MINUTES OF THE

      ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

 

      Sixty-seventh Session

      June 2, 1993

 

 

 

The Assembly Committee on Education was called to order by Chairman Wendell P. Williams, at 3:40 p.m., on Wednesday, June 2, 1993, in Room 330 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Meeting Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

     

      Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Chairman

      Mrs. Vonne Chowning

      Mr. Tom Collins, Jr.

      Mrs. Marcia de Braga

      Mr. William D. Gregory

      Mr. James W. McGaughey

      Mr. Roy Neighbors

      Mr. Michael A. Schneider

      Mrs. Gene W. Segerblom

      Ms. Sandra Tiffany

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

      Mr. Ken L. Haller       (excused)

 

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

 

      Senator Mark James, District 8

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

      Marla McDade, Research Assistant

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

      Henry Etchemendy, Nevada Association of School Boards

      Lindsey Jydstrup, Nevada State Education Association

      Carolyne Edwards, Clark County School District

      Greg Betts, Rural School Districts of Nevada

      Doug Byington, Nevada Association of School Administrators

     

 

SENATE BILL 218 -Authorizes school districts to enter into agreements with certain postsecondary educational institutions to assign students of such institutions to certain training positions in public schools.

 

Mrs. Chowning referred to the proposed amendments which all parties involved agreed to (Exhibit C).  Mrs. Chowning explained the amendment provided a four-year sunset clause.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN CHOWNING MOVED TO AMEND AND DO PASS SB 218.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

SENATE BILL 354 -Prohibits corporal punishment in public schools.

 

Senator Mark James, Senate District 8, emphasized the importance of the bill which would ban corporal punishment throughout the public school system in Nevada.  Senator James referred to correspondence from the National Coalition to Abolish Corporal Punishment in Schools indicating half of the states in the nation had banned corporal punishment in public schools (Exhibit D). 

 

Senator James cited a supreme court case dealing with the Cruel and Unusual Punishments clause.  Over a period of time, the clause had evolved and the criminal justice system viewed by society had changed.  Senator James pointed out SB 354 was universally supported by the education system in Nevada including school teachers and administrators.  In his opinion, Senator James maintained corporal punishment in public schools was not effective and did not work.

 

Senator James read from a report which had been submitted to the Senate Committee by the National Association of School Psychologists, a section entitled Use and Effectiveness of Corporal Punishment:  "There have been numerous scientific investigations regarding the administration of corporal punishment as a disciplinary measure.  These studies have found that corporal punishment often is administered in a hap-hazard fashion rather than being used as a last resort.  The severity of punishment has been found to be inconsistent with the severity of infraction.  Further, even when specific limitations are set on the use of corporal punishment, they frequently are ignored.  Corporal punishment often appears to be administered in a discriminatory fashion; the most frequent recipients have been students with emotional or behavioral problems as well as black, hispanic, and lower socio-economic status white students.  In addition, corporal punishment most frequently is administered to male students by male staff.  The use of corporal punishment has not been found to significantly reduce school discipline problems or promote a positive learning environment for students or teachers.  The use of corporal punishment has been associated with broad range of undesirable consequences which potentially affects students, teachers, families, and the community.  Corporal punishment in the educational setting may increase anxiety for both recipients and observers and thus may decrease students learning.  Children learn many behaviors through modeling; thus, corporal punishment not only models violent solutions to problems, but it fails to demonstrate more positive techniques for students to learn.  It does not promote self-discipline and legitimizes violence and aggression as acceptable methods of problem solving by those adults from whom the student is expected to learn.  As a result, corporal punishment promotes a form of behavior that is inconsistent with the values of the school and it may increase the likelihood of violence and aggression as a means of solving problems."

 

Senator James clarified present policy stated corporal punishment could be used by the schools as a last resort.  In his opinion, the message sent was violence was the final solution when dealing with behavioral problems.

 

Senator James maintained any decision of corporal punishment administered should be made by the parents.  Senator James concluded if SB 354 was passed, Nevada would be provided a form of consistency on a statewide level and it would not interfere with the rights of parents to deal with their children's problems as they saw fit.

 

Chairman Williams pointed out private schools were not included in the bill; therefore, the message of no corporal punishment would only pertain to a portion of the children in Nevada, not all of them.  Senator James agreed the policy would be beneficial across the board; however, when parents chose a private school for their child, they were aware of the disciplinary policy of such schools.

 

In his opinion, Senator James was concerned if the bill encompassed private schools, there would be no chance of enacting such a measure.  Chairman Williams emphasized the Assembly Education Committee governed regulations relating to both private and public schools, and he felt there should be no discrimination between issues addressing whether a school was public or private.  Senator James clarified the disciplinary standards in the school system had been addressed differently and adding private schools to SB 354 would be changing existing law.

 

Mrs. de Braga referred to Section 2 regarding the word "attack" and she asked if it related to "physical attack."  Senator James responded the word was part of existing law and there had been no misinterpretation of it.  Senator James alluded to Subsection 3 defining corporal punishment as "the intentional infliction of physical pain upon or the physical restraint of a pupil for disciplinary purposes.  The term does not include the use of reasonable and necessary force:..."

 

Senator James submitted correspondence from the "End Violence Against the Next Generation, Inc." for the record (Exhibit E).

 

Henry Etchemendy, Executive Director, Nevada Association of School Boards, presented testimony in support of the bill.  Mr. Etchemendy pointed out currently there were seven districts allowing corporal punishment; however, the conditions permitting the punishment were extremely strict and seldom used.

The remaining districts had policies prohibiting corporal punishment.

 

Dr. Greg Betts, Rural School Districts of Nevada, spoke in support of SB 354.  Dr. Betts maintained the school districts which permitted corporal punishment were in favor of the bill.

 

Chairman Williams asked if Mr. Etchemendy or Dr. Betts had a problem with including private schools in the bill.  Mr. Etchemendy stated private schools were a separate matter and he reiterated current law addressed public schools only.

 

Mr. Collins expressed concern with the fact many teachers were leaving the profession since it was becoming extremely hard to maintain control without discipline.  In his opinion, Mr. Collins felt many instructors were playing "mind games" with the students since they "can't put a hand on them."  Dr. Betts pointed out there were several effective ways to change a child's behavior besides corporal punishment.  Dr. Betts agreed many teachers were leaving the profession; however, today's students appear to be burdened with more emotional concerns and problems than students faced many years ago. 

 

Lindsey Jydstrup, Nevada State Education Association, spoke on behalf of the association's president, Rick Milsap, and read from Mr. Milsap's prepared testimony in support of SB 354 (Exhibit F).  According to Mrs. Jydstrup, corporal punishment was not an effective deterrent or punishment for violent students, and there were many alternatives teachers could use for disruptive students such as putting them in time-out programs, separating them from the rest of the class, counseling, calling their parents or, in extreme cases, suspension and expulsion.

 

Mrs. Segerblom questioned if a teacher could "swat a student on the knuckle."  Mrs. Jydstrup replied under the definition of corporal punishment, it would not be allowed.

 

Mrs. de Braga referred to the issue of private schools and asked Mrs. Jydstrup to address the issue.  Mrs. Jydstrup pointed out the statute as written pertained to public schools and, as a parent, there was a difference between private and public schools and, accordingly, the choice should be up to the parent.  Mrs. de Braga was concerned the proposed language of the bill might segregate a particular group of children.  Mrs. Jydstrup responded she had no problem with including private schools; however, her main concern was to obtain a uniform policy throughout the state which would prohibit corporal punishment.

 

In his opinion, Chairman Williams emphasized the bill should include all schools, not only public schools.  Mr. Schneider commented the parents should have the option of sending their children to private or public schools, and they were normally aware of the disciplinary policies at such schools.

 

Carolyne Edwards, Clark County School District, explained current policy in her school district permitted corporal punishment; however, several members of the school board of trustees were in support of the bill.  According to Ms. Edwards, the current policy was discouraged since corporal punishment was not considered an effective form of discipline.

 

Ms. Edwards referred to the issue of private schools and pointed out they were certain state curriculum requirements governed for both private and public schools; however, there were many differentials between the two, including the discipline process, regardless of right or wrong.  Ms. Edwards was concerned if the language of SB 354 was amended, the bill would not move forward, and she urged the committee to support the bill as written.

 

Chairman Williams emphasized what some individuals would allow, due to politics, should not be compromised for the sake of children.  In his opinion, Chairman Williams felt if Nevada chose to abolish corporal punishment, it should apply to all schools in the state. 

 

Doug Byington, Nevada Association of School Administrators, spoke in favor of the bill and supported the modified definition of corporal punishment. 

 

Mr. Neighbors asked how the issue of private schools had been addressed in the Senate.  Mr. Byington responded he did not recall the issue ever surfacing.

 

Chairman Williams delayed action on the bill until the issue of private schools could be addressed.

 

Chairman Williams requested committee action on the following Bill Draft Requests:

 

      BDR 34-2024 -     Specifies relationship between certain statutory and regulatory provisions regarding absences of school employees and provisions of collective bargaining in agreement with the school district.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN CHOWNING MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF     BDR 34-2024.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN DE BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

      BDR 34-2023 -     Makes various changes regarding attendance at public school of certain suspended or expelled pupils.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF BDR 34-2023.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN SEGERBLOM SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED UNANIMOUSLY.

 

      BDR 34-2080 -     Prohibits gambling on intercollegiate athletic events.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN DE BRAGA MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF     BDR 34-2080.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN CHOWNING SECONDED THE MOTION.

 

      THE MOTION PASSED WITH ASSEMBLYMAN NEIGHBORS VOTING NO.

 

      BDR R-2081 -      Urges Congress to reconsider exemptions for certain states from federal prohibition against gambling on college sporting events.

 

      ASSEMBLYMAN CHOWNING MOVED FOR COMMITTEE INTRODUCTION OF     BDR R-2081.

 

      THE MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF A SECOND.

 

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.

 

     

                             RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

                                                                         

                            Marilyn Cole, Committee Secretary

??

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assembly Committee on Education

Date:  June 2, 1993

Page:  1