MINUTES OF THE JOINT MEETING

      ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

      AND SENATE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES & FACILITIES

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      January 27, 1993

 

 

 

The joint meeting of the Assembly Committee on Education and Senate Committee on Human Resources & Facilities was called to order by Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman, at 3:05 p.m., on Wednesday, January 27, 1993, in Room 119 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

     

      Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Chairman

      Mr. Ken L. Haller , Vice Chairman

      Ms. Vonne Chowning

      Mr. Tom Collins, Jr.

      Ms. Marcia de Braga

      Mr. William D. Gregory

      Mr. James W. McGaughey 

      Mr. Michael A. Schneider

      Ms. Gene W. Segerblom

      Ms. Sandra Tiffany

 

SENATE COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

      Senator William R. O'Donnell, Vice Chairman

      Senator Joseph M. Neal, Jr.

      Senator Bob Coffin

      Senator Lori L. Brown

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

      Senator Randolf J. Townsend

      Senator Diana M. Glomb 

      Mr. Roy Neighbors

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

      None.

 

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Pepper Sturm, Research Analyst

      Donald Williams, Research Analyst

 

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

 

      Dr. Aimes McGuinness, Education Commission of the States

 

Chairman Rawson announced the Senate committee would begin as a subcommittee since a major portion of the delegation was meeting with the governor.

 

Chairman Rawson introduced Pepper Sturm of the Legislative Counsel Bureau Research Division.  Mr. Sturm read from prepared testimony explaining how the Education Commission of the States (ESC) was created (Exhibit C).  Mr. Sturm remarked the ESC conducted policy research, organized national forums, and provided technical assistance to the states.

 

Mr. Sturm explained Dr. Aimes McGuinness was the Director of Higher Education Policy at ESC and specialized in issues related to coordination and governance of higher education systems in the United States.  Mr. Sturm stated Dr. McGuinness would address the committee on both higher education and school restructuring.

 

Dr. Aimes McGuinness, Education Commission of the States in Denver, explained the ESC was an organization comprised of both political leaders and education leaders.  The primary objective of the ESC was to obtain a better understanding of what public priorities were.  Dr. McGuinness indicated he had spent a great deal of time as a school board president along with serving on the state college board in Colorado.

 

Dr. McGuinness emphasized almost every state in the country was facing an irreconcilable conflict between two points.  The main problem was the increase in demand for educational services, particularly related to higher education.  Dr. McGuinness stressed the demand was not only numbers, but questions of higher expectations regarding what students should know and do, along with the increased complexity of the population to be served.  According to Dr. McGuinness, the public and students no longer accepted the country processing large numbers of students through the system without ever asking the question, "Have they learned anything." 

 

Dr. McGuinness clarified the resource problem was not a short-term issue and a turnaround might not occur until well into the next century.  Dr. McGuinness pointed out most legislatures throughout the country were faced with the costs of health care, Medicaid, criminal justice, coupled with the costs of equity in school reform.  Currently, state budgets were stable, if not declining, yet the share appropriated for higher education was decreasing primarily due to fixed commitments which were forcing down the resources available to the system.  Dr. McGuinness reiterated the same thing was happening in the K-12 system which would result in a long-term decrease in the dollars available from public resources per student.  Dr. McGuinness indicated the situation was occurring at a time when more was expected from what students should know and do and many students would be unable to continue their education.

 

Dr. McGuinness commented a third issue beyond the issues of demand and resources related to public opinion.  Dr. McGuinness remarked the K-12 system was in serious need of reform and public opinion held a great deal of skepticism regarding increased funding without a tradeoff of evidence of change.

 

Senator Rawson questioned if the change was "radical reform," such as a choice in education, or curricular reform.  Dr. McGuinness replied radical reform since most state legislators were frustrated with the lack of progress. 

 

Dr. McGuinness pointed out the higher education situation was different and presented a large dilemma for states.  The public placed an exceptionally significant value on higher education which if affordable, was absolutely essential.  Dr. McGuinness stressed the public was angry with how the system was run, along with the increased costs and lack of responsiveness.

 

Dr. McGuinness referred to four options, particularly relating to the higher education system.  The first was to do more with less and was focused on the terms of faculty productivity.  According to Dr. McGuinness, the real problem was not trying to solve doing more with less within one sector, but the productivity improvements in K-12 might be making options available relating to apprenticeship, community service, and the first two years of college, rather than institution by institution.  The second option which was the dominant option throughout the country was to do less with less.  Dr. McGuinness referred to institutional self-interest; what an institution would do or a faculty would do when faced with a particular set of circumstances.  Regarding public interest, the question arose as to access; who should be served and how the whole conception would fit together for each state.  In his opinion, Dr. McGuinness believed the general pattern throughout the country was to do less with less which might not connect with public interest.  The third option was to attempt to win the battle against Medicaid, health care, prisons, and serving people in need through other social services since funding for such services was often taken from K-12.  Dr. McGuinness referred to the fourth option which was what other sources of revenue and tuition were available.  Dr. McGuinness stressed the relative increase of tuition rather than the absolute amount was important.  According to Dr. McGuinness, the majority of states took action on tuition policy in an incremental way with no debate about who would be affected.  Dr. McGuinness acknowledged most states showed an increased inclination to cap tuition and political leaders wanted to see evidence showing such an increase would reach services affecting the students paying the tuition.

 

In his opinion, Dr. McGuinness believed tuition needed to be increased; however, such an increase would not be sufficient enough to close the gap between the demand and the resources available from states.

 

Dr. McGuinness pointed out states who faced the realities would be without standing systems in the next century while the states who currently "floundered around" would notice significant limits in enrollment, barriers of access to populations which were gaining access, and a general withering of their education systems. 

 

Dr. McGuinness indicated K-12 had a decade of reform regarding the length of the school year, time in the classroom, and mandated curriculum, along with changing the state role by fostering improvement on a decentralized basis countered by a redefinition of the state role.

 

According to Dr. McGuinness, all children were capable of learning; however, most students were being tracked out of the system.  Dr. McGuinness stressed higher expectations for all students were essential without significant increases in resources. 

 

Dr. McGuinness commented there was a major emphasis in decentralization, discovering new ways to serve all children, and supporting the transformation of schools on a decentralized basis including reorganizing the state role.  Dr. McGuinness remarked only 5-6 percent of schools throughout the country were conducting fundamental change.  Dr. McGuinness pointed out the states which would move ahead on K-12 reform were the ones who were aware of the elements of a long-term "systemic change" strategy.

 

Dr. McGuinness referred to the ABC television program with Peter Jennings which reiterated all children could learn; however, the public was only concerned with the individual handling of each student and who should be educated.

 

Chairman Rawson was concerned with the funding formula relating to K-12 and higher education using replacement dollars rather than new dollars and questioned what technology could be used with textbook dollars.

 

Mr. Collins referred to the Peter Jennings program and asked whether the substance of the program could work in all cases or was it strictly an exceptional situation.  Dr. McGuinness responded he only watched the beginning of the program and did not see the portion Mr. Collins was referring to.

 

Dr. McGuinness suggested the possibility of having a team of teachers who could reach each student with different approaches, active learning and creativity. However, the percentage of teachers with such capability was particularly low.

 

Chairman Rawson pointed out Nevada was facing growth and inflation, along with federal education mandates.  Chairman Rawson stressed the Medicaid mandates made it extremely difficult to consider any significant change in education.  Chairman Rawson questioned what kind of change might happen regarding financing in the funding formula.  Dr. McGuinness responded in both higher education and K-12 there was a need to focus on smaller units which contained greater flexibility to allocate all available resources with potentially no increase, but with a tradeoff of clear expectations of performance related to the use of such resources.  According to Dr. McGuinness, the entities should be held accountable for efficient use of all resources in order to meet certain expectations related to performance and to the range of students who would be served.

 

Dr. McGuinness commented there were three systemic priorities relating to the technology level; performance expectations, redefinition of the state role in regard to providing technical assistance to individual units; and the use of technology for exchanges among units to serve the population in creative ways. 

Dr. McGuinness stressed there were few states which had asked the question, "Does our school finance formula really support change at a school level, or does it basically allocate funds in a way which reinforces and, in fact, may be based on an entirely outmoded production model."  Dr. McGuinness remarked a policy review for each state would be necessary to determine if the state funding formula would help or detract.

 

Chairman Rawson stated a bill would be introduced for a pilot or experimental program in school based governments and questioned if Dr. McGuinness was referring to the same type of program.  Dr. McGuinness responded any state which had not moved beyond a pilot program should ascertain what their true goal was.  According to Dr. McGuinness, each state should determine how smaller groups could be empowered to assume responsibility for efficient use of resources to serve all children as a fundamental part of policy.

 

Senator Neal asked how systemic change in accordance with centralization and decentralization would place itself in terms of what educational objectives should be.  Dr. McGuinness replied productivity would require a framework for any type of change to work.  Dr. McGuinness pointed out a standard problem throughout the country related to what the school districts expected versus the admissions standards from the colleges and universities which completely ignored performance.  Dr. McGuinness stressed the progressive school districts were attempting to set higher expectations for all students to keep more students in school while admission requirements were designed to screen people out.

 

Senator Neal remarked the system of education in the United States was not "locking on" to what could be by addressing future needs.  Dr. McGuinness responded the U.S. had a tendency to follow fads, but investing in education and in schools would be the one thing which would have a positive affect.  Dr. McGuinness added parental involvement such as reading, spending time, and nurturing children at home was essential.

 

Dr. McGuinness pointed out a large number of women had strong capabilities in mathematics, but for a variety of reasons were screened out.  Dr. McGuinness emphasized the importance of both men and women engaging in mathematics in order to become more confident in the field.

 

Senator Neal mentioned Canada, Germany, and Japan and acknowledged the countries functioned from a survival culture rather than a winning culture; however, the United States focused more on a winning culture.  Dr. McGuinness replied expert opinion indicated all children could learn which was essential to the future survival of the U.S., but might not connect with individual behavior.  Regarding other countries, Dr. McGuinness pointed out the U.S. had a 50-52 percent participation rate in higher education which was the highest in the world.  Dr. McGuinness commented several countries had made a commitment for a large portion of students to enter higher ed schools in order to be prepared for the work force.

 

Mr. Collins emphasized Japan was an extremely competitive country due to the job situation whereas students in Clark County were being passed who did not deserve to.  Dr. McGuinness responded a system should be implemented which would challenge every individual student to the maximum point of his or her ability.  According to Dr. McGuinness, no student should be allowed to pass if he had not achieved his single ability or if he had not met the expectations similar to the passing point of entry to college or finishing high school.

 

Mr. Collins questioned if the technology and replacement would involve substituting, as an example, computers for textbooks.  Dr. McGuinness explained there were relatively minor yet very important improvements which could be made at a cost savings.

 

Dr. McGuinness pointed out the knowledge and skills an apprentice from a foreign country was required to have was at a considerably higher level of performance than 80 percent of United States high school graduates actually had.

 

Mr. Collins expressed concern with the trades in southern Nevada which were losing their quality.  Dr. McGuinness suggested each state examine their own economy and resources to determine what reform was necessary.

 

Chairman Rawson commented the attitude concerning education throughout the U.S. seemed to reflect everyone should be as similar as possible or at an average level.  Funds were not being used for teaching the extremes, but instead were being used to bring the less functional students to average.  Dr. McGuinness pointed out an increasing percentage of federal aide was being used for the lowest expectation training.  Chairman Rawson emphasized additional programs were necessary for higher education. 

 

Chairman Rawson was concerned the access to an affordable education was becoming more difficult to obtain due to the tuition issue.  Dr. McGuinness indicated Nevada would need to discover a system which would limit enrollment if tuitions were not increased.  Dr. McGuinness stressed the importance of each state defining their goals, values, and expectations regarding education.  Dr. McGuinness reiterated the problem could not be solved only with new money; reallocation would be a strong prerequisite.  Dr. McGuinness asked if the policies of the state created a climate which supported the maximum amount of creativity at the lowest part of the system to solve the problem.  The possibility of merging the funding from all students aged 16 through 24 might be one solution.

 

Chairman Rawson pointed out the legislature had heard hundreds of bills with the content of sex education, what level of math was necessary for graduation, etc., and the problems might never be solved unless the reform became far bolder.

 

Dr. McGuinness concluded ESC was actively working with individual states to bring together both the education and political leaders to discuss the values each state should be facing, along with presenting concrete options which might be available.  Dr. McGuinness emphasized investing in education would eventually pay off in the quality of life for people.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:25 p.m.

 

                             RESPECTFULLY  SUBMITTED:

 

 

                                                                

                            Marilyn Cole

                            Committee Secretary

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

                                        

Assemblyman Wendell P. Williams, Chairman

 

 

                                        

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education

Date: 

Page:  1

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education and

Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities

Date:  January 27, 1993

Page:  2

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education and

Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities

Date:  January 27, 1993

Page:  2