creates for exposure to higher ed and so you've got a kid that's sitting in, you know, high school right now that may be intimidated by going to a college class or campus or, you know, not think that they're capable of achieving in that environment
this creates the exposure, uh, through the, you know, higher, high school level for them to see what it's like to participate in a college class. I think it's one of the most. Impactful things that we're going to be able to do we're talking about 5 or 30 credit hours by the time that you graduate high school if your high school's willing to participate and do what it needs to do to have the, the, you know, the relationships with higher ed institutions, 30 credit hours by the time you graduate high school. And again for these kids that may be on the fence that we're trying to determine if this is
something they could do or not to do or maybe the GPA isn't perfect. They still have the opportunity to participate and, and get that exposure, which I
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:05:38
think is gonna be and also have the possibility of weighted credit, which is something that this bill changes, um, and that, that is something we because we've expanded the definition of accelerated learning now, uh, a student who would go in and take concurrent credit would have
that opportunity to receive weighted credit, which is a further benefit, not just when they get to college, but it benefits them as they, uh, are It benefits their GPA, uh, in high school. It's gonna make them more competitive when it comes to the application process and so there's a lot of really good things that are happening
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
1:06:15
here. Sen her so. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Y'all, I'm on page
75. Uh, of 246. And it's line one.
Where it says engaged in unprofessional conduct that adversely affects the state-supported institution and on further. What are the parameters for one to define unprofessional conduct. It seems that that should be followed by some sort of standard or a law or a bill. It just seems like that's fairly broad. Can you respond to that, please? to keep in mind in Section F
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:06:59
1 through 8 that the these are things that we are.
We, we cannot direct higher ed institutions to do. I mean, the very key word in on page 74 in the Senate bill on page 21 is may require immediate review of faculty member, including member without tenure, any time, and then goes down through and then these are what we would like to see as the guidelines, but we are not mandating to be the guidelines and so that professional, unprofessional conduct is something that's going to be defined by the higher ed institution. And we would not want a national standard put in place as you've been very, uh, appointed to make
those references in the past about other issues, uh, but again, that's gonna be left up all of the section is gonna be defined by them or not defined by them. That, that is correct. Again, we cannot mandate that they do that. This is a May and these, these are the items that we'd like to see to be
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
1:07:55
addressed. So just, I guess a process question when they make that decision to do
that, well, that, well they're standard then come before ALC or come before this body at all? No, there's independence between higher ed and us, language is
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:08:09
written for a particular reason, something know something I something I don't, I don't think that they're, uh, they're internal. I guess do's and don'ts or something that comes before us for, uh, review or approval. OK, thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Speaker 192
1:08:23
Chair. Represent Fall, you're recognized for a question. Thank you. I'm on the House
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:08:29
bill, page 36, uh, section 23. So I This section kind of bothers me a whole lot.
Um, because I've had students that have came to committee that have testified I ran a Holocaust bill that the student I actually let him present the bill because he's the one who brought me the bill and I allowed him to present. Uh, we had students come to education last week that supported. I think it was Representative Mayberry's bill, and they come and spoke as to why this bill was important for them as seniors in high school, um, but this bill seems to take away all local control if they can decide
if somebody can or cannot come, um, and participate in the processes here, uh, at the Capitol, and if somebody can help me understand why we're taking this away, I would appreciate that. And one, it doesn't take
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:09:24
their ability to come and be a part of legislative process away. in any way, uh, what it does is, you know, state, the standard that those will not be excused absences. And I mean, I would tell you, do we really want school boards to be making determination of what's a worthy thing to come
and speak on or against or is everything because at that point then everything should be available to the student for excused absences to come speak on bills, uh, because I don't think we can wait one policy greater than the other or one point of view greater than the other for students to come and participate in the dialogue here at the Capitol again, the goal is not to eliminate that at all. In fact, it doesn't. It just tries to set. very basic parameter that that is the discussion decision for the student and their parents if they're going to come and if they do come, it's not an excuse
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:10:13
to absence. So therefore we are limiting them to whether they can come or not, because not many students can go without my having being able to make up the work, and excused absence means you can make up the work. An unexcused absence means that you cannot make up that work. So the child who came, 16 year old boy that brought the Holocaust Bill, he would not be able to come. And help me with that bill present that bill because he would receive an unexcused, which again is taking away local control.
Absence, um, and that, I mean that worries me that we're. Not allowing them to, uh, and you say we're allowing, OK, we're allowing it to happen, but we are telling the school board, we're telling a superb, we're telling the principal that they can no longer make that an excused absence. Am I correct? I mean, I mean, I guess, uh, and
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:11:03
again, I'm not trying to ask a question back, but it's more of just for the purpose of the discussion. What if that school board member or I mean
uh the superintendent or whoever it made it makes that
policy has a policy opinion that is different from yours, that they then don't allow an excused absence for then how are we going to take that account and is that really up for us to make that decision or for them to make that decision. There's a,
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:11:32
there's a. In the bill, it says it's an unexcused absence. I mean, it clearly says that will be an
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:11:38
unexcused absence. You're right, it will be an unexcused absence. We do say in the bill that that it they they can they excuse for, uh, purposes of, uh.
curricular, co-curricular activities approved by the school district. Also, if it can be excused as long as they're not engaged in political protest, social or public policy advocacy or attempts to influence legislation. So he would not have been able
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:12:00
to come because he was the question
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:12:03
is why are they in school? Why do we send students to school? So
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:12:09
you don't think it was beneficial for him to come here and be
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:12:12
a part of the process beneficial, but we have, are we gonna start mandating that every
employer allow individuals to have excused absences from work to be here. I think we have to make a decision to senator Dima's point, I mean, the initial point is we're saying we're not gonna excuse absences. We're not gonna allow excused abs absences for uh legislative advocacy because there's. There's the challenge in are we going to allow that for every point of view even for points of view that the vast majority of Arkansans might find offensive. And so we're, I think we're
doing our school districts a favor by saying this I think we're also doing the students a favor to say that we're that we're not going to excuse that if they if they are able to work with the to your example, uh, we have times where we have to work with bill sponsors about about scheduling special committees and doing other things and that's what the average Arkansan has to do every single day if they want to come advocate there's always decisions that have to be made, but at the end of the day, I think we have to make it. decision, are we sending
students to school to be educated or we gonna send them to school and then allow for all these other things and I just think that that this is not uh this is not an unreasonable requirement because I think that most folks, when they get out into the real world and have a job that is probably not too far afield from what is prohibited in their own job. If, if you're gonna do those things, you're gonna do it on your own time and again they can do that
they're just not gonna be allowed an excuse to. absence.
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:13:52
I just Follow-ups sir. Thank you. Um, I think it, I understand what you're saying except for a business and the employee, that's a private, that's between the boss and that employee, whether they're going to give them that time, just give me a second before you cut in. Just the way it would be between a school super principal, whatever it might be and that student. I think it is important for kids to see how the process goes. That's why we, so we will no longer be able to have pages on
the house floor, because that is an excuse to absence for them to be. to come and see
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:14:27
him participate. That, that would continue to be permitted. School groups would continue to be permitted.
The prohibition, the prohibition is on public protest, public advocacy or attempts to influence legislation, and I understand that. I understand that. My
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:14:38
point is, those kids are still getting to come participate in a process. They get to see it. They get to understand a little bit better, but now we're saying if somebody is involved with a piece of legislation, they can no longer do that with an excused absence.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:14:53
That's, that's correct, and again it goes back to Senator Disma's point is who gets to decide what is an acceptable, what's an acceptable policy poposition to warrant and excused absence because they probably are things that if there were excused absences being given that many people would find objectionable and we're just saying the schools are there to educate, then we're not going to, uh, condone one way or the other, any particular policy uh position and therefore we're saying it shouldn't be.
excused whether it's something we agree with or something we disagree
with that that the schools should be focused on educating. Why would it, I would say
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
1:15:32
that they are learning while they're here. But thank you. Representative Garner, you're recognized for a question. Thank
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:15:43
you, Mr. Chair. I've got a couple of questions, um, and, and they're more general, I can tell you specifically the sections, but there are a lot of different sections that we're talking about, um, on the
waiting of AP and changing it to accelerated. Could you just explain a little bit about how those courses are going to be weighted if we don't use, um, AP or IB I, I don't know enough about Cambridge. She'll have to explain that how they're gonna be. waited, um, and how we're going to determine the, um, academic rigor to make sure that they're weighted such that um it takes
Speaker 65
1:16:29
in that core concept, that weighted concept. Sure, so thank you. Uh, one thing that.
Speaker 68
1:16:37
We're gonna accomplish through weighted credit is recognizing more rigorous coursework for students. So currently, when you look at our existing statute, which is, which is why we expand it. AP courses are required to get weighted credit, and that's on a five-point scale. If a district has courses that they feel I've met some rigorous definition, they can apply
through the state to see if those courses could be weighted, but it's not standardized. And so when you look at that. kind of SN access about standardizing, what we wanna do is standardize a course code directory that defines which courses would count for weighted credit. So by not by saying AP is a rigorous coursework in, um, advanced placement, International Baccalaureate IB, um, the Cambridge Education, which is ACE, which is similar to those programs or concurrent
credit by establishing a uniform expectation that Classes that could earn college credit or earn college credit are gonna be weighted at the same weight, defining what honors is cause there's a difference between chemistry and chemistry honors or algebra and algebra honors, which courses, um, in high school deserve an honors weight and then what are your standard courses that would be a standard weight. So what happens is because now is because students are so
concerned about class rankings. Maybe and which courses are weighted or which ones aren't. I can tell you examples of where I, where I've met in schools with students that are national merit semifinalists like these are some of the brightest students in the state of Arkansas that are gonna go to one of our universities. And I remember talking to um a national Maor semifinalist who was a senior and was only coming to school for 2 courses. And I was like, why, why are you
only taking two courses? Well, uh, that's every AP course at our school offers. Well, why not take some concurrent credit, right? Like, why, why not go to the state college and take calculus 3 or organic chemistry or something that I helped make you better prepared for when you transfer to university. You have some more background knowledge. And the student looked at me, said, I would love to. But those courses aren't weighted. And if I take extra courses, my GPA will get lowered. And I'll lose a scholarship.
So we have a uh a disincentive for our best and brightest students to take more courses. It should be the other way around. We should be incentivizing our students to want to take more courses, so that's why we're really trying to standardize um the weights so that we can recognize college level work equally across the board. Follow
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:19:29
up, Mr. Chair, and I guess I, I understand that. I, I guess so it's concurrent defined concurrent.
classes. I, I guess who's determining that academic rigor for each one of those classes. So is it, um, It, there's all different kinds of math. There may be math for business, there may be math for
welding or, or construction or AP calculus or. Yeah, so, uh, when we,
Speaker 44
1:19:59
when we're talking about standardizing for the colleges, one, the standardized that we've talked a little bit about was we
Speaker 67
1:20:09
wanna unified course code directory across all of our colleges and universities so that when we say this course is college algebra and a student earns that course, it can transcript and be transferred to any of our students. So when, when we look at who's determining which courses are for concurrent credit, that's through the. The local college or university that the school has an articulation agreement with, then they have their sanctioning and governing bodies, and they have their provosts and they
have their, their deans that go through and approve those syllabuses to define what those course metrics are gonna be. OK. Thank
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:20:53
you, Mr. Chair. Representative Duke, he recognized her a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, my question and my apologies
that I don't have the page on this, but it has to do with the diplomas with distinction. So my first question on that part is, is that linked to funding for the school. And second, Is there like a scale on that or
percentage that your expectation, how you're viewing that with schools because obviously larger schools we're gonna
have a higher percentage than a smaller school will of students who have who received that diplomas with distinction.
Speaker 44
1:21:24
So, great question. We're always gonna measure graduation rates, right? Like that's very important as a state, that's important
Speaker 67
1:21:30
to report out for high schools or school districts, which percentage of their students are graduating with their peers, uh, we currently report out in a 4 year and a 5-year rate.
What's the different diploma designations do is recognize that we have some students that meet the standard graduation requirements. They meet all of the smart core components. They're gonna meet, um, the requirements to earn their standard high school diploma. But we also have some students that go above and beyond. We have some high school students that may take and pass an AP course. Maybe they earn an industry certification. Maybe they earned a seal of biliteracy. Maybe they took some concurrent credit, um, did some things that would go above and
beyond that standard diploma, basic graduation requirement. We're gonna quantify what those conditions are and roll to say those students may earn a diploma of merit. Then we have some students that earn an IB diploma, where they are an AP scholar designation. They earn their advance or associate in arts degree while they're in high school. They have not only just gone above and beyond the minimum expectations, they have excelled and demonstrated mastery, and those would be the qualifications for Irving a diploma of distinction.
Those would be recognized by the state through the credit transfer system so those students can get those designations with their diploma.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:22:55
Follow up. Is there any funding linked to the number of students that you have in your school district that receive any of these designations. Not
Speaker 67
1:23:05
currently, no. I mean, we, we want all students to graduate. What we wanna do is push the envelope that just getting the bare minimum, when, when, when 47% of our high school seniors.
don't have full schedules. They can do better and if we can create incentive opportunities, say, hey, if you actually apply yourself, you can earn a diploma of merit distinction that may help you with entry into a more rigorous institution or help qualify and meet some of the conditions from our academic scholarships, um, those, those designations will hopefully incentivize behaviors for students to want to do more. One more, if I may, and then I'll jump back in. Um, so my
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:23:48
next question has to do with the letter grades that the schools receive, which I am too, I'm a big fan of the letter grade. I think it is a very important piece that parents understand and I've found. Schools have pride in and sometimes incentivize. So can you tell me, number one, is it in statute right now all the different pieces because I know there are a significant number of pieces that, um, fold into the letter grade. And then, so if you can clarify that one for me, I think I know the answer, but I just want to make sure. And then second, To your point on it will come
back into rules. The problem that some of us face with rules is not all of us are members of ALC. And so we're not all a part of that rulemaking process or, yes, we can send a text or maybe we can come down, of course, it saves our taxpayers' money if we don't come down here if we're not on the Committee, right? Um, but we all also have full-time jobs as well. And so that's a little bit of my concern about it not being in statute is the input, I like the narrowing down that you're having, my understanding is it's
weighted in growth, both of those together, right? They're achievement and their growth and then I can't remember what else you said, but that's not in statute, that's what you're planning. And so I have some concerns with that not being in statute, because I believe the other piece was And that's one of the reasons why there's concerns is many of us are not members of ALC and that body, body in the interim that goes over the rules. So to, to
Speaker 65
1:25:13
kind of points. One, When, when we passed learns, I, I think most of the members that
Speaker 67
1:25:21
were here remembered that as an agency, we made a commitment to develop roles in a transparent manner. In fact, we put out a call to order had over 1000 stakeholders want to be part of some of the working groups and those roles not
Speaker 68
1:25:34
only went through our state board for public comment, review and process before we put them out and then for finalization, for feedback, and I know it goes through ALC. We also on our own presented. those roles through the education committees, and we will do happily do the same,
especially for roles, um, like school accountability because we, the more rounds of feedback and stakeholder input we get, we feel like it helps us deliver a better product. So I, I can say here very clearly that when we come to the rules, if we want those to gore committee before they go through ELC or however that process is, you have our commitment, we'd be happy to do so because I understand that everybody
Speaker 67
1:26:17
wants to make sure that we're getting relevant stakeholder input. The challenge that we have with
our school grades right now is. We have to make federal reporting requirements but it's called our state SL plan. So the feds tell us these are the things that you have to report on. Annually, or you can't participate in your federal programs. What we did as a state, it says, well, if the feds say we have to do this, then we're gonna build our state accountability system to mirror what the feds have. And I can tell you when I had conversations with superintendents all across the
state. I asked them. Should our school
Speaker 68
1:26:58
grades reflect with DC thinks is important to the state of Arkansas or can Arkansas educators and experts figure out what's important to us and say this is how we're gonna measure expectations in our schools. We can bifurcate the two. We don't have to create a school accountability system based on the feds, and that's what we're doing. We are bifurcating ourselves from their
unnecessary, unnecessary reporting regulations and requirements and saying our experts that are Arkansas experts know it's best for evaluating schools and we wanna do that system with our experts and get that right, be happy to work through
Speaker 67
1:27:38
the rules and make sure that process gets across the finish line as transparent as we can. I agree with you on those
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
1:27:46
pieces. The only concern that not only the concern I guess I have is the rulemaking process.
When you have it in statute,
wouldn't you agree that that outlines it for a long time to come and gives it clarity so that In 468, 10 years, maybe that's standard because I think this is 2015, the standard we're operating on, and I think it needs to be cleaned up. I 100% agree. But if I'm looking forward and I think that's one of our responsibilities, our major responsibilities as legislators is to look down for generations, right? And if we think this is so important that we change it and we need to do it, I think
the clarity in the statute gives higher accountability in the future rather than just in rules, and you may not agree
Speaker 134
1:28:34
with that or not, but, and I think that's why it's important to note the role or the statute still very clearly says
Speaker 68
1:28:40
it's gonna be based on achievement. All of those reporting categories are gonna be in reporting on achievement, and it's gonna be based on learning gains, all of those different categories are part of learning gains and it's gonna be based on graduation rate. All of those students are gonna be part of graduation rate. Well, we're
Speaker 67
1:28:57
gonna determine in rules is how much weight do we wanna put on each of those different categories to help define the letter grade because I heard very clearly from superintendents that say, um, the way we calculate learning grades and waited. In a school grade formula, we, we may have students that may not be hitting the mark in achievement, but we're not getting credit for how much learning they're doing. We want the ability to set those weights. All of those students are gonna be part of those reporting factors. That's not gonna go away. How we calculate it is what we want to be able to
Speaker 235
1:29:28
do and roll. Thank you for that clarity. Appreciate it.
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
1:29:41
Represent Barnett, you're recognized for a question. Thank you Uh, my question goes back to Representative Vault's question regarding section 23, um, parts A and Part B, of course, first dealing with the absences. I really don't understand why there's a need to dictate student absences to me that strip school districts of their autonomy when it comes to that
matter, but my other question has to do, um, with Part B, where it talks about academic standards, teaching standards, education standards. And so on and so forth. I have concerns around field education experiences. Will teachers in districts be penalized. For having their students engaged in what could be deemed a field education experience with coming and seeing and also
participating in the legislative process. It seems that this Bill is seeking to restrict that.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:30:40
Well, you know, section C also outlines what it doesn't prohibit. But, but that that follows after it has
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
1:30:47
outlined what it does prohibit. And so when we're talking about field education experiences in which you're going to teach children about the legislative process, they will be restricted from being a part of it.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:31:02
Well, I think that that if you're saying that the, well,
number one, a student, a student could still participate, they just would not be entitled to an excused absence, but secondly, uh. I'm not, I would. With regard to a teacher, um. You asked the question from the standpoint of
a teacher helping students engage in the legislative process. I mean, I think that's part of the concern is who gets to decide what they're advocating for.
Speaker 242
1:31:33
Who gets to decide, do districts not get
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
1:31:36
to have autonomy though, and how they Uh, carry out their curriculum and I mean, you, you have instances in what you want teachers to think outside of the box and to be creative, but it's also seemed like you're trying to tie their hands with these two sections here in this bill.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:31:55
I think, I think the focus is on political protest, social or public policy advocacy and attempts to influence legislation.
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
1:32:04
Should not students and educators have. A voice in that. They do have a voice in that you're saying they do but at the same time, these I don't think these lines in
Speaker 242
1:32:16
this deal are restricted and tying their hands from that. Well, I think
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:32:21
that, I think that part of the concern is, is that the teacher is involved in, uh, trying to, uh, help them engage in political protest, public policy, or influencing legislation, I think that's, I
think that's a concern, uh, because they're there to learn and I think that this is focused, it's narrowly focused on those several instances. But again, we're clearly stating that we're not, we're not prohibiting students from attending, uh, and being a part of that process or being a part of observing that process, but we're focused on, we're
not, not allowing excused absences for these 2 or 3 things. I have to have two other follow-up
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
1:33:05
questions. Um, number one, what issues arose that caused the need for this, and how does this mandate improve student performance. outcomes. Well, I think we've seen across the country, whether
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:33:15
it's in K through 12 or higher education specifically if you, if you would please let allow uh Representative Shepherd to
answer the question before we do a follow up. I think we've looked across the country,
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:33:26
we see this has been an issue. And as far as how does it improve
education improves education by saying that we want our students in school to learn.
And that it is a matter, it's a matter of importance that they are there to get an education and not, they're not there to have a teacher push them into some type of advocacy or political protest or in some type of attempt to influence legislation. Again, the concern is that who decides what is appropriate for that student to advocate for or not. And I think that again, I think we're doing our school districts a favor by including this because the students are there to learn. They're there to obtain an education.
And I think this provision moves us in that
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:34:15
direction. Representative Garner, you're recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm, I want to go
back for just a second on, um, uh, with the follow up on several of the, uh, questions about the stakeholders in the group, uh, section 2, page 1 and 2, I understand your explanation about not wanting the Particular groups there, but wouldn't it be just as important
to mandate that a parent and a teacher and a superintendent and administrator be on those committees as well as the chairs of education in the House and Senate. We can let Senator Dimay or one of
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:34:52
the others here can answer that, but I, I think that this again goes back to what
has been a trend over the last several years and actually I think there was actually a Supreme Court case from a few years ago in another area of law that, uh, and so there's been a trend to move away from these designated
positions based on, um, certain memberships and organizations, but I think most of these provisions still provide for, uh, stakeholders to be engaged. I think the, uh, the one that's listed at the outset that commission that's put together, they can provide for others to be a part of it, um, but again, I think it's just continuing on something that had already had already begun several years ago when I deferred to the secretary of the commissioner if they have other comments. No.
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:35:46
You have a follow-up in Garner. I have a second question, um, I'm kind of changing, changing tax a little bit, going to, um, higher ed and the definition of ROI and there's not really, I, I couldn't find in the bill specifics about how ROI will be determined. I know there's several things that. Kind of lean toward that, but it doesn't really say how ROI would be determined. Can you? Explain that a little bit.
Speaker 45
1:36:19
So the bill is authorizing language to for us to uh add an or a return on investment metric into
Speaker 171
1:36:25
the, into the existing formula, so over the last Year or so what we've done is looked at all of our degrees and associate degrees and bachelor's degrees across the state and look for a fiscal return on investment and how long it took the individual to pay for the degree or how much more money they made, uh, versus the same cohort of of a of a high school
graduate. And so uh we, we, we Use the cost of tuition and fees, books, and so on and so forth, and then we also added the cost of attendance by lost revenue. So what the, the foregone wages that a student's lost by participating in higher education versus having been working full time. And then we measured that. The um wages earned for that degree against the high school graduate in that same cohort and saw how long it took in years for the degree to pay for itself
and so there are a lot of returns to investment, higher education, not just monetarily. But the, the, the issue here is, um, higher education has lost confidence from folks, and one of the reasons why is they say that we aren't teaching relevant skills and we cost too much. And I think it's time for our institutions to be accountable to that, and I think they're ready for that. So we want to offer degrees and taxpayers' money to fund degrees that we know there is a very large likelihood that that individual is going to have a chance to earn more for them and prosper for prosperity for them and their family.
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:37:51
Follow up, Mr. Chair. You recognize. So is there direct funding tied to those ROI metrics, um, such, such as graduate earnings or loan repayment or economic impact or The formula as it exists is not include an ROI
Speaker 72
1:38:09
metric. What we'll do with this language if the bill passes is
Speaker 171
1:38:12
that we will get with our constituents and all the stakeholders to say what is a fair judgment on ROI? How long should it take for a degree
to pay for itself and what, uh, how can we work that into the
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:38:28
formula in a responsible fashion. And, and do we already have mandatory, uh, tracking
Speaker 171
1:38:34
of post-secondary. Jobs We do look for um. Postgraduate outcomes. We have a really good strong state, longitudinal data system, especially from about 2010 until now. So what we did in this scenario is rather than asking the schools to self-report, we wage match Social Security numbers from graduates back to
their uh unemployment insurance wage match or wage data, so it's Arkansans who earned degrees in Arkansas, went to work in Arkansas, and we know exactly what that RLO is based on, on the UI wage match. So there may be a, there, there may
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
1:39:08
be a difference between what they graduated with or what they, what degree they graduated with and what they're doing
in their job at that particular time. That is correct, and I think that's something
Speaker 171
1:39:20
that has the data and the process matures, we
might look at more holistically. We did not compare the nature of the degree and what the job they were doing, we just simply looked
Speaker 72
1:39:30
at what they earned and were they earning more than their, the cohort of college graduates in the same year. OK, thank you. Representative Kozar,
Chair
Unverified
1:39:41
you recognized for a question? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you committee or Actually, I don't know what I wanna
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
1:39:48
call you guys, but Bill sponsors out there. I think you've done a great job. There are some things that are gonna
have to be tweaked, I'm sure as we're already doing, but on section 31, uh, which is about academic facilities. Uh, I think you've done a real good job on this. I appreciate what you've done. I like the, I like what you set up. I'm actually praising you more than I'm questioning in you, uh, but, uh, the, the only real thing I have about this, I was just getting ready to run a bill to, to try to address this. And I thank you for saving me that time and, and difficulty of trying to put something through, uh, I like the way the selection
on it is. The only question I have, is there a time frame that this committee, uh, Group facility, um, members would work on those problems because as you know, we are so far behind on having the accurate numbers for facilities and transportation items and things like that, that these guys would work on. So will that, I guess I'm asking the commissioner probably, is that something that they will come in and set up a, uh, uh. The rules and regs on what they
do. We ran a bill in 17, uh, Senator English and I did. I don't think that's really been that they've met and really acted like I think they should have. So I'm gonna put my little 2 cents in and I think as long
as we put this committee together, and, and actually work on it and act on it, I think it'd
Speaker 44
1:41:14
be great. Would you agree? Agreed. Thank and thank you for the recommendation, and I, I feel like, um, we'd be happy to, to take that recommendation, put it in
Speaker 67
1:41:21
action and work with you to develop some language about the, the process because it it
needs to be expedited, it needs to be efficient, it needs to be done right. So anytime we can find a partner to help us move forward, we want to make that happen. I'd be
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
1:41:35
glad to help. I, I just really am, am, uh, excited about who you
have on this committee that that's proposed, and I just I said, I'd like to see it happen as quickly as possible. Uh, you know, I, I guess my other thing was this omnibus bill is what I'd call this bill again. It's kind of like the Laws bill, you know, sometimes we don't know these things are coming. There's probably a lot of things in this bill that people are have been working on or wanted to work on, so I
appreciate what you're doing, and it basically saves me time of having to do
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:42:15
it. Thank you. Center flowers you recognize for a question. Thank you. I'm going back to the Closing of the achievement gaps of between minority students. Uh, African American, Hispanic, and Caucasian students and
looking at page 9 of the Senate bill. And The striking of the Language that exists now. On lines 12 through 13. And I want to know,
and, and maybe you alluded to it earlier. Do we have data on how Much if any. The gap has closed. And
By striking this language, are we saying we're not concerned about what the state. Has always, or at least for a long period of time has known there was this gap. And if, but do we have the data
and has the gap closed in any significant measure. Page 9. The Senate bill. And it's It's
lines 12 through 14. Let me see, page 9, Senate Bill 246.
Speaker 67
1:44:27
So, um, just to kind of answer your question around do we have the data around learning and learning gaps and trend lines over the time, yes, we, we have a lot of data that can go back historically. We did change standardized assessments, um, over the past. Let's say a year, if you remember, we went through a a state assessment was called the ACT Aspire. That was what we used to report out in our school grades and our accountability, we just switched to the Atlas assessment, which is the Arkansas Teaching, Learning and assessment System, so we're
getting different data because of the test measure different things, so as we're getting into the 2nd round of administration on our new assessment, we're gonna have even better data, um, I, I would propose to the committee chairs that once we Finish our 2nd round of assessments and finalize that data. I'd love to come and present specifically on demographics and programs on how our students are doing across different regions across the state and make that a, a kind of a special workshop, we'd be
happy to do that because we're we're getting better and more sophisticated data. But from
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:45:33
the last day you say the ACT aspire. Assessment Did
it show a closing of the gap? I don't have
Speaker 164
1:45:42
that in front of me, so I'd have to come
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:45:45
back and report. OK. And the other, uh, question if I might, uh, well, a
couple. I'm not sure what page, but it's section 613808, the Arkansas
Traveling Teacher Program uh, is being repealed, uh, history of that goes back to 2000. 7 Was this ever used? But Do we have a Operational traveling teacher program. I I'm not I'm not sure about that. I can say that one of the
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:46:30
reasons why that language is struck is struck is that through what we did and learns by increasing the minimum salary for for teachers that has addressed some of the needs and shortages across the state, but then also there are other programs that are, that are whether in this bill or that were part of the Les program that also address that
need, um, as far as the what program. did exist. I don't have that information. And then the last
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:47:01
question, Mr. Chair, on page
15. And I'm referring to the Senate bill. It It speaks, it's uh. Line 26 on on that
bill. But it, it deals with waivers. Standards for accreditation.
And I want to know. What
is the definition. For the standards applicable to the general operation of a school district. Which failure results in probationary status are there existing rules. I think this is coming from page 15. And also page 16.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:48:06
Lines 25 and page 17. What can you, can you give us the page
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:48:13
and line again. OK. The thing just went. Page 15 of the Senate bill. Having to pull it up again.
Page 15 line 26. I'm looking at my notes. It's about standards. It's referenced in in uh this May. Page 15 line 11. That was repealed.
But section 8. These lines um. Dealing with the accelerated learning course and I'm not sure if, if this was my note from before it was amended or not,
but uh. Uh I'm inquiring about the standards for accreditation. Waivers,
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
1:49:50
part of the change here it looks like if I'm looking at, at the section you're looking at is instead of these references being to just AP courses or to AP and concurrent enrollment is that we use this term accelerated learning, which it includes those and so we're just using that term to, to incorporate what was already
there plus it includes uh a few other things that were already discussed about um what would fall. for that accelerated learning.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:50:26
Well, I, I'm interested in, in knowing what.
What standards? are applicable And, and this might not be the right reference to the page number, but, uh, somewhere in here. I had noticed that um There were Reference To standards applicable to general operation of a school district. And the Failure
To meet those standards result in probationary status. Yeah, so, um, to
Speaker 44
1:51:04
Speaker Shepherd's point, Part of the standards for accreditation,
Speaker 67
1:51:08
so, so if a school falls out of compliance, say for meeting certain statutes or rules, they can be kind of formally notified by the state board, you're out of compliance and if they continue to be a bad actor, there could be some other things that may happen where they may get a standards violation for accreditation.
Um, for failing to meet Arkansas code or law. Currently in that standards for accreditation, which is why this section was updated. Every school is required to offer and it's either 3 or 4, I think it's 4, a minimum of 4 AP courses, and if they don't offer those courses, then they could have a standards violation. All we're doing here is saying, as long as they're offering the courses that meet the definition of acceleration, meaning more pathways, more opportunities.
It's not telling that they need to take their current AP. Programs out because a lot of schools have done a wonderful job building out high quality advanced placement program, but if they wanted to be an IB designation school if they want to expand concurrent credit, those other accelerated courses can meet
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:52:23
that standards for accreditation. That's on page 7. For accelerated learning. That that then is replacing. Advanced replacing advanced placement throughout.
That coat section. That's on page 7 and on our Senate bill, it starts on page. Or line
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:52:47
7 Well Have, have you noticed? Mr. Secretary, any school districts that have been unable. To set up Advanced
placement courses. Yeah, to, to my knowledge,
Speaker 44
1:52:57
every high school has met that requirement. Some may have to do it through a virtual component
Speaker 67
1:53:03
because they may not have a certified teacher that meets the requirements or credentials cause in order to be an advanced placement teacher, there's some trainings you have to go through, you have to do, uh, a syllabus audit. There's some requirements so if they're not able to. quantify or qualify a candidate that's on campus. Some of them are meeting that requirement to a virtual proponent. Maybe they have a co-teacher in the classroom that's supporting the students, but that course is being delivered to a virtual platform
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:53:34
if you allow me, Mr. uh,
chair. I had one other. Question about Uh Deletion of Arkansas
school boards association as a consultant or supervisor of
training or reading or interpreting audit that's on page line in my notes. Page 11 Line 25 through.
26 in lines 31 through 34 Page 11 lines 25 through Yes ma'am. All right, um, and
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:54:22
so that's just, it doesn't prohibit the Arkansas School Board Association from doing those trainings, but those trainings would have to be certified by the Department of Education for them to be able to do that. At this point, the way that it's written right now, the school
board association itself deems what's good, right, wrong, indifferent as far as the training, this is just setting one more standard that it's got to be before someone else before it, it
would be able to count as continuing education. So the Department of Ed would. would create What they're
Speaker 96
1:54:50
looking for curriculum or they could just approve what is being, you know,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:54:56
offered by, uh, the school board association, but it would not give autonomy to the school sports association to make that determination on their own.
So it could be denied. It could be if it's not a. You know, if it, it doesn't, I, I guess, meet the criteria that the Department of Education would set forth, and yes. Now
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:55:22
they can speak to that more, but I,
I think I've Essentially hit on the with all these changes, I'm just wondering how, how, how our school districts supposed to, to understand what now? Uh, as a result, of this becoming law. How is
that communicated and how what kind of transition is there because it seems to me, I mean, I'm just legislator or lawyer, but it, it, it seems very complex. To me, to try to understand the dos and the don'ts and what you have to do. Each one of those entities have their associations which I
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
1:56:01
promise you from the feedback that we've gotten have thoroughly, you know, gone through the
bill to understand what its implications are going
to be, um, and that's not the end all be all. I mean, I think it is incumbent on the districts, uh, just like it is with any law that we change that they understand what that means and how it's going to impact them, whether it be funding or enrollment or all the other various issues. So, again, I, I think that they are capable. Um, I don't believe that this
is something that it's not gonna. to a hurdle that they can't cross or or understand it just is us essentially saying the general bill encompasses, let's put students first.
Um, and, and again I think this just helps them, uh, have a path to, to rece or to
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
1:56:48
achieve that result. And I do believe the school districts, uh, the, the ones that are in my district I think they're genuinely concerned about the students. I'm
just Looking at it As they go about their day to day operations. And then having to come back and understand all of this and what
changes you have to make and all this, I mean, it seems to me like it would be a hurdle. And You know, I guess just like with the legislative. Laws that we create. They're supposed to be communicated to the public by the Secretary of State's office. How are these things communicated to the school districts. So I, and thank you for bringing
Speaker 44
1:57:42
that up because I, if there's one thing we can't do is overcommunicate all the changes. So what happens
Speaker 67
1:57:47
similar to what we did last session, we learned is When session was completed, we put together a packet for school districts that we sent to everybody with a legislative implementation chart because depending on not just this law, but all the other laws and all the different committees and how everything comes out, there's some things that are gonna be effective immediately. There's gonna be some things that may be
effective July 1. There's gonna be some things that require our agency to do a rules promulgation which takes time and there's gonna be some impacts that local school boards are going to have to adopt roles over time in every different bill in every different nuance has a different deadline and implementation, so we put together a full packet with summaries of all the bills and charts to help superintendents and school districts know exactly what's done for them we send out weekly
commissioners memos that anybody can sign up for, whether you're a superintendent, principal, teacher, anybody throughout the organization can sign up for our commissioner memos. That will have those specific tasks and how we're supporting along the way. We do webinars with our holders we host conferences, we go boots on the ground, visit, um, we work a lot with our educational cooperatives who are definitely supporting mostly our small rural districts because those are the ones that I tend to worry about more when there's just a lot of change because they don't have big district
offices like some of our larger districts do or the capacity to help with some of the implementation. So we are actively robust, not just kind of with Access support, but with all legislative support to make sure that everybody's in compliance. Everybody's doing what's right for students and all of the systems are gonna meet the expectations and deadlines that this legislative body sets forth. Representative Brown, you're recognized for a question.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
1:59:48
I had a question, and I think it may already be answered on page 7, but I was wondering um for uh for these accelerated courses. Oh, I wanna preface that by saying I think this is a great bill. I think this is great legislation. I'm really looking forward to being able to vote for it, but I do have a question, uh, with regards to the accelerated courses, what kind of Um, accountability do we have that someone who actually goes
through this process is then prepared for the next level when they get to college. Do we have any kind of
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:00:30
feedback on that. I think that
when you look at at the accelerated learning, uh. The categories of that which include the. Pre-AP AP. The IB, the Cambridge Advanced, uh, concurrent credit and then,
uh, similar programs, those are all, they all have, uh, either organizations that oversee the curriculum and the quality of the curriculum, um. Clearly I guess the 1st 3, those are outside entities that that are part of that process, but then when you think of concurrent credit, that's gonna be through an institution of higher education and so those each of our institutions we know have their standards for
their faculty and for uh the course curriculum and then finally on that final, um,
item similar courses I've, I've, I've described as what we may have used to know as an honors class, uh, the department has to approve those programs, so there's, there's certainly um entities whether it's the department, the institution, or these, uh, outside entities that have some oversight and are going to be a part of ensuring the quality of the of the curriculum
Speaker 312
2:01:43
and the instruction. Thank you and um. So I.
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
2:01:53
I'm hoping I would hope that that would lead to, uh, fewer students needing to take remedial courses when they get to college. Um So with with this legislation and with learns, um, I know this probably is not the place to do this, but would you assume then that the commission on closing the achievement gap is now a defunct commission. I mean, is there any need for it anymore?
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:02:25
I mean, I think all that kind of remains to be seen. We want, we,
I think have looked at every option and opportunity to improve, uh, the delivery of education in the state of Arkansas and improve student performance and so whether it's on this issue or any other issue, uh, we want to take advantage of whatever opportunities we can, uh, to make sure that our students are performing at the highest level possible. And one other, um, I
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
2:02:51
know somebody else brought this up, I think, uh, senator, um.
Sullivan Page 75 on the Senate bill, um. Line one. In the language engaged in unprofession professional conduct. I had an attorney, uh, text me that they thought that violating professional standards might be a better way to say that. I
don't know if it's uh. That different
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:03:27
Language or not, but these are one thing to keep in mind, uh, one through 8
are not requirements. There are what we're suggesting that we put in place by the higher ed institutions, and I would assume as they're developing their professional standards that impress um that we would hope that they provide a definition for unprofessional conduct. But again, that this is, if you go all the way back to. Line 21 on the Senate bill that it may require immediate review, um, these are not requirements that we can put in place.
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:03:57
Thank you. No other questions. Senator Murdoch, you recognized her question. Thank you, chair. Uh, thank you, um, to the uh sponsors of the bill and to the department for being here, uh, to answer our questions, uh. So a few questions first I want to go to section 23. I want to revisit that. And um a statement slash question, maybe more of a statement. Uh, in the discussion, uh,
representative, um, Shepherd, as we discussed, as you discussed that what Representative Barnett and um Representative um. Of art I, I too believe
that that exercise that that that we're eliminating here as an excuse absence. is a possibility for true education and teaching, and it should be probably excused because in many situations, I know in mine, uh, my civics class when I was in high school.
Uh, we had such an experience and it was not any way. Uh, directed at anything to uh negatively affect our ability to listen, learn, uh, and become a more well rounded individual so that experience of coming to the Capitol, whatever the case may be, uh, can be very, very, um, educational and should be excused in my opinion and should not be something that we
determine from Little Rock. I do understand the point you're making. Uh, or the thing you're trying to avoid is unnecessary distraction to learning, and I agree with that part, but I do believe that our local uh school boards and leadership should be given that autonomy to deal with their local um um constituency, if you will, to make that decision of what's best for them. I think it's kind of overarching overreaching when we determine what's.
Educational and what may not be good for uh students in a particular situation, so. I want you to agree with that, by, by your document. I know you don't, but if I can have
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:06:17
a chance to respond, I think, to the question that, which is, do I agree with that? I think was your question, but if you go to, uh, page 37 on ours and in section C, we do allow for uh dis our students that are attending uh curricular or co-curricular activities approved by the school district or open enrollment charter
school for credit that is not prohibit them, uh, from that which and again if you're coming up here for a class or whatever it may be and the district's approved that you know that, uh, trip or participation or whatever it may be, then those, those are going to be excused absences, um, again, so let's
just take an example. You've got, and I'll give it to you, I mean there may be. Uh, I, I've had multiple times in which there have been, um, schools that have developed legislation that we've helped
them pass, right? Students, uh, there's nothing wrong with that, and they've done it as part of a a larger class, uh, when they go through to make that presentation to have those presented here, uh, those that would be a part of a class, part of a
curricular, co-curricular activity. It was approved by the district that they come and participate and so that approval I think is very important and is worded in that section C. As it relates to excused, unexcused absences. OK.
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:07:35
So, I appreciate that, Senator dismay, but as Representative Shepard
was talking and discussing with those other two members. I The, the, the point then, as I, as I heard and understood it was that. It would be precluded for the possibility of being concerned about um. Political protest or anything of an advocacy type nature. I, I do think As I, I want to reemphasize that education comes in so many ways and in so many places and what
makes us better as grownups is when we're able to experience things as students or as youngsters and with oversight so even learning how to advocate prophecy, there's a lot going on in our country now that's bad and people are not doing things in in any manner that's responsible or responsive uh or respo or in good or good for everyone. involved and you're getting into a lot of uh things that is distracting. I think there's a way in the educational process, and I'm
gonna go back to my civics teacher who taught us how to do things decently and in order. So it's not that we should preclude it from Little Rock. We should not preclude that from being a, a, a part of the, the process. I just, I just think that we're on, we're on a different page there. And I think I'm gonna get to that at the end of my uh question if I'm allowed to indulge a little bit more, uh, but thank you. I don't want to go back and forth on that for the interest of time. Um
As, as, as this bill focuses on all students and uh and from higher ed K through 12 is touching everything as it relates to accountability. I'm gonna talk about that for a second. And we have focused on making sure, uh, the private school sector, uh, get scholarships, have access, those things that has been determined by whoever put this document together as being necessary. I don't have a problem with that from that standpoint, but to you that
developed this, my question is the accountability piece. You know, the students are not they they're where you see public school and charter school students are prohibited from prohibited from there's never private schools. Why aren't the private schools, students who we care about who this bill has addressed in certain areas. Why when it comes to accountability. I do it just say public schools or public charter schools. So, and I know the answers. Well we don't have jurisdiction to
some degree, but you take The initiative to provide funding, and I'm not debating the funding, I'm not saying it's even bad for those in those uh private sectors. But let's take the accountability. Shouldn't we take the accountability piece to them as well. In terms of everything that you that that that you that you allow or don't allow for public and charters, even uh coming to do the in the section section 23, uh, when it talks about um
the political protests, social or public policy, those and so forth and so on, it only addresses public school district or open enrollment public charter school. It don't address the others. And so many other a letter grades. Private schools don't get the letter grades that we're talking about. When you even talk about how we're going to redo that and the rethinking of that, you don't include them. But you do, we do provide services and we do provide dollars. So if we do that on that side, why not balance it
with accountability. I don't think it's unreasonable even to the private schools, it probably would not be because you are entering into their life in a different way than we've done in the state of Arkansas, and if you deem it necessary as the The ones that has developed this. Then I think accountability should be a part
of it. Don't you agree with that? Thank you for your statement. I want a response.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:11:51
Why don't we have the accountability piece. The number one, I think you've already answered your question several times throughout your statement. right? I mean it's. Essentially you said, uh, they're not under the state's jurisdiction. There are not state entities. They are not public or public schools and charter schools are under the state direction, um, and so I believe it would be an overreach uh to go beyond for the private
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:12:21
schools. Well, so I made a supposition as to your thinking on why you Did something, but, but if, if, if we would if we made an overreach and started providing funding to them. Which is not under our jurisdiction, if that's an overreach, to use your word, then why wouldn't we make an overreach and being and holding them accountable for, because let me say what accountability does. Accountability raises the tie. It makes everybody better, accountability is not a bad word.
And it should not be a word that's a biased word either. Accountability is just good. So I don't think I'm asking or anyone to ask for accountability. In this case, and I think wherever you send your money, you have an opportunity. To have an expectation for standards for results. So I don't think it's so anyway, so, so here's my last part. When you brought this document together. Those of you that put this
together. Let's talk about who's at the table. Because probably the reason why you get less than ideas of everyone inclusive of things and I know inclusivity and diversity is being challenged as being necessary. This is an example of why it's necessary, a real life example right now that we're living. Of why inclusion and diversity is necessary in conversations.
When this bill was developed, and this is a legislative question now. To you and Representative Shepherd, who is sitting there. Was there anyone from the minority party, a part of these integral discussions as you develop this legislation.
The Democratic Party throughout the process, absolutely they were involved
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:14:17
in your conversations has been filed for a while so that there is input and filing filing the making of this bill.
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:14:28
The meetings, the creation. Because if you're not involved, I'm not talking about, cause I know Desi did some things. I've seen because I'm gonna get a secretary credit. I've seen him go across the state because he came to my district. Let's
go legislative. I haven't seen it. I don't know about it, but I'm asking it on the record. Was anybody included that may have
A different experience, a different um. point of view That represent real people. That may not live, think, look like you. But we all together in this, duly elected. And as an accountable body. Did we have Minority representation at that table. When this
was being made. Not after you filed it and then you run it through because you got the numbers. The numbers are
what they are, but I'm talking about making a good document. That's
inclusive. A did that happen? Yes. Who No, legislative, remember it's a legislative body. I can,
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:15:46
I can say that myself, the department we had conversations. I'm not talking about the department. I'm,
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:15:51
I want to keep this separate let's try
to stick to asking questions and answering, there's certainly will be time for a very robust debate, which we can continue, but in the interest of
time and other people who have questions I want to make sure that we ask a question and get answers.
Speaker 336
2:16:08
I'll, I'll allow one additional question.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:16:11
I, I don't have a different question. Thank you so much. as a legislator. I had discussions with a number of individuals, uh, primarily related to higher education. Uh, but differing backgrounds. I don't know what their political affiliations may
have been, but. I had, you may not like the gaming me Shepherd. That's not right what
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:16:27
you're doing now. Now we ain't gonna do that. We ain't gonna do that.
We're not gonna do that. Don't do that. No, I, I, I, I respectfully said it respectfully Senator, uh, and for just a moment, uh, respectfully, uh, to members of the audience, so we'll request that there be no outbursts. We are continue the question and answer portion. Uh, Senator, do you have an additional question for Representative Shepherd or anyone
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:16:54
at the table. Yes, so my last question, uh, slash statement, Representative Shepard. You're my classmate. We came here together. I respect you, but you know exactly what I'm asking you, and I think you
know it's a good question, and if it. did not happen because you you you do know what all of our political affiliations. It ain't but a few of that's that's not yours, so you do know that, so when you say that that appears that you're not being genuine with your answer. You were asking, I didn't
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:17:21
know it was specific to the legislature. I'm talking about with this legislation, legislature was put together. This was put together in discussion with the department and the governor's office since it was filed, we've had a numerous now and and you may not like the answer, no, you're not answering my question. I had
OK, and that's what I was responding to. The fact of the matter is after it was filed, we had a number of discussions following that, quite honestly, probably most members of the Republican Party had not seen the bill or any form of it because we knew we needed to file the bill and then have further discussion. And then we filed it when was that? 2 or 3 weeks ago. We had conversations, we've asked for input and then we came back and filed an amendment to it. You may not like the answer. You may
not like the answer, but the fact is that we took a lot. of time and effort. You may not like what's in the bill, but don't demean the process and don't demean us as far as the work that we do, you know me, and so you know that I do my homework on these things and I would welcome I throughout this process we have welcomed to get input to where we can to amend the bill there may be philosophical disagreements and that's OK, that's OK, but the fact is we did have we've had a
number of conversation. and since the time it's been filed, as you know, myself and centered dismay are always open to have discussion we're always open to taking input good night we brought an amendment this morning because of concerns raised over the weekend. And so this was, this was I'm proud of how this bill was developed and you may not like the bill, but don't demean the process and don't demean me and senator dismay, so I've got to make a statement to that Senator, but no, he said
Speaker 337
2:19:06
something I got to respond to because I'm not
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
2:19:09
demeaning you. I mean you talk about Senator, with all due respect Matthew Shepherd Shepherd process before Senator Murdock. And I gave credit to to the department for Murdoch. Senator Murdoch, with all due respect, the process,
Senator Murdoch with all with all the, that's it. With all due respect, Senator
Murdoch, thank you for your passion. We appreciate it. I certainly welcome members to have a very robust and open debate as we move forward, we
will do that if we get to a motion on the bill, which likely will be later on today. We can have as much of a debate as we want to relative to specifics of the bill. Let's continue with the question and answer portion right now. Representative Duke, you're
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:19:52
recognized for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I have a few, if I can have some latitude, they're short. My first question is on the scholarships, particularly the governor's scholarship. Is this 5000 a semester or a year. And all relate to the other
scholarships as well. Is it semester scholarship semester, and
Speaker 45
2:20:17
then the other ones are they semester or a year, so the governor's scholarship, excuse me, the governor's scholarship. I was thinking of Governor's distinguishers's a small
Speaker 171
2:20:23
difference there. The governor's scholarship is $5000 per year, uh, academic challenge, and I don't know if you've got the one page on all the scholarships, I'll be glad to get that for you. Uh, it talks through the difference in those. I don't know if you want me to go through all of those now, but the big ones, academic challenge moves fresh. Awards of 2000, uh, the
workforce challenge, you saw some changes in the workforce challenge where there's opportunities for non-degree uh funding at a $3000 per ATI for program. Um The access to acceleration that we've talked about, which is $2000 per year up to 30 credit hours per year. Uh, we can bind some scholarships with, with, uh, the law enforcement officer and a few of the others to create the um hero scholarship, um.
We talk a little bit about Arkansas Teacher Academy, um, the teacher apprenticeship dual licenser pieces that I think was alluded to with no traveling teacher program, but these are some really good opportunities I think are even better than traveling teacher program. Uh, happy to go into more detail or be sure you get the, the one pager that you just clarify for me, my apologies
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:21:33
if I'm not, um, putting all the pieces together correctly. The governor scholarship is. What we're used to referencing, I guess, the last several years, that was 32 on the ACT and
different other pieces to it, which I think was a total of 10,000. Is that remaining the same? Is that changing? How is that looking? So the amount
Speaker 171
2:21:50
will remain the same. We are going to enhance opportunities to, uh, participation in that scholarship through diplomas of distinction. OK, thank you. Um, if I may.
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:21:59
OK, so, um, the other question that I had, let me get my
glasses back on. So, um, I wanted to have a little bit of clarity on these pathways and the different diploma programs or
opportunities for diplomas. What is the flexibility of students in those high school years of moving between those different pathways if. I mean, I know we I I know my understanding is the hope is they would have more clarity when they get into high school, maybe what they would like to do, but they're not always that way, and as often referenced in In education circles is our young men's brains develop a little bit later, so they might have a little bit more, um, movement than maybe the young ladies do, but I think many of our younger people still are
trying to figure things out even into college. So, what is the flexibility of them being able to move from these different pathways. Try a few different things, um, and still be able to accelerate because oftentimes those people who are like a variety of things, um, also a very high achieving. I think my dad's probably had 40 different careers in his lifetime, right? And also very high achieving, so is there, are you going to be penalized? Is there going to be flexibility? And I'm going to give you my third question just because as just to speed things
up, um, if your kids accelerate, if you have like a junior who graduates their senior year, how does that impact funding for that school district. Um, how do they plan? Is there any impact, um, as they prepare, as these kids maybe accelerate through a little bit more quickly, which I assume is somewhat of the goal, um, how will the stu how will this districts be impacted. Will they not? Or have you already taken that into account? Thank you. I'm trying to make sure I think
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:23:45
I understand the question, but as far as the different pathways and exposures that are gonna be made available to kids. It doesn't lock any kid into any particular program and so is that what you mean? So I mean if they're able to. Go take a welding class at the, you know, local tech college or two year, that doesn't lock them into having to go into welding, but it does expose them to potential opportunities or things they want may want to pursue later. Is that it is
Speaker 353
2:24:09
all about exposure's the, um, just. If a school district, my
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:24:17
concern, and I've voiced this for a few years is my concern is if, if, if school districts are incentivized because they get kids who complete a pathway, then human nature is, you're gonna want to keep them to complete that pathway rather than let them explore a little bit. So our school district's going to be rewarded on the amount of completers they have and thus in its essence penalized if kids move around a little bit and try and find, um, maybe what is a better fit for them academically or maybe in the
future. So that's if it's linked to testing, if it's linked to funding, if that completer process of
Speaker 67
2:24:57
the pathway matters. Currently it's not linked to funding or testing, we want kids to explore, grow, succeed. Kids changed your mind all the time. We're setting up a system that's gonna allow. A student to go from one pathway program, what they have in elective one year may change the next year. Um, our graduation requirements are not changing, right? So when we look at the
smart core, um, grade point average or there's certain things that are gonna remain the same. What we're talking about is additional experiences for those students, which is why there's different levels of merit and distinction, uh, as well for those students that go above and beyond. Thank you. And
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:25:37
any, any potential impact for students who complete their high school degree maybe earlier and move on and while they're doing this concurrence, is there any, I, I, that question got asked me, so I want to be respectful people who would ask that if there's gonna
be any harm to planning for school districts or any new challenges maybe as we shift kids into accelerating a little bit more funding
Speaker 67
2:26:01
wise. So there, there's currently those programs and pathways already exist, so this wouldn't be any. Different, um, the current funding formula model looks at declining enrollment categorical goals. So if, if a student graduated early, depending on the situation and nuance in the district, they may still continue receiving that funding, but my hope is that that student
experience while in high school, to your point, is expanded because right now our seniors are
Speaker 68
2:26:29
leaving by taking only 2 courses. We fund a full day of school. Why aren't we
Speaker 67
2:26:36
putting them into different programs to try different current technical programs, different concurrent credit programs. What we're doing here
Speaker 68
2:26:42
is not trying to incentivize students to finish the system earlier is to make sure that when they leave the system, they're ready to be employed, enlisted or enrolled. So to me, this is about
expanding opportunities for students, not rushing them through a system. Thank you. I appreciate that and thank you all
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
2:27:02
for your work on this bill and for also the feedback that you have taken. I know I've asked several questions of Representative Shepherd, and so I really appreciate that and um look forward to. Seeing what great things happen for our kids. Thank you. Represent Gonzalez Worthing, you recognize
for a question. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you for bringing
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:27:18
us all together to help vet this bill and make it the best bill ever,
um, I have actually 5 different questions and they're on 5 different topics, so I will just do the first one and then come back around or how would you sure give you a latitude to
ask a couple questions or question a couple follow-ups, and then we'll have you move to
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:27:43
the end and start back over. OK, thank you. Um, I'm looking at the house bill page 7, and it's our definition of accelerated learning starting on line 5. Um And it, it defines, um, 4 areas and then the and then
the 5th area. College Board pre-advanced placement and advanced placement courses, IB Cambridge Advanced International certificate. The concurrent credit courses, and then it says a substantially, substantively similar course or program approved by the division of Elementary Secondary education, um, it goes down and line 19, the grant funding for, uh, accelerated learning and then it It discusses accelerated
learning why we're doing it to prepare more students for success in higher ed, post-secondary training, high wage, high demand careers, OK? Now just bear with me. OK, now, um, now I'm gonna, let's go over to page 31. On page
31, section 17, line 19, it talks about the concerning a
certificate of, of attainment, um, for students completing an approved vocational career technical pathway, and it goes on line 26 that these certificates would be appropriate career pathways or programs of study, and then the second item, line 28, used for consideration of acceptance and priority placement into an apprenticeship training program. OK, keeping in mind the apprenticeship program and then the last thing, page 46.
Section 33. This is concerning coursework at academic course placement under the Arkansas Military Child School Transitions Act, and it talks about that academic course placement, line 25, accelerated learning, and then 28 academic, technical and career pathway courses. OK, so my question is, going through all that because I was in 3 different sections. When we define accelerated learning, are we, are we gonna consider, are
we going to consider apprenticeship programs. I, I, I wasn't sure it we discussed apprenticeship programs and we've talked about that earlier as a way of accelerating learning and getting our students into high demand fields we don't have enough jobs, etc. in these various areas. It's not, I, I'm seeing it in a couple of different places, but it's not part of the definition unless it is part. But we're not seeing it, so that's my question.
Speaker 45
2:30:42
So, uh, the first part of your question. Right now
Speaker 171
2:30:45
has uh Secretary Leva stated earlier, we're highly connected to AP. And the professional development that's paid for to get uh uh teachers credential to teach AP so what this does is give us a lot more latitude to think use things other than just AP. So we have the international baccarret. You have Cambridge and particularly when I'm really interested in is concurrent credit.
We have data that shows if a student took a single concurrent credit class while in high school, it doubled their likelihood of a post-secondary award, not a bachelor's degree, but of some post-secondary award. So we're really trying to push acceleration. In the model, uh, prior where we had core and Smart Corp. When we had core and Smart core, we had Smart core and not so smart core. That's a disservice to our kids. We need all students, career technical or otherwise, to meet
a minimum threshold for a high school diploma, so that's what we have no matter whether you're going into a blue collar job or a white collar job or you're going to work or you're listed or employed or enrolled. We have a high school diploma and then we have opportunities for merit and distinction in CTE pathways, including apprenticeship, pre-apprenticeship, and um. Also into what we think of more traditional academic pathways, so it's an important one that we don't devalue one or value one
more than the other. And with this new high school diploma process. And merit distinction. We let our students know. Of the opportunities and let them choose how best to distinguish themselves so that they can accelerate their career path, whatever they may may be into academia or more technical
Speaker 263
2:32:35
or direct to employee uh employment or apprenticeships. Does that answer your question?
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:32:41
Um, so you're, if, if I'm understanding the career
technical and apprenticeship programs would Be part of the consideration for accelerated learning. That is correct. OK, so I guess I'm wondering if, is that gonna be included in the, in, in the definition. So for, for example, It's listed, you know, without limitation, you know, advanced placement IB, Cambridge concurrent. And then the 5th is just kind of broad substantively similar
Speaker 171
2:33:19
course or program approved by, I think the last bullet was really trying to keep us from doing continuing where we had been and only these things. If something. A really good opportunity comes along. It gives us the latitude to say this is equivalent, this is good for students, and we can put this, we can use this opportunity for students, uh, where you find the detail about, uh, uh, apprenticeships and the other is in our language, uh, it's not in the bill necessarily, but in our, in our new diploma pathway. So we have
diploma, diploma of Merit, Diploma of distinction. That's where that's detailed. That's where that's gonna be detailed.
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:33:53
I, I was just happy to share that with you OK. had
some questions related to that. There's, um, a constituents worried that that has totally been taken out and so that's, that you know if anything I would say it's the opposite. OK. OK thank
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:34:12
you. Real quick, if you The definitions for accelerated learning as they relate to the concurrent credits the AP courses and all those sorts of
things if there was an I don't think it contemplates apprenticeships, by the way. This is a path to college, not a tech degree. I, I believe in what it's really referencing back to is if there was something like that would have to be approved by division of Elementary and Secondary education. Um, so it's not specifically stated here. I don't believe it's really contemplated, but if there, if it were to be contemplated,
then it would have to go through, uh, the board. OK.
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:34:48
Um Would you like me to ask my
second or wait? Go ask one more question, then we'll move on to another representative. OK. Um, looking at the teacher opportunity program. Um, information, I believe that's on page 79. Let's see. Uh, that might be,
it might be 79 in the Senate, just a second. OK, yes, 79 on the Senate bill, it's section 65.
And it talks about grants, the fir um, line 27, section 65, grants priority, uh, line 29, the first priority for the award of funds under the teacher opportunity program is the award for additional education in and it lists STEM, of course, in A B, computer
science, C literacy or reading, the pre-K and E in special education. I'm concerned and would like to
consideration in including, um, ESL or Um Priority for English as a second language or multilingual students. Um, and that's because that that those students are gonna run throughout. Science, technology, engineering, mathematics, computer science, literacy, reading, and pre-K. Page 79 on the Senate bill. Um
Unless I'm, let me just. Senate beyond the Senate bill page 79. Line 27, section 65. So it's not changing the STEM language
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:36:52
that's there, but it does add an additional piece for a teacher may receive an award of seeking dual license or an additional subject very
different from the subject area in which the teacher is currently teaching. Um Yeah, my understanding and that I'm getting a head nod, that's correct, that that could qualify for, I think what you're asking about. Is it possible to include that?
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:37:20
As on the list? Could it be letter F in a letter, letter F, special education and And let her maybe a letter F. English as a second language. I mean it's the first time I've
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:37:33
had the question brought, uh, to me at all, so, um, I mean, we got a little bit of time we can discuss it. I think what you want is actually covered, but we can, you know, circle back and make sure that that's the fact.
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:37:50
OK. Thank you. Representative Bayberry, you recognize for a question. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Listening to a lot of the comments and the concerns from, from
some of the folks here, um, I just would like to throw out some suggestions. Uh, I don't think we're going to vote on this
before, uh, session, uh, begins at 1:30 and maybe you can take this back and, and since we are doing an amendment, you might be open to, to some clarity. Um, I, I know Senator Sullivan and Representative Brown kind of commented on this, and I just wanted to Of, um, on page 74, this is the House bill, page 74, we're talking about section 60, um, the very last line, line 36, it says engaged in unprofessional
conduct that adversely affects blah blah, blah, blah, blah, and, and Just wondering if you'd be willing to clarify that and say conduct, engaged in conduct violating professional standards. Um, that, that might help some of us breathe a little bit, um, easier with, with that language and I have one other small suggestion too. I mean I only
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:38:57
just trying to understand, I mean, if you don't mind, where is the request for that coming
from, because I don't, professional standards are going to vary institution to. Constitution and so if we just say outright professional standards, then I think you have to decide what those standards are and this is giving the latitude and just some direction to the higher ed institutions that this is something that we'd like to see addressed in their employee handbook for, you know, lack of a better way to put it. So I'm not, do you mind who is, where's the, I just,
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
2:39:28
I just think that the other wording would add some clarity. Let me also say that I know many of us
have been concerned and I, and I have a feeling that there's a large of people here to speak later on on this topic and maybe we can, um, help calm some of that if, if you consider this wording change and this goes back to, um, page, again, I'm in the House bill, page 36. This is that section 23, um, because we've kind of heard a theme over and over again. And, and I will say, I, you know, I was approached by someone who was actually the very first person to speak in favor of the Learns
Act. Um, it was a student, a 17 year old student who spoke in favor of it and is fearful that if that were to take place again, you know, he would not have had the opportunity to do so. And, and I'm always speaking to groups of students and telling them that I want them to be engaged and, and what's going on up here. And I love when we get feedback. The students are the ones that are affected most by what we do here in the education committee and I
love, love getting their feedback. It's so important, um, and, and so I'm just wondering if maybe changing where it says shall not grant excused absences. Again, that's on page 36, line 25, maybe changing the words that say may limit, um, maybe, maybe there's been excessive absences, uh, due to that, but maybe if we change that wording to say may limit, that would, that would be a compromise on.
both sides still allowing it, but, um, not letting it, uh, become something that a student is chronically absent because they're trying to speak at the Capitol. Those are just some ideas. I'm just trying to find ways that we can, um, still accomplish, uh, many of your goals, but maybe add some clarity to help some of us get a little over the hump of some of the
concerns. Thank you. Reson Gonzalezor and you're back up. OK Um
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:41:42
This ties in with the, um, productivity-based funding model. I believe that is
in Senate bill on page 68. So higher ed, um, funding
model will be based on productivity-based funding model. If we look at
Line 14, the rules adopted to implement a
productivity-based funding model for state-supported institutions of higher education. shall contain measures for effectiveness, affordability, and efficiency. That acknowledge the following priorities. And it and it goes on to list what those priorities are, and then when it and then. On the next page 69. Um, oh, I'm sorry, uh, still on
page 68, letter F, line 36, Institutional. Collaboration. That encourages the successful transfer of students, Gess in serving on a represented students. H production of students graduating with credentials that align with statewide and regional workforce needs. 69, so my question, I have two related to this success in
serving underrepresented students, so I guess I'm, I just want some clarity on what you mean by that in light of, in light of You know, what we have been, do you know where I'm at? OK, um, in light of, um, um, DEI diversity, etc. um, letter and maybe it's not related to that, but I just wanted clarity on G underrepresented students, and then, um, And that align with statewide
and regional workforce needs, and I wondered if If um Parents would be able or the community would be able to see what those, they would be posted somewhere, OK? So, that's it. Those
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:44:00
two. Yeah, in the rulemaking process and as you're
working through that and they create definitions for statewide and regional workforce needs, uh, those things are gonna be discussed, uh, in the public's got the ability to participate. The, uh, previous portion of success in serving
underrepresented students as existing language. We're not striking that. which obviously, um, and I mean, I think one of the things. There, there should be nothing that would prohibit someone from running to uh recruit. From a particular demographic or area of the state or any of those other things, and we should encourage that. I mean, for instance, if we need doctors in South Arkansas, one of the best ways to get doctors in South Arkansas is to recruit potential doctors from Arkansas cause that's where they're gonna go home to, um, and so I don't think we wanna remove that as a
qualification, but what it does say, you know, in other parts of the bill is while that recruiting may happen you can't give a different level of um Yeah, qualifications to be able to actually, you know, attend a school, uh, but I don't, I don't, we would not want to hinder or, and I think it should be contemplated in the funding model, um. Making sure that we're recruiting from all areas of the state. And demographics.
OK, thank you. Do you have additional questions, Representative? Yeah right Yes,
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:45:41
ma'am. There's no one else in the queue, so I'm gonna let you continue. Eligibility for Arkansas heroes scholarship, um, this is on page one, this is on the House bill,
the House bill page 103. I, wait a minute. Yeah, that's right. Page 103. House bill, Line 29 eligibility for Arkansas heroes scholarship. OK. And now I'm gonna, this talks
about the qualifications. And now I'm gonna go to.
Page 105. And maybe I have a an initial copy. I'm not sure, but it is, it is, um, eligibility for Arkansas Hero scholarship. OK, Li 9 Letter F. Scholarship benefits may not accrue. Are you following me? No. 105, but maybe it's uh. Let
me look at the Senate.
Did you say F? Yes, scholarship benefits, those are the first
two words on letter F lowercase f. on page. Well, I'm it's
Speaker 390
2:47:27
house bill, but it may be an older copy. I apologize. OK. All right. Um
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:47:40
It's House Bill page 30 page 100, line 35, the Senate bill, it's page 1012
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:47:49
the scholar, Yes, this is it. OK, page 101, Senate bill, page 101, up at the top, line 2, letter F. OK Um, scholarship benefits may not accrue under this subchapter to a person if the wound or injury suffered by an American hero is
self-inflicted or if the death of an Arkansas hero is self-inflicted inf inflicted. I guess I'm wondering about, you know, in In our, in our arena now of mental health, mental illness, um, those who suffer from depression, anxiety disorder, PTSD. I'm just wondering, are we going to not allow that, um, for those benefits for the.
For the child unless I'm misunderstanding this totally. I mean
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:48:57
that's, that's what it says. I mean, I think that not in like uh. You know, whether you
look at insurance policies or other things, oftentimes there's prohibitions on, um, uh, things that are self-inflicted, but we can take a look at it, um.
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:49:13
Here and, and see if that, um, very much so. OK. And then the last, the last thing will be, um, Non-discrimination policies. This is on Senate. On the Senate bill, page 57.
OK, page 57 line 18. It is the intent of
the General Assembly that administrators, faculty, and other employees of a state-supported institution of higher education, maintain non-discriminator non-discriminatory policies in accordance with Title IV 67 of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. This subchapter is enacted to prevent discrimination. Promote the inte intellectual development of students and faculty in Arkansas.
And number 3, protect the free exchange of ideas according to the United States Constitution and the Arkansas Constitution. OK, so I have been, um, approached by, um, higher ed. Higher ed faculty. Related to this and because of the Um, um, prohibiting. The teaching of anything related to diversity, equity and inclusion. There is some concern related to
Do professors. Need to change their research agenda when it comes to this, do, um, Are they, is there academic freedom being removed, um, because it's having, I think it's unintentional, but I think it's having a chilling effect when we're talking about institutions of higher ed. Could you, could
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:51:13
you point to the specific provision that, that if they're concerned about because. I think the, the language.
That actually implements. The implementing language is pretty specific and so if, if you could point to. It's
it's, it looks like it's probably over primarily on the House bill, the prohibitions are on page 59, the Senate bill, uh, they should be
around the same. same place if I guess I would need to see which which. They are concerned about because. I don't think that we prohibit. That discussion.
Um, we actually say that we're, we're not, um. That there's, there's also some clarity as to um. What we're not doing with this, but I, I,
I guess I would need to see specifically because that that illustrates the purpose, but then the actual prohibitions are found a few pages later and so if there is some specific concern, I'd be glad to, to take a look at it, but I don't believe that this bill will have
the effect that maybe, uh, has been expressed
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:52:29
to you. OK, it does say on page 58, line
15. It does list diversity, equity and inclusion initiative or DEI.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:52:40
OK, and so that that is a that's a definition that is then used, I
believe the actual reference to DEI is, I believe it's only actually used in uh small letter F, a few pages over
and that relates to the accreditation
process and, and that um this is this was actually amended, um. Really at the at the request I think of institutions that previously the language prohibited and accrediting agency from considering these things, but what we amended it to was that the institution shall not consider those things because that will allow them greater flexibility and being able to to deal with their accrediting agency and hopefully resolve any inconsistency between what the accrediting
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
2:53:30
agency wants and what Arkansas state law would provide. I guess I'm a little bit, um. Confused as far as when we have talked about DEI in the past. institutions of higher ed or at least this is what the understanding was they were not. They were, they were not able to uh removing anything related to diversity, equity, and inclusion and coarse syllabi in their lectures, um, and so what we tried to do with this bill and we
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
2:53:58
spent a lot of time on it is
it's, it's easy for for folks on both sides of the issue to just throw out a term and then just say well we are for or against this and
so what we tried to do is, is actually, uh, draft language that's very specific and you can see uh in the house. Bill in '59 and 60, you can see the specific prohibitions what that relates to, and again I would, I, I really believe that that I think that virtually all could agree that the statements in here, I think, uh, by and large, folks could agree with with what we're trying to
prohibit in fact then we um we follow that up and include some protections as well or what or clarify exactly what we're trying
to prohibit and that we're not um. That we're not uh. We're not trying to uh to uh.
chill the discussion of legitimate topics within, uh, the curriculum of a of a class and the commissioner that deals with these issues a lot when it comes to academic freedom. He may have some follow up on that,
but I think if when you look at those prohibitions and take
them for what they say, for the words there, not for what other people may want them to to mean or what or what some people think that
we were trying to do, but just look at the um. The the statements and and if you look at uh. Yeah, yeah, page 61 up at the top of the House bill this subchapter does not prohibit officers, agents, administrators, employees, teachers, contractors, or students of a state support institution of higher education
from discussing public policy issues or ideas that individuals may feel find unwelcome, disagreeable or offensive. So we're trying to provide those protections and and also we tried to give a lot of thought to make sure that that this that this language applies evenhandedly across the board, uh, regardless of what may be the, the viewpoint of the day or what the uh you know, what may be the, the political winds at that point in time is to have something that applies evenhandedly and I think that's
what we have. OK, thank you. Thank you. Members, just a quick note on scheduling. We have a couple more, uh, committee members who are in the queue for questions. I will allow non-committee members to ask questions after all members have asked theirs, and again, there's a couple of members left who want to ask questions. We are gonna break at 12:45 as we will be going into session at 1:30, so just a note of scheduling will break at 1 at 12:45 and then we will come back, uh, return after both the
House and Senate have adjourned this afternoon. Representative Nazarenko, you're recognized for a question. Uh thank you, Mr.
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
2:56:46
Chairman, and, and thank you all for being here. I, I really do appreciate the, uh, amount of time, effort, energy that's
been put into this awesome bill. Uh, I, I, I have read it as well. I'm still working on memorizing the entire, uh, bill, but, uh, I have read through it and, uh, as you know, when I first heard about it, we were talking uh about veterans, you know, 23 year veteran myself, I have a, a huge passion for veterans and so
I was making sure that we had that covered, even veterans coming into the state because I know we're recruiting them, uh, from other states. So. wanted to make sure that they were covered, uh, and I was, uh, you know, I was encouraged that that that was being considered, excuse me, and then, um, As far as the H2, the high wage, high, uh, demand jobs that we talked about, uh, that were talked about in this, uh, I reached out, uh, to the Department of Education to, um, um, to address that, you know, in our local area, and that was something that was right away
brought uh brought to the table, and I really wanted to, uh, to express my appreciation for that and kind of my question is on that lines, do you all, and this could be for anybody there at the table. Uh, my question is this, do you think as far as the bill. In its entirety when we have, because each area has different constituents, different questions, different issues. Do you think the best way that we can address those to make sure that this bill is covering them, uh, those questions, best, best way is to reach out, set something up, and then that way
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
2:58:11
we can get to the table, talk about it, make sure
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
2:58:18
that it's addressed. Yes, and I mean I think that's been happening throughout the process. It's great and like I said, we, we did, and I, it's still
ongoing, uh, and I really appreciate you being available
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
2:58:30
for that. Thank you. Center flowers you recognize for a question. Thank you. Just from my own information,
uh, on. Page 43 of the Senate bill. There is a.
Definition, well, Yeah, yeah, definition for institution of higher education and B says, um, a private nonprofit 2 year or 4 year college or university with its primary headquarters in Arkansas, that's eligible to receive Title IV federal student aid funds. What What makes a institution, private institution
or these others that are named here eligible to receive Title IV. Federal student aid funds. Title 4 funds are federal financial aid,
Speaker 171
2:59:26
so you have to be accredited by one of the entities that accredits schools to receive Pell grants. So would they be
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
2:59:33
all those that are listed, you mentioned IB something. All those that were so these just pertain to higher education
Speaker 171
2:59:44
institutions Title 4 that received federal financial aid. Those other institutions have their own authorities and, uh, accreditation processes like Cambridge or AP they have their own processes, but when it comes to concurrent credit, uh, you know, we have accrediting bodies too and Title 4 is about federal financial aid eligibility through the form of mostly hear a lot about Pell grants you're familiar with those and Stafford loans that are subsidized government loans to participate in higher ed. You
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:00:10
have. The, the word eligible caught my
attention The, the word eligible caught me my attention, what makes them eligible, and you said
Speaker 171
3:00:20
areditation, one of the many creditors across the nation. They used to be regional, now they're not regional. So any of those can, you know, uh, accredit any school basically and there's different ones for like, for us, the main ones, the Higher Learning commission, uh, you've heard Sacks, Southern accreditation Council, you've heard of council and occupational education. It's a process you have to go through, uh, before you can receive federal financial aid
just to assure that you, you know, you have the facilities, you have the, you have the faculty expertise, you have, uh, all the things you need to offer an education, uh, to, to students with
Speaker 75
3:00:56
and without risking or mitigating some of the risk of bad actors and, and uh fraudulent degrees. Do we have many
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:01:03
private nonprofit2 or 4 year college, just our universities with the headquarters in Arkansas. If you include public and privates together
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:01:23
So, and that's being added. To our definition. For What What purposes besides
scholarships. Oh I'm, I'm trying to understand why is this
so this is um As a,
Speaker 171
3:01:41
as of now, our scholarships, students can use
our academic challenge, other scholarships at private schools capped at the amounts they're awarded in a public schools. So this just this particular one I think it pertains to purple, is that the Purple Star Schools
Speaker 45
3:02:25
Yeah, and that pertains to, uh, OK, so that's clarifying
Speaker 171
3:02:34
who's under. It's a largely definitions, OK. I think it's just defining for a lot of other purposes, and a lot of the pieces of the code about who's eligible primarily for scholarships. So, uh, you can be a private institution that's Title IV eligible in the state and receive state scholarships. And it's about 20 of those, so that's something that's that's
Speaker 45
3:02:55
gonna be new then under this. No, ma'am. We have about 170 private career technical schools. This
Speaker 171
3:03:04
is about your colleges, private colleges and universities. Now there are some other places where we talk about workforce challenge where those folks offer maybe diploma programs, not, uh, not associate degree, bachelor degrees and academic awards, uh, for this purpose, this is for scholarships that are for those private institutions. We will not give state funds, uh, for
under certain scholarships unless you are eligible for. To receive federal financial aid. That's a consumer protection issue. OK. I was just curious because it's new language
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:03:34
is being added to this section of the code, and I didn't. Understand why. I think it's just more clarity.
Speaker 413
3:03:48
And consistency. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:03:56
Reps in lungstrom, you recognize her question. Thank you and thank you for allowing me to ask a question. Um, I'm excited about this bill, especially one particular section of Votech, um, if you look at page 108. If you start at Line 15 where it says private nonprofit 2 year. I love that you added or a private the technical school in public,
that's great and workforce innovation opportunity eligibility. This includes people that are licensed in Arkansas to run those heavy equipment and welding, so that's, that's a major step forward. My concern comes at page at line 31 on page 108, where it talks about certificate programs are first advanced manufacturing, second. is healthcare by not having a qualifier at the end of that. We spent a
lot of time looking at what that would do to the budget. There's only 5 million set aside
for non Pell Grant opportunities by not having some type of qualifier in there and I'm talking about page 108. Line 34. There needs to be a qualifier
following that that says trades or professions not eligible for a scholarship program under Arkansas Academic Challenge Scholarship. I realized the names changed. But that opens. By, by putting that in there, it means that $5 million will be
accessible for LPNs and CRNAs and some of the folks that are not getting a bachelor's in nursing. And that's critically important to our workforce issues by clarifying that, that 5 million is only gonna go so far. We looked at it if we left it open-ended like the like it currently is. The
cost between 15 and 20 million. So in
order to keep the costs where we need it to be, there needs to be a qualifier in there. And I know it's been discussed putting that in rules,
but I think we need a belt and suspenders
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:06:09
on this one. I'm just to make sure that I'm you're only. Picking on two
healthcare and you wanna make. What, what are you saying that I don't, I'm not following
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:06:19
the qualifier. Yes, sir. Um, Those 4-year colleges and even some of the two are going to be Using this for RN. For your Degrees in RN. This needs to be
for cert certificate programs such as LPNs. And I want to make sure that whether we do it now or we do it later that that is extremely clear. Would it be a set to a $3000 cap. Yes, but
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
3:06:53
some of those programs are much more expensive. Well, yeah, some of these programs we're talking about funding here are much more expensive than 3000 through the folks.
Speaker 45
3:07:07
So, I just for clarity, I think you're trying, you're referring to the workforce challenge component or you talk to academic challenge component,
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:07:13
I make sure the workforce component stays for the workforce academic challenge stays for academic and there isn't double dipping, right? That's, that's
Speaker 171
3:07:20
how we, that's how we interpret this too, is that the workforce challenge is for non-degree programs of instruction. I just want to make sure we stay, stay in our,
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
3:07:28
stay in those lanes and opportunities with academic challenge for those degree programs. Workforce challenge.
will be for non-degree programs If somebody wants to get a degree in nursing, there's lots of money. I just want to make sure there's no bleed over into the
workforce. With that, I thank you for your indulgence. Are there additional
questions for members? One clear, one point of clarification, members, there's been a lot of discussion about uh difference between the House bill and the Senate bill. We've been looking at different page numbers and line numbers, uh, and so our amazing staff has got
that clarified on page 15 of the Senate bill, line 16, they inserted an extra space. Uh, so that, uh, appears to be what the uh what the challenge was, of course, we should Probably reserve all comments about how the Senate will find a way to booger things up for us, but that's OK. So that there's not a difference in the actual language of the legislation. Uh, Senator Dotson, do you have a question? Thank you for being here. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
3:08:40
And I apologize late, but I've listened to most of the committee as I was driving in. From Northwest Arkansas this morning and I've heard this particular, uh, section discussed a little bit. On the Senate bill, uh, page 36, section 23. Um Just wanted some clarification regarding excused versus. No, non-excused absences, just in general, um, because the question was brought up, uh,
earlier that an excused absence is one in which you can make up the work. In an unexcused absence, you can't make up the work, so potentially it could affect your grade. Is that is my understanding correct on that? That would probably be more. Clarification from the department, I would assume. I'm gonna have to follow up because I don't wanna give
Speaker 44
3:09:35
you wrong information. That's my understanding, but I want to
Speaker 232
3:09:37
verify before I go on the record and say that that's affirmative.
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
3:09:44
OK. So it, it's, it's, you're leaning toward it is likely that that's the case. So if someone were to come and Say, um, assuming that is accurate, uh, If they came and they testified on a bill or they help come and present a bill in committee because they were passionate about it, um, they would not only be taking time away from school, but potentially taking a hit to their grade point average.
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
3:10:17
I mean, I, I think that will, that will depend on, I mean, the department says they want to look
into it further to verify, but that may very well be the case. I mean, uh, and it's an it what we provided for if they individually were wanting to come advocate, protest, otherwise, whether it was protesting here, advocating here, or protesting at home wherever that that wasn't, would not be an excusesed absence. OK. I, I just want to make sure I understood that.
Correctly. Thank you. Seeing no additional questions from members, Senator dismaying Representative Shepard had presented the bill. We will now have a
time of public comment for the bill. We do have, uh, I believe 44 people signed up to speak on it again. We will be breaking at 12:45 for, uh, the House and Senate to go into session, and then the plan will be to come back after session adjourns for the remainder of public comments and to continue, Senator, uh, Sullivan, you recognized for a motion.
Uh Uh, public comment to 3 minutes per person.
Senator Sullivan has made a motion to limit public comment to 3 minutes per person. There's a second all that, all in favor say aye, all opposed. Representative Kozar, you're recognized for a motion? Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make one for the House
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
3:11:43
side to limit public comment to 3 minutes per person. Represent Cozar has made a motion to limit public comment
to 3 minutes, all in favor of CI all opposed. Both motions have
passed, so just to clarify, we will take this based upon the order that is signed up and so I would, uh, appreciate a little
bit of grace and latitude from the public if uh uh if I don't pronounce your name correctly, I will do my best to do so. Uh, most of you write much better than I do. However, some, uh, some a little bit of a scribble, so I'll do my best. Uh, first up, we have, uh, Mr. Bill Kopsky, who is
recognized to speak against the bill, Mr. Kopsky, are you here? He is not here. We will move on to the second person, uh, Brad Bartels. Mr. Bartels, are you here, Mr. Bartels, if you would
please come introduce yourself for the record and then you're recognized. And our staff will be keeping the time. Speaking against the bill.
Speaker 435
3:13:01
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Appreciate that. My name is Brad Bartels. I'm the executive director of the Arkansas Education Association. For those of you that don't know, the Arkansas Education Association represents higher education members. We uh, we have membership in the public schools we also represent educational support professionals and we also represent aspiring educators, that is, uh, those folks who are working toward uh teaching license and a college degree at the same time.
So we cover a lot of ground. We have about 5500 members, which is a large voice and we, I am speaking in opposition to this bill today just because it doesn't really honor teacher voice at all. I mean, the Arkansas Education Association is more than just a spokesperson, me, it's more than just the president, it's more than just our board. The Arkansas Education Association is 5500 educators in the state of Arkansas. And generally speaking with this
bill, their voice is lessened, and we're very concerned about that, um, and there's a lot of reasons for that, um, first of all, it removes members of the school leadership coordinating council of which we're a member, um, there are a lot of different committees, uh, in this bill that basically stakeholders like the Arkansas Education Association and other important stakeholders have been removed from. Um, this particular, uh, council is important to us. There was some presentation earlier about the importance of closing the achievement gap.
In the schools, and I can tell you that our educators are vitally concerned with closing the achievement gap. And so basically not sitting on this council is a way for us to basically not have a voice in kind of trying to figure out exactly what's gonna work to do that. It abolishes the council on post-secondary education and career readiness, taking us out completely, um. It, it does a lot of other things that basically weaken our
voice, um, for example, it takes us out of the, uh, professional development council. Um, you may not be aware of this, but the Arkansas Education Association is vitally concerned with professional development. Um, a lot of times I think we forget that the Arkansas Education Association has a very good online program for professional development called Learns Upon, um, many of you are aware we do a professional development conference every fall that has been highly respected over the years, uh,
many school districts take advantage of that professional development conference by basically sending, uh, their teachers to us for professional development roles. We had, we draw in a wide. range of different people that teach professional development as part of that conference and basically by taking us out of this, of this group, we lose our voice at the state level. With something that we're very vitally concerned about, uh, as an association. Martels, thank you for your time. Uh, you're 3
minutes is up. Are there questions for, uh, Mr. Bartels? it Center flowers.
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:16:19
Yes, I want to know how long has your organization been a part of that council. Since its inception. Because I think it was. If you press your button, please.
Right. 2009 was when when it was actually uh initiated, I believe, or established. I believe that's correct. So you all
have been a part of it. From the beginning, it wasn't just some group that was added at a later time as far as I
know that's the case. OK. Do you recall if you all have had regular meetings, it says, uh, Meets 4 times a year. In the past And I appreciate that
Brad Bartels
Unverified
3:17:03
question, Senator. I need to, in full disclosure, say I've only been
at AEA for about 10 months. And so during that time period, I have not met as a member of this council. I can't speak to the last several years. Thank you. Represent
McKenzie, you recognized for a question for with
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
3:17:22
us. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, so 123 page bill, a
lot to go through, significant conversation already today on. Composition of these boards and, and I just, words matter, the weight of words matter. The first thing that you said is from the director at the perspective of the director of the AA was that this doesn't
take into account teachers' voices, but from my understanding of the bill, not just the leadership, uh, board we were speaking about. The AEA's removal from certain boards has been supplanted with actual teachers and educators in the classroom. So I just need to ask, is it teachers' voices have been taken out of the framework, the specific. AEA teacher organization that you represent because by my reading of the bill, we're, we are including teachers' voices. We are asking for in classroom educators who see all of this
firsthand to be a part and active
Speaker 435
3:18:15
in that process. Yeah, thank you for the question. I know that there, there are some committees, for example, that do, uh, still have one representative who is an educator, um, although they've taken out other language that would be, uh, that would include the Arkansas Education Association, so that's true and some of the amendments also have the phrase and other stakeholders, um, so. You know, in response to, uh,
Uh, the presenters, um, views about what those other, who those other stakeholders can be. I mean, I would like to apply the Arkansas Education Association to be some of those stakeholders in those committees where we have strong interests. Um, we were not consulted prior to this bill and to the extent that some stakeholders were contacted and this bill was discussed with them. We were not one of them, and we would have had a lot of input, I think, had we had an opportunity to speak to it, so you're correct in that it does replace, uh, some of the
membership of AEA, uh, functions on some of these committees, um, it also leaves some of them open-ended and so I mean we definitely want to be a part. We want to be a voice for the teachers in the state. A positive voice to help improve education and to the extent we can do that, we would like to be involved in these councils and committees.
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
3:19:36
You reckon that's for fault. Thank you. Wouldn't you agree to make a declarative statement that teachers' voices are not being heard when teachers are in fact taking part in these boards
is, I understand you, you, you are here to advocate for your organization that represents a large number of teachers, but it It's somewhat misleading to say that teachers' voices
Speaker 435
3:19:59
aren't being heard. I think when you look at the weight of the various committees and councils that the Arkansas Education Association has been taken off. I think you could make a general statement that that basically is marginalizing a teacher's voice. Um, I think it's. I think it's also true that, uh, to the extent that we weren't
consulted prior to this, I think that also really detracted from the idea that educators had a voice in this particular bill. And you're right, um, it's an omnibus bill. It covers a lot of ground. I had 3 minutes to speak to it. I think generally speaking, our membership believes that basically this bill goes some distance toward silencing their voice. I'm sorry, one more. Again, we're just, as
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
3:20:42
we keep talking, we're adding, we're, we're kind of kicking some, some beehives. I, I've seen because, you know,
your organization prior to you being a part of it came down and advocated strongly against the Learns Act, as well as all the other organizations that represent, you know, other, other teacher organizations as well as other uh professional associations in education. When we make a statement like generally, Learns was a great example of all of these organizations came in and had uh public opinion poll or membership based polling. I So generally, how, how do you derive that, that statement. Again, we teachers' voices being being um. Lessened, we have teachers that
are part of the boards generally, teachers are opposed. Do you have any empirical data to present to the committee?
Speaker 451
3:21:29
I don't today. OK, all right, thank you. Representative makes you have a question for the witness.
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
3:21:35
Yes, thank you, um, I'm over here by the, by the pillar. Um, Wouldn't you agree that um whenever we have private institutions, allowing them to make choices on who sits on these boards, that that is an
unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority. I'm not gonna
Speaker 447
3:21:56
speak to that specific question, that's a legal question. I don't have the answer for it as
Speaker 435
3:22:01
we sit here today, however, you have to remember that the 5500 members we have, they're all public employees. And yes, we do represent their voice, but it's public employees that are the Arkansas education association. It's not Brad Bartel's the executive director. Which I, I don't disagree, but they answered my question is, is
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
3:22:23
yes, whenever we have a private business or entity, um, that is an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority, which is part of the reason why it was
removed from the bill. Thank you. And members all allow the same latitude uh relative to questions, uh,
we'll do members, committee members first and then non-members next,
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
3:22:44
uh, so senator flowers you recognize. Thank you. I, I'd just like
to respond to, um, Representative Meeks, uh, statement there because we do have private
organizations that are uh actually controlling some of our governmental affairs, you look at the uh. These are Catfish promotion boards, all those promotion boards and so if, if having a teacher organization is, is some kind of way in unconstitutional certainly uh these promotional boards for agriculture cor corn, soybeans, uh, any kind of produce you can think of,
catfish, cows, the whole bit. So, uh, that, that's not uh accurate. It might be unconstitutional, but we certainly have it in our
law. Center hammer, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks for being here today.
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
3:23:49
Quick question. Uh, do you know how many teachers total there are in the state.
Brad Bartels
Unverified
3:23:55
I believe it's in the range of 30,000 plus. I'm sorry, how many? 300,000,000. Teachers And you have 5500 members, uh, approximately.
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
3:24:02
OK. OK. That's all I need to know. Thank you. Thank you for
your time. Thank you Mr. Chair. Next one we speaking for the bill. We have Timothy Ray.
Mr. Ray, are you in the room? You're recognized, if you would please introduce yourself for the record, then you recognize speak for the bill. My name is Timothy Ray. I am an Arkansas educator. I
Timothy Ray
Unverified
3:24:57
teach concurrent credit English and history at El Doreta High School. I have been a concurrent credit instructor for now nearly two decades. And I appreciate this, the House, the Senate, and the governor's office. Uh, in their, um, push. To make education accessible across the state for all students. Uh, I strongly agree.
With the leveling of the playing field. Uh, dealing with the quality point of the bill. Uh, for students, uh, for years now, my students have taken concurrent credit English and history and have not been allowed, uh, to earn that 5th quality point whereas a peace students in the same district have earned that Quality Point by making an A in the class and
I just want to say thank you for uh the. Move toward leveling that playing field and I strongly recommend for all members to push this bill through the education committees and onto the floor of both the house and the Senate for passage. Thank you for your time. Are there questions? Thank you for your time. Next signed up to speak against the bill,
we have Michael Reed. Are you in the room?
If you would please introduce yourself for the record and you
Michael Reed
Unverified
3:26:30
recognize you have 3 minutes. Uh, OK, my name is Michael Reed, um, I'm. I'm not representing anybody. I'm just a resident of North Little Rock. I'm a product of the Arkansas public school system, um, First off, I respect everything you guys do now because I also read this 123 page document over the weekend and made some notes
and uh it was a beast. Um I don't disagree with everything on it. Some things I like. Uh, increasing the amount of money for some of the scholarships is great. I think expanding just from just AP to also IB and concurrent credit sounds great. But my main clients come with uh 23 and 47 sections 23 and 47, which I think are the same in both bills. Those are the ones that we've had some discussion about that talk about restricting students or not
allowing excused absences from school, uh, from schools and colleges for students to come and participate in this sort of discourse and protests and and the like. I understand the concerns about not wanting. People to um take advantage of that and be tyrannical and say you can speak for, but you cannot go because you want to speak against, but. Um, I think there might be a better way to word that to allow. To allow that to happen voter turnout is low, and I think helping to train. People not to participate is
only going to hurt that. Um Going off of a lot of the board changes. What I noticed is that a lot of it seems to consolidate a lot of power into the executive branch. A lot of the boards are reorganized so that their members are either direct appointees of the executive branch or their appointees for a large part. Um, and I just find that. A lot of that Is a little scary trying to consolidate all that power, um, in one branch, not, not
everywhere, some of the, some of them have like I think the The first section had the chairs of the uh education committees are on that as well. Um The DEI, the removal of DEI policies, I'm not a fan of, but no one brought that up, so I don't think that's gonna go anywhere, um. Uh, and I'm glad that Governor or that uh Representative Gonzalez Worthen brought up the point I was gonna bring up about the Language in the Arkansas Heroes Act about not.
Awarding that if the person. harm themselves in any way. Mental illness is a is a big thing and it would be a tragedy if that was uh. To be the cause of the student not getting an award. But I also don't want to, I also understand the point of not Creating a situation where a person might feel the need to choose between their own life and Providing an education for their child. I understand. That, but I do think I would hope that there is a way to include that sort of language. Um
I summarize a lot of these thoughts and a little bit more into an email I sent to all of you, so that should be thank you for your time. Are there questions from the committee? A little
terrifying. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Next sign up to speak for the bill, we
have Michael Brickman, Mr. Brickman, are you in the room? If you would please come
Michael Brickman
Unverified
3:30:15
introduce yourself and you're recognized to speak. You've got 3 minutes. Thank you all for uh hearing this bill today. Uh, I know there is a lot to this bill and people have been here for a long time, so I'm just gonna try to highlight a handful of items and I'd be happy to take any questions. My name is Michael Brickman. I lead education policy for Cicero Action. Uh, we focus on, uh, enacting good policies in education reform in a number of different states. I'd like to, as I said, just highlight a few things in this bill, which overall reduces
bureaucracy, bolsters freedom and flexibility for students in school. uh, fights taxpayer funded political indoctrination promotes greater access to the education students need for uh the jobs that they want that will be available in the future. Uh, the expanded course offerings align with uh some of the best practices we've seen in other states where parents are not forced into all or nothing choices, but they can, uh, help their children choose from a number of different providers, I think expanding, uh, beyond just
uh advanced placement courses to additional types of courses is uh the right way to go and uh other states have even taken that further to create marketplaces for courses and would be happy to have that conversation. I in in the future, likewise, expanding testing freedom uh to include the classical learning test is a recognition that there are a growing number of ways that students are being measured in different types of education that they are, uh, taking advantage of and so I think
that's a strong move as well. Uh, the bill stands up to the accreditation monopoly by refusing to participate in requirements that violate state law, encourage that provision of the bill as well. Um, as well as the, uh, upgrading teacher training for uh or upgrading to training for school leaders to ensure they have the basics of of finance, student achievement, and, uh, this aligns with some of the best practices of other states as well. Uh, I know there's just
limited time left, so I will very briefly mention that um. The incorporation market-based outcomes into the funding formula and the incorporation of a transparent single portal for college admissions is strong policy and I hope you'll consider, uh, either in the bill or in the rulemaking process, uh, publishing ROI data so that students know before they enroll what they're likely to get out of their education. Uh, finally, I'll just be a voice in favor of
the A through F letter grades as they exist today, it shows that you're being transparent and honest and not. trying to hide anything from parents and communities, so uh with that, I thank you uh for uh spending so much time on this bill for having me here today. I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your testimony. other questions from the committee? CNN,
we appreciate your time. Thank you. Next time, to speak up, uh, to speak against the bill. Last
name is Garner. I apologize. I can't read the first name.
If you would please introduce yourself for the record, you've got 3
Speaker 468
3:33:30
minutes. Good day. Good evening. My name's Canon Garner. Excuse me if I'm a little shaky. I'm kind of nervous doing these things, but I've got a testimony written up that I'd like to read for you. Uh, the Access Act was brought to my attention recently, and after reviewing its contents, I was instilled with a substantial amount of fear and dismay. Not only is the sack an attempt to unruly central control over our state's education, but it's an infringement of constitutional rights, I believe.
The sect in shorter term seeks to minimize the democracy within our state's education system, strips students from their inclusion and rights. Firstly, I must highlight the unconstitutional limitations applied to our student protest. Students are the individuals directly affected by these kinds of bills. Why do they not, why do they not want us to speak out? That considered there's a presumably undemocratic reason hidden within. After recently speaking with an administrator at my school, they informed me that, and they over decade-long administrative career, they have only once
received an excuse note for a student. Demonstration. Students missing school for moments like this is quite rare, so why is it a problem? Limiting the ability of students to protest is simply against our Constitution. And that could not be allowed. Criminalizing the rights of Americans is not what this state nor country stands for. On the note of minimizing the democracy within our education system. I cannot understand the advantage of removing elected officials from the school leadership coordinating council and inserting governor appointed
ones. Fewer of them at that. Who does that benefit? It's obvious the governor. Fewer people to disagree with you. And are far less likely chance when appointed by you will want to disagree. What is that equal? Someone who can be unrivaled, get their way. The undermining of democracy. This cannot be allowed. On a final note, the attempt to disclude the influence of diversity, equity and inclusion. Is a disgusting display of
insensitivity and helps no one but can hurt many. I as a human being cannot understand why anyone would have the inclination to remove opportunity and support for other human beings, especially those marginalized. Well, I've got a lot more to say, all I can say concludingly is please consider every word I've said. Along with everyone else's speaking. I feel as a student body we fear our, for our rights, we fear for our futures. And we fear for the well-being of our education. Please consider that as us to decide. Thank you.
Speaker 332
3:35:56
Thank you for your testimony or the questions from the committee. See you
none. We appreciate your time. Next up, speak against the bill, Ava Kate
White. Are you in the room? If you would please come introduce yourself for the record and then you're recognized for 3 minutes. Good
Ava Kate
Unverified
3:36:21
afternoon, um, madam and Mister Chair and the committee. My name is Ava Kate Wyatt, and I'm a student at Little Rock Central High School, and I'd
like to speak against Section 23 of the Access bill concerning students' autonomy to influence legislation. When debating whether or not to speak today, um, one of my deciding factors was this. Today may be my last chance to do so without the fear of being punished simply for stating my opinion. Today may be the last day that I, along with my peers, will not be labeled and handled as truants because we hope to have a say in decisions that are crucial to not only ourselves as individuals but to the state of Arkansas as a whole.
Section 23 of the Access bill ensures that measures will be taken to limit the participation of students and local legislative outcome or specifically to limit our attempts to influence legislation or other government policymaking. This further suppresses the voices of the youth. As an aspiring journalist, I understand the importance of the First Amendment, and I can acknowledge that this bill will not only serve as a suppressant, but it will simultaneously pave the way for more potentially harmful legislation in the future. To that I say look outside.
Look into the faces of the statues of the Little Rock Nine. They did not make history by letting themselves be silenced. They did not make lasting impacts on the world by giving up when they were denied their rights. These 9 brave individuals changed society before they were even of age to vote. As students, we have the right to voice our beliefs, whether they are for or against the acts of the current administration. Tinker versus Des Moines ruled that our First Amendment rights do not cease to exist at the schoolyard gates. Past generations have worked to ensure that we have the right to
express ourselves, and we will not be silenced today. I would, I would request the bill be amended to delete section 23, and I urge you to not to vote no on this bill in its current form. Thank you, Mr. and Madam Chair and to the committee and I I don't accept any questions. Thank you for your time or the questions from the committee? Thank you for your time. Well done. Thank you. Next signed up
to speak against the bill. We have Mira Crane. Are you in the room? If you would please introduce
yourself for the record, then you're recognized for your 3 minutes.
Mira Crane
Unverified
3:38:45
OK, um, hello, good morning, my name is Mira Crane. I'm a junior at Little Rock Central High School, and I'm here today to talk about Section 23 and to ask you to vote no on the Access Act. This bill violates the rights to free speech and is going to harm public schools and students, um, 2 years ago I gave a speech at
the Arkansas Peace Week dinner about the powers teenagers have to bring peace, specifically about walkouts and protests at my school, and afterwards, all of these adults came to me saying how beautiful it was that we cared so much and that we protested and that we walked out. And I just felt so uplifted and supported and it is the job of this legislature to do the same, to support and uplift its students and their rights, and that is not what this act does. Section 23 violates our rights and it endangers our education.
I have participated in several central walkouts, and I can tell you that we do not take them lightly. We walk out for serious issues that we as a student body find important. They're a way to make our voices heard and to make a difference because as teenagers, that's not something that happens often. This act sends a clear message to us as students that our voices do not matter, and we deserve better than that. I know that it seems like these walkouts may disrupt our learning, but they don't. I assure you that I take my education very seriously. And before I walk out, I make
sure that all of my assignments are done and that I've finished my learning for the day. I don't let it interfere with my education. Walkouts and protests are a way for me to stand behind my beliefs and learn about politics and civil action. They're not a disruption to my education. They are a part of it. There has been a lot of discussion today about who has the right to dictate what we advocate for, and I don't think that anyone has the right to dictate what we choose to advocate for. That's our right, and it's your job to support us and our decisions and what we choose to advocate for.
As a Jewish student who has spent my whole life in public schools. I'm very familiar with the struggle to get excused absences or um. Um To get excused absences for things that aren't technically part of the school like curriculum and I just, it's so frustrating to have to fight and like choose between standing up for what you think is right and standing behind your beliefs and supporting your education because learning is very important to me. I don't want to
have to choose between sacrificing my education, um, I don't wanna sacrifice my education. I don't wanna have to choose to sacrifice it in order to stand up for what I believe. So. Um, in conclusion, I hope that you will stand up for the rights of our youth and think about how important it is to us to stand up for ourselves, and I urge you to vote against the Arkansas Access Act. Thank you so much for your time.
Speaker 481
3:41:30
Thank you for your comments or the questions from the committee.
Speaker 482
3:41:42
Cozart, do you have a question? Carmel. Oh, there you go. All right, so I, I really, I have a question. Uh,
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
3:41:53
but I also think because we're running out of time, and I know there are a lot of students here. Could I just ask Mr. Chairman that all those students that are here to speak the same way that these last 3 have would just raise their hand and that would expedite some of those. They may want to go back to school after this. Are there other students in the audience that would just
raise your hand that you're here to say the same thing they just said. That would show the group. I mean we have a few
Speaker 481
3:42:20
that are here to do that. I that really fast. OK, I think it's important that they have a chance to
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
3:42:26
say what they planned to stay and speak. I'm not asking that. I just was going to say that if someone wanted to go back to school, they could, but I'm not asking you to not stay. I just was wondering how many out there had the same story to tell, and it just kind of lets us know that too. So, but I thank you for what you've come and said. I
appreciate what you're doing. Uh, I agree that, that we should never take your voice away. So thank you for coming. Thank you Cozart. Thank you for
your time. Uh, so members, uh, as we have discussed, we will be recessing now that it's 12:45. Uh, I would encourage everyone to keep tabs on both the House and Senate, both have a fairly lengthy, uh, schedule today. So we will I do need a motion to adjourn, motion to recess. But on paper say I all opposed.
Unknown speaker
3:43:15
Joint education stands in recess.
We just gotta make sure there's more senators.
Joint education will come to order. cherishes quorum. All right, members, we will Go
ahead and start back with our public testimony back down the list, uh, from where we last began there, uh, is an amendment that's on the way on this. However, we're gonna go ahead and, uh, for the interest of time, go ahead and start moving through this. So the next, uh, person we recognize for public comment is Waylon Matthews. Are you in the room? If you would please introduce yourself for the record. You're recognized for 3 minutes.
Waylon Matthews
Unverified
7:10:26
Touch that button right in front of you. Perfect. Hello, my name is Waylon Matthews, um, I apologize if I'm a little bit nervous. I don't usually speak in front of a lot of people like this. Um, I'm a student at Central at Little Rock Central High School, uh, I'm, I, I will come out and say I'm not a big fan of several sections of this bill, uh, for example, cutting down committees and programs such as traveling teachers can only hurt the quality of education, even if it is made up for in other aspects, but I wanted to speak to some specific sections.
As a Votech student myself, I'm happy with concurrent and CT pathways becoming weighted credits, however, I'm worried that future legislation could use the the group of uh accelerated learning programs in order to generally cut funding to AP, CTE and concurrent credits. I'm, and the bill itself does not protect against uh like mass cutting of funding like that. I also think that section 23 is a direct attack on our freedom of speech as students and a direct attack on uh the local control of school districts.
Uh, and, but, and third most is a direct attack on parents' rights to be able to uh excuse their students or their their child in order to allow them to go to political events and protests. Uh, a parent after this passes will no longer be able to excuse absences for political or ask for absences to be excused for political purposes such as being here today with you or being at a political protest. And it would also completely remove the ability for students
to walk out, which is whenever a walkout happens at Central, it, it's always news. There's always THV 11 there, and people always talk about it and it, it's a big way for students to make their voices heard and by cutting that down, it's an attack on our freedom of. I also think that by attacking rural education by cutting down on the ability for school boards to remain certified and recognized by the state. That is a direct attack on local control and a direct attack on
uh. parents and their ability to affect what happens to their child's education. I'm gonna be honest, I was a little bit underprepared for the speech. I didn't really have too much more to say. Um, but thank you for your time. Thank you, Mr. Matthews. So
Speaker 472
7:12:48
the questions from the committee. CNN, we appreciate your time. Next
up, speak against is Andrew. So Tina Crouch is how I read it. If you would please introduce
yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Uh,
Andrew Saina
Unverified
7:13:15
good morning. My name is Andrew Saina Crouch. I'm a student at literal Catholic High School for Boys. I wanna start off by saying that I feel compelled to note that the manner by which these hearings are heard and scheduled are by their very nature contrary to their purpose. It is nearly impossible for a concerned
citizen or student to take off work and attend these hearings and practice their First Amendment right to redress of grievances. Furthermore, while you claim that this bill doesn't limit student participation in legis any actually serious person knows that this bill expands upon this infringement by silencing and disallowing almost any form of student advocacy. It also serves as a predatory reach for power and unchecked decision making authority to the Department of Education. The apparent purpose of this
bill is to reform and better education by amending and repealing parts of codified law pertaining to educations on all levels. In reality, this bill provides none of the necessary and proper mechanisms to claw ourselves out of the shameful sublevel of mediocrity of education in Arkansas. If this bill passes, I can assure you that we will continue and maintain the underwhelming and disappointing outcomes from education we currently have, and we will continue to have. Secondly, when reading this bill
for the first time, one cannot help themselves but question whether this bill was written in whether whether it's this bill was written with any outside interests or influence, and you know, considering that organizations such as Walmart or the Walton Family Foundation, who in 2016 donated $1 billion to charter schools and in 2022, so coincidentally donated to the election. campaign of one of the sponsors of this bill, I can say it
almost certainly does. On a nationwide scale, Arkansas ranks 38 in education, 37 in literacy, 41 in high school completion and 39 in college enrollment rates. And instead of making a half decent attempt at change changing any of this, you introduce a bill that attempts to censor student voices and destroys every ounce of local representation from the school system. This bill degrades public education. to a point of bankruptcy along with the integrity of its sponsors.
Do the sponsors understand that by reducing the bill, the That by reducing the number of members in the school coordinating council from 17 to just 5. It becomes so obvious that special interests are involved in this bill. The level of purposeful ineptitude, you display demonstrates exactly why this bill is the antithesis of its goals. You should be extremely ashamed of the carelessness you display for law in passing the in seeking the passing of this unconstitutional and destructive piece of
legislation that only seems to benefit its sponsors, not, not children and not your voter base and definitely not any Ranson. That, that's all I have 3 minutes is up. Thank you for Um or the questions from
the committee? See you then. Thank you for your time. Next up is Olivia Bauer. To speak against
the bill. Slowly here. If you would please enter yourself with the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes.
Olivia Bauer
Unverified
7:16:39
Hello, my name is Olivia Bauer. Uh, I'm a senior at Bryant High School and I would like to address specifically Section 18 and Section 23 of this bill, starting with section 23, violence is the language of the unheard. If you advocate for blindfolds and earplugs when it comes to the opinion of your youth, you are advocating not for education but for delinquency. Secondly, I would say that if it is motivated by what you say it is, by getting butts into seats, then you would probably focus on things. Like, uh, socioeconomic status,
health issues, infrastructure, and bullying as reasons people do not come to school instead of protest. I implore the members of the Senate to think back to when they found a time that many of uh or at least any kind of fraction of the people in this audience were students, um, on section 23, uh, or Section 18 I would rather say, the standardization of AP and access related learning, uh, social studies courses. Makes social studies on the
basis of a lie of omission, leaving out things that were horrible about our history such as Harris, uh, the Brownsville Affair, uh, Guantanamo Bay, the passing of the Patriot Act, Koy Matsu v. United, uh, the American Eugenics Society, while equally erasing the triumphant history of this country with the Compton cafeteria riots, the Seneca Fall Convention, uh, Browns v. Board and the Harlem Renaissance. The Haba Lubaitch, things like that. When you say these things, it's harmful to everyone by
preventing uh people of your future to learn about your past and be present in your present. You are forbidding a future worth fighting for, from coming to fruition. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your time. All the questions from the committee? CNN.
Thank you for your time. Next, Audrey Johnson. Are you in the audience? Or
if you would please introduce yourself for the record. You recognize for 3 minutes. It's a green button, right?
Speaker 560
7:18:44
You recognize it's on. All righty. Um, hi, my name is Audrey Johnson. I'm from Bryant
Speaker 562
7:18:51
High School. Um, I'm just, I'm gonna keep it kind of simple, um, this, this is sort of a really trivial small issue. I think it's really odd to like target, um, the small, uh, part of students that do go out to or um who do organize like this and go out to protests, and I just think it's odd to have a. part of the bill that just targets those people specifically when there are so
many other issues that could help when it comes to, you know, getting more people to go to school, want to be at school. And so it's just I don't, I just really don't get it, um, why are we focusing on, uh, getting people to feel, you know, threatened when it comes to going out to things like this when, you know, we could be, again, like, like Olivia said, um, focusing on improving infrastructure or socioeconomic
status, things that like really do impact people going to school. Um, I, I, I just, it just doesn't make sense. sense to me. And You know, I, it. I, I, I wish more people would be involved, but things like this just discourages them from getting more involved in their local community and politics and things like that. And that's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you for your time. Recognize Senator.
Chair
Unverified
7:20:16
Solving for emotion. He I make a motion that
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
7:20:24
we expunge the vote by which the amendment passed. Senator Sullivan has made a motion to expunge a
vote by which the amendment passed. Is there any discussion on the motion? See no discussion, I favor CI all opposed. The motion
is passed. Representative Cozart, recognized for motion. Make a motion to expunge the vote by which the amendment for
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
7:20:46
1512 passed. Representative Coozar has made a motion to expunge
a vote by which the amendment to HB 1512 is passed. Is there any discussion on the
motion, seeing none, all in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations you congratulations for the vote has been expunged. Uh, senator dismay and Representative Shepherd, you're now, uh, recognized to present an amendment to HB 1512 and SB 246. You want to let somebody, uh, Let me explain it, OK, uh,
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
7:21:18
members, uh, so we've got an amendment and it's going to take into account the the previously adopted amendment, um, and that's just to simplify the process for staff and so, and staff is passing out the amendment right now, OK. I'll wait until you have a chance to take a look at it.
You ready, Mr. Chair. You're recognized right members this uh strikes
the language that was on page I believe 36 at least in the Senate bill, yeah, 36 and 37, the Senate bill and replaces it with this language so essentially, uh, the public protest or political protest would still not be excused absences, however, it does allow a path for a student to uh receive an excused absence for social or public policy advocacy or attempts to influence
legislation of the governmental policymaking at the state, local, or federal. level, uh, one of the provisions would be number one that we have to be granted by the school and then number 2, that a parent, uh, provides written permission for their student to attend to be able to be that advocate or influence the legislation, uh, in one of those levels also, um, and I think this is important it keeps the same section in about not prohibiting uh students from attending a curricular or co-curricular activities and then lastly, one of the things that's important to me and
really this whole process is what I don't. It's a district being the arbiter of what's a worthy cause to advocate for and which one is not, uh, that's been one of my concerns is that you have districts that can make that call and so if they happen to disagree with the uh the uh the policy position of a student, and they say that that student can't go advocate, then I think that's a wrong situation, um, and so this kind of clears that up or at least gives us some additional oversight by ensuring that a report of all the excused and unexcused absences, you
know, without the. students' names and the reason uh that the advocacy was there, so if they're what they're coming to advocate for is submitted to the Department of Education about June 30th of each year, um, and again this would just allow us to keep track to make sure that districts aren't picking what's worth being advocated for and what's not. I would anticipate that a district will utilize this develop rules, our procedures for how this would work in their school district all the way to
how they would define what a political protest. Other questions on the amendment. Seeing none. Oh Reading the amendment. We'll give it just a moment for members read the amendment.
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
7:25:06
Senator, you recognize. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So we've heard a lot of testimony about allowing students to be advocates reading this amendment, this allows a path for them to do what they're asking to do. Yes, their, their parents would just
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
7:25:23
have to make sure, I mean, be, be OK with it through a written notice to the school. And then the school district may approve
an excused absence for them to, uh, do social or public
policy advocacy or attempts to influence legislation at these local, state, or federal level. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are there additional
questions, Representative garner you recognize you, and I'm, I'm just gonna ask my
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
7:25:51
question again. Did you figure out a definition for, uh, protests, does, does that include a march or a rally or
what is, what is a protest exactly as it stands right now, that will be something that I think would be determined at the
Speaker 553
7:26:06
district level. I mean, by this legislation. OK. Thank you. See no additional questions. Is there a motion to adopt the amendment on
the Senate side? Motion to adopt. In a second, all in favor say aye, all opposed. Congratulations to the motion of the amendment has been adopted. Motion to adopt on the House side from and painter all in favor say aye, all opposed. Congratulations, you're amendment has been adopted. We'll now continue with public comments.
Next up we have, I believe it's Za Kelly. My apologies if I did not pronounce that correctly. I get one every once in
a while. You recognize if you would please introduce yourself for the record and you
Zaid Kelly
Unverified
7:27:02
got 3 minutes. Uh, good afternoon. My name is Zaid Kelly. I'm the vice chair of colleges for the Young Democrats of Arkansas and the acting state president of the Arkansas Student Government
Association. For the past 22 years or so that I've been alive, I've tried to dedicate my years to public service, and those routes were planted in my time in public school, where my peers and I learned government, politics, and most importantly, how to be good citizens. Uh, one year, my service in particular was recognized by one of these schools, and I was given the opportunity to page, uh, in the building adjacent to us, uh, for a state representative. Uh, and there I received a pocket
constitution, which I still have and although it is faded with time, it still sits in my pocket as a little charm. But since then I've learned quite a lot about the Constitution, and I know that access is an attack on it and it violates it and is contrary to the in the amendment that was just adopted does not do enough to fix it. Uh, not only is it regressive to the 1st and 14th Amendments as my peers have and will tell you, but it also violates Tinker versus Des
Moines, which says schools cannot ban speech without proving disruption, Mahoney Area School District versus BL, which says that schools cannot regulate off. campus speech and uh Perry Education Association versus Perry Local Educators educations association which says that the government cannot favor some speech over others, and the West Virginia State Board of Education versus Barnett, which says that the government cannot force ideological conformity representatives, senators, uh, you will hear far more credible voices than mine who will tell
you the same thing, but what you must hear from me is that I find it ironic that Axis is for students, but At the same time, it severely curtails representation from unions and professional development organizations on the boards of adults per se, and that's to say that students were cut out of the equation long ago. And the reality is that students have never been a part of the decision making process. Never. And whether intentionally or not, those members here and elsewhere who vote for access
are telling us kids and students like me who want to be involved and are involved that we don't want you or you don't know as much as us or maybe put simply, we don't care about you, and that's not OK. Representative senators, if you adopt access at the end of the day, we students, we're gonna remember. We will remember the gratitude he showed us and as we grow older, we will return that gratitude more and more with. Each and every election until we're finally at the table.
Uh, and we're all here today in advocacy, but also in warning for the inevitable loss of rights that we have. But also in the pursuit of hope. Uh, I quote Bobby Kennedy Senior, who says each time one stands up for an ideal or acts to improve the lot of others or strikes out against injustice, they send forth a tiny ripple of hope. And crossing each other from a million different centers for your time. Your 3 minutes is up. Vote no. Thank you. Are there any questions for? Mr. Kelly.
See you then appreciate your time. Next on the list to speak against we have Emily Temple. And you're
in the room. If you would please introduce yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Push that
Emily Temple
Unverified
7:30:39
green button right there you got it. Hello, my name is Emily Temple. I am a current student at the University of Central Arkansas, and I wish to express concerns
about sections 23 and 47 of this bill. In both college and and high school, I received excused absences to participate in the listed activities. Two prominent examples included when I was excused to participate in a political campaign in college and when I was excused to, um, Advocate for changes in mental health policy in my school district after one of my classmates committed suicide. You could argue that these absences do not fall under the purview of the bill. However, the very fact that this can be up to debate points to a glaring issue, which is the fact that
these provisions are too broad. Districts can twist a variety of activities to fall under prohibited activities by defining what is social, what is political, what constitutes influence or protest, which does not address the speaker's reasons for including these sections, and it diminishes the bills um intention of standardization. Excuse me. My concerns are more than just logistical. Many aspects of K through 12 and higher education concern attendance rates. While there's no prohibition on participating in political and advocacy activities, not
excusing the absence acts as a cost to the exercising of our constitutional rights to petition the government and to assemble. And yes, to protest. Not only that, it creates a barrier to entering our political and civic communities. Arkansas ranks in the 40s for political, civic and community participation. Therefore, Arkansas needs to incentivize, not disincentivize political participation in our youth, the future of our state, and excuse absences or want such incentive. The last thing we need is to add barriers to participation, especially for the younger
generation. A primary issue with this bill is that it in effect restricts and discourages political speech, the most protected form of speech by the Supreme Court without any evidence to prove it is necessary without any substantive evidence that engaging in politics and advocacy hinders academic performance and without Any substantive evidence that any ideology is being favored or suppressed. This bill acts as an undue burden on high school and college students' ability to participate, express our
grievances, and exercise our rights to be good, engaged citizens, and how ironic when school more than a job training ground are supposed to cultivate good citizens. Thank you. Thank you for your time or the questions from the committee? CNN, we appreciate your time. Next
up, speaking against the bill is John Guerrero. John, are you here?
John Guerrero
Unverified
7:33:21
If you would please introduce yourself for the record. You've got 3 minutes. Good afternoon. My name is John Guerrero. Before I even started reading this bill, it was already made clear that it was heavily flawed. Based on the honest responses from local educational employees who I applauded for trying to actually improve students' experiences in education. They've agreed that this bill is to centralize power over higher education. Most also agree that this bill focuses on unnecessary topics. They portrayed as serious problems when in reality it's insignificant compared to actual problems that aren't mentioned
in this bill. After reading through the entire bill, it's been made clear that while it claims to make education better and more accessible, it actually deteriorates the quality of education our kids will receive by decreasing local representation, reducing qualification standards and cutting programs. And changing advanced placement classes as well as targeted removal of the uh influence supposed indoctrination in classrooms and student advocacy. It is a fact that public school management requires a lot of representation and qualifications to maintain its role as one of the most collaborative and thoroughly
intellectual aspects of an organized society. Every decision that's made in this field, the government should have as much feedback and expertise put into as possible for the people. This bill wants to do the exact opposite by decreasing the amount of qualified members and representation needed while replacing those roles with a small number of political appointees who will dictate and oversee the changes our schools will go through. This will be done by the numerous changes in this bill that support this overall plan to centralize authority over education. This bill allows the commissioner of Education, the secretary, and the governor to have the ability
to appoint whomever they please as a councilor commissions over publicly funded education. Also sections 36 and 46 in this bill, give the higher education coordinating Board of. Department of Education, the power to set their own requirements and and regulations on vocational schools with section 50 also decreasing the member requirement. There are many more examples I could list, but it's all clearly stated in this bill that will regress our education system. This bill also plans to lower incentives and requirements for teachers to pursue higher levels of their field by lowering the teaching qualification
standards, this means that any person with the baccalaureate could qualify for an AP teaching position. It also dissolves incentive programs for teachers to pursue a higher degree in this field. This doesn't do anything to help the state and its students succeed if even the teachers are going to struggle to find support for improvement. If this bill were truly written for the designated purpose of bettering education for our students, it would aim to encourage and open opportunities for teachers to improve in their field. Not, not like the standards to actually educate our students. No organization should have the
sole authority to pick and choose what classes are recognized by the board for advanced placement credits. This bill places any power to recognize credits to the school coordinating council this in no way further education our kids will see in reality, literally diminishes it by learning the account to control how teachers teach and what students are able to get out of an AP course based on how much support they think the course will uh gets. Responses from educational employees and experts who actually do real work towards improving students' experiences functionality of schools agree that this will get us nowhere better.
Mr. Gregory, 3 minutes are up. Thank you for your time. Are there questions from the committee? See you, thank you for your time. Next up to speak against the bill is Benjamin Grisham. Beam, are you here? If you would please introduce yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes.
Speaker 553
7:36:56
Go ahead and push that button right in front of
Benjamin Grisham
Unverified
7:37:00
you. There we go. Thank you. OK. So, uh, hello, my name is Benjamin Grisham, and um I'm a senior at Little Rock Central High. And um I'm here to ask you all to vote no for the free access for the, uh, access bill. Um, let me start with saying that I'm not usually a politically active person. Like most young people, I have a lot of stuff on my plate that pulls me away from participating in our government, but that is not the way that it should be. Young people are already
unrepresented. underrepresented and we need to bolster our opportunities to participate, not take them away. Section 23 of this bill aims to do just that and remove the chance to speak for me and every other public student in the state. This conflicts directly with the First Amendment, what the First Amendment is supposed to protect. This bill threatens unexcused absences for coming to public hearings just like this one, which can lead to truancy charges. If you support this bill, you are saying that I should be penalized and be facing potential legal trouble just for being here, speaking my own
mind. It was meant to be a free country. All because the hearing is scheduled during school hours. My right to free speech should not depend on the time or day. Now I understand that there is to be an amendment. That at the bare minimum allows us to get excused absences for things like this hearing. Good job. This is still not enough because it still does not allow walkouts, which is one of our greatest tools for free speech. We should be allowed to establish our own pro pro protests just as any other citizen can because our rights to free speech do not end at the
schoolhouse gates. I'd also like to note that none of the restrictions on college students have been amended at all, which is very bad because they're just as damaging. I don't understand how anyone can support this. We should not be discouraging political involvement in our own citizens, regardless of how old they are. I find that frankly un-American and undemocratic. Nothing about this supports my learning, nor does the school board a favor. In fact, I've learned a lot from being here. It just takes away my voice in legislation. That's why I'm exercising my right to be here.
I'm not sitting for hours in this room to skip school. I care about my education and just the same, I care about my rights to free speech. And from what I'm seeing, this may just be my last chance to address those meant to represent me. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your time or other questions from
the committee. So now I'm thank you, Mr. Gresham, for your time. Next
up to speak against the bill is Eli Clardy. I hope I pronounce that correctly. Eli, are you in the room? If you would please introduce yourself to the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes.
Speaker 583
7:39:35
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I am Eli Clarity. I am a member of the Young Democrats of Arkansas and a senior at Arkansas Tech University. I have traveled to the capital today to testify in opposition to Arkansas access and would like to focus on a particularly troubling aspect of the bill. It's intent to restrict a student's ability to protest on their campus and to emphasize this, I wish to briefly share with this committee my own personal experience regarding the importance of having the right to protest on
one's campus in 2019, my school, Arkansas Tech, chose to name a scholarship in honor of a retired ATU professor who during his time as an educator had presented anti-Semitic works as legitimate historical references and engaged in holocaust denial, most notably at a 2005 graduate seminar. The move was swiftly condemned by multiple Jewish organizations, the anti-Defamation League, the Jewish Federation of Arkansas and reaction amongst the student body was equally condemning with the administration under pressure to remove or rename the scholarship
neo-Nazis descended onto the ATU campus in support of this professor and his views. The university allowed this, not wanting to infringe their right to free speech. The student response. was a sight I'll never forget. Bravely students in the dozens, their numbers growing with time met the self-proclaimed Nazis and engaged in a fervent counter protest. Many were excused from class to do so understanding the importance of making sure such hate did not go unchallenged. Eventually with their numbers
swelling and voices overpowering the anti-Semites were driven away, and frankly it was one of the most American and patriotic displays I have ever seen. Now as I sit before you this body considers legislation that would have made that student response impossible, a bill that had it been law at the time, would not have only prevented those students from speaking out, but also potentially penalize them for doing so. Conversely, I can't think of anything more un-American in a country that by its very nature
was founded by protest. Students should be allowed the right to peaceful protest without any fear of reprisal, and I will leave you with this last thought. Had access been law in 2019, that right that I am speaking of would have been extended to those Nazis, but not the students protesting them. They could have been punished for speaking out. They could have even been expelled. Is that the kind of state or country you wish to live in and can you in good conscience vote for a bill. That would allow that. Thank you for your time.
Thank you for your time or the questions from the committee. CNN, appreciate your time. Next to speak against the bill is Joshua Silverstein. Joshua, are you here? If you would please introduce yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Push it one more time if you would please.
Speaker 250
7:42:38
There you go. My name is Josh Silverstein. I'm a law professor and I live and
Josh Silverstein
Unverified
7:42:45
work here in Little Rock. However, I'm speaking today in my individual capacity, not on behalf of the university where I teach. Thank you for providing this opportunity to testify. I think in many respects, access is a step forward, while the bill has many commendable features, however, I'm unfortunately here to testify against it for two reasons. First, the part of access to which I most strongly object has already been mentioned by Senator Sullivan and Representatives Mayberry Brown. It's in section 60, page 75, lines 1 through 3 of Senate Bill 246, which provides that a
faculty member can be immediately reviewed and even terminated for gauging in unprofessional conduct. That is extremely problematic because what is generically unprofessional is almost entirely in the eye of the beholder. Such strikingly broad language is a serious threat to academic freedom, ideological diversity, and free inquiry on campus. There's no language in the Access bill that limits the scope of unprofessional conduct. Thus, it could apply to almost anything. Here's some things that have been deemed unprofessional in IRed recently, criticizing DEI, criticizing
affirmative action, presenting data that affirmative action results in admitting less qualified students. arguing that Western values are superior, disagreeing with an administration about matters of university policy and so much more. Note that it's generally not liberals like me who get punished with charges of unprofessional speech or actions, it is much more likely to be conservatives. That's unsurprising given the research showing that administrators are even more liberal than faculty. Permitting administrators to punish faculty by labeling something unprofessional is an invitation to suppress
conservative perspectives. Senator Disman's point this morning that Section 6631 of RF only allows, it does not require universities to discipline for us unprofessional conduct does not address my concerns. The bill directly authorizes universities to discipline via the vague charge of unprofessionalism without any internal rules necessary. Statutory authorization for such a broad grant of authority will inevitably be used to punish faculty for dissent. Senator Sullivan and Representative Maybury mentioned a potential
amendment that I think would solve the problem that I, to my understanding, many Republican support. We changed the language on page, on line one of page 75 from unprofessional conduct to conduct violating professional standards that would more than cover every relevant type of misconduct. It isn't captured by other parts of proposed section 663104 subsection F. Faculty are subject to numerous professional standards regardless of their field. This includes both general accreditation standards and discipline specific standards.
Uh, secondly, I also oppose the prohibition on excused absences, my young, brilliant, inspiring colleagues sitting all around me have already made most of the arguments I would consider making. All I will add is that I think, excusing absences is a legitimate pedagogical practice. It's an excellent way to teach students our system of government and democratic participation, and I think it could be fixed with some modest limits that go beyond the current amendment. I'm happy to take any questions you have for me. Thank you for your comments, Mr. Solstein. Other questions from
the committee. See you now, we appreciate your time.
Except to speak against the bill is roan roancua. apologies if I don't pronounce that correctly. If you would please introduce yourself for
the record and you recognize for 3 minutes. Hello, my name is Ron Kuda.
Ron Kuda
Unverified
7:46:17
I am a student at Little Rock Central High and I'm a senior.
Since we all know that the vote will probably pass access today. I'm going to speak directly to the world and the public about how the sponsors of this bill are planning to cut out local Arkansans from their own education system. So let's begin with the school leadership committee. The school leadership committee is basically the head of the Department of Education and it requires that the executive directors of the teachers union, the administrators union, the school board association, the rural Education Association, public schoolsource Center, and more all hold positions on that
committee. Now all of those positions are completely removed and the governor can appoint whoever she wants. It doesn't matter if they're from Walmart, doesn't matter if they're from Don Tyson. It doesn't matter where they're from. They could be out of the country. Similar things have gone down with the Safe Schools Committee, the professional development process, the public school, academic facilities Committee, the Disabilities Act Compliance Committee, the dyslexia guide committee and the higher education coordination Committee. All of these required positions of professionals, professionals who have been
involved at a local level in this state are having their positions completely removed and now all of the authority is being placed in the hands of the governor and her appointees. Why is this being done? Well, let's defund some schools. Let's look at rural schools first. In this bill, we're going to repeal the smart core initiative, an initiative that provides more elective courses for rural schools, and we're going to repeal the traveling teachers program that does basically the exact same thing. So we are looking at our struggling rural schools, and we are pushing them
down in the water that they are drowning in so that they can suffer even more and fail. But it's not just rural schools, it's also urban schools. Let's look at the LRSD. The rating system for public schools is changing to only include neighborhood crime rates and a couple of other things, but removing any considerations of teacher qualifications, uh, community involvement, preschool programs, and diversity, all things that the LRSD specifically excels in. So we're defunding uh uh urban schools as well. Is that money going to
rural schools? No, it is not, because the rating system for private schools has been completely removed and now private schools can receive vouchers regardless of their rating. So the standards that were promised by the sponsors of the Learns Act are now being repealed in the legislation that is being fronted by the very same people that were pushing for the Learns Act. We've heard a lot of lies today. Now, I wanna get to the silencing of the public. There are numerous sections in this bill that are flagrant violations of our First Amendment rights. I will begin with colleges, Section 60 allows
the division of higher education to revoke tenure from professors that don't meet their arbitrary requirements. And of course, the division of higher education is going to be made up of uh specifically just govern governor appointees. Access also allows governor appointees in the Department of Education to revoke all state funding from schools with DEI programs or collective guilt, 3 minutes is up. Thank you for your time. Our other questions from the committee. See you now, we appreciate
your time. Next up, speaking against the bill is Adam Shaver. Shaver, are you here?
Adam Shaver
Unverified
7:49:32
If you would please introduce yourself to the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Good afternoon. My name is Adam Shaver. I am a native of Fort Smith and currently in my 2nd year at the University of Arkansas. As a lifelong student of Arkansas public schools and part of a family of educators I've seen firsthand the strengths and flaws of our education system. I'm a product of it and continue to be molded by it because of this experience, I feel the
responsibility to speak against the Arkansas Access Act. This bill silences student voices, makes Arkansas less competitive, removes opportunities for low-income students and strips control from those. know our schools and students best, local educators and communities. As a student, I feel the amendment is not good enough. This still gives schools control over which kinds of political events we can or cannot go to. That is way more obvious student indoctrination than any DEI program that I've been a part of, it is still a violation of our First Amendment rights, especially for us
students over the age of 18. What's wrong with how we handle absences for political activities currently if it's not broke, don't fix it. Now removing the requirement for AP classes doesn't create more opportunities for students, it does the opposite. Uh, most other states utilize them. Why should we be any different? Without the requirement, the AP classes offered around the state will drop drastically. The hardest hit people will be low-income students who rely on those classes for affordable college credit. A student teacher I know put it best, quote, I currently teach
students whose only meals and support come from schools and whose only college credit they can afford comes from AP. classes, they are effectively limiting students from opportunities to improve themselves. I have more students who sleep on the floor than in beds. More students go hungry every night as opposed to having a warm meal on the table and more students wear the same clothes day after day because it's the only ones they have. The governor is stripping students from the right to seek a better life and escape poverty. Additionally, without AP courses, rural schools will likely stop offering advanced coursework altogether, further
widening the educational and economic divide between urban and rural Arkansas. By eliminating leadership positions at the local level, this bill removes decision making from the people who understand these schools and communities best. Why should politicians in Little Rock have more control over our schools than the educators working in them every day. The needs of Arkansas communities are too diverse to be forced under centralized leadership. Fayetteville is not Jonesboro. Mountain Home is not Fort Smith and Stuttgart is not El Dorado. It makes no sense to take decision-making power away from those directly affected by these
policies. While some provisions of the Arkansas Access Act are beneficial, like increasing the academic cha uh challenge scholarship and the focus on vocational schools and certificates. The overall impact of this bill is far too dangerous. It silences students, weakens our schools, removes opportunities for those who need the most and strips accountability from those in charge. I urge you all to vote against it in its current form. Thank you. Thank you for your time or the questions from the
committee. Senator Murdoch, do you have a question? I'm over here.
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
7:52:47
school? University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. You know sharks on Faya. OK, I'm a graduate of that university and I would like to commend you and many others such as yourself that
have done a great job of articulating your your points, whether they agree to or not, I do want to commend you and many, many others for conducting yourself in a manner that's been very, very Uh, well spoken and something that we all can learn from if we listen. Thank you. Me and all my
Adam Shaver
Unverified
7:53:12
counterparts really do appreciate that. It means a lot to us. See no additional questions. Thank
you for your time, Mr. Thank you. Next up is Julia Taylor. Julia, are you in the room? If you would please introduce
yourself for the record and you recognized for 3 minutes. My name is Julia Taylor. I am A
Speaker 601
7:53:44
Citizen of Little Rock, Arkansas. I'm here speaking for myself, and as a former educator. Um, I do appreciate. That, sorry, I'm in the weird. Glasses, no glasses stage of life. Um, I appreciate, um, that there are efforts being made to make amendments to this bill, um, even as the day has progressed, um, I've had to leave for a while and haven't been able to keep up with all of them, but I still feel that
there are too many questions and too many concerns, uh, for this bill to, uh, Be passed today, so I hope you all vote no on it in its current form. I do think there are things of value in the bill. Um, but as I said, there's enough that is of concern. I've also been here this week, um, or last week testifying on um the ballot initiative process, there's been a lot of talk about the citizens needing to read the
ballot title before they sign it. Um, and I appreciate that many of you have said you read the bill today. Um But how much more important is it for a legislator to read the bill, but not just to read the bill, but to Report to their constituents and allow their constituents time to ask the questions, um. And not just the constituents
who voted for you, um, because you do represent all of your district. Um, the correct thing to do when presented with a bill of this size is to read it, report to your constituents and listen to their concerns before you vote. Um, I feel. There's just too many things that are left unclear at this point. Um In closing, this is not about you or your vote. It is about our state universities, our colleges, and our public school districts. Thank you.
Thank you for your time. All the questions from the committee. See you now and we appreciate your time. Next up to speak against the bill's Jordan Barnett. Jordan, are you in the room? You recognized, if you would please introduce yourself, and
Jordan Barnett
Unverified
7:56:09
you're recognized for 3 minutes. Good afternoon. My name is Jordan Barnett. I'm a Dean's List student at Arkansas Tech University and a distinguished honors graduate of Conway Christian School. And today I'm here opposing HB
1512. I have many concerns, but would like to focus on the excused absences policy that is introduced in sections 23 and 47. This past election season, I worked on the campus of Arkansas Tech University with our campus Life Administration to register voters on our campus, share information and resources regarding ballot issues and candidates and collecting mail-in ballots to be sent out for students. It was mentioned earlier this morning that part of the reasoning for prohibiting excused absences was because it is not realistic of the real world and that we as adults are unable to miss work to participate in these activities.
However, I did miss work and or reschedule times with my employer to participate in this. I was employed last semester by Arkansas Tech University as a teacher's assistant for multiple classes, and I worked with my employers to both complete my duties for them as well as fulfilling my civic duty. Political protests, policy advocacy and influencing legislation is patriotic. Dedication dedicating your time to do so displays a dedication to your community, your state, and your country. Government funded entities such as schools and universities
should recognize and encourage us more than anyone. For example, my high school civics teacher offered us extra credit for registering to vote our senior year. This same teacher brought my younger sister's class to observe the Supreme Court just next door, only last week. This is the energy that we should be encouraging, extending it to the civic participations mentioned in this bill. Concerned due to the current climate was mentioned as reasons for these prohibitions. The best way to address this concern is to foster a pride in legislative advocacy and working
to better our communities rather than shutting it down and creating barriers such as risking grades and by extension are scholarships, as well as the truancy charges that can be obtained. As such, I and the majority of my peers present oppose HB 1512 in its current form. We, as your current and future voters ask you to do the same. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your time or other questions? So you know, we appreciate
your time. Next up on the list to speak against the bill is Jayden Pace. Jay, are you in the room? If you would please introduce
yourself for the record and you're recognized for
Speaker 604
7:58:37
3 minutes. Hello, I'm Jaden Peace. I am, I was born in Russellville and I'm currently schooling in Russellville at Arkansas Tech University. I have two main issues with this bill. Of course, you've already heard that Section 47, uh, the part pertaining to uh disallowing
students from attending gatherings like this and from prohibiting them from attending protests and such. Uh, is of course an a infringement on our First Amendment right as US citizens. Um. But additionally, I'd like to point out further concern regarding the um Ignoring Uh, college student, um, excursion.
You see a lot of taxpayer dollars go into our scholarships and our classes. And if we have unexcused absences, then we are in danger of having our classes dropped from us. And all of that money going to waste. Now I don't know about you, but I would not like to see taxpayer dollars get wasted on actually nothing. This doesn't achieve anything, but censoring and silencing adults who can vote.
I find this very problematic. Secondly, I believe it's section 48. That pertains to uh removing DEI from the Um, college experience, but we worked so hard to destroy with DEI was racism, misogyny, homophobia, and xenophobia. We created DAI to help people not want to kill themselves at schools.
Suicide among some of these marginalized groups is rampant. The National Library of Medicine asserts that somewhere between 180 and 45% of transgender adults and youth have made an attempt on their life. By outright banning their support in schools by legislating that their leaders and the people responsible for keeping them from being bullied in schools. By mandating that they cannot intervene and then they, they
cannot advocate for equal rights for these people. You are removing their support, and you are personally tying their noose. This is unacceptable. DEI takes power from these supremacists and subjugators and plain bullies and gives it back to those whose lives have been worsened by them. My friends and my peers are still alive, luckily. Though that's not to say some of my peers. Have not attempted on themselves and that I have had to
experience my peers attempting on themselves. Thank you. 3 minutes is up. Thank you for your time.
Other questions for Mr. Pace. See you, thank you for your time. Next up to speak against the Bills, Max Wiggins. Max, you're in the room. If you would please introduce yourself for the record and you recognize for 3 minutes.
Max Wiggins
Unverified
8:02:07
Hi, my name is Max Wiggins. I'm a junior at Little
Speaker 607
8:02:10
ox Central High School. 3 years ago, I stood and spoke at a committee here for the Loans Act alongside my peers, some of whom are here. The Honorable congresswoman from North Iraq to put it bluntly, shut our speeches down within the first sentences. This caused an outraged. I was interviewed and recognized for it when I went to Ireland that summer with my family. I had a tour guide recognize me from the viral video. This was an active rendition of using my voice and
it actually changing my life. Is that what you strive to kill with this bill. When I first read this bill, and yes, I read the bill, I started drafting what I wanted to say, but I came to understand later that the of the bill is not what lies at stake here. It's our lives and education that matter. Some legislators in this state believe that students are ignorant to their surroundings, to their community, and to their nation. And because of that, they can pass legislation under our noses that directly affect us. Some also believe that we're too much into the community, even more so the reason why they
would want to infringe upon our constitutional rights. Moving on to section 23, I would like to echo the words of Mr. Kelly earlier. Already existing laws, statutes, and Supreme Court decisions already prohibit schools from picking and choosing what we can protest. The section 23, um, specifically about the protests, how you are, uh, uh, continuing, uh, you're with the amendment, you're taking out the portions of the unexcused absences, but keeping in the the protest portions because you're worried about um what schools may or may not prohibit is already uh uh is
already protected from the of the bill is built on false ideals of student interest. Before the second portion of the session began, the writers of this bill, uh, went up to some of us, uh, in the audience and said that they were going to propose the amendment to strike the unexcused absence. This is a fantastic idea and we, of course, support this, but this is obviously a ploy to give us just a little bit so they can retain the rest and the, the main portion of the bill. The principle of them infringing upon our constitutional rights to assemble, as stated in the First Amendment of the
Constitution is enough reasoning for why we cannot settle for less than we deserve. Student walkouts are of course controversial and honestly, I agree they shouldn't count as excuse absences. However, that doesn't mean that we should be criminally convicted with truancy, which is a legal offense for uh for assembling on school grounds. Don't settle for less. I would also like to rebut what the congressman said about um uh at the at this table said earlier, he said that students can participate, they just can't get it excused. That is plausible deniability. Even if this was a
amended, uh, as for protests, unexcused absences equals truancy, and truancy is a legal offense, like I said. What do you want us to do if we want to engage in our community or gain knowledge about congressional session sessions for our future careers. The kids that came in here today, today, I can assure you are passionate about their community and especially their school studies. So when I say that we are here to learn, it is true. The section of the bill sparks a really
Speaker 608
8:05:03
important dilemma, which is how far will the student, will the rights of students students protected. Thank you for your
time. Are there questions for, uh, the witness. See no, thank you for your time.
Next up to speak against the bill is Owen Haynes. Oh, are you in the room? If you would please introduce yourself
Speaker 609
8:05:29
for the record and you recognized for 3 minutes. Thank you for the honor, the opportunity to speak, Mr. Chairman. I am Owen Haynes. I am the political affairs officer for the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Student Government Association. Yesterday, I emailed all of you
a letter. I'm not sure everyone had gotten the chance to read it, so I'll read it aloud for everyone. To the honorable members of the Arkansas House of Representatives and Senate, and the Honorable Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders. We, the undersigned members of the University of Arkansas at Little Rock Student Government Association. I would like to strongly urge you to oppose the passage of HB 1512 and Senate Bill 246. As officers and senators of the
UALR Student Government Association. We aim to represent a politically diverse student body. Whose members reserve their constitutional rights to advocate for whichever political causes in which they believe. We find issue in the access bills proposed restrictions on the rights of students engaging in civil society, as is protected by the First Amendment, which includes freedoms of speech. Assembly and seeking redress from one's government.
In this vein, we wish to bring to light the 1972 United States Supreme Court case, Healey versus James, which states, Yet the precedents of this court leave no room for the view that the First Amendment protections should apply with less force on college campuses than in the community at large. Quite the contrary, and this is where the court cites Shelton versus Tucker. The vigilant protection of constitutional freedoms is nowhere more vital than in the
community of American schools. Additionally, we see concern in removing the ability of higher education faculty and administrators to excuse students participating in civil society activities and in creating channels through which faculty can have their tenure revoked or otherwise be punished. Sincerely concerned, the undersigned members of the student government, which is 19 people. Thank you so much. Thank you for your time. Are the questions
from the committee. Seeing no. We appreciate your time. Next up, speaking inabil is Christina Smith. Christine, are you in the audience?
OK. We'll move on next up to speak against the bill will be John Thompson. John, are you in
the audience? Don't see John. Addison Grace Kane.
Miss Canny, if you would please introduce yourself for the record and you recognize
Speaker 262
8:08:25
to speak. For 3 minutes. Good afternoon, members of the committee. First off, I want to start by thanking, um, Senator,
Addison Grace
Unverified
8:08:33
um, Senator Murdoch, Representative Gonzalez Worthen and Senator Flowers for their questions on these matters earlier before I begin. I appreciate you bringing importance to the voices of our students. My name is Addison Grace Cain, and I am a senior at Little Rock Central High School.
I'm here standing before you because this bill threatens student voices and communities, not just mine, but for every student in Arkansas. I may be leaving the system soon, but I will always be a product of it. I have a younger sister and peers who will experience the consequences if this bill is passed. The Access bill is not about improving education. It's about control. It strips power from students and teachers. Access mutes, student voices, and punishes us for speaking out as if caring about
our own education is a threat. Section 23, pages 36, ending at the beginning of page 37 of the House bill, which we know has an amendment now, but again, it's not enough. Um, proves the penalties that students will entail if they choose to speak. With my alma mater being solid proof of the strength and student's ability to make positive change. Why are you so afraid of us using our platform? This bill will not help us. This bill would not create a more compatible system, and it will not empower us. It will do
nothing but attempt to silence us. It does not fix what's broken. It shatters it even more. Access goes after diversity, equity, and inclusion, as if those words are threats, something to fear, but DEI is safety. It's opportunity. It's the reasons why students like me, students of color, students who are queer, students from underrepresented communities can see ourselves in the history we learn, the teachers who guide us and the policies that shape our education.
Removing DEI does not create a quality, it creates a erasure. Instead of attacking DEI, we should be addressing the real issues in Arkansas education. Students need an education that prepares us for the real world, not one that is stripped of truth, representation, and inclusion. You cannot foster higher education without us being able to speak on our needs. This is not non-biased learning. This is oppressive, restrictive education. You have a choice today. Will you stand with Arkansas students
or will you be the ones to to attempt to erase us. I urge you, vote against this bill and leave more time for amendments and review, because we will remember those who stood for us and those who tried to silence us. Self-expression is not indoctrination. Thank you so much for your time. Thank you for your time or the questions from
the committee. See you now. We appreciate your time. Next up to
speak against the bill's Madison Douglas. Madison, are you in the room? Hm
We'll move on. Xavier McLennan. If you would please introduce yourself and
you recognized for 3 minutes. Yo, hello, my
Ieva Mclennan
Unverified
8:11:45
name is Ieva McLennan. I am a senior from Mills University Studies High School, and basically, I'll be talking
about certain parts of the bill that I generally don't like and, well, I kind of appreciate it a little bit. So for section 2, right, y'all came in here talking about y'all gonna talk about me, my bad. So Yeah I mean, so there's 17 people on the board currently, and you're trying to take it down to 5. So if you, if you really want to fix this problem, make a Zoom meeting and y'all all just meet up there one day. Or, and if a person can't make it to the meeting, how about y'all all come together and impeach the person that doesn't um Come to these meetings and just
kick him out. I mean, it's a simple solution to a problem. Also, you also talk about doubling down on education, but we're still ranked thirty-eighth. Like
Speaker 614
8:12:33
make it make sense. Apparently this bill or any bill that are currently making are not working
Ieva Mclennan
Unverified
8:12:39
for Arkansas education. But currently, I do totally agree about pulling concurrent classes on as a as a weight credit because when I was in, cause I'm still currently in high school, and the reason why I never took um concurrent classes because they weren't away credit and I didn't see no
use in them. Also, it is not your choice on education because We have a board of education for a reason. So why in the world would we let legislators decide on what we get to teach and to be honest with y'all, y'all are like a little bit on the older end. So I don't understand how y'all know what the youth needs or what the youth is going to be using in the, in the future. We grew up in different times. It's like you're rising or gaslighting us to believing that this bill can actually help us in with the future.
And for section 16, if a school is the F school, then they deserve an F. Graduation rate, test scores and learning environment doesn't make a school a school. It's a foundation. It's the environment in every in every student around that matters in that situation. Also, seniors have jobs and they have a life to live. So if we're forcing the seniors to stay In school, it's like we're forcing them to do work, even if they don't need to, even if they have all the credits. So it's like, it's gonna affect school
in a terrible way and a school grade, if we're going based on the matter of grades and student attendance. Section 23. 0, my school basically told me I have an unexcused absentee, but I decided to come here anyways because my education matters and my siblings and everybody else that are younger than me, education matters. And I call BS on your amendment, respectfully, because it seem like you're just kissing up to all of us to make sure That you are on our side on what, on, on school and getting an excused, respectfully. And
but you were not allowing us to come to school and, well, basically not allowing us to come here to speak on a problem that we are currently having currently. Because we matter and our voices need to be heard. And it just seems like you're just blocking that out of here. And and America is built. Thank you for your time. Your 3 minutes is up. Are the questions from the
Speaker 616
8:14:45
committee. We appreciate your time. Next up to speak against the bill
is Chance Bradford. Chancery in the room. If you would please introduce yourself to the record and you're recognized for your 3 minutes.
James Bradford
Unverified
8:15:23
Hello, Chairman. My name is James Bradford. I am a senior at Mills High School, uh, following up my constituent. There are some issues that I have with this bill, you know, it says that it's here to help students, to help the education, but I simply do not see this motive behind this legislation. I mean, I'll try to keep off the topic of section 23, since there was an amendment made, but I do have to talk about it at least a small bit. I appreciate that dudes are seeing that students were heavily against not having
the right to be at these type of political meetings that you made an amendment to try and advocate for it, but simply put, I can't accept it. It seems like a half measure in order to appease us and simply put, I'm not willing to meet you halfway, because with the amendment, we are still not allowed to get on our feet and go out. protest. We are not simply allowed to still do real action. I mean, the motive behind it really does seem like you're either afraid or don't care about what the youth says. I mean, there was a senator in this room that if I'm not
mistaken, literally said we send students to school for education, not to do all this extra stuff. I'm sorry that I want to engage in civic duty. I'm sorry that I care about the uh about the political state in Arkansas. I mean, the following statement was, I don't think we should be. allowing students up here to not talk about the majority of Arkansans. I didn't know it was only the majority's voice that mattered. I didn't know that only Majority's voice mattered. Uh, but there are other issues that I have with this bill. Simply put, the
disenfranchisement of schools in rural areas with with sections like 7, that my friend Ronan addressed. It repeals the Arkansas Traveling Teachers Action, smart core, and also 15 sections, 15 and 16, which would remove letter ratings from private schools in order for them to get vouchers and it would also take away funding from rural schools. This would mean that schools in marginalized areas. would lose all of their all of their base. It would tear schools down in areas because
the only thing that we're taking account with all the removals is the grade of the school and the area that it's in, this means that schools, for lack of a better word, and ghetto areas would not have the money to keep running because simply put, it's in a bad state of Arkansas. It's in a bad place in Arkansas. Following up, I would like to address section 31. The commissioner of the committee, uh, now has control to appoint whoever they want to DLE and it only has 5 slots. Now, given that this is a trickle down
effect of who our governor would pick for this position. It feels more like a dictatorship than a true democracy because they would handpick people that revert that echo chamber their same motives in order to pick everything in schools. A dictatorship would be put in place because, simply put, not every voice would be not every voice would be heard. I think as Senator Murdoch stated earlier, not even in the creation of this bill was the point of anybody but
Speaker 616
8:18:23
the majority addressed your 3 minutes is up, Mr. Bradford.
Thanks for your time. Are the questions from the committee? See you now. We appreciate your time. Next up is speaking against the bill is Tyson Thompson. Tyson, are you in the room? If you would please come introduce yourself
for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. I How y'all doing today? My name is Tyson Thompson. I'm a senior at Mills High School also.
Tyson Thompson
Unverified
8:18:59
Um, first off, I'd like to say that Why wouldn't y'all want to hear student voices. Everything that we do around here is because of the students. Y'all want to help the students, y'all want to be there for the students. How about we be there for the teachers also. In my two years of being at Mills High School because I went to Parkview my 9th grade year. I've had two teachers leave, and this year standing alone, I've had, I'm about to have 3 teachers leave also, all because they aren't getting paid enough. I want to go to school to learn. I want to learn something. I want, I want
to be there. I want to be engaged. But if my teachers leave, how can I learn anything? They're being replaced with teachers who aren't qualified to be their substitutes. You also say that Me being here, I wouldn't be excused from school. That's fine. I'm fine with not being excused from school for today. Because right now I'm learning a lot about all the people that's in front of me. I'm going to let you guys really don't care. Honestly You guys don't care about our voice. You guys don't care that we're here. You look at us in the crowd.
With the stain on your face is really. Honestly, I may not, I may not know everything that they know, because I'm just here. I'm just here to talk about how you guys limiting our voices isn't really fair. That's pretty much it. Thank you for your time, Mr. Thompson. Are the questions from
the committee? See you now, we appreciate your time. Next up is speak on the
bill, Marissa Kane. Marissa, are you in the crowd? Where Seone is not here. Next up, Chloe Washington. Chloe Washington in the crowd? Chloe, if you would please introduce yourself for the record and you recognize for 3 minutes. Good
Chloe Washington
Unverified
8:21:00
afternoon. My name is Chloe Washington and I'm a senior at Mills High School. I
Speaker 623
8:21:05
am here to add to advocate against the Senate Bill 146 and House Bill 1512. In section 18, it mentions imposing regulations on AP US history and AP African American studies. As a student that has taken a push and received the college credit, I can confidently say that a push shouldn't be regulated. This is a class that is designed for students who want to grasp a deeper knowledge of how our how our country arose. How would they learn this if the class is censored. We don't want to learn bits and pieces of our history,
but want to know why the horrible actions and decisions transpired. In Section 9, it
Speaker 621
8:21:40
states that the Department of Education will be able to deny any AP programs that don't
Speaker 623
8:21:46
fit program requirements. I cannot understand why you want to take opportunities away from students who want to learn. AP courses are presented to students who want in-depth knowledge of our country's history. I don't believe the Department of Education should limit what they want to learn in order to, in order to fit an agenda of centralized control.
In section 23, even though it has been amended, I would like to, I would still like to, um. To mention this. It mentions that students will not be, will not have an excuse absence for protesting, advocating, and etc. But why should students be punished for speaking out. I agree that being in a classroom is very important. However, this is more valuable because this bill is directly affecting students. We would all like to be in school right now, but we can't comfortably learn knowing that our education is under attack.
That is all that I have for you today. Please vote no. Thank you for your time.
Thank you. The questions from the committee. See you now and we appreciate your time. Next up to speak against the bill is
Doctor John Landowski. I believe I pronounced that correctly. Are you in
the room? Moving on, uh, next up, Annabelle Miles Mills. Miller, I apologize. If you would please introduce
Annabel Miller
Unverified
8:23:13
yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. My name is Annabel Miller and I'm a senior from Little Rock Central High School, and I disagree with many things in this bill. Many portions remove opportunities from rural schools such as Section 7 with the repealing of the Arkansas Traveling Teachers Program. There is no purpose in removing a program that benefits students at rural schools. This gave many students access to to classes they normally wouldn't have at their school balancing out the divide between bigger schools and main cities and smaller schools out in rural towns.
If the goal of the bill is to benefit rural rural schools. Then it defies that goal by deliberately removing programs and waivers that keep those schools open in teaching students. The Matthew effect refers to a pattern in which those who begin with advantage accumulate more advantage over time and those who begin with disadvantage, accumulate more disadvantage over time. When we fund schools that are already already successful when in the schools that primarily teach students from low-income households and homes plagued with stress, financial and family problems, the more we widen the gap between those
students' performances. We should be prioritizing giving students the best education possible, not purposefully removing the things in place to try to balance out the disadvantage. We must at all students up for success, not just the well off ones. Next, I do not agree with things listed in section 53 of the goals listed were to promote student participation in AP classes to increase the amount of 3s, 4s, and fives earned by students taking those classes and to decrease the participation and performance gaps between racial groups of students. Two of those goals were crossed out, those being
the 2nd and 3rd ones. We cannot just prioritize getting students to take the class. We have to push these students to perform well, so it will benefit them later in college. I also believe it is important to have a goal of decreasing any kind of participation or forms gaps between groups of any kind. Everyone from all groups should be pushed to do well. I also have problems with how the state will choose to fund these AP classes. The language used here is a bunch of maize and depends. It is hard to trust the state's judgment on the funding with indecisive language like this. We can't trust that the state won't just come up short of money when we ask for
funding for a class like AP African American studies. I believe it should not be left up to the state to determine whether or not students are allowed to learn from a certain class. No one should tell students what they can't and cannot learn. I disagree with Section 23 as well. I know this was amended and I absolutely understand the desire to make sure students are safe and parents know where they are, but there are many students that deviate from the parents' beliefs. Many parents refused to let their children do things like that don't lie with the align with their beliefs and students shouldn't be scared to testify or protest because of what their parents believe. And students like me who are
already 18 are presumably also restricted by their parents' judgment. The students who come here had the initiative to look up the bill and figure out the times to come here and what to say if they chose to testify. I had a friend who wore their hood during a walkout because they were scared. Their parents would see them on television and punish them. Because they believe differently than their parents. No one should be scared to exercise their First Amendment right. I don't think our right to protest should be curbed by the implementation of unexcused absences and a right to participate in legislative processes should be limited by our parents' beliefs and rules. Thank you for your time.
Speaker 475
8:26:16
Thank you for your time, Ms. Miller. Other questions? See you
now, we appreciate your time. Next up, to speak against the Bills, Allison Grigsby Sweatman. Are you in the
room? No. Moving on, Stephanie Giblin. Oh, I'm sorry, my apologies. Oh, that's excited, didn't think so. Stephanie Giblin? After that, next up we have
Mick Klein. I apologize. OK, Stephanie, you are recognized,
if you would please introduce yourself. You're recognized for 3 minutes. Sorry,
Stephanieel Giblin
Unverified
8:26:55
these heels are really tall, he had to give me a minute. Well, good evening now, I guess, uh, chairman and members of the committee. My name is Stephanieel Giblin. I'm the president of the Young Democrats chapter at the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. A student government executive social work major interning with the Little Rock School District.
So given my background, you can understand why this bill is a little bit concerning to me. There are a few components of this very lengthy bill that I can appreciate, but they are completely overshadow shadowed by sections B or sections 5, even the amended 23 and 47. Arkansas ranks embarrassingly low in national education rankings. Rather than introducing policies that would expand educational opportunities for every Arkansas student. This bill weakens our
academic foundation. The repeal of the smart core funding would disproportionately harm rural low income and majority minority communities stripping them of critical resources. Making AP optional for school districts, does not create an even playing field and will in fact dictate the success of his students by their zip code. Rural Arkansas public schools have history books from the Clinton administration. Eight year old public school children are hungry and in debt to their school cafeteria, but
cutting DEI programs and AP funding is of high priority. And not to mention the already significantly discussed constitutional concerns. The amended section 23 of this bill directly violates Heatley versus James in infringement, fringes on First Amendment rights. What are you actually afraid of? Civic engagement. free speech. Every legislator in this room was elected to serve your constituents and protect our rights, not silence them.
As a social worker, advocacy is of utmost importance to our work. I mean, just last week, I was right across the street at the Capitol at the Arkansas Association of Social workers' lobby day. Advocacy, civic engagement and being in the very rooms that decide your future is not a bad thing. As representatives, they should be encouraged and not punishable. No amount of increased scholarship funding is worth the cost of our freedom of speech and protest. As a concerned public university
student, I strongly hope you all vote no on this bill, and I hope you actually hear all of our concerns. Thank you committee for the opportunity to speak. Thank you for your time. What other questions. See
you then. We appreciate your time. Next up to speak against the bill is Mick Klein. Mick, are you in the room? If you would please introduce yourself for the record, and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Hello, uh, my name
Mick Klein
Unverified
8:29:50
is Mick Klein. I'm not the uh most educated on
this bill. I kind of just came in on a whim. But from what I've heard today, it seems to me that this bill is more an attempt to gain power and silence the voices of the people than it is to actually help us because It seems like I've seen kids force themselves to throw up just because they don't want to be at school. And just, just skip school for reasons other than protests and it's like, why specifically protests because if you wanted to get butts and seats, you'd focus on the kids throwing it like making themselves throw up just so they can skip. So I, I don't get that
why protest? It, it seems to me more you just don't want people speaking against you. Uh, also lowering the committee of 17 to 5. Just seems kind of like a power grab to me, because, well, it's 17 people from diverse backgrounds, which promotes debate and discussion, and it does make the decision making process slower, yes, but it makes the decisions they come to in the end better and more fair when you make it 5 appointees, it just seems like these are 5 people that the governor puts up and they're in the pocket of the
governor and in the pocket of whoever may support the governor. And it just, it's, it doesn't seem to benefit the people of the state, it seems to benefit. Other interests and I think that's all I have to say for today. Are the questions from the committee see none.
Thank you for your time. Except to speak against the bill is Kwame Abdul Bay. Are you in the room? Moving on. After that, we have Shay Rafferty. Shay Rafferty?
Speaker 475
8:31:36
Doctor Charity Smith. Doctor Charity Smith. I will apologize. I won't attempt to
pronounce the first name, last name Powell. Mr. Powell If you would please come
introduce yourself for the record and you're recognized to speak for 3 minutes. Hello, my name is like his pal.
Like His
Unverified
8:32:07
I'm representing Flanders Smith University and uh why young Democrats of Arkansas. Uh, greetings, uh, chairperson and members of the committee. Um, I strongly oppose uh SB 246 and HBU 1512. Because they violate free speech. Weakened education and violate the Arkansas Constitution. Uh, supporters argue that these bills promote efficiency and
order, uh, within education, but the Supreme Court of Arkansas and or the Supreme Court itself and the Supreme Court of Arkansas have already ruled this unconstitutional, uh, as stated. In our Constitution that the state has an absolute duty or absolute constitutional duty to provide adequate and substantial or substantially equal education to all public school students, the failure to do so cannot be justified by fiscal constraints or policy preferences. SB.
SB 246 eliminates the traveling teachers program that ensures rural students can take advanced courses, uh. And that that's covered in section uh section 7. But in Dupree versus Alma School District back in 198083, the Arkansas Supreme Court ruled that the system's fundamental flaw is that the quality of a child's education remains largely a functional of the wealth of the district in which he or she resides. This results
in an unequal education system that violates the Arkansas Constitution. Therefore, creating a system where rural students lose opportunities solely based on zip code by eliminating state programs that equalize access to teachers, coursework, and college preparation. And this this report disproportionately harms rural school districts, therefore it violates the state law. And it removes steak It moves the smart core incentives which discourage
students from taking college prep coursework. Hm And in section 10, The smart uh that which is the appeal of the Smart core program, uh, It does, it doesn't make sense to me because in Lakeview versus Huckabee back in 2002, the court ruled that The state has an absolute constitutional duty to provide adequate and substantially equal education to all public school students. This duty is
affirmative and the state may not passively observe disparities, but my take active steps to correct them. Eliminating rigorous cork work defies this ruling completely. We're not taking active steps against the asperities we're just allowing them to happen and widening them. Mr. Powell, thank you for your time. Your 3 minutes is up. Is there any questions for Mr. Powell? Seena, we
appreciate your time. Next up, speaking against the bill is Hank Skolnick, Hankering in the room. If you would please
introduce yourself for the record. You recognize for 3 minutes. Hell, thanks
Hank Skolnick
Unverified
8:35:34
for allowing me time to come back to speak to you this afternoon. My name is Hank Skolnick. I'm a proud Arkansas City, Arkansas citizen and resident of Fay Fayetteville and proud alumni of Arkansas State. Congrats to our women's team, one in today and a big game for the men here about to start soon. Um, I'm returning from a very educational
experience in Selma, Alabama this past weekend that marked the 60th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the anniversary occurred Friday, an anniversary, and we crossed the daring Edmund Bridge this past Sunday, yesterday. I'm here because of the importance of this movement on me and others, and similar actions taken by students specifically around the United States. As I'd like to share this beautiful and incredibly educational experience. I'm here because these are the movements that this bill is trying to stop. John Lewis and many marchers were students at this time, and these students changed this country. Just like the students of Little
Rock Central High School. I want to ask the question, if the same 9 students of the great Daisy Bates and school desegregation movement would have been given truancy and punished for their actions on September 4th and September 23rd of 1957. We're even sending Statues and building murals outside our doors of the Little Rock Nine movement while we passed legislation today that's against everything that they fought for. We're finding ways to address school issues in the state, and I think that is great, expanding classes and
access is needed to fix the issues with the state education divide is real and it's still happening. This is all without mentioning private school cushions that we provide. Little Rock Central was not desegregated. It was shut down for a year like the rest of the city schools in 1958. That year, these white students were able to enroll in private institutions with no oversight of racist practices or separation, coupled with white flight, redlining in modern highway systems. These affect actions today. We see schools in the inner city like Little Rock having problems. Seemingly overnight previous schools like Little Rock Central had their
student body demographic demographics slipped on its head, not even split, but in 2025, we provide the same affluent students of private schools with freedom of choice, vouchers, and still in this bill rack regulation and oversight. But still receive funding from the government. I asked representatives not to be fooled by the Veterans Awards and increased scholarships, and I also don't be fooled by 125 page bill because 120 pages of 2024 pages of greatness can be covered. Can be a cover for a small
paragraph of darkness. With that being said, I heard a quote this weekend that said, Jim Crow might be dead, but he has nieces and nephews everywhere, and I want to state that this bill right now in its form is one of his nephews. Thank you. Thank you for your time or the
questions from the committee. See you none. We have one additional person signed up
to speak against the bill, Mr. Bikowsky. If you would please introduce
Bill Cosky
Unverified
8:38:31
yourself for the record and you're recognized for 3 minutes. Thank you, Mr. Chair and committee. My name is Bill Cosky. I'm the director of the Arkansas Public Policy Panel. It's a behemoth bill and there's a lot to say about it, uh, more than 3 minutes would allow. I might send some of your comments in writing, which I'm sure you'll read in great detail, but I'll send them anyway. Um, I think the section that's most pertinent for me to focus on is the, uh, our concerns about the anti-DEI provisions. Our organization was founded in 1963
by mothers of school children working on desegregation and diversity, equity and inclusion across Arkansas based on race, religion, and. gender long, long before it was cool. Our founding mothers uh faced, uh, physical threats and other harassment for simply saying that our diverse communities have common humanity and values that far exceeded our differences and that we collectively as Arkansans have a moral obligation to create equitable opportunities for all
Arkansans. They had to do this because of rampant school segregation that continued decades after Brown v. Board and because our communities were isolated from one another to the detriment of us all. The definition of DEI in the bill is far too vague and will chill essential education and dialogue about hard facts of our past and present. Will the bill limit educators' ability to teach facts about historic biased treatment of minorities, facts such as limitations on the right to vote for people of color, people in poverty, and women, banning
people of color from receiving home loans through government-mandated redlining programs, school segregation and hundreds of other examples like these. These facts are not woke opinions, they are historical facts that created today's gaps in income, health, education, and nearly every other quality of life me. that we have in Arkansas. The prohibition in Section 48 of teaching someone that by virtue of their race, to paraphrase that they're somehow inherently responsible for actions committed by other members of
the same race shows a fundamental and disturbing misunderstanding of what DEI is. The bill goes to even the extreme length of banning the collection of DEI data on differences of outcomes, presumably on any program. This is extremely harmful. 15% of our Kansans taxpayers are black, 7% are Latino, slightly more than half are women. If our state funded institutions do not have that level of representation in their bodies, that is a problem, and we should know about it. We should be able
to collect data on that problem, explore solutions to it, and we should do the same when we see large differences in quality of life outcomes for demographic subgroups of any Arkansans. The point of learning about historic and present day institutional inequality is not about making one feel responsible for the actions of others, or really any feeling at all. It's not about your feelings. The point is that regardless of how inequalities come to be, we collectively, you and us have a moral obligation to solve them.
The facts and legacy of 3 minutes I finish one sentence, please your last sentence, please. Thank you. The facts and legacy of our institutional bias in Arkansas may be inconvenient or uncomfortable, but it's also undeniable that we have a moral and obligation, uh, moral and ethical obligation to solve them. We can only do that by facing them head on. Thank you for your comments or the questions
from Mr. Kovsky. CNN, we appreciate your time. Thank
you. Remembers, that concludes all of the public comments on the two bills.
Unknown speaker
8:42:06
We will now recognize senator dismaying and Representative Shepard to close for the bill.
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
8:42:43
Uh, thank you, members, uh, for your attention today and also thank you to all those that have taken the time out of the today to participate in the discussion. Um, I will say that even in our discussion that we had, uh, I mean, I think we were all, we all learned something. I think that was the result of the amendment that you had ultimately in front of you, um, you know,
I'm, I'm proud of the process. I think it's helpful and and ultimately I think we have a better bill. Then I'll turn it
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
8:43:09
over. No, just, uh, likewise appreciate the committee's attention and uh.
Devoting this, this devoting most of the day to this and appreciate those that have shown up to speak on the bill, uh, you know, I think this has been a productive process. We feel like we have a good bill, uh, that is going to advance, uh, higher education and education as a whole in the state of Arkansas and we'd certainly appreciate a good vote. Center dismaying has closed for
SB 246 represent Shepherd has closed for HB 1512. What is the will of the committee? We have a motion do pass on the
Senate side as amended from Senator Davis with a 2nd from Senator Dotson. Is there
a discussion on the motion? Senator Murdock, you're recognized for discussion.
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
8:43:59
Thank you, chair. um. Obviously, uh, let me appreciate. The work, the good work that has happened inside of this piece of this huge piece of legislation that has Many good parts that will help us in Arkansas, but again,
There are parts in this bill. As is written, that does not allow me to support it for the people I represent. Because the parts that is not good is most egregious. And it tears away at the very core. Of our being. Of Being a part Of a process. Uh, being included, even when it's good. Some of the good stuff, even the good things that are in this bill.
Still being included in the process. The core fundamentals of What we should be as a body, in my opinion. is different than what we're doing. And it's shown throughout. The um passage of legislation. Um, respectfully to everyone. Here that has been elected by those that have elected them. Um, in this state.
It is hard to fathom and understand. Um How we get where we are. I can't support the bill because of the things, like I said, that are so egregious to the very core and rights that we should have. Uh, to speak. And for the students that have came today and articulated it so well. What does it mean to them? And when you look at the other side of the thinking on this philosophy that we have.
For specifically a couple of the sections of the bill. It is a shame that we have those sections in a bill that has such good things in it that we have those, these things that we have to take on that are so bad. But if you listen And make some critical amendments. I still think that this could be a great piece of legislation. If you're willing to do that in here and it still progresses, or you could not hear. Because obviously you have the numbers. My good friend Dotson made it in time. So it will do what it will do.
But, um, prayerfully, I hope that what has been said. If it don't happen today, young people that have spoken. It shall resonate one day. Over time And it will make the difference that you intend for it to make. We may not win the vote today. But the battle rages on and do not stop your voice. All I have and we have right now is our voice. I can't support it as it is. Thank you.
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
8:47:02
Senator Sullivan, you're recognized. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And again, I recognize and appreciate this is the process. For one to say in uh respectfully my colleague, uh, we've talked on several occasions in development of bills and you've developed them privately and I've developed them privately. This is the forum where people are allowed to speak. This is a development, I think it's very clear when the amendment was made today, uh,
based upon comments that were made by the public. So I think this is the process we were elected to represent the people. And I don't know how the vote will turn out on the Senate side or the House side, but again, I would argue this is the process. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Sullivan,
seeing no additional discussion. This will be for Senate Bill 246, all in favor say aye. All opposed. The bill is passed.
Chair
Unverified
8:48:03
I recognized representative McKenzie for motion. I make a
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
8:48:19
motion do pass as amended on the House Bill
1512. Represent McKenzie has made a motion to pass, uh, McKenzie.
Speaker 192
8:48:36
Grab that motion. You recognize. I make a motion do pass
Chair
Unverified
8:48:42
on SB 246 as amended. Represent McKenzie has
made a motion to pass as amended for SB 246 for us on the house side. And Representative Garner, you're recognized for discussion on that motion. I'm sorry. You're recognized for discussion. Did you have a discussion on the motion? Yes, thank you.
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
8:49:00
Um, yes, I too want to say thank you for listening
and um working through some of the process. I do still have some concerns about the bill and I just would like for you to hear
them, um, the bill absolutely reduces stakeholder involvement, and I do think we make better decisions when we have diversity at the table, when we have everyone involved in those issues at the table. And I've spent my life doing that, um, you know, we don't, we're limiting potentially limiting, educator, administrator, parent, student
input and shaping education policy, which may not reflect the needs of each community. The other thing is the switch from AP emphasis to accelerated learning. It seems to lack
a clear accountability measures so that for me it raises concerns about raising the high academic standards when we don't have a framework to do that. And then the bill also fails to establish a transparent formula
and determining the ROI on higher ed funding. Leaving again, no framework for measuring student outcomes, workforce readiness, or economic impact. And to me, that's too many questions that are left up to the rules process for me to support the bill, but I appreciate your work on it and uh I hope in the future we can work on more things together, but I do think that the more people we have working on the front end is much better and we'll have a better product at
the end. Thank you for that reason, I'm a no on
Speaker 645
8:50:47
this bill. Represent recruiter, you're recognized for discussion on the motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified
8:50:53
want to thank all of the uh Work that was Brought about to get us to this point, um, Senate side and the House side, it's a tremendous amount of work that took place. Also want to thank all of the students that uh took their time to show up here. I think, uh, out of all the people that spoke, we
Had 90% spoke against the bill. Which raises some concerns, uh, my concerns are, uh, We, the rules because we don't know what merit and distinction is as far as uh people graduating from high school, uh, I, I also, uh, have some concerns about uh the college students, uh, who are, uh, protesting. I'm wondering if we're going to amend that section, uh, but I do know from experience myself, uh, We hear about legislators,
especially low-income communities, but the ability to come over here and see us at work. It actually inspires people to come over here and do this job. Uh, somebody may want to come over here and be a press secretary. Somebody may want to come be a lobbyist, so there's so many things that occur over here and I think it matters that people come over here and see what we do, uh, especially, uh, from low lower serve communities, so uh, I, I just wish that we didn't remove the stakeholders because those people in low income communities Uh, that their voice needs to be
heard. We don't understand their perspective because we haven't lived their lives. All of us walk in different, different lives, different paths. So I think their voice needs to be heard. So, uh, I love the work that was put into it. There, there are some good things in this bill, but I, I, I wish we could all sit down at the table and discuss coming from different perspectives cause in a delta, it's totally different from here in uh Little Rock. Uh, we've never had students, uh, come out and protest. We've never had students walk out of the classroom, but I know for myself when I I was a teacher teaching
history, uh, Trayvon Martin incident occurred. We had a courtroom in my class and we and we discussed that issue. And when we discussed that issue, I was the judge and the students did such a good job that the officer got off just like it happened in real life. But we need to expose students to different things, different perspectives so they can get a better understanding of how the process works in all walks of life. So for that reason, I can't support this bill because I don't think we have enough stakeholders at the table, but I do Appreciate the time that you put into this.
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
8:53:16
Representative Kozar you recognized for discussion? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair and committee members, I, I want to just express that I believe that this bill has been worked real hard. These two gentlemen are sitting out there in front of you today, have, have worked hard and tirelessly on this bill for, you know, they could have just sat back and done nothing and would not have had all the time that it took them to do this, and they're doing it, they're still here today, we, along with us, they've worked hard, they've done a lot of changing, they've heard what we have had to say and if you
didn't get with them and say what you want. wanted to hear or what you wanted to see in this, then that's your own fault. It's not our fault. That's that's not their fault. We, we've all talked to him. Uh, they've came back today, make amendments on this bill for what they've heard here I believe they heard the students in the early part about the things they want to hear. They came back and made an amendment, um, we, we heard a lot of students talk today. I, I am glad to hear them, you know, I told him this morning, that's what we want to hear if you want, if you wanna come back and
speak this afternoon and we heard the student. We've heard what they are and what they said and I have no problem with what they said. They said what they believed in their hearts, you know, I like the bill. I like the changes that's been made. I think it's, it's a good, uh, compromise that we made today, and I will be voting for this bill. Representative Gonzalezor
than you recognize for comment. Yes, I
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
8:54:42
wanna thank you for all of your hard work, um, as well,
and also the students and the audience that testified, um, you were very inspiring and I also, it kind of makes me think about um when this was all being put together. I know this is hours upon hours of work, but how we might could have been involved with some of that, maybe there wouldn't be, um, maybe there would be a little more clarity, um, with some of these areas, um, such as, uh, the productivity-based funding
model. Not quite sure exactly how that's gonna be, uh, determined, um, I mentioned earlier about teacher opportunity program and um and then I'm still a little bit, um, on the side of not quite understanding how apprenticeship programs. may be in there and I, I think it's just clarity, uh, again, um, I still have, um, um, assistant professors, associate professors, um, that are a little bit, um, hesitant in
terms of what this is gonna do to their future related to the DEI initiative, those, those pieces in terms of research, publications, um, and so, um, and then the mental health aspect of. the Arkansas Heroes, uh, scholarship program. So, There are a lot of wonderful pieces to this, but I think for me, I would just like a little bit more clarity um on it so
that we understand exactly, um, what each of those areas, plus some other areas that were mentioned today. So I will vote no, mainly because I would like to have more clarity. Thank you. Thank you, Representative. We have
a motion on the table of do pass as amended for SB 246 on the house side, all in favor of CI. All opposed. Congratulations, your bill is passed. Representative McKenzie, you're recognized for emotion?
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
8:56:50
Megamotion do pass as a minute on House
Bill 1512. We have a motion on the table of do pass as admitted for House Bill 1512. Is there any discussion on that motion? Seeing none all in favor sayI all opposed. Congratulations. House Bill 1512 has passed. We have a motion on the Senate side. We have a motion from rep uh from Senator Davis Du pass as a minute for House Bill 1512 with a second from Senator Dodson. Is there any discussion on that motion, seeing none, I don't know if I ever say aye. All opposed
Congratulations, House Bill 1512 has passed as amended, as well as Senate Bill 246 as amended. Members, uh, thank you for your time, uh, Senator and Representative, and thank you for those who came to speak on the bills. Uh, now we will, uh, take up two additional pieces of legislation from Representative Lundstrom. Uh, for a couple of the lottery bills we have House Bill 1446, I believe Re Lundstrom is. Over here you're recognized, if you would please introduce
yourself for the record that you're recognized to present. HB 1446.
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
8:58:38
Representative Lunstrom, you're recognized. Yeah. Thank you, colleagues. I'll make this quick, um. First of all, I'd like to say thank you to all of you for being here all day today and taking care of this important bill, and I appreciate the sponsors for taking such important time to deal with the vote tech issue. I think that's something that needs to be said. So thank you. HB 1446 is picking up ninth graders in concurrent scholarship. That's all it is. It allows them to go ahead and start taking the courses. There
are a few out there that would like to go ahead and start and be challenged, and this allows that with that, I'll entertain any questions. Are the questions from the committee for Representative
Lungstrom. See, no questions. Would you like to close for your bill? I think between me and dinner,
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
8:59:26
I think I'll just close and get out of here. There is no public comment
on this. Representative Longstream is closed for a bill. We have a motion to pass on the table. All in if I say aye. Uh, I'll post. Mm
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
8:59:45
We did have comments. We do have comments. Uh, Mr. Warden wants me to check the number in 1446 or 1441. I want to make sure we
get 1451, excuse me, that's the 9th grade concurrence. So he is
apologies. So, uh, I would like to have a motion to expunge the vote by which this pacifist representative all in favor, say I have the on paper, say I have the motion to expunge the vote. I posed The vote has been expunged, so now
we'll take a step back and representative. Well stream, you're recognized
to present HB 1451. Ditto to what I said last
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
9:00:20
time, and I would definitely appreciate a good vote. Thank you. We have a
motion to pass on the ditto on HB 1451, any discussion on the motion, seeing none, all in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations is passed. We have a motion on the Senate from Senator Davis for motion to pass and a second all in favor say aye. All opposed. Congratulations, you've passed your bill. Thank you. Thank you for your time.
Unknown speaker
9:00:47
Seeing no additional business, joint education will stand adjourned.
Agenda
SPECIAL ORDER OF BUSINESS
SB246 J. Dismang TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE AS THEY RELATE TO EDUCATION IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
HB1512 M. Shepherd TO CREATE THE ARKANSAS ACCESS ACT; AND TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS CODE AS THEY RELATE TO EDUCATION IN THE STATE OF ARKANSAS.
REGULAR AGENDA
SB216 J. Dotson TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS.
HB1446 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS WORKFORCE CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
HB1451 Lundstrum TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF A STUDENT UNDER THE ARKANSAS CONCURRENT CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.
HB1480 Andrews TO AMEND THE ARKANSAS ACADEMIC CHALLENGE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM; AND TO AMEND THE DEFINITION OF "APPROVED INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION".
SB243 Hickey TO AMEND THE LAW REGARDING LOTTERY-FUNDED SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAMS.
SB232 Hickey TO AMEND VARIOUS PROVISIONS OF THE ARKANSAS SCHOLARSHIP LOTTERY ACT; AND TO DECLARE AN EMERGENCY.
Documents
| Title | Type | Pages | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agenda — EDUCATION COMMITTEE - SENATE AND HOUSE MEETING JOINTLY WITH ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION, Mar 10, 2025 | Agenda | 1 | Official source ↗ |
Speakers
Representative Keith Brooks Chair
Unverified
Representative Bruce Cozart
Unverified
Speaker 16
Speaker 18
Speaker 19
Speaker 23
Speaker 26
Senator Jonathan Dismang
Unverified
Representative Matthew J. Shepherd
Unverified
Speaker 45
Representative DeAnn Vaught
Unverified
Speaker 44
Speaker 67
Speaker 68
Speaker 72
Senator Stephanie Flowers
Unverified
Speaker 91
Speaker 93
Speaker 104
Representative Steven Walker
Unverified
Speaker 116
Representative Julie Mayberry
Unverified
Speaker 127
Julia Taylor
Unverified
Representative Hope Duke
Unverified
Speaker 165
Speaker 171
Senator Dan Sullivan
Unverified
Speaker 192
Representative Denise Garner
Unverified
Speaker 65
Speaker 134
Speaker 235
Representative Lincoln Barnett
Unverified
Speaker 242
Chair
Unverified
Speaker 164
Speaker 96
Representative Matt Brown
Unverified
Speaker 312
Senator Reginald Murdock
Unverified
Speaker 336
Speaker 337
Speaker 353
Representative Justin Gonzales
Unverified
Speaker 263
Speaker 389
Speaker 390
Speaker 289
Representative Jason Nazarenko
Unverified
Speaker 75
Speaker 401
Speaker 413
Representative Robin Lundstrum
Unverified
Senator Jim Dotson
Unverified
Speaker 232
Speaker 435
Brad Bartels
Unverified
Representative Brit McKenzie
Unverified
Speaker 451
Representative Stephen Meeks
Unverified
Speaker 447
Senator Kim Hammer
Unverified
Timothy Ray
Unverified
Michael Reed
Unverified
Michael Brickman
Unverified
Speaker 468
Speaker 332
Ava Kate
Unverified
Mira Crane
Unverified
Speaker 481
Speaker 482
Waylon Matthews
Unverified
Speaker 472
Andrew Saina
Unverified
Olivia Bauer
Unverified
Speaker 560
Speaker 562
Speaker 553
Zaid Kelly
Unverified
Emily Temple
Unverified
John Guerrero
Unverified
Benjamin Grisham
Unverified
Speaker 583
Speaker 250
Josh Silverstein
Unverified
Ron Kuda
Unverified
Adam Shaver
Unverified
Speaker 598
Speaker 601
Jordan Barnett
Unverified
Speaker 604
Max Wiggins
Unverified
Speaker 607
Speaker 608
Speaker 609
Speaker 262
Addison Grace
Unverified
Ieva Mclennan
Unverified
Speaker 614
Speaker 616
James Bradford
Unverified
Tyson Thompson
Unverified
Chloe Washington
Unverified
Speaker 623
Speaker 621
Annabel Miller
Unverified
Speaker 475
Stephanieel Giblin
Unverified
Mick Klein
Unverified
Like His
Unverified
Hank Skolnick
Unverified
Bill Cosky
Unverified
Speaker 645
Representative Jessie McGruder
Unverified