Vic’s Statehouse Notes #170 – January 31, 2014

Dear Friends,

Your messages in opposition to SB 322 had a positive impact on Wednesday. The Senate Education Committee deleted the outrageous section of SB 322 that would have allowed voucher schools to ignore both ISTEP and the A-F school letter grade system.

What was left of the bill passed on a party line vote, prompting the need for more messages to kill the bill on the floor of the Senate early next week. We can be happy, however, that the effort to let voucher schools off the hook on ISTEP accountability and school letter grades has failed for now.

Public school advocates are incredulous they even tried.

Senate Bill 322

I couldn’t resist the urge to give you all the details on this one. The story is too rich for a brief summary, including a twist that I have never before observed on a bill in committee.

Senate Bill 322, clearly a key bill to ease the path for private schools in becoming eligible for vouchers and to further privatize the schools of Indiana, was scheduled as the last bill in an overcrowded agenda of eleven bills. I have no doubt this scheduling was by design. Few can stay to the end of long meetings to testify against such things. This meeting lasted over five hours, beginning at 1:30pm and adjourning at 6:45pm. Chairman Kruse was finally ready for SB 322 at 6:20pm.

Senator Schneider, the bill’s sponsor, offered an amendment to make the bill apply only to schools already eligible for vouchers on January 1, 2014, saying this would stop any new fiscal costs. The amendment was approved by consent.

Then he offered a second amendment which was more complex and was not distributed to the audience. Under this amendment, the line saying that voucher schools were not required to do IDOE paperwork would apply to voucher schools that are accredited by agencies other than the state. If they were state accredited they would continue to respond to all requirements. He said reporting requirements have become “onerous” and that some voucher schools have had to hire help to complete the reports. The amendment was approved by a vote of 9-3.

Then Senator Kenley asked about the lines changing the requirement of ISTEP, asking if we don’t need to give everybody the same test. Senator Schneider had not mentioned this key element about testing as he introduced the bill.

Senator Schneider described how the state dictates to eligible voucher schools through the assessment process. By requiring ISTEP, he said, the state can dictate the standards and the curriculum. He said voucher schools have now learned this with the introduction of the Common Core. He said that Florida allows an alternative test in their voucher program as proposed in this bill.

Florida. Once again, Florida is held up as a model for Indiana.

Other committee members weren’t buying his argument. Senator Broden asked why not “let all schools have an alternative test.”? Senator Schneider said that would be the basis for a good discussion, hinting that he is ready to question ISTEP accountability for all schools. He said that “standards change” but tests should “not change.” He said if it is a quality alternative assessment and students are “proving proficient” on it, “it should be OK with the state of Indiana.”

Think about that one.

Senator Rogers said that taking the same test would help students. Senator Leising questioned whether we could still grade schools if the school didn’t take ISTEP. By this time, several side consultations we going on among Senators. After a consultation between Senator Schneider and Chairman Kruse, Senator Schneider announced he had brought along a third amendment which deleted all references to substituting an alternative test for ISTEP. Other Senators of both parties looked relieved that he was giving up on his quest to allow voucher schools to ignore accountability on ISTEP, and they quickly agreed by consent to his amendment to “remove the testing component”.

Then something happened that I have never seen in my eighteen years of watching the General Assembly. Listen to this one:

Chairman Kruse announced that it was so late that members of the committee had to leave, so he would call for the vote now before they left and then he would stay to listen to anyone who came to testify.

I thought to myself that the drive to pass this bill certainly seemed strong, testimony or no testimony.

His announcement met with enough grumbling from committee members and a general buzz in the room that he changed his mind slightly and said that we would have one person testify on each side of the issue before the vote, with testimony to be limited to two minutes. He then called on the attorney that had apparently inspired Senator Schneider to introduce the bill who held up and described onerous paperwork that his client schools had do for the English Language Learner (ELL) program. He described long applications and data collection requirements that he believed were unfair to the voucher schools. He had far more than two minutes to say, and when he talked through Chairman Kruse’s request to conclude and was still going strong, Chairman Kruse gestured to me from the podium while the testimony continued to come forward to speak against the bill.

When my predecessor decided to relinquish the podium, I first thanked Senator Schneider for amending the bill to delete the section allowing voucher schools to ignore ISTEP. I said there is absolutely no need to pass the rest of the bill, because paperwork is inevitable if voucher schools take state money for programs like ELL, and taxpayer accountability requires that they fill out the forms needed. I said if they don’t feel like doing the paperwork, they should not apply to be an eligible voucher school. They should not be given the right to ignore needed reports via this bill.

My written testimony on the original bill which included secession from ISTEP is attached.

Chairman Kruse then called for the vote. All eight Republicans were still present and all voted “Yes.” Three Democrats were still present and all voted “No.” The bill passed 8-3.

Then as Senators on the committee left, others who had signed up to testify were called. The first three said they supported the bill without further comment. Then seven were called who had signed up in opposition to the bill: Chuck Little of the Indiana Urban Schools Association, Joel Hand of the Indiana Coalition for Public Education, Sally Sloan of the American Federation of Teachers-Indiana, Roni Embry of the Indiana State Teachers Association, Todd Bess of the Indiana Association of School Principals, Scott Tourney of the Small and Rural Schools Association and J.T. Coopman of the Indiana Association of Public School Superintendents. All who stayed to the end should be commended for sitting through over five hours of the meeting only to be told the vote would be taken before the testimony.

After listening to the hearing, it seems clear that the proposal to drop ISTEP was prompted by private schools that didn’t want the Common Core to influence them via ISTEP. Secession from ISTEP was not received well by the committee. What is left in SB 322 resulted from two schools hiring a lawyer because they thought that the IDOE was giving them too much ELL paperwork. There is already language in Indiana law, added in the 2011 voucher law by a 2011 amendment from Senator Schneider, which says: (IC 20-51-4-1)

the creation of the choice scholarship program does not expand the regulatory authority of the state, the state's officers, or a school corporation to impose additional regulation of nonpublic schools beyond those necessary to enforce the requirements of the choice scholarship program in place on July1, 2011

Apparently the schools and their lawyer decided it would be cheaper and easier to solve their paperwork problem by passing a new state law than by filing suit.

Why can’t public schools have that kind of access to power in the legislature?

Senate Bill 282

The other voucher bill, SB 282, was taken up next to last, about 6:10pm. Senator Eckerty, the sponsor, said it simply reflected current practice. Chuck Little and I testified that it therefore wasn’t needed. Joel Hand, lobbyist for ICPE, testified that the Attorney General’s opinion issued last summer did not recommend any change in state law. All three of us said that if voucher schools are going to take money for special education students, they should comply with facility standards for the disabled under the Americans for Disabilities Act, as all public schools must do.
 
The bill passed 7-4, with seven Republicans voting “Yes” and four Democrats voting “No”.

Next Steps

Both SB 322 and SB 282 will be going to the Senate floor on Monday for second reading and then third reading the next day. Public school advocates should continue to send notes of opposition. While SB 322 has been defanged, it could remain a vehicle for other voucher amendments in the House. The secession from ISTEP concept could be added back into the bill at any time.

I urge your continued messages of opposition to both bills.

Thanks for reading to the end, and thanks for your active support of public education!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #169 – January 28, 2014

Dear Friends,

For your immediate attention tonight and tomorrow:

Two voucher expansion bills have been scheduled for hearings tomorrow that deserve your immediate action tonight to contact members of the Senate Education Committee:

Senate Bill 322, scheduled for a hearing Wednesday, Jan. 29th at 1:30pm, would make it easier to become a voucher school by removing the requirement to give ISTEP. The bill would allow private schools to be eligible for the voucher program if they administer “a nationally norm-referenced test approved by the state board.”

By removing the ISTEP requirement, these private voucher schools would no longer receive school letter grades. Current voucher schools would be allowed to stop taking ISTEP and to stop getting a school letter grade while retaining their eligibility for voucher money. This is a giant step backward on accountability in the voucher program and would be completely unfair to all other schools who must take ISTEP.

Senate Bill 282, scheduled for the same Wednesday hearing at 1:30pm, is simply not necessary. It rewrites law to restate current practice with vouchers for special education students. A dispute over the rules for special education vouchers last summer prompted an Attorney General’s ruling that special education students under current language could get a voucher at a private school and then could opt to have special education services provided either at the private school or at the local public school.

This bill confirms current practice, so there is no need for the bill, but since voucher proponents want to reopen the issue, we should require private schools who want to enroll special education students to meet the building standards of the Americans for Disability Act, as all public schools must do. Private schools should not get tax dollars to serve the special education population if they are not equipped to help all handicapped students.

These bills are part of the never-ending march led by Gov. Pence, Speaker Bosma and President Pro Tempore Long to expand vouchers and to privatize public education.

The Senate Education and Career Development Committee will hear these and other bills at 1:30pm tomorrow, Wednesday, January 29th in the Senate Chamber.

Before then, I hope all who support public education and oppose any further expansion of vouchers will contact members of the Senate Education Committee with a clear message:

Reject Senate Bills 322 and 282.

Senate Bill 322

As Indiana jettisons a flawed A-F system that failed because it was rooted in norm-referenced measures, this bill sponsored by Senator Schneider and Senator Banks comes along to claim that accountability using a “nationally norm-referenced test” is just fine. Indiana stopped using norm-referenced tests for accountability purposes over a decade ago. The thought that voucher schools could take state money for private school tuition but not be held accountable on ISTEP tests should outrage every taxpayer.

Some private schools don’t like ISTEP because it may potentially be linked with the Common Core, and they oppose the Common Core. However the battle over the Common Core comes out, ISTEP is Indiana’s test based on the standards approved by the State Board. There should be no other measuring stick for accountability in Indiana. Allowing voucher schools to substitute the Iowa Test of Basic Skills for ISTEP is totally inappropriate and unfair to all other schools in the competitive marketplace of schools that Indiana has created.

The bill adds the following line: “The department (1) may not require an eligible school to report any information that is not necessary to carry out this chapter; and (2) shall reduce undue reporting burdens on eligible schools.” The key questions here are: Who decides what information is “necessary”? And who decides what is “undue”? If private schools are taking tax money, they should provide information as needed to show accountability for the public money. If they ever thought public money would come with absolutely no strings attached, they did not understand that taxpayers need to know that their tax money is being spent appropriately.

This bill should be rejected. We must maintain accountability through ISTEP for all voucher schools. If the Senate has lost faith in ISTEP, then all schools should be allowed to use an alternative test.

Senate Bill 282

Last summer’s argument over special education vouchers ended with a clear statement from the Attorney General about how the law should be interpreted. SB 282 sponsored by Senator Eckerty simply reflects that interpretation, so the bill is not necessary. It does raise the question, though, about how private schools can be allowed to get full tuition plus special education funds for disabled students without having a facility that complies with the Americans for Disability Act.

In 2011, the House passed the historic voucher bill with a provision that private schools must comply with ADA facility standards in order get voucher money. Several members of the House said how important that point was to them in voting for the bill. Then in the Senate, the ADA facility requirement was dropped and disappeared.

It makes no sense that private schools are serving disabled students, taking the state’s foundation money plus the special education grant, when the private school facilities do not meet the ADA standards that every public school has to meet.

This bill should be rejected. It is not needed. It describes what is already in the rules. It fails to require that schools serving disabled students comply with the ADA facility standards, just as House members voted in 2011.

Please contact members of the Senate Education Committee and other Senators as soon as possible. Of course, if you read this after tomorrow’s hearing, it would still help if they know of your opposition to SB 322 and SB 282 in the days ahead.

Thank you for your support of public education and your opposition to voucher expansion!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #168 – January 27, 2014

Dear Friends,

I am happy to report that I believe your notes and emails last night and this morning on House Bill 1320 made a difference. In the House Education Committee meeting this morning, Chairman Behning opened up discussion of his bill by saying that what he meant all along would be that the Indiana Department of Education would improve access to student records, not the State Board of Education. He offered an amendment to HB 1320 that took out every reference to “State Board” actions and replaced each reference with “Indiana Department of Education.” His amendment was approved.

Then at the end of the testimony, Chairman Behning held the bill and did not take a vote.

His actions this morning have at least for now taken student test records out of the center of a potential conflict between the Indiana Department of Education controlled by State Superintendent Ritz and the State Board of Education controlled by Governor Pence.

I want to thank all those who sent last minute messages to legislators on HB 1320.

Access to Student Records

What is left in HB 1320 is an effort to improve access to student records to help parents and to help schools that need the records of transfer students. No one appeared this morning to support that concept or to explain why what we are doing now is inadequate. For the $3.7 million dollar price tag, legislators need to know that this is a high priority, so that they might support the expenditure of that much money when they have found no money for several years to support teacher professional development.

Even the Senator Ford Technology Fund which provides money in the state budget to schools statewide for much-needed technology and computer upgrades is funded at only $3.1 million each year. The General Assembly for reasons hard to understand in this age of technology has actually reduced technology funding for several budgets in a row.

Chairman Behning also added Rep. Thompson’s bill on data security to HB 1320. That amendment was taken by consent.

The future of HB 1320 needs to be tracked. At least for now, student data records are not the center of a dispute over the authority of the Indiana Department of Education. That is definitely good news.

Thank you for your messages to legislators in support of wise policies and strong public education!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #167 – January 26, 2014

Dear Friends,

This deserves your immediate attention and action tonight to contact members of the House Education Committee:

House Bill 1320, scheduled for a hearing tomorrow (Monday, Jan. 27th) at 8:30 am, would put control of a new system to expand access to student records in the hands of the State Board, not the Indiana Department of Education. For the first time, it would make the State Board an administrative agency, replacing student data functions that have always been controlled by the Indiana Department of Education. The expanded data access through this data warehouse will cost $3.7 as projected by the non-partisan Legislative Services Agency, requiring an independent computer staff for the State Board with a new stand alone computer system. The duplication of services is obvious.

The $3.7 million price tag is more than the current entire annual budget for the State Board of $3 million.

This is a major salvo in the battle to move functions out of the Indiana Department of Education under the control of State Superintendent Ritz and into the domain of the State Board controlled by Governor Pence.

Rep. Behning has scheduled House Bill 1320 for a hearing on Monday Jan. 27th at 8:30 am in the House Education Committee in Room 156-C.

Before that time, I hope all who believe that student data is too sensitive and too important to become a political football in the Governor’s power grab will contact members of the House Education Committee with a simple message: Withdraw or defeat HB 1320.

Expanded Access

The bill purports to improve parent access to student data and to help transfer data among schools. If that is truly a bigger priority problem in a state that has no money for teacher professional development or for preschool, lawmakers could give the $3.7 million for computer work required by this bill to the Indiana Department of Education, the current trustee of student records.

This bill doesn’t do that. It gives the authority and the resources to the State Board, a policy making board that now for the first time would become an administrative agency with complete control over student records. This would be a monumental shift in authority and makes the bill a power grab to boost the control of the State Board over the IDOE.

This would be the first time that the Indiana General Assembly has assigned an administrative function to the State Board. The State Board is authorized by law as a policy board. It is hard to believe that the General Assembly really wants to make the State Board an administrative agency as well, setting up total confusion about the administrative roles of IDOE in relation to the State Board.

The Risk of HB1320

In this proposed bill, Rep. Behning and the Governor are playing with fire. If the parents and teachers of Indiana’s students come to believe for one minute that student test data are being used as a wedge in a political dispute between Governor Pence and State Superintendent Ritz, the trust built up over two decades that student data is being handled impartially and appropriately could vanish overnight. If parents sense that the data of their students are being used for political purposes, they may well demand that any test results be given only to them and for use by their local school, and not for state use. Such a step would collapse the entire accountability movement that this General Assembly has slowly built since the A+ program of 1987.

There must be no hint of political maneuvering related to student test data. This bill has politics written all over it and must be turned down by this committee.

There is no reason to involve any agency other than the Indiana Department of Education in student records. IDOE’s work in handling student data has been accurate and above reproach. Any claim to the contrary has been made for political purposes to support a takeover of data by the Center for Education and Career Innovation, to further undermine the authority of Superintendent Ritz. This bill puts at risk the faith and trust of parents in state authorities that has taken years to establish.

The Development of Parent Trust in State Records

I am old enough to remember well a time when Indiana did not have a state test. When I began my career in Indiana in the 1960’s, all testing was local testing, and local parents and teachers could assess the progress of their students. There was great mistrust in that era that state test results kept in the Statehouse might be used inappropriately by people that did not have local ties and might not have the best interests of the students in mind. It took years of patient reassurance that the privacy and sanctity of state test scores would be maintained. State tests were introduced in the mid-1980’s and student ID numbers allowing the state to track individual students by number were introduced around 2002, based on the availability of high speed computers. Approval of that step required tremendous trust on the part of parents. This bill could put that trust in jeopardy overnight.

Why does anyone other than IDOE need to supervise student data? They don’t. I have observed over many years that the Indiana Department of Education takes very seriously the trust that is placed in them to maintain the accuracy and the privacy of student data.

Please contact members of the House Education Committee and other House members as soon as possible. Of course, if you read this after tomorrow’s hearing, it would still help if they know of your opposition to HB 1320 in the days ahead.

Student data must not be made part of a political tug-of-war, but this bill does that. HB 1320 is unwise public policy and should be withdrawn or defeated. Let legislators know how you feel about it.

Thank you for your advocacy for wise policies and strong public education!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###

Everything you need to know about Common Core -- Ravitch

From Jerry Ervin, Zone 1, ISTA-R
Subject: Re: Everything you need to know about Common Core -- Ravitch

This came to me by one of our members. This is lengthy but is a good look at the problems created by No Child Left Behind and compounded by Race to the Top and our own Indiana Polititions. Click on the link below and please read.

I'd like to share this with as many as I can. Diane Ravitch has written a couple of books including The Death and Life of the Great American School System [and Reign of Error: The Hoax of the Privatization Movement and the Danger to America's Public Schools]. What staggers my mind is that there are 5 million people who know more about what happens in a classroom than the vast majority of those making decisions about Public Education. I believe it will take decades for our Schools to recover and the decision makers will be rich and gone.

Jerry Ervin Zone 1 ISTA-R

Everything you need to know about Common Core -- Ravitch
By: Valerie Strauss

Diane Ravitch, the education historian who has become the leader of the movement against corporate-influenced school reform, gave this speech to the Modern Language Association on Jan. 11 about the past, present and future of the Common Core State Standards.

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #166 – January 21, 2014

Dear Friends,

At the January 14th Indianapolis hearing on REPA 3, strong opposition to lower standards for teacher and administrator licenses was registered. Fifteen spoke against lower standards while one spoke in favor of one provision.

In contrast to her predecessor, State Superintendent Ritz actually attended and listened to the entire hearing. Dr. Bennett had abandoned the practice of attending major rules hearings starting with the A-F hearing in April 2010. Two State Board members, Cari Wicker and David Freitas, also attended the REPA 3 hearing in Indianapolis. Superintendent Ritz also attended the hearings in South Bend and Evansville.

Among those testifying against major portions of the proposal was Risa Regnier, speaking for Glenda Ritz and the Indiana Department of Education.

One must ask: If Superintendent Ritz and the Indiana Department of Education are opposed, who is pushing this stuff?

The answer is that the Governor and some of his State Board members and staff are for it, although other State Board members have said they oppose key sections. On the same day that public school advocates had to fight the winter elements to come to a hearing seeking to simply maintain current teacher licensing standards, the Governor was saying in his State of the State Address that “at the end of the day a good teacher makes all the difference.”

That statement is inconsistent with his efforts to bring us REPA 3. He should quickly have his State Board members withdraw all parts of REPA 3 that lower standards for teachers and administrators.

The Hearing

Scheduled for 9am on Tuesday, January 14th, the hearing was in no way convenient for the many teachers that wanted to speak out against lower licensing standards. Still, 16 speakers showed up to testify. Fifteen of those spoke strongly against rule changes that would-----

• remove the requirement of a master’s degree to get a principal’s license.

• remove the requirement of an educational specialist’s degree to get a superintendent’s license.

• allow individuals who have not qualified for a principal’s license to get a Temporary Building Level administrator license.

• allow individuals who have a bachelor’s degree and have passed a content test to get a five-year Adjunct Teaching Permit without any student teaching.

• allow licensed teachers to add music, art or theater arts to their license by passing a content test, without pedagogical courses in those subjects or student teaching.

• eliminate the 10-year Accomplished Practitioner license in favor of making all licenses renewable for 5 years, removing recognition currently given to our most accomplished teachers.

One social studies teacher who had been a lifelong artist spoke in favor of the REPA 3 plan to allow an art license to current teachers who could pass the art content assessment.

Strong testimony opposing the changes listed above was registered by three college deans, Dean Gonzalez from IU, Dean Shelley from Butler and Dean Moran from the University of Indianapolis; by Jill Shedd, Executive Director of the Indiana Association of Colleges of Teacher Education; by J.T. Coopman of the superintendent’s association; by two current superintendents, Julie Wood and Michael Jones; by ISTA Treasurer Callie Marksbury; and by other teachers and retired teachers.

In my testimony, which is attached, I objected strongly to allowing teachers without pedagogical training or student teaching to begin teaching with a 5-year Adjunct Teacher Permit and to the lowering of standards for principals and superintendents.

The Monumental Change

When voters elected Glenda Ritz in 2012, they probably thought that she and the IDOE staff would become the ones to listen to rules hearing and then to shape the final rules during the promulgation process, as State Superintendents have done for the 37 years I have been watching the making of rules in Indiana. The huge change that was obvious at the REPA 3 hearing is that Superintendent Ritz and the Indiana Department of Education have become supplicants requesting changes by the State Board, just like me and the others testifying. Risa Regnier, Assistant Superintendent who oversees licensing, spoke for the IDOE. She said that IDOE opposes all six points bulleted above, along with supporting some non-controversial changes.

Who, then, has the real power to confirm or withdraw these lower licensing standards?

State Board staff leaders Ann Davis and Michelle McKeown posted and ran the hearing and appear to be in charge of what happens to the rule, acting on behalf of the Governor and the State Board. They will read the comments and make recommendations to the State Board. They invited emails directly to them as well as to the online comment site: www.in.gov/sboe/REPAIIIcomment

Let them know how you feel about lowering standards for licenses! They are collecting comments through January 31st.

Then let the Governor know how you feel as well. He could end these bad ideas quickly by telling his staff to withdraw the proposals for lower standards. It seems inconceivable that he would want to go forward carrying the banner for lower licensing standards for teachers and administrators. It didn’t work well for Dr. Bennett, and it surely won’t work well for Governor Pence, especially when, to quote the Governor again, “a good teacher makes all the difference.”

Now we know for sure: The Governor and his new education staff are accountable for whether or not Indiana lowers its standards for teachers and administrators.

Thank you for your advocacy for highly trained teachers and for public education!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###

Vic’s Statehouse Notes #165 – January 21, 2014

Dear Friends,

The old saying “Never let a crisis go to waste” came to mind as I watched Rep. Behning shepherd the preschool scholarship bill HB 1004 through the House this past week. Indiana has ignored funding vital preschool programs to the point that many consider our situation to be a crisis. Rep. Behning’s response is to fund preschool scholarships which also simultaneously make scholarship students eligible for K-12 vouchers for private school tuition. His bill is the only vehicle to fund preschool, and he is using it to expand K-12 vouchers.

The bill could easily have been written to fund preschool without a link to K-12 vouchers, but his bill supports Rep. Behning’s avowed goal to continually expand K-12 vouchers for students who have never enrolled in a public school. The bill passed the House with lighting speed, passing the committee 10-3 on January 9th, second reading on January 13th, and the final vote 87-9 on January 16th, just one week after the committee hearing.

Section 10

Early sections of HB1004 set up preschool scholarships of $6800 for a full day program or $3400 for a half day program for families making 185% of poverty or less, funding levels that some K-12 districts would envy. The LSA fiscal note said that the bill might fund 4600 vouchers in five pilot counties at a cost of $24 million. The Governor in his speech in Corydon said we should fund 40,000 vouchers. Speaker Bosma said that 1000 vouchers would be funded. Rep. Behning in the committee introduction said that the bill would set up the program this year and funding would be addressed in next year’s budget.

If you are not confused by this description of the size and cost of this program, you should be. The fiscal cost has clearly been blurred by the sponsors.

Then in Section 10, the bill rewrites the infamous voucher bill passed in 2011 to add the following to the list of individuals who meet conditions for a K-12 voucher: “The individual or a sibling of the individual received a scholarship of at least $500 for an early education scholarship under IC12-17.2-7 before enrolling in school.”

I testified against this portion of the bill, asking the committee to strike Section 10. The testimony on behalf of ICPE is attached.

Several other groups in testimony made the same appeal. The Legislative Services Agency, using conservative estimates, wrote that there would be an ongoing cost of $1.6 million to the state for K-12 vouchers for preschool students who would go on to kindergarten at a private school with a voucher paid for by Indiana taxpayers as a result of this bill.

In committee discussion at the January 9th hearing, Rep. Vandenburgh directly asked Rep. Behning to remove Section 10 from the bill because of the opposition she and other Democrats had to expanding K-12 vouchers. She said that removing Section 10 might ease the expected opposition to this bill in the Senate, where it died last year. Rep. Behning replied that he knew Senators who would vote against the bill if it did not include the guarantee of a K-12 voucher as written in the bill, and he would not agree to change Section 10.

Think about that one: He is saying that he knows Senators who would not support preschool funding except for the fact that the bill would expand K-12 vouchers. That leaves the question: Is this bill more about preschool or more about expanding K-12 vouchers?

Second Reading

Section 10 was challenged again during second reading amendments on January 13th. Rep. Delaney filed Amendment 8 which simply deleted Section 10, breaking the link between helping preschool students and expanding K-12 vouchers.

For public education advocates, it was the most telling vote of the new session. The 29 yes votes were all Democrats plus Republican Rep. Niemeyer from Lake and Porter County. The 62 no votes were all Republicans. The bill remained an expansion of K-12 vouchers as well as help for preschoolers.

The Final Vote

Rep. Behning called HB 1004 for its third reading vote on Thursday, January 16th. Rep. Pelath said the bill is “deserving of criticism” for “doubling down on voucher methodology” but his side of the aisle has had preschool in their agenda for many years, and he would vote yes. Rep. Vernon Smith said a “very good concept for academics has been marred by a quest” for more K-12 vouchers. He would support the bill with “a lot of red flags.” Rep. Vandenburgh, Rep. Candelaria Reardon, Rep. Pryor and Rep. Delaney all came to the podium with similar sentiments of support for the bill but opposition to Section 10. Rep. Delaney said that in setting up a pipeline to private school vouchers through preschools, public schools “can’t compete here” because they are stretched to the limits of their funding now.

The final vote was 87-9, with eight of the no votes coming from Republicans who opposed the precedent of preschool funding: Representatives Culver, Harman, Ober, Rhoads, Thompson, Turner, Washburne and Wesco. One Democrat, Rep. Kersey, who strongly opposes private school vouchers, voted against the bill based on its link to K-12 vouchers.

The Second Time Around

The bill now goes on to the Senate for the second time. Last year, it died there based on fiscal concerns about the eventual costs for a statewide program.

The K-12 voucher program has changed remarkably between the time HB 1004 passed the House in 2013 and its passage here in 2014. As a result of the voucher expansion passed in April 2013, vouchers for private school tuition are available in a number of ways to incoming kindergarteners who can now get state tax dollars to attend private schools without ever giving the public schools a try. Beginning kindergarteners are now eligible for vouchers if they---

• are siblings of previous voucher students.

• are special education students. Even if parents want special education services from the public school district, they can attend private schools using a taxpayer voucher for family incomes as much as $84,000.

• reside in an attendance area for a school that received an F under Indiana’s flawed but still used A-F system.

These expansions of vouchers had not been passed when Rep. Behning first proposed in 2013 a pipeline to K-12 vouchers through preschool. It seems like the pipeline is already there now and need not embroil basic help for low income preschoolers in the education conflict of our generation: whether to privatize our public schools.

What Can Public Education Advocates Do?

It is time to contact Senators about the preschool bill HB 1004 that will be coming their way in a few weeks. Ask them to strike Section 10 from the bill to help preschoolers without using the bill to expand K-12 vouchers.

Remind them of the controversial expansion of vouchers last year, a debate when more than one Senator said they would not support additional expansions after the 2013 expansions. Remember that 23 Senators voted against the major voucher expansion of 2013, just three short of a majority. Let all Senators know how you feel about Section 10, but of course initially the Senators on the Education and Career Development Committee will hear the bill in February.

HB 1004 is one of the key bills of the session. It should not be used to once again expand K-12 vouchers.

Thank you for your advocacy for public education!

Best wishes,

Vic Smith

ICPE has worked since 2011 to promote public education in the Statehouse and oppose the privatization of schools. The 2014 session of the General Assembly has begun. Joel Hand will again serve as ICPE lobbyist for the session. We need your membership to help support his work. Many have renewed their memberships this fall, and we thank you! If you have not done so since July 1, the start of our new membership year, we urge you to renew by going to our website.

As the session begins, ICPE has about half of what we will need to fund our lobbying efforts, a vast improvement over previous sessions in 2011, 2012 and 2013 when we started from zero each session. With your membership support, we have raised the money each session, and we must do so again. We need additional members and additional donations. We need your help and the help of your colleagues who support public education! Please pass the word!

Go to www.icpe2011.com for membership and renewal information and for full information on ICPE efforts on behalf of public education. Thanks!

Some readers have asked about my background in Indiana public schools. Thanks for asking! Here is a brief bio:

I am a lifelong Hoosier and began teaching in 1969. I served as a social studies teacher, curriculum developer, state research and evaluation consultant, state social studies consultant, district social studies supervisor, assistant principal, principal, educational association staff member, and adjunct university professor. I worked for Garrett-Keyser-Butler Schools, the Indiana University Social Studies Development Center, the Indiana Department of Education, the Indianapolis Public Schools, IUPUI, and the Indiana Urban Schools Association, from which I retired as Associate Director in 2009. I hold three degrees: B.A. in Ed., Ball State University, 1969; M.S. in Ed., Indiana University, 1972; and Ed.D., Indiana University, 1977, along with a Teacher’s Life License and a Superintendent’s License, 1998.

###