MINUTES OF THE meeting

of the

ASSEMBLY Committee on Education

 

Seventy-First Session

March 5, 2001

 

 

The Committee on Educationwas called to order at 3:45 p.m., on Monday, March 5, 2001.  Chairman Wendell Williams presided in Room 3143 of the Legislative Building, Carson City, Nevada.  Exhibit A is the Agenda.  Exhibit B is the Guest List.  All exhibits are available and on file at the Research Library of the Legislative Counsel Bureau.

 

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Mr.                     Wendell Williams, Chairman

Ms.                     Bonnie Parnell, Vice Chairman

Mrs.                     Sharron Angle

Mrs.                     Barbara Cegavske

Mrs.                     Vonne Chowning

Mr.                     Tom Collins

Mrs.                     Marcia de Braga

Mr.                     Don Gustavson

Mrs.                     Ellen Koivisto

Mr.                     Mark Manendo

Mrs.                     Debbie Smith

Ms.                     Kathy Von Tobel

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT:

 

None

 

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:

 

Susan Scholley, Committee Policy Analyst

Linda Corbett, Committee Manager

Mary Drake, Committee Secretary

 

OTHERS PRESENT:

 

Dr. Skip Wenda, Southern Office Administrator, Nevada Department of Education

Chris Chairsell, Intern Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs, UCCSN

Vernon Luft, Associate Dean, University of Nevada, Reno

Dr. George Ann Rice, Assistant Superintendent, Clark County School District

Dr. Linda Quinn, Associate Dean, University of Nevada, Las Vegas

Danny Gonzales, Director of Institutional Research, Great Basin College

Dr. Kevin Laxalt, Southern Nevada Community College

Rose McKinney-James, Clark County School District

 

Chairman Williams asked that the record reflect that Mr. Gustavson had an appointment and would be excused later from this meeting.

 

Dr. Skip Wenda, Nevada Department of Education, Southern Office Administrator and Director of Teacher Licensing, stated that A.B 47 of the Seventieth Session was in many ways a “landmark” as it required the Department of Education (DOE) to work in conjunction with the University and Community College System of Nevada (UCCSN) to develop a plan for recruitment and professional development of teachers (Exhibit C). 

 

Dr. Wenda said that Nevada needed a coordinated system of education; a sense of interdependence, not independence, functioning together rather than competing for dollars; and funds for educational reforms that were concrete, measurable, and accountable.  Funded education produced knowledgeable students who effortlessly transferred their skills to the work force. 

 

The A.B. 47 of the Seventieth Session plan involved K-12 teachers, colleges of education, community colleges, the state DOE, and government, focusing on the students and was accountable for the money it received.  To have students with the knowledge, skills and disposition to be productive workers, Nevada must fund programs that developed the group that had the most impact on student performance—educators. 

 

At full capacity, he claimed, only 18 percent of Nevada educators came from the Nevada university system.  The standards had increased for these Nevada-trained teachers.  A.B. 47 of the Seventieth Session was an effort to provide meaningful professional development within the state for all teachers, either trained in the state or recruited from elsewhere.

 

Chris Chairsell, Intern Associate Vice Chancellor for Academic and Student Affairs, UCCSN, brought a number of institutions together to review their common challenges and individual strategies for recruitment and preparation of teachers. 

 

Vernon Luft, University of Nevada, Reno (UNR), gave a brief overview of the College of Education programs.  With respect to A.B. 47 of the Seventieth Session, UNR wished to continue ongoing recruitment activities, including the Dean’s Future Scholars Program; provide scholarships for post-baccalaureate students who entered the teacher education program; provide scholarships to post-baccalaureate student teaching interns during their internship semester; establish a teacher education student competitive loan forgiveness program, forgiving 20 percent for each year that they teach in the state; and establish a teacher education student retention initiative focused on quality advising.  Dr. Luft concluded his presentation by requesting support for the plan that was submitted for A.B. 47 of the Seventieth Session.

 

Ms. Parnell asked whether they had ever thought of a creative method to assist student teachers so that they were not working in a “deficit,” i.e., paying for their tuition, yet unable to earn an income.  She also wondered if UNR offered seminars for teachers to assist them with taking the Praxis exam.

 

Dr. Luft replied that some institutions had created partnerships with local school districts for a year-long paid internship whereby student teachers moved into unfilled teaching positions.  UNR had not done that because they were unable to differentiate who would get a paid internship and who would not.  As to the Praxis exam, UNR had computer software teachers used for practice as often as they needed.

 

Chairman Williams inquired about nontraditional college students and whether student teaching was offered at nontraditional hours.  Dr. George Ann Rice, Clark County School District (CCSD), responded that her district did have Sunset as an option for student teaching for those who work during the day.

 

Ms. Parnell replied that as Sunset was in Clark County, there were still 16 counties where this issue was not addressed.  Many people had to leave daytime salaried jobs in order to student teach.  She felt this was a serious obstacle.

 

Dr. Wenda said they had created a solution for this situation:  Student teachers obtained a substitute teaching certificate.  Most of the time a long-term substitute position was obtained for them. 

 

Mrs. Smith told Dr. Wenda she was concerned about the missed opportunity for the relationship of the student teacher with the classroom teacher and the lost mentoring in a purely substitute teacher role.  Dr. Wenda replied that they did not permit that to happen.

 

Ms. Von Tobel asked Dr. Rice if this long-term “subbing” was done in Clark County.  Dr. Rice confirmed that it was, especially in cases where they could not fill a position permanently.  CCSD worked with Dr. Wenda to accomplish it.  It was not a general rule, but rather a “special needs” situation only.

 

Dr. Linda Quinn, Associate Dean, University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), told the committee the UNLV College of Education had seven undergraduate majors.  During the fall of 2000, there were 1,970 admitted undergraduate students.  Students could take the first two years of course work at the Community College of Southern Nevada.  Dr. Quinn addressed the Millennium Schools Program (Exhibit C) for developing quality teachers.  The goal of this program was to create a teaching/learning cycle where all questions had the potential to develop into ideas and actions that lead to understanding and improving the teaching/learning environment for K-12 student success.

 

Another issue Dr. Quinn spoke about was advisement.  There was one fulltime advisor who saw 300 to 400 students per month.  From the Advising Center, students were directed to faculty advisors.  The Center followed the student all the way through the degree program to student teaching placement.  This was very difficult for one advisor to accomplish, so Dr. Quinn requested the committee’s consideration for A.B. 47 of the Seventieth Session and the Millennium School Program and advising.

 

Danny Gonzales, Director of Institutional Research, Great Basin College, testified that the college had a strong partnership with Northeastern Nevada Regional Professional Development Program.  The school had been able to identify and address some of the teacher shortages in the Elko area.  Over 90 percent of the teachers in that area were trained outside the state.  An elementary education program begun in the fall of 1999 would graduate 25 teachers in May of 2001.

 

Mr. Gonzales confirmed what was just stated by UNR and UNLV, that advisement was critical.  Great Basin College was developing a stronger academic advisement plan, and planning a high school student college fair and high school career exploration day. 

 

Chris Chairsell added that Great Basin College gave a presentation at a national conference on community colleges wanting to offer baccalaureate degrees.  It was obvious, she said, that they were one of the most progressive community colleges in the nation, “head and shoulders above the rest.”

 

Dr. Kevin Laxalt, Southern Nevada Community College (SNCC), pointed out that the SNCC teacher education program had only been in existence for three and a half years, but they did offer four different pathways for future educators:  early childhood education, elementary education, secondary education, and special education.  These represented about 15 units, which could be transferred to an upper level institution.  Dr. Laxalt explained the diversity of backgrounds of the students and why she felt these would be Nevada teachers. 

 

Referring to page 25 of Exhibit C, Dr. Laxalt recommended scholarship and book money, a fulltime liaison staff position to work with the school district, a fulltime recruiter to concentrate on minority populations, a fulltime education advisor, advertising money to promote programs, and library materials.

 

Ms. Von Tobel commented perhaps if the community college would change their policy on books, not using them as fundraisers for many activities, education students could afford those books.  She also said she had heard complaints from numerous student teachers that UNLV is not student friendly.  She hoped to someday see the students complete their [baccalaureate] degrees at the community college. 

 

Chris Chairsell concluded the reports by adding a responsibility of the chancellor’s office was to obtain funds beyond the state appropriations.  They have partnered with the Educational Commission of the States and submitted a grant request to study public policies that prevent community colleges from offering the baccalaureate degrees in the preparation of teachers and teaching technology. 

 

Chairman Williams asked why test teachers who had successfully taught for 15 years or so.  Dr. Skip Wenda felt that this was unnecessary because these teachers had a proven track record.  The purpose of the test was to determine if new graduates possessed competence and pedagogical knowledge, not to test teachers after years of experience.  The Nevada Revised Statutes did require the testing of all initial applicants, but A.B. 142, an upcoming bill, allowed the commission to develop alternative methods of assessment for these experienced teachers.  The DOE went on record as supporting that 100 percent.

 

Chairman Williams then inquired how many teachers Nevada lost each year because of the testing.  Dr. Wenda affirmed that Nevada had the highest turnover rate in the nation, at 54 percent within the first four years.  That cost the state a great deal of money.

 

Concerned about this turnover, Mrs. Angle wished to know where these 54 percent go.  That percent represented people who were no longer in the teaching force in Nevada, either leaving teaching or leaving the state to teach elsewhere. 

 

Mrs. Koivisto asked why they left and was told by Dr. Wenda that it was no secret teachers could make more money parking cars on the Strip or at McCarran Airport.  The reasons most people had given for leaving during the first four years had to do with inadequate support, inadequate professional development, and inadequate induction and mentoring programs.

 

Ms. Parnell wanted to know how many people left after three years at the end of their provisional because of the testing.  Dr Wenda replied it was too soon to know, but records would be kept; however, if A.B. 142 passed this session there would be no need to keep those numbers.  These tests cost up to $85. 

 

Dr. Wenda continued his presentation on professional development.  Many entities within the state offered such and he recommended coordination and facilitation between them to avoid costly duplication; digitalization and distribution of professional development for Nevada K-12 teachers; mentoring and induction programs; and restructuring of the license system to a performance-based system.

 

Ms. Von Tobel had done some substitute teaching.  Many of the student teachers she had met expressed a fear of substitute teaching, preferring the security of a permanent classroom.  She felt that mentoring was very important for the student teachers who were long-term substitutes.  Dr. Wenda admitted that it was true that some teachers were frightened on that first day, which was why they needed the mentoring program.

 

Mrs. Cegavske shared with the committee she had received a phone call from the Education Commission of the States.  They indicated they had done a six-month study and concluded the Great Basin College nationally had the best program anywhere.  Mrs. Cegavske planned a weekend field trip to Great Basin College to learn about their program.  Every state suffered from the same problem—lack of teachers and lack of students interested in becoming teachers.  It was a concern to her that no mentoring was done in the colleges to encourage students to stay in the education program.  Some students have complained they did not have enough time in the classroom to prepare to be teachers.  Skip Wenda responded the State Board of Education passed a regulation that required all providers of teacher preparation programs to adopt the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) 2000 Standards.  Another concern was money; people often did not choose teaching because of the lower salaries, starting $8,000 below other Bachelor degreed positions.  Teaching was not seen as a “glamorous” profession. 

 

Dr. Rice spoke of the need for special education teachers in the Clark County School District.  The school board gave permission and funded salaries and benefits for 30 of the best who had already done their core work, and who knew they wanted to be special education teachers.  UNLV designed a special program and produced 60 special education teachers in three years.  These people had been instructional aides; they would stay in the district and were predominantly minority.

 

To obtain teachers, Clark County had alternative routes to licensure (Exhibit D) for persons who wished to become early childhood, bilingual or special education teachers.  They had offered, through UNLV, education classes via the Internet; and, they video-conferenced presentations to college students across the nation.  The district had also contacted military personnel to attempt to interest them in entering teaching after service

 

Ms. Von Tobel inquired whether the elimination of the penalty for retired teachers returning to the classroom, so they could keep their retirement, would bring teachers back.  Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) was sponsoring such a bill.  Dr. Rice felt this was a “band-aid” they sought.  They expected great numbers of vacancies and preferred to bring back master teachers rather than long-term substitutes.  This was “vital” to their survival she said. 

 

Ms. Von Tobel asked how many teachers might be interested in doing this.  Clark County was in the process of contacting principals and retired principals to identify any retired teachers who they felt should be called back into service.  Dr. Rice stated they would look at anyone who retired before September of 2000.

 

Chairman Williams requested the number of the bill and its status.  Rose McKinney-James, Clark County School District, understood that the bill was under final review and would be sponsored through PERS and would give it to the committee as soon as they received it.  Dr. Rice stated that it had been in their original proposal as a bill draft, but PERS took it and would submit it as their bill draft. 

 

Ms. Parnell cautioned the bill was a band-aid to the problem.  The generation about to retire might come back for a year, and then the problem was doubled; the initial retiree had gone and the rehired retiree left.

 

Chairman Williams stated it was a good sign that many things were being done to resolve this dilemma. 

 

There being no further business nor discussion, the meeting adjourned at 5:23 p.m.

 

 

 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED:

 

 

 

Mary Drake

Committee Secretary

 

 

 

 

Linda Lee Nary

Transcribing Secretary

 

 

 

APPROVED BY:

 

 

 

 

                       

Assemblyman Wendell Williams, Chairman

 

 

DATE: