MINUTES OF THE ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION Sixty-eighth Session February 7, 1995 The Committee on Education was called to order at 3:30 p.m., on Tuesday, February 7, 1995, Chairman Wendell P. Williams presiding in Room 4410 of the Grant Sawyer Office Building, Las Vegas, Nevada. Exhibit A is the Agenda. Exhibit B is the Attendance Roster. COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. William Z. (Bill) Harrington, Chairman Mr. Wendell P. Williams, Chairman Mrs. Gene Wines Segerblom, Vice Chairman Mrs. Patricia A. Tripple, Vice Chairman Mr. Thomas Batten Mr. Max Bennett Mrs. Deanna Braunlin Mrs. Marcia de Braga Mr. Mark Manendo Mr. P.M. Roy Neighbors Mrs. Jeannine Stroth COMMITTEE MEMBERS ABSENT: Mrs. Vonne Chowning (Excused) GUEST LEGISLATORS PRESENT: None STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT: H. Pepper Sturm, Chief Principal Research Analyst OTHERS PRESENT: Debbie Cahill, Nevada State Education Association Suzann Marrazzo, Horizon High School Antonio Zavala, Student, Horizon High School Junie Cruz, Student, Horizon High School Scott Dickinson, NCC G. C. Gralrunener Jerry Connor, Nevada Association of School Administrators Leanora Hedrick, All Parents United Becky Coleman, Boulder City Douglas M. Stoker, Department of Education Nadia J. Depart, Student, Grant Sawyer and Marion Earl Schools Deborah R. Jones, Student, Grant Sawyer and Marion Earl Schools Maria Caivez, Clark County School District Barbara Leganstre Kris Jensen, Nevada Concerned Citizens Wanda Rosenbaum, All Parents United, Nevada Parent Coalition Neil Twitchell, All Parents United, Citizens for Community Schools Bobbi Youngblood Sylvia Harber Becky Albiston, Carson City School District Dan McTurrneny, Carson City School District John J. Erlanger, Bond Oversight Manager Louis Baccus, Parent The hearing was opened on Assembly Bill 4. ASSEMBLY BILL 4 - Allows pupils to earn credits toward graduation from high school by completing community service projects. Ms. Maria Chairez, Director, Horizon Project, an alternative program in Clark County designed to keep students in school, introduced two speakers in favor of A.B. 4, Ms. Suzann Marrazzo, and Mr. Antonio Zavala. Ms. Suzann Marrazzo, teacher, Horizon High School South, explained how two years ago she and others helped author A.B. 527. She spoke of the great need to motivate her students in ways other than research papers or commonly practiced teaching methods. A better motivation, in her opinion, is for the students to do community service work, seeing themselves as champions and accomplishing great things. Those experiences need to be validated. Ms. Marrazzo stated community service is a "win-win" situation and asked the committee to allow students in the State of Nevada to make great contributions to society. She explained Horizon High School is a school for "at-risk" youth. These students are resilient, with each student having some sort of heartache, something in their lives placing them outside a traditional educational setting. The students are especially in need of validation of the good things they do for the community. The program will be used to aid those students who are credit deficient. She asked the committee to please judge their efforts by the young people represented at the meeting. Mr. Antonio Zavala, a senior at Horizon High School, South Campus, spoke in favor of A.B. 4. He noted students at Horizon High School are credit deficient and elective credit classes are difficult to enroll in. The bill enables the students to do community service, receive credit for doing so, and enable them to meet graduation requirements. He felt passage of A.B. 4 would help the community, benefit the students, motivate the spirit of the students, help the students learn to help people, and become better citizens. He compared learning how to help others to learning how to talk and read; skills that are never forgotten. Participation in the community service program sets an example for others as well. He noted how beautiful it is when you help someone and that person looks back at you and says, "thank you". Mr. Zavala requested the committee say "thank you", and pass the bill, thereby recognizing the student's effort. Ms. Marrazzo complimented her students for their heart, empathy, compassion, and inspiration. She felt if society is going to be prepared it will be done by the nation's youth and noted it is time to empower them. Assemblyman Bennett asked how much time should be spent in community service to earn a credit. Ms. Marrazzo replied sixty (60) hours for a semester or half credit is the unit being used. She noted the time spent has to be equal to the time spent in classroom instruction. Assemblyman Segerblom inquired if the program was monitored by teachers. Ms. Marrazzo answered affirmatively. Teachers and supervisors would coordinate the effort, making it a work-study effort. Chairman Williams indicated in Section 2, subsection 2, of A.B. 4, the approval of the state board, and the board of trustees of each school district is necessary. Assemblyman Batten asked for clarification on Section 1, subsection 1, line 9. He inquired if in referring to academic credit it is meant the "three R's" or if elective credit is being used as a substitute. Ms. Marrazzo explained this is in lieu of other elective options, such as art. Ms. Chairez introduced two additional speakers, Ms. Junie Cruz, and Dr. Don McHenry. Ms. Junie Cruz, student at Horizon High East, stated she is enrolled in the Crime and Justice Course and plans on volunteering this semester at the Neighborhood Justice Center where she will have new experience and earn credits toward graduation. Ms. Cruz said she believes an education is everything and noted community service is a good thing to do when a student is credit deficient. Dr. Don McHenry, area Superintendent for Alternative Education spoke in support of A.B. 4. He explained the school district began the community service credit program in Clark County through a committee formed in the Department of Curriculum and Instruction. The committee developed the curriculum and a set of guidelines by which community service is operated in Clark County. He noted how the community service plan must be approved and explained how forms, monitoring, and approvals are required by the student, parents and instructors as well as the building administrator to insure the activity is of merit. Dr. McHenry noted one of the needs of public education today is partnerships in the community, partnerships in business, and partnerships with charitable organizations. The organizations benefit as well as the students learning about the good feelings that come from community service. Dr. McHenry stated a revised regulation was adopted last summer by the Clark County School District, Regulation 5127, which allowed for community service as an elective credit. Sixty hours of participation are required in order to earn one-half credit. A student may not earn more than one full credit during their four year high school career in community service according to Clark County School District guidelines. A brochure was distributed to committee members outlining credit options available to students outside of the typical curriculum, (Exhibit C). Assemblyman Harrington stated his doubts about A.B. 4 were dispelled by the testimony of Ms. Cruz and Mr. Zavalas and indicated his support of the bill. Assemblyman Segerblom inquired if she taught Dr. McHenry. Dr. McHenry replied affirmatively. Assemblyman Bennett, referring to (Exhibit C), inquired if community service was already allowed in the Clark County School District. Dr. McHenry replied affirmatively. Assemblyman Bennett asked why a bill was needed. Dr. McHenry explained a number of counties in the northern part of the state would like to see this type of program as an option encouraged by the state. Assemblyman Manendo inquired what school districts do not have this program. Dr. McHenry replied he did not know, but offered to try and find the information. Assemblyman Manendo stated he would appreciate the information and complimented the program. Assemblyman Bennett commended Ms. Cruz and Mr. Zavala for coming before the committee. Ms. Kristine Jensen, representing Nevada Concerned Citizens spoke against A.B. 4 and expressed concern about the problems of graduation credits. A shift from academic standards with goals and objectives over to performances demonstrated by behaviors was the basis of the concern. Ms. Jensen noted the value of community service with the internal motivations required. She did not feel the motivations should be external and be attached to a diploma. The Bethlehem, Pennsylvania school district has shifted from voluntary community service to mandatory community service with some seniors having their diplomas in jeopardy due to not completing community service requirements. Nevada Concerned Citizens supports high academic standards and recognizes the concerns of obtaining sufficient graduation credits. They asked the committee to find other mechanisms of addressing those concerns. Chairman Williams stated there is no language in the bill allowing community service to substitute for credit deficiencies. Ms. Jensen said it is her understanding when a student misses one course, or fails one course, their diploma is put in jeopardy. Students are trying to make up those credits for graduation by participating in community service. Chairman Williams stated he did not see anything of that sort in the language of the bill. Ms. Jensen quoted Section 1, line 9. Section 2, line 14. Chairman Williams noted nothing was stated for credit deficiencies. According to the language in the bill in Section 2, when community service credits are approved by school boards the credits will be used toward graduation but not to support or take care of credit deficiencies. Assemblyman Batten reminded the committee this has nothing to do with core classes and asked what the difference would be. Ms. Jensen explained community service has its own external or internal rewards and to expand the courses for graduation credit opens up areas which need to be watched. The hearing was closed on A. B. 4. Chairman Williams explained action could be taken on a bill while the committee meets in Las Vegas, but the bill must again be ratified, if passed, when the committee returns to Carson City. Chairman Williams submitted to the record a statement from Assemblywoman Chris Giunchigliani who sponsored the bill, (Exhibit D). ASSEMBLYMAN HARRINGTON MOVED DO PASS A. B. 4. MRS. de BRAGA SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY BY THOSE PRESENT. The hearing was opened on Assembly Bill 112. ASSEMBLY BILL 112 - Revises provisions governing membership of commission on professional standards in education. Ms. Debbie Cahill, representing the Nevada State Education Association, spoke in favor of A. B. 112 from prepared remarks, (Exhibit E). Assemblyman Batten asked if private schools were currently under state guidelines as far as their curriculums, etc., were concerned or if they created their own. Ms. Cahill replied private schools licensed under N.R.S. 394 have curriculum requirements in statute, but she was unsure of schools operating under exempt licensure. Assemblyman Batten asked why if there are some state guidelines governing private schools, what is the problem with having a representative from the private schools sit on the board. Ms. Cahill stated the Commission deals only with issues of licensure. It does not address issues of curriculum, local school policies, or state regulations dealing with curriculum or activities within the school district. Right now 186 people are represented by one person on the Commission and NSEA feels this is a disparate representation. In the construction in Subsection 2, persons who are appointed to the Commission represent a specialty area and no special endorsement exists for private school instructors, they are either secondary, elementary or special education teachers and it is felt they do not need a separate representative on the Commission. Assemblyman Batten inquired if the private school teachers had a teachers' union. Ms. Cahill answered there was no union she was aware of. Assemblyman Harrington noted the Commission contains nine members, eight of whom are appointed by the Governor, who chooses from a list given to him by the teachers' and administrators' unions. He felt having the person on the Commission representing private schools was to give a private sector perspective. He suggested more perspective might be appropriate, not only from the educators but from the parents as well. Taking out a position removes a broader constituency. He inquired whether or not the private school representative had been useful to the Commission. Ms. Cahill replied the private school representative was indeed useful. She pointed out that Dr. Richardson, who has served on the Commission, has brought good perspective to the Commission. She noted a mechanical problem exists in the bill as well. In Section 5 there is no mechanism by which the appointment of a licensed private school representative is made. When vacancies have occurred, recommendations have not been received for private school representatives. Assemblyman Bennett noted the mechanism appears in Section 1, Lines 17 through 19 of the bill. He stated the governor is the mechanism and inquired what the problem was. Ms. Cahill replied in Section 5 it states one member, either teacher, administrator, or psychologist must be employed by a private school. It does not say it has to be any of the above persons and no recommendation process from the groups who recommend people to serve on the Commission exists. When the position becomes vacant, it is automatically refilled by the person currently holding it. Administrators do not feel this is to their advantage. Assemblyman Batten said all the committee would have to do is to make an amendment to the bill to add a mechanism to insure a private school teacher can be successfully appointed to the Commission. Ms. Cahill agreed that sort of amendment could be proposed. NSEA would return to their point that private school teachers do not represent a particular interest just because they teach in a private school. They still fall in the category of elementary, secondary, or special education teachers. Ms. Cahill stated she does not understand the need to give 186 teachers representation on the Commission when their interests can be represented by the specialty area in which they are licensed. Assemblyman Harrington said many private school teachers, even though not required to meet the standards, are expected to meet the standards in some schools. Many teachers want to maintain their licensure of their own initiative. He feels those teachers should have some input as to what the standards should be. Ms. Cahill noted when the Commission is in the process of reviewing regulations and feels changes need to be made, a task force is generally established. She suggested private school teachers could be part of the task for recommendation purposes. Assemblyman Stroth inquired whether a licensed private school had to hire licensed teachers. Ms. Cahill replied affirmatively. Assemblyman de Braga asked if the Commission had any type of control over professional standards in private schools. Ms. Cahill replied they do, but only in regard to licensure. Assemblyman de Braga asked if parochial schools of any kind are licensed. Ms. Cahill stated information from the State Department of Education says a private school may seek exemption from licensure. She was unsure what qualifications are required for the exemption. Assemblyman de Braga said her understanding of why the Commission was set up was to oversee public education and in the private sector there are a wide variety of interests. She agrees a representative of the private schools does not belong on the Commission. Chairman Williams asked where the names of prospective members of the Commission are obtained from. Ms. Cahill stated prospective Commission membership is addressed in Subsection 4, (a) and (b). Three of the four teachers, and counselors employee organizations representing the majority of counselors and majority of teachers, submit a list of names to the Governor who uses the list to make the appointments. The same is true of the administrators. Chairman Williams, referring to Subsection 5, which is proposed to be deleted, inquired where the names come from in the private school sector. Ms. Cahill recounted this is the problem. She thought the position had been held by an administrator since the inception of the committee in 1987. One of the two administrators has been the person to represent the private schools. Whenever a vacancy opens for a teacher suggestions are submitted to the Governor but none from the private school sector have been submitted. Chairman Williams asked if the administrator who has served under Subsection 5 has been an administrator of a private school. Ms. Cahill replied affirmatively, that one of the two administrators is from the private school sector. Chairman Williams inquired if NSEA's concern with the language of the bill in Subsection 5 is with the mechanism of selecting a private school teacher. Ms. Cahill replied it is a two fold situation. NSEA feels the selection mechanism is a problem and also there are 186 licensed instructors employed by private schools who can be represented on task forces for Commission access who do not need to be represented by one of nine people. Ms. Cahill disclosed it has been suggested the Commission be enlarged, which NSEA does not advocate, due to cost factors. Assemblyman Batten commented about the diversity allowed for in the Commission makeup and agreed with Assemblyman Harrington about the need for representation from the private sector. He wanted to know why the change is needed if the current system is working, other than to provide an amendment to ensure one individual is not the constant representative for the private sector. Ms. Cahill was unsure she could answer the second question. She returned to NSEA's concern that if there were a private school endorsement a teacher had to obtain before obtaining employment in a private school and how a disparate representation exists. She deferred to Mr. Connor who she felt could give better information as to why the current Commission system is not working. Assemblyman Bennett asked if all teachers in the public school system are NSEA members. Ms. Cahill replied negatively. Assemblyman Bennett asked if NSEA had, historically, submitted nonmember names for the Commission. Ms. Cahill replied nonmember name submission had not happened to her knowledge. Mr. Jerald Connor, Executive Director of the Nevada Association of School Administrators spoke against A.B. 112. He stated A. B. 112 removes the mandate that one member of the Commission be from a licensed private school. He explained when Senator Ray Rawson led the bill to passage five sessions ago, the private school representation was a point of contention. The disparate numbers were discussed by Mr. Connor. He explained when Governor Richard Bryan had to appoint a private school person to the Commission, he was unable to do so because the law says the nomination has to come from the association which represents the majority of administrators of schools in the state. Governor Bryan called Mr. Connor to say two seats for representation of school administrators were available. One of the seats was requested to be relinquished to a private school person and he requested Mr. Connor to nominate the person. In the spirit of cooperation NASA nominated a private school person for appointment to the Commission. Since that time one of the two administrator seats on the Commission has always been held by a private school person. Two public school administrators have never served at the same time on the Commission. Mr. Connor noted this is a problem for NASA and it is a problem for the Governor. The Governor has to go to organizations for names of people not involved in those organizations. The possibility exists for NASA to desire their full representation and not wish to nominate a private school person. A deadlock would exist. It was mentioned varied grade level representation is nice and Mr. Connor noted the administrators would like the same consideration. Having the full two members, the secondary school perspective would be represented as well as the elementary perspective. Mr. Connor feels the Commission works well but a representative exists to represent a small group of people and this has caused some problems. He stated having a tenth member designated as a private school person is a possibility, but fiscal considerations exist. Assemblyman Harrington asked how the tenth member of the Commission, a member of the general public, has been selected. Mr. Connor stated he is unaware of how the Governor selects that individual. Assemblyman Batten asked for the number of the statute referred to by Mr. Connor. Mr. Connor stated it was N.R.S. 391. Assemblyman Batten asked if N.R.S. said a member of the private school system could not be on the Commission. Mr. Connor clarified that the private school person is mandated, one of the nine must be from the private schools. The Governor has to appoint the members and needs to receive a list from NSEA or NASA. If neither of the groups submit a private school person there is no one to be appointed to the position. Assemblyman Harrington asked if NASA would be happy with some kind of language indicating where the private person was to come from and not have it always be the administrator. Mr. Connor maintained the point of view it would still be disparate representation, but it would give the Governor some direction. Assemblyman Harrington noted that as the Committee is currently set up five of the members come from the teacher's union, two come from NASA and two other members are a public member and a university dean. He inquired how the votes go and if changing the makeup of the Commission will result in many tie votes. Mr. Connor stated he did not think it would be a concern. Assemblyman Harrington questioned Mr. Connor again on how close the votes are on the Commission. Mr. Conner stated it has been his experience that the Commission has been more in agreement than disagreement. Assemblyman Segerblom asked how many licensed teachers are in the private schools. Mr. Connor noted there are 186. Assemblyman Segerblom asked how many licensed teachers are in the public schools. Mr. Connor stated there are 14,000. Assemblyman Segerblom asked if Mr. Connor would say there are nine times more teachers in the public schools than in the private. Mr. Connor said there are 257,000 students in school in Nevada, with 9,000 of those in private schools. Assemblyman Segerblom asked if a person can teach in a private school and not be licensed. Mr. Connor stated it would be possible if it is a religious school and the school elected to take an exemption. Mr. Scott Dickinson spoke against A. B. 112. He stated in Section 1, Subsection 4, Line 17, listing the appointment of a counselor, the administrators and three of the four teachers must be made from a list of names of at least three persons for each position submitted to the Governor. Technically the way the bill stands right now, one of the four teachers does not have to be appointed from a list submitted by the teachers' union. Mr. Dickinson stated that he feels somehow NSEA has the power to get all the teachers appointed and the administrators have to split their two spots with the private schools. His comment was this is fairly obvious with nine people on the Commission. The question is not how many teachers there are in private schools that are represented, but how many teachers, administrators, counselors, and students are represented by the one member of the Commission. Assemblyman de Braga asked if all members of the Commission serve voluntarily. Mr. Dickinson stated he did not know. Mr. Connor replied no financial compensation was received by any member to his knowledge. Dr. Tamar Lubin, School Head, Hebrew Academy, Las Vegas, Nevada spoke. Dr. Lubin noted her involvement in teacher hiring, noting all their teachers must be licensed. Every year during the summer Dr. Lubin calls on Dr. Stoker from the Department of Education to locate teachers who are licensed according to state codes. Everything her school does is governed by the state even though the school is a private, independent school and has been so licensed by the state for fifteen years. Being governed by the state Dr. Lubin advocates some input into what professionalism on the part of education is acquired. In 1987 twelve schools were organized and chartered called APPSN, the Association of Private and Parochial Schools in the State of Nevada. Most of these schools are state licensed. Yet no representation of any kind on this Commission has occurred. APPSN receives no feedback and can provide no input into the commission and Dr. Lubin wondered if one representative for all private schools, licensed or exempt could improve on the input. She stated the goal and mission of APPSN has always been to provide an excellent educational system for the children of the State of Nevada. Representation for the private sector, which is growing statewide, was requested of the committee. Chairman Williams noted one of the points brought by those who wish to remove the language denoting private sector representation is the mechanism of selection. He inquired if Dr. Lubin had any thoughts or ideas for the committee on establishing a mechanism for selection. Dr. Lubin stated since she has been President of APPSN, three resumes have been sent to the Governor on three different occasions for selection as a representative of the private sector in any of the categories of teacher, administrator or counselor. She noted Mr. Connor stated he has, in the past, been in charge of providing a list of names of people from the private sector. Dr. Lubin sees no problem with that. Chairman Williams stated his point is if there is representation on the Commission for private schools, with seventeen counties in the state, if there is a mechanism which will give the Governor a list of people representing most of those counties or the general spectrum or private schools in the state, the committee would like to know what the mechanism is or seek help identifying the mechanism. The point of those who want to remove this is there is no mechanism. Dr. Lubin replied the APPSN would be a good starting point. The association represents twelve to fourteen schools yearly and is chartered by the State of Nevada. Chairman Williams asked Dr. Lubin to submit other ideas at a later time if she came up with some. Dr. Lubin replied she would be more than happy to do so. Assemblyman Harrington asked Dr. Lubin if it would be acceptable to the private school community if APPSN submitted a list of three names to the Governor for the selection process. Dr. Lubin stated she thought it would work very well. Assemblyman Braunlin asked Dr. Lubin if other states required teachers from a private school be licensed by the state. Dr. Lubin reported in most states of the union most private schools are not governed by their state boards of education. She noted Nevada is a most rigorous state in which private and independent schools in this state are totally governed by the State Board of Education and the State of Nevada in every way. Assemblyman Bennett asked if public and private schools in Nevada fall under a national accreditation association. Dr. Lubin replied affirmatively. They fall under the Northwest Association of Schools and Colleges. The hearing was closed on A. B. 112. Assemblyman Manendo requested the number of licensed teachers in the private school system. When testimony was being given, various audience members were in disagreement with the numbers involved. He expressed concern about adding another member to the Commission. Chairman Williams reminded everyone the legislation would be heard again in Carson City. Mr. Williams noted the issue effects the children of Nevada and the committee will continue research to be able to make a good decision. Mr. Williams announced teleconference meetings from Carson City were a possibility for Las Vegas concerns to be addressed. He explained to the audience the items on the agendas for February 7, 1995 and February 8, 1995, are all the committee can discuss, as is required by law. Wanda Rosenbaum cautioned the committee that the Professional Standards Committee is a very important committee for Nevada, especially for reform. She noted personal concerns about the makeup of the Commission stands in the way of reform in Nevada. She offered to send written testimony. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 4:28 p.m. APPROVED: RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, ______________________________ ___________________________ William Z. Harrington, Chairman Barbara Prudic Committee Secretary _______________________________ Wendell P. Williams, Chairman Assembly Committee on Education February 7, 1995 Page