The Senate Committee on Human Resources and Facilities was called to order by Chairman Raymond D. Rawson, at 1:50 p.m., on Monday, February 15, 1999, in Room 2135 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

Senator Maurice Washington, Vice Chairman

Senator Randolph J. Townsend

Senator Mark Amodei

Senator Bernice Mathews

Senator Michael Schneider

Senator Valerie Wiener

GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT:

Senator William J. Raggio, Washoe County Senatorial District No. 3

Senator Ann O’Connell, Clark County Senatorial District No. 5

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

Kimberly Potvin, Committee Secretary

OTHERS PRESENT:

Senator Rawson opened the hearing on Senate Bill (S.B.) 49.

Senate Bill 49: Revises provisions regarding council to establish academic standards for public schools. (BDR S-863)

Senator William J. Raggio, Washoe County Senatorial District No. 3, emphasized his role as the Chairman of the Legislative Committee on Education and that he would be discussing issues resulting from that committee. The Senator began by discussing Senate Concurrent Resolution (S.C.R.) 3.

Senator Raggio described S.C.R. 3 as a provision of the Nevada Education Reform Act of 1997 (NERA) and stated, "NERA requires that high school accountability reports include the percentage of its graduates requiring remedial course work within institutions of the University and Community College System of Nevada (UCCSN)." The Senator expressed concern that only 37 percent of Nevada high school graduates were continuing into higher education, compared to a national average of almost 67 percent and in some states 90 percent.

Senator Raggio emphasized that almost half of these students continuing into higher education were involved in remedial courses. He stressed these concerns as factors for actions taken during the interim by the Legislative Committee on Education, including an increase of committee standards.

Senator Raggio acknowledged that no significant problems surfaced in gathering the percentage of high school graduates involved in remedial course work. However, he clarified that the school districts requested more detailed information when appearing before the interim Legislative Committee on Education.

Senator Raggio mentioned that the interim committee heard testimony that "school districts had requested individual student data to provide for analysis of problems at the course or classroom level." The Senator stressed that this information could assist high schools in redesigning their course curriculum with professional development decisions. He explained that restrictions arose through the federal law in the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). Senator Raggio stated that UCCSN questioned whether individual student records should be shared. The Senator emphasized that to create data concerning high school statistics, this was necessary information and could be gathered without students’ consent.

Senator Raggio testified that the interim Legislative Committee on Education was also advised by the school districts that information provided by Nevada’s higher education facilities regarding the strengths and weaknesses of Nevada’s recently trained teachers would be valuable. The Senator explained that the interim committee endorsed S.C.R. 3 to increase communication between the public school systems and higher education institutions.

Senator Raggio proceeded to page 3, line 8, of S.C.R. 3. The Senator summarized:

Senator Raggio mentioned that the higher education system is urged to develop a process involving consent forms for the release of student information to record improvement in the statistics. He added that the State Department of Education provides assistance to the Statewide Management of Automated Record Transfer (SMART) system or other relevant data sources to assist in this effort.

Senator Raggio explained that S.C.R. 3 encourages Nevada’s school districts to provide feedback to higher education facilities concerning Nevada’s teachers. The Senator stated that the State Department of Education and UCCSN were to study this matter and report to the Legislature in 2001.

Senator Raggio continued his testimony with S.B. 49 and emphasized this bill as a result from the interim Legislative Committee on Education, whose members noted the central component of the 1997 education-reform package as high academic standards. Senator Raggio stated a quote from the first meeting for the interim committee concerning directions to the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools. He quoted:

Senator Raggio mentioned Senate Bill 482 of the Sixty-ninth Session, which makes various changes governing education. He explained this bill, which was developed by the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools, to establish statewide standards before September 1, 1998, in English, math, and science.

Senator Raggio testified that these standards were adopted by the State Board of Education in August 1998 and would take effect within public schools during the 1999-2000 school year. The Senator emphasized that during the second phase of S.B. 482 of the Sixty-ninth Session, which is underway, the standards council is required to review the standards in arts, computer education, health/physical education, and social studies.

Senator Raggio testified that the interim Legislative Committee on Education reviewed the "phase 2" work plan for the academic standards council, including its "charge to create standards in these other subject areas." The Senator mentioned that clarifications were recommended in the descriptions of these subjects by educators, members of the academic standards council, and other instructors.

Senator Raggio explained the controversy of "social studies" in states adopting these standards. The Senator testified that the term could be too unspecific, implying history and geography as uninvolved with social studies. He stated that specifically mentioning civics and government would confirm these concepts in the social studies category. Senator Raggio mentioned that the interim Legislative Committee on Education recommended social studies’ standards to specify standards are developed in history, geography, economics, and government.

Senator Raggio stated that the interim committee raised questions concerning the required standards for computer education and whether to include technology in general. The Senator testified that the interim committee agreed on the broader approach to provide an increased flexibility addressing the educational applications of future technological innovations.

Senator Raggio referred to page 2, line 1 of S.B. 49, which amends NERA to add "and technology" to the requirement that the council develop content and performance standards for computer education. The Senator discussed the second proposed change on page 4, lines 23 and 24. He emphasized that "social studies" would include history, geography, economics, and government. He mentioned that the bill would be effective on passage and approval with the aforementioned changes affecting the standards, which are currently being drafted by the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools for "phase 2" of its work program. Senator Raggio added that the council has been notified of the proposed changes and the work is being conducted accordingly.

Senator Rawson questioned whether the effects of the amendments to S.B. 49 would be occur immediately. Senator Raggio confirmed the question.

Senator Schneider reinforced that only 37 percent of high school students in Nevada continue into higher education facilities. Senator Raggio stressed that the statistics were from the sixty-ninth session and Nevada’s are the lowest of any other state.

Senator Schneider asked whether 67 percent accurately indicated the amount of students enrolled in remedial classes. Senator Raggio answered that from 37 percent enlisted in higher education, almost half were enrolled in or required to take remedial courses during their first year of higher education. Senator Raggio questioned Pepper Sturm, Committee Policy Analyst, Research Division, Legislative Counsel Bureau, whether these statistics were accurate.

Mr. Sturm agreed that the statistics were accurate. Senator Raggio reiterated that these numbers originated 2 years ago and motivated his involvement with this effort.

In response to Senator Schneider, Senator Raggio testified that students receiving a high school education and diploma conflict with these statistics, which indicate that students are not measured properly or completing enough requirements. The Senator stated concern that these students would not have the capacity to compete with students from other countries.

Senator Schneider questioned whether the lower percentage of enrollment into Nevada’s higher education facilities resulted from high school graduates finding employment in the well-paying resort industry, instead of enrolling in college. The Senator asked whether the 37 percent involved the type of residents in Nevada being less educated than in other states.

Senator Raggio mentioned discussions involving those issues during the interim Legislative Committee on Education, where no definitive answer was decided. He surmised that the 37 percent could be that the students might not be challenged enough. The Senator explained that reports are being received from surveys of high school students in Nevada counties that mention there is not enough challenge within the education system. Senator Raggio stated that a more challenging program during earlier grades could develop an incentive within students to continue into higher education. Senator Raggio agreed with Senator Schneider that economic factors might exist to dissuade students from continuing into higher education. Senator Raggio emphasized that Nevada could not be that great of an exception when compared to the other states. Senator Raggio mentioned the improbability, considering that State of New York’s percentage resides at close to 90 percent.

Senator Rawson noted effects that may result from growth which should be recognized. The Senator emphasized that Nevada’s rapid growth did not allow time for the infrastructure to catch up. He considered that if 67 percent of high school graduates presently applied in Nevada for higher education, then the amount of available college slots would need to double. Senator Rawson emphasized that there would be no enrollment space for those high school students. He clarified that the problem involved many issues, including Nevada’s infrastructure.

Senator Raggio explained the situation when the measurements were taken 2 years ago. The Senator remarked that space in higher education institutions for students to enroll were available at that time. Senator Raggio stated that an incentive was needed to incite a student to become involved in higher education.

Senator Wiener questioned Senator Raggio about page 3, line 13 of S.B. 49. She asked whether there would be specificity to form how the consent of the students would be procured or recorded to produce a record of the action.

Senator Raggio emphasized that providing that type of information could be a violation of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). The Senator pointed out that research indicated it would not be a violation if the student consented. He said that there did not appear to be an invasion-of-privacy issue and most students would willingly provide the information. Senator Raggio emphasized that the goal was to improve and measure the statistics of the high school graduates continuing into higher education facilities.

Senator Ann O’Connell, Clark County Senatorial District No. 5, began her testimony by describing her involvement with the writing teams for the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools. The Senator mentioned the array of people involved and supportive of S.B. 49 including high school teachers, university professors, and parents with the intent of raising the standards. She pointed out that the writing process is complete and the next phase involves work on the performance standards.

Senator Mathews questioned whether the 37 percent statistic included the students enrolled at the freshman level within a higher education institution or if it only included students directly out of high school. She mentioned that students tend to be older when they enroll in community colleges or universities. The Senator asked if the number was a pure figure of high school students or a mixture of all students enrolled in freshman level courses.

Senator Raggio answered that the percentage included the number of high school graduates who continued on to higher education. Senator Rawson mentioned that high school students are more probable to access higher education facilities 3 to 4 years after high school graduation. Senator Raggio stressed that these percentages were measured identically throughout all states, in which Nevada’s results were last place.

Senator Mathews questioned Senator Raggio about the length of time Nevada has placed last in having the lowest percentage of high school students to enroll into higher education facilities. Senator Raggio was unsure of the specific time period, but clarified that Nevada was one of the last states to begin raising its education standards.

Jane Nichols, Ph.D., Vice Chancellor, Academic Research and Student Affairs, System Administration Office, University and Community College System of Nevada, testified to her support for S.C.R 3 and S.B. 49. Dr. Nichols noted that the report on remedial/developmental enrollments for summer and fall 1998 (Exhibit C. Original is on file in the Research Library.) had been sent to all the school districts and the Legislative Counsel Bureau. She mentioned that a benefit included in the Nevada Education Reform Act of 1997 (NERA) has been the ability of university systems and kindergarten through twelfth grade facilities to provide superior data to examine what takes place with students. Dr. Nichols emphasized that more information is now available concerning high schools and students beginning in the system.

Dr. Nichols addressed Senator Mathews by acknowledging that Nevada and Alaska have had the lowest college enrollment rates of any other states throughout the past 10 years. She clarified that the statistics in Nevada have risen to 38 percent, but continues to reside statistically behind Alaska.

Dr. Nichols testified that an estimated 25 percent of high school graduates are being placed in remedial courses when arriving at higher education institutions within 12 months of high school graduation. She mentioned that no difference appeared in these statistics between universities and community colleges. Dr. Nichols clarified that university students frequently meet testing admission standards, but have a weakness in English or math and are placed in remedial classes. She pointed out that a majority of the students do not require remediation in both subject areas, but only in one. Dr. Nichols explained that in universities, 37 percent of the students in remedial education are recent high school graduates, whereas the statistic drops to 16 percent in the community colleges. She clarified that this was primarily due to community colleges’ enrollment rate of adults returning to school.

Dr. Nichols testified that more statistics are available this year, including the amount of students who went to which institution from each high school and the percentage of students placed in remedial classes. She clarified the importance of this information to achieve better communication between high schools and higher education facilities concerning expectations for academic performance. Dr. Nichols mentioned these statistics as imperative to begin aligning placement tests and performance measures with the new kindergarten through twelfth grade standards. She pointed out that high schools want to know which students are being placed in remedial courses to develop the causes. Dr. Nichols testified that the high schools want to know in advance if they can prevent college students from needing remedial courses. She clarified that remedial courses accrue higher costs and resources for educational facilities, whereas proactive measures could reduce these costs.

Dr. Nichols testified to several issues included in S.C.R. 3. She emphasized the support provided by the University and College System of Nevada. Dr. Nichols provided examples of problems involving consent forms to grant permission to student information. She explained that many students who apply for admission in colleges or universities are not 18 years of age, which requires permission of a parent to receive student information. Dr. Nichols mentioned that many students enroll in a single course, where no formal admission process is in place and the information is not provided.

Dr. Nichols noted that community colleges have previously not collected the high school transcripts for all attending students. She explained that this information will now be gathered and the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools will be examining the type of predictors might cause a student to have low academic performance. Dr. Nichols emphasized that individual student’s identity will be protected in this process.

Dr. Nichols commented that the school districts are being asked to provide information to all other educational institutions on the strengths and weaknesses of Nevada-trained teachers. She stressed this as a necessary action.

Senator Amodei asked Dr. Nichols to describe an incoming student’s process who is placed in one of Nevada’s higher education facilities in a remedial course. He clarified that students may appear accurate through one institution’s test indicators, but then arrive at another institution where these indicators differ. The Senator requested that Dr. Nichols clarify the uniformity and the process of creating standards between different institutions. Senator Amodei also inquired whether the language in S.C.R. 3 would facilitate a complete information exchange between high schools and higher education facilities concerning expectations of students in specific areas.

Dr. Nichols answered that the terminology included in S.C.R. 3 clarified that the University and Community College System of Nevada is required to report to the Legislative Committee on Education the accomplishments made in educational facilities. She commented that sharing of information includes sharing test scores in remedial course placement, first and second semester grades, achievement scores on the American College Test (ACT) and the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) in relation to the grades achieved in regular courses. Dr. Nichols explained that the higher educational institutions requested information on proficiency exam test scores completed in the high schools, to track and evaluates a student’s readiness for college. She clarified that models are being examined in other states, where articulation between high school and college begins in eighth grade. She emphasized that students can indicate through these test scores their readiness for college.

Dr. Nichols clarified that placement in universities for math or English derives from SAT and ACT scores. She mentioned that this information is available to the public and high school counselors. Dr. Nichols stated most students attending community colleges have not taken the SAT or ACT tests. She stated that many students might attend the community colleges for this reason. Dr. Nichols stated that some students are unaware these scores are required to enroll in higher education facilities. She explained that these students arrive at community colleges without any other measure than high school grades. Dr. Nichols stated that the University and Community College System of Nevada utilize all nationally standardized placement tests for college readiness. She emphasized that the community colleges meet to discuss their placement methods and scores. Dr. Nichols emphasized that the long-term desire is to attach the placement tests for recent graduates to high school exams.

Ray E. Bacon, Lobbyist, Nevada Manufacturing Association, began his testimony by discussing information received by a manufacturing plant manager in Indiana 2 to 3 years ago. Mr. Bacon explained that the gentleman became a school board member and requested from the Educational Testing Service (ETS), SAT scores by class standing. Mr. Bacon clarified that the percentage of students that take SAT scores vary substantially between tests and states. He stated that these scores show students separated in percentiles, beginning with students in the top 10 percent of their class. Mr. Bacon explained that these top 10 percent of Nevada high school students, from 1992 through 1996, ranged from the position of 37 to 39 to 44 to 43 and to 45, respectively. He recognized that even the best of Nevada students are not improving.

Mr. Bacon stated his support for S.C.R. 3. He clarified that parental pressure is needed to open student’s test scores and records. He explained that it should especially include test scores that are the result of taxpayer support. Mr. Bacon asserted that the existing proficiency tests and where the standards should be are still far apart. He emphasized that Nevada is testing with a 50 percent failure rate and only a 64 percent passing score on the math test.

Mr. Bacon mentioned that Tennessee is tracking student performance by teachers in the five major subjects. He explained that issues such as financial status and race are considered irrelevant for a lack in student performance. Mr. Bacon noted that the performance of the teachers vary substantially from subject to subject and in Tennessee appears to be a defining factor in the progress of a student’s education. He mentioned a survey being conducted in Tennessee that demonstrates the impact of a teacher who is weak in a certain subject area appears evident in a student’s progress 3 to 4 years later. He remarked that some principals are moving the students of a weak teacher in math or English and to a teacher that is extremely strong in that subject area the following year.

Chairman Rawson relinquished control of the meeting to Vice Chairman Washington.

Henry Etchemendy, Lobbyist, Nevada Association of School Boards, emphasized support for S.C.R. 3. He stated that most educators have attended post-secondary education, realize the benefits involved, and would like students to accomplish that goal.

Mr. Etchemendy commented on page 3, lines 26 through 30 of S.C.R. 3, which states:

Mr. Etchemendy emphasized that the SMART system is not complete. He explained that this session additional funding for completion of SMART was to be created. Mr. Etchemendy declared that the State Department of Education submitted a budget request for the current biennium for $14.8 million to complete the system and cover the costs of the other districts. He stated that appropriation was not included in the Governor’s budget. Mr. Etchemendy stressed that the districts will do whatever is possible with the current systems to provide the information necessary. He pointed out that the Nevada Association of School Boards will complete the SMART system when the funding is available.

Keith Rheault, Deputy Superintendent for Instructional, Research and Evaluative Services, State Department of Education, addressed both S.C.R. 3 and S.B. 49. He emphasized the State Department of Education’s support. Mr. Rheault mentioned that the concerns that the State Department of Education have already been brought up during other testimony. He defined that S.C.R. 3 relies on using the SMART system and no funding is currently available to complete the system. Mr. Rheault expressed concern involving FERPA requirements and the records being used in other states.

Mr. Rheault testified that the State Department of Education supports S.B. 49. He stated that the changes in S.B. 49 have been identified, and if passed, the work will remain on schedule to include the four areas in social studies and technology. He called attention to page 3, subsection 6. Mr. Rheault mentioned the responsibility of the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools to submit any recommendations to the Director of the Legislative Counsel Bureau for transmission to the Nevada Legislature. He clarified that there were a few amendments requested along with the funding request. Mr. Rheault asked if an amendment could be submitted to modify this regulation. He explained that the suggested amendment (Exhibit D) involves modifying the time line for development and approval of the "phase 2" process. Mr. Rheault stressed that one amendment to S.B. 49 moves the approval date from September 1, 1999, to January 15, 1999.

Vice Chairman Washington recommended that Mr. Rheault submit the recommendation to Senator Raggio, Chairman, Legislative Committee on Education. He explained that Senator Raggio would decide if appropriations were to be made for the amendment to S.B. 49.

Jeanie Simons, Concerned Citizen, testified that if FERPA is entered on the Internet, a model of regulations recommended for post-secondary schools appears for parents and children to be aware of their rights under FERPA (Exhibit E). She emphasized item 6, section C, of the Internet document, which explained data-gathering activities. Mrs. Simons wanted the public to be aware of this document.

Kristine K. Jensen, Lobbyist, Nevada Concerned Citizens, expressed her frustration that any issues involving S.C.R. 3 were not understood or worked out prior to this hearing. She presented a list of several questions (Exhibit F) involving S.C.R. 3.

Senator Washington questioned Dr. Nichols for information concerning remedial students. The Senator asked if numbers were available on the retention ratios of those freshman prepared to enter into the higher education systems. He mentioned the fact that many students leave prior to completion of a degree.

Dr. Nichols explained that the University and Community College System of Nevada is involved in a federal study that began in 1991. She mentioned that recent high school graduates that are placed in remedial classes are being tracked on whether they successfully complete the courses and the retention rate involved. Dr. Nichols clarified that persistence defined completing the freshman to sophomore year successfully. She explained that on a national level, the data indicates that students who complete remedial courses successfully and proceed into other courses tend to be successful. She emphasized that Nevada will soon be tracking its own data.

Debbie J. Smith, Lobbyist, Chairwoman, Academics Standard Council, began her testimony by providing an overview regarding the work involved with S.B. 482. Ms. Smith read from the 1999 Legislative Report on Academic Standards Activities from the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools (Exhibit G. Original is on file in the Research Library.). She described the areas of concern that the standards will impact, including professional development, remediation, and special need students. Ms. Smith explained that on August 20, 1999, in a joint meeting with the State Board of Education the content standards for English, math, and science were adopted.

Ms. Smith explained that the Council to Establish Academic Standards for Public Schools, made recommendations to the State Board of Education regarding the assessments that are tied to the standards, which she clarified, was adopted at the December 1998 meeting. She stated that the performance standards should be completed on social studies, computer, the arts, and health by the beginning of the year 2000.

Ms. Smith drew attention to the publication Raising the Bar (Exhibit H). She explained the publication as an overview of what a standard looks like and implies, and how it affects a student. Ms. Smith defined the goal of this publication to inform educators, the public, parents, and business or community groups.

Ms. Smith testified about the list of legislative issues that the council would like to support in Exhibit G. She explained the critical need for assessment to be funded and accountability for schools to be judged and held accountable in a criterion reference test attached to the standards.

Vice Chairman Washington requested a motion on S.C.R. 3.

SENATOR WIENER MOVED TO ADOPT S.C.R. 3.

SENATOR MATHEWS SECONDED THE MOTION.

THE MOTION CARRIED (SENATORS RAWSON, TOWNSEND,

AND AMODEI WERE ABSENT FOR THE VOTE.)

*****

Vice Chairman Washington adjourned the meeting at 3:50 p.m.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

Kimberly Potvin,

Committee Secretary

APPROVED BY:

Senator Raymond D. Rawson, Chairman

DATE: