Senate Committee on Education (02/11/2009)

Final
STAFF SUMMARY OF MEETING

SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

Date:	02/11/2009	ATTENDANCE

Time:	09:58 AM to 12:47 PM	Groff	*
		Heath	X
Place:	SCR 356	Hudak	X
		King K.	X
This Meeting was called to order by		Scheffel	X
	Senator Bacon	Spence	X
		Romer	*
This Report was prepared by		Bacon	X
	Jennifer Thomsen
		X = Present, E = Excused, A = Absent, * = Present after roll call

Bills Addressed:		Action Taken:
SB09-046 SB09-136 SB09-045 SB09-160		Postponed Indefinitely Postponed Indefinitely Amended, Referred to Appropriations Amended, Referred to Appropriations

09:58 AM -- Senate Bill 09-046

Senator Sandoval, sponsor of Senate Bill 09-046, brought her bill back to the committee for action only. Testimony was heard on the bill on January 29, 2009. Senator Sandoval reiterated some of the testimony heard by the committee at the previous hearing on the bill.

10:01 AM

Senator Sandoval described amendment L.009 (Attachment A). The amendment, she said, removes most of the detail in the bill, instead directing the State Board of Education to promulgate rules with regard to healthy snack foods, and it also pushes back the implementation of the bill.

Senator Sandoval responded to committee questions about the amendment, including a question from Senator King about requiring the State Board of Education to promulgate rules. Conversation between Senator Sandoval and Senator King on the amendment ensued.

Senator Hudak expressed concern about the amendment, and noted that she would offer an amendment (L.010 Attachment B), which would address her concerns. She said she feels the discussion about healthy snack foods should take place at the local level, rather than the State Board of Education level.

10:10 AM

Senator Sandoval asked for a no vote on amendment L.010, expressing concern that there would 178 different sets of standards, and businesses would have a difficult time meeting all these standards. The committee discussed the amendment and Senator Hudak responded to questions about it. Senator Bacon said he would offer an amendment encouraging the adoption of a snack food policy rather than requiring it. Senator Sandoval said if her amendment, amendment L.009, is not adopted, she would like the bill to be postponed indefinitely. The committee discussed this option.

10:17 AM

Committee discussion around the bill and the amendments continued. Senator Hudak commented that her amendment, amendment L.010, would move the idea of healthy foods in school forward while allowing local communities to discuss what is best for their communities. Senator Sandoval asked again that the bill be postponed indefinitely if the committee does not adopt amendment L.009.


BILL:	SB09-046
TIME:	10:17:00 AM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.010 (Attachment B). The motion failed on a 2-6 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	No
	Heath	No
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	No
	Scheffel	No
	Spence	No
	Romer	No
	Bacon	Yes

Not Final YES: 2 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:	SB09-046
TIME:	10:22:24 AM
MOVED:	Bacon
MOTION:	Moved a conceptual amendment changing "shall" to "encouraged to" throughout the bill. The motion failed on a 1-7 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	No
	Heath	No
	Hudak	No
	King K.	No
	Scheffel	No
	Spence	No
	Romer	No
	Bacon	Yes

Not Final YES: 1 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:	SB09-046
TIME:	10:23:39 AM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Refer Senate Bill 09-046, as amended, to the Committee of the Whole. The motion failed on a 1-7 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	No
	Heath	No
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	No
	Scheffel	No
	Spence	No
	Romer	No
	Bacon	No

Not Final YES: 1 NO: 7 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL

10:24 AM

Senator Romer commented on the bill, and encouraged Senator Sandoval to reconsider her request to postpone the bill indefinitely.


BILL:	SB09-046
TIME:	10:24:12 AM
MOVED:	Spence
MOTION:	Moved that Senate Bill 09-046 be postponed indefinitely. The motion passed on a 5-3 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Yes
	Heath	No
	Hudak	No
	King K.	Yes
	Scheffel	Yes
	Spence	Yes
	Romer	No
	Bacon	Yes

Final YES: 5 NO: 3 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

10:28 AM -- Senate Bill 09-136

Senator Scheffel, sponsor of Senate Bill 09-136, asked the committee to postpone the bill indefinitely. The bill concerns the eligibility for the alternative principal preparation program.

Senator Romer asked Senator Scheffel to explain the bill. Senator Scheffel explained why he brought the bill, and why he has asked the committee to postpone it indefinitely. He indicated that he would continue to work of the idea. Conversation between Senator Romer and Senator Scheffel on the topic of school leaders ensued. Senator Hudak commented on current law related to alternative principal preparation.


BILL:	SB09-136
TIME:	10:29:16 AM
MOVED:	Scheffel
MOTION:	Moved that Senate Bill 09-136 be postponed indefinitely. The motion passed on a 7-0 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Excused
	Heath	Yes
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	Yes
	Scheffel	Yes
	Spence	Yes
	Romer	Yes
	Bacon	Yes

Final YES: 7 NO: 0 EXC: 1 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

10:33 AM -- Senate Bill 09-045

Senator King, sponsor of Senate Bill 09-045, presented his bill to the committee. The bill requires the Colorado Commission on Higher Education (CCHE) to establish articulation agreements for at least five baccalaureate degree programs by July 1, 2011, and establish one subsequent agreement each year thereafter. Senator King described his goal in bringing the bill forward, and commented that in the current economic climate, many people need to access higher education. He said the purpose of the bill is for community colleges and four-year institutions to collaborate to find common opportunities for students who start at the community college level, which is all they can afford, to move on to get a four-year degree.

10:38 AM

Senator King talked about the fiscal impact of the bill as identified in the fiscal note. He said his amendment (L.004 Attachment C) would change the funding of the bill to gifts, grants, and donations.

Senator King responded to questions from the committee, including a question from Senator Romer about which other states have similar articulation agreements, and how many Colorado students take five years to earn a degree. Senator King said around 30 states have such agreements, and provided California as an example.

Senator King responded to a question from President Groff about how the provisions of the bill differ from current articulation agreements.

10:45 AM

Committee questions for the sponsor continued, with additional questions from President Groff about current agreements and the concerns he is hearing from four-year institutions. Senator King responded to a question from Senator Heath about the impact of the amendment, clarifying that the amendment removes the 120 credit hour cap. Discussion between Senator King and Senator Heath ensued, with conversation about how the concerns can be overcome.

10:50 AM

The following persons testified:

10:50 AM -- Kathleen Bollard, representing the University of Colorado System, testified in opposition to the bill. Ms. Bollard talked about the issues around major courses and degree tracks as opposed to core classes. She provided specific examples of courses that might cause issues in articulating to the University of Colorado.

Ms. Bollard responded to committee questions, including a question from President Groff about current cooperation with community colleges. Senator King said his intent is not to limit the ability of institutions to offer multiple degrees in a particular area, rather to work with community colleges to allow students the opportunity to transfer to a four-year institution.

10:57 AM -- David Skaggs and Julie Carnahan, Department of Higher Education, testified in opposition to the bill. Executive Director Skaggs said the current approach, which is more differentiated, is a better approach than the one proposed in the bill.

Dr. Carnahan talked about current articulation agreements, explaining why the agreements have developed the way they have. She provided specific information about the number of students who transfer from particular community colleges to particular four-year institutions. Dr. Carnahan talked about student transfer guides available to students and said that the relationships between two-year and four-year institutions are good. She said the proposed statewide agreement would drive generic degrees that are not the best thing for students.

The witnesses responded to questions from the committee, including a question from Senator Hudak, who noted that if there was a problem with transfer credits, the student would not have transferred and would not be reflected in the department's transfer numbers. Dr. Carnahan spoke to Senator Hudak's question. Senator King spoke to these issues as well, saying the bill will give opportunity to students to stay at the community college for as long as possible before transferring, creating more affordability and accessibility.

11:08 AM

Committee discussion with the witnesses continued, with a question and comments from Senator Heath about the how core credits transfer as opposed to other credit hours. Dr. Carnahan responded, saying there is an expectation that every degree looks alike, but that is not the case at four-year institutions. Senator Bacon asked for clarification of this issue, which Dr. Carnahan provided. Committee discussion of issues around transfer of credits from community colleges to four-year institutions continued.

Executive Director Skaggs spoke to the questions being raised around transferable credits, saying that guaranteed transferability does not guarantee that the credits will fulfill prerequisites for a four-year degree. Senator Romer talked about access and affordability in higher education, and said the public needs help in these areas. Executive Director Skaggs responded, talking about specialized training required by the workplace.

11:16 AM

Senator Bacon asked Dr. Carnahan to describe an amendment he would offer on behalf of the department (L.005 Attachment D).

11:17 AM -- Thomas Smith, representing the University of Northern Colorado, testified in opposition to the bill. He said the bill addresses a problem that, to a large extent, does not exist. He said the problem of students who do not persist, or who take five years to earn a degree, is not due to a lack of articulation agreements. Mr. Smith responded to committee questions, including a question from President Groff about current articulation agreements at the University of Northern Colorado. He clarified that lack of articulation agreements does not effect ease of transfer for students.

11:21 AM -- Alan Lamborn, representing Colorado State University, testified in opposition to the bill. Mr. Lamborn talked about articulation agreements, transfer guides, and other memoranda of understanding, explaining the differences between these concepts. He said the transfer guides tell students what they need to take to earn a particular degree. He said the first 60 credit hours and the second 60 credit hours cannot be made the same across the state and still achieve students' goals. Mr. Lamborn spoke to amendment L.005, which he said maximizes the ease with which students can transfer without effecting the quality of the student's degree. He discussed the amendment further, explaining what the amendment will accomplish.

11:27 AM

Senator King spoke to amendment L.005, explaining that the bill will not limit diversity in degree programs, and reiterating the goals of the bill. Committee discussion with the witness around amendment L.005 ensued.

11:30 AM -- Nigel Middleton, representing Colorado School of Mines, testified in opposition to the bill. He said the legislation conflicts with the board of trustees' statutory authority. He said the bill would effect the quality of degrees from the institution. Mr. Middleton talked about how employers value School of Mines graduates and value School of Mines degrees. He discussed work on a statewide engineering articulation agreement. He concluded, by saying the School of Mines supports a customized approach.

Senator King responded to the testimony, saying amendment L.004 addresses many of the concerns raised. Discussion between Senator King and Mr. Middleton ensued.

11:36 AM -- Lance Bolton, representing Northeastern Junior College and the Community College System, testified in support of the bill. Mr. Bolton said tens of thousands of students in the community college system have changing circumstances, and those students should not be penalized if they have to go to another college.

11:39 AM -- Tony Kinkel, President of Pikes Peak Community College, testified in support of the bill. He described the type of student the bill aims to help. He talked about expense to students who have to take extra semesters to earn a bachelor's degree. He explained why the bill is so important to those students.

11:43 AM

Senator King made closing comments to the bill. He said the bill is about lack of access and about affordability. Senator King said the bill is a modest step forward for students.

Senator King responded to questions from the committee, including a question from Senator Hudak about why amendment L.004 focuses on the five degree programs it does. Committee discussion about amendment L.005 ensued, with Senator King commenting that L.005 will drive costs for the department.

11:48 AM

Senator Romer made comments to the bill, saying it would seem to be the duty of the CCHE, rather than the General Assembly, to make these kind of policies. Senator King responded, saying the CCHE has not made progress on these issues.

Senator King responded to a question from Senator Heath about how specific degree programs would fit under the bill.


BILL:	SB09-045
TIME:	11:54:11 AM
MOVED:	Romer
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.004 (Attachment C). The motion passed on a 7-1 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Yes
	Heath	Yes
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	Yes
	Scheffel	Yes
	Spence	Yes
	Romer	Yes
	Bacon	No

Not Final YES: 7 NO: 1 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS


BILL:	SB09-045
TIME:	11:55:13 AM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Moved an amendment to amendment L.004 to remove the specific identification of the five degree programs. The motion failed on a 2-6 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	No
	Heath	No
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	No
	Scheffel	No
	Spence	No
	Romer	No
	Bacon	Yes

Not Final YES: 2 NO: 6 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: FAIL


BILL:	SB09-045
TIME:	11:58:21 AM
MOVED:	Heath
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.005. The motion failed on a 4-4 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Yes
	Heath	Yes
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	No
	Scheffel	No
	Spence	No
	Romer	No
	Bacon	Yes

Not Final YES: 4 NO: 4 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: TIE


BILL:	SB09-045
TIME:	12:00:03 PM
MOVED:	Romer
MOTION:	Refer Senate Bill 09-046, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a 5-3 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Yes
	Heath	No
	Hudak	No
	King K.	Yes
	Scheffel	Yes
	Spence	Yes
	Romer	Yes
	Bacon	No

Final YES: 5 NO: 3 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

12:01 PM -- Senate Bill 09-160

Senator Hudak, sponsor of Senate Bill 09-160, presented the bill. The bill concerns the recommendations of the P-20 Council related to educator licensure.

12:05 PM

The following persons testified:

12:05 PM -- Lieutenant Governor Barbara O'Brien, representing the P-20 Council, testified in support of the bill. She explained the need for the bill, and provided a handout (Attachment E).

12:07 PM -- Floyd Beard, representing the Colorado Boards of Cooperative Educational Services (BOCES) Association, testified in support of the bill. He told the committee about Teacher in Residence programs run by BOCES. He expressed a concern about language related to minimum coursework standards on page 7 of the bill. Mr. Beard also expressed concern about the bill's requirement for on-site evaluations. He talked about the number of people who have gone through BOCES programs, and said the programs are rigorous and accountable.

Mr. Beard responded to questions from the committee, including a question from Senator King about whether these programs require college coursework. Mr. Beard said the BOCES bring instructors to the field to offer instruction for these programs.

12:15 PM

Senator Hudak responded to Mr. Beard's testimony, speaking to a number of his concerns.

12:17 PM -- Zack Neumeyer, representing the Systems and Transformations Subcommittee of the P-20 Council, Colorado Succeeds, and Sage Hospitality, testified in support of the bill. He said the bill provides more opportunities for students to establish a relationship with accomplished adults in the classroom.

Senator Romer commented about where this idea is on the priority list of businesses.

12:20 PM -- Sean Vanberschot, representing Teach for America, testified in support of the bill. He described Teach for America and why it supports the bill.

He responded to committee questions, including a question from Senator Heath about how the bill will help attract teachers to the Teach for American program. Senator Romer commented that he is concerned that Teach for America teachers do not stay in the profession long enough, and asked if the bill would help with that issue. Mr. Vanberschot responded, talking about the number of Teach for America teachers that stay in education. He also talked about how Teach for America places teachers around the country.

12:25 PM -- Robert Reichardt, representing the Educator Subcommittee of the P-20 Council, testified in support of the bill. He talked about the make-up of the subcommittee and its focus. He commented that the current system is outdated and unaligned. The intent of the bill, he said, is to create flexibility for those who prepare teachers, and to create a clear path for people who want to become teachers. Mr. Reichardt said he has evaluated alternative teacher programs, and said he found a hodgepodge of programs in the attempt to be innovative.

12:30 PM -- Richard Wenning and Jami Goetz, Colorado Department of Education (CDE), testified in support of the bill. Dr. Wenning said the amendments address some concerns of the CDE.

Dr. Goetz expressed support for the bill and said it will improve access for people who want to become teachers.

The witnesses responded to committee questions. Senator Romer asked the witnesses whether they support the amendments. Senator Spence asked how the bill would impact a program in Douglas County operated under a waiver. Dr. Wenning clarified that the bill would not have an impact on programs such as the one in Douglas County. Senator Hudak said amendment L.001 addresses this issue.

12:34 PM


BILL:	SB09-160
TIME:	12:34:40 PM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.001 (Attachment F). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff
	Heath
	Hudak
	King K.
	Scheffel
	Spence
	Romer
	Bacon

Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

12:38 PM

Dr. Matt Gianneschi came to the table to explain amendment L.002.


BILL:	SB09-160
TIME:	12:38:30 PM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.002 (Attachment G). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff
	Heath
	Hudak
	King K.
	Scheffel
	Spence
	Romer
	Bacon

Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection


BILL:	SB09-160
TIME:	12:39:54 PM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Moved amendment L.003 (Attachment H). The motion passed without objection.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff
	Heath
	Hudak
	King K.
	Scheffel
	Spence
	Romer
	Bacon

Not Final YES: 0 NO: 0 EXC: 0 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: Pass Without Objection

12:41 PM

Senator Romer made comments about the bill and about President Obama's statement on education innovation.

Senator Spence asked for clarification around language on page 11, line 20, asking what constitutes "good cause." Senator Hudak replied, saying this is the same language as is in current law, and responding to the question.


BILL:	SB09-160
TIME:	12:41:58 PM
MOVED:	Hudak
MOTION:	Refer Senate Bill 09-160, as amended, to the Committee on Appropriations. The motion passed on a 7-0-1 vote.
SECONDED:
		VOTE
	Groff	Excused
	Heath	Yes
	Hudak	Yes
	King K.	Yes
	Scheffel	Yes
	Spence	Yes
	Romer	Yes
	Bacon	Yes

Final YES: 7 NO: 0 EXC: 1 ABS: 0 FINAL ACTION: PASS

12:45 PM

The committee adjourned.