|
Dear Friends,
Now we know! House Bill 1005 would allow appointing a K-12 State Superintendent with no K-12 experience! Now we know! Bill sponsor Senator Buck has made House Bill 1005 the "Mitch Daniels Could Be State Superintendent" bill. (See quotes below) Now we know! The Senate bill does not require that the Governor appoint a K-12 educator to be State Superintendent. Nothing in the new amendment defining qualifications says "K-12". Now we know why the Senate leadership was willing to damage the entire Senate's reputation as a body that stays true to its own rules. Now we know why the Senate leadership has put its credibility with voters on the line to authorize a second vote on a bill that was decisively defeated, what some have called a violation of Rule 81E, to end 166 years of power for the voters to elect the State Superintendent, the latest downgrade of our democracy in Indiana. Now we know. The reason for ignoring Senate Rule 81E and pushing the bill through the Senate was to write a formula into law whereby Mitch Daniels or someone like him could be appointed State Superintendent. In the words of Senator Breaux, it is still a "bad idea". It allows a person with no K-12 experience to be appointed to lead K-12 education in Indiana. Yipes! That's not right. This bill is flawed! The Senate should vote HB 1005 down - again! Contact your Senator or all Senators before the final vote this Monday, April 3rd, in the session beginning at 1:30 p.m. Let them know the new amendment is unacceptable. The State Superintendent must always have K-12 experience. Let them know you oppose taking the power to choose the State Superintendent away from voters and handing that power to the Governor. Here is What Happened During Second Reading Amendments on House Bill 1005 Updating the path of House Bill 1005: After 166 years, Speaker Bosma and the Governor really want to end the power of the voters to elect the State Superintendent. The Senate voted down the bill to do so 23-26 on February 20th. Senate Rule 81E (as quoted in the IndyStar) says when a bill is defeated "that exact language or substantially similar language shall be considered decisively defeated and shall not be considered again during the session." The Senate Rules Committee passed the bill 8-4 on March 27th, saying the amendment made it substantially different language. Debate over amendments on March 30th turned out to show that the new amendment was not substantially different. The Senate version voted down on Feb. 20th allowed the Governor to appoint a person with no experience in K-12. Now the new amendment turns out to allow appointment of a person with no experience in K-12. There is no difference. Here is how this played out on Second Reading: Senator Breaux's Amendments On Thursday (March 30) on the floor of the Senate, Senator Breaux proposed an amendment to strike the line "Executive in the field of education" in the list of four work experiences making a person eligible to be appointed by the Governor, calling it a vague description of eligibility that no one can define. She said the other three listed ("Teacher, Superintendent, Principal") are sufficient in terms of background for eligibility. Listen to bill sponsor Senator Buck's response to the amendment: "I rise in opposition to the amendment. While we are trying to consider the availability to the Governor of somebody that would be the administrator of our department of ed, I hope we realize that someone with the depth of experience of executive leadership and in higher ed such as former Governor Mitch Daniels would be excluded from that category. I think it gives the Governor a great deal of latitude in looking to somebody that has executive experience in the field of education." Sen. Breaux responded: "OK that brings a little bit more clarification to me. We're making it possible for folks like Gov. Daniels to return as secretary of education. I still think that's a bad idea and ask for your support of my amendment." The amendment failed on a voice vote. Earlier, Senator Breaux had proposed an amendment to delete the word "preferably" from the two following descriptors of who the Governor can appoint: "(2) has demonstrated personal and professional leadership success, preferably in the administration of public education;" "(3) possesses an earned advanced degree , preferably in education or educational administration, awarded from a regionally or nationally accredited college or university; and" The word "preferably" means that the State Superintendent is not required to have experience in the "administration of public education" and is not required to have a degree in "education or educational administration." It is optional. Senator Breaux made a strong attempt to make sure it was not optional, but her amendment was voted down 9-40. The Fatal Flaw of the New Senate Amendment: It Doesn't Require K-12 Experience or Degrees We are left with a fatal flaw in the bill to appoint the State Superintendent. Not only does it take power away from citizens who vote, but it also leaves open the door to appoint a person with no K-12 experience and no degrees in education. Tell your Senator you have read the fine print and House Bill 1005 would allow a State Superintendent with no K-12 experience. This must not stand! This is flawed legislation and deserves to be defeated a second time when the Senate votes on Monday. Contact Senators This Weekend Before Monday's Vote If all 26 Senators who opposed the bill the first time maintain their no vote, the power of voters will not be diminished. They need to hear from voters loudly and clearly. Once again, the 26 Senators who voted no on February 20th are as follows: Senators Becker, Glick, Leising, Stoops, Bohacek, Grooms, Melton, Tallian, Breaux, Head, Mishler, Taylor, Crane, Kenley, Mrvan, Tomes, Crider, Koch, Niemeyer, Young, Doriot, Kruse, Niezgodski, Ford, Lanane, Randolph (Copy & paste these addresses into your "to" field:) [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected] The 23 Senators who voted yes on February 20th but now should be asked to take a principled stand on Senate Rule 81E to call this bill "decisively defeated" and to stop a bill that clearly allows for appointment of a State Superintendent with no K-12 experience and no degrees in education, are as follows: Senators Alting, Charbonneau, Houchin, Ruckelshaus, Bassler, Delph, Long, Sandlin, Boots, Eckerty, Merritt, Smith, Bray, Freeman, Messmer, Walker, Brown, Hershman, Perfect, Zay, Buck, Holdman, Raatz One Senator who was excused and did not vote on the bill was Senator Zakas, who should also be contacted on these points. (Copy & paste these addresses in your "to" field:) [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected] Tell them how you feel about losing the power to elect the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Tell them how you feel about the wording of the new amendment which would allow a State Superintendent with no K-12 experience. Tell them how you feel about Senate Rule 81E and the Senators' decision to pass a previously "decisively defeated" bill when the new bill is equally as wide open as the first bill on qualifications. Tell them Senators should follow their own rules. Will Indiana voters defend their powers? It's up in the air. The Senators need to hear from voters like you! Thank you for actively supporting public education in Indiana! Best wishes, Vic Smith [email protected] The following bills are to be reviewed and voted on by the Senate Committee on Education and Career Development on Wednesday, 3/29
HB 1003 - Student assessments. Replaces the ISTEP test program after June 30, 2018, with a new statewide assessment program to be known as Indiana's Learning Evaluation Assessment Readiness Network (ILEARN). Provides, beginning after June 30, 2017, that a high school must administer an end of course examination in the subjects of: (1) English/language arts; (2) science; and (3) algebra I. Repeals a provision defining the ISTEP program. Makes conforming amendments. HB 1382 - Charter schools. Changes the definition of a charter school organizer. Requires each authorizer to establish a charter school Internet web page. Makes changes to the minimum standards for renewing a charter. Makes changes to the procedure for suspending an authorizer from authorizing a charter school. Provides that an authorizer is considered a state education authority within the meaning of the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act. Provides that a charter school located in a county containing a consolidated city must determine which students may attend the charter school by using a publicly verifiable random selection process. (Current law provides that a charter school must determine which students may attend the charter school by use of a random drawing at a public meeting.) Makes changes to information that an education service provider must provide to a charter school. Provides that an authorizer must provide notification of acceptance or rejection of a proposal to establish a charter school within 75 days unless the authorizer and organizer agree to an extension of time. (Current law provides that notification must be provided within 75 days.) Provides that an organizer shall immediately inform the authorizer if its tax exempt status is questioned, modified, or revoked by the Internal Revenue Service or if its nonprofit corporation status is questioned, modified, or revoked by the state. Makes changes to the information an authorizer is required to report to the department. Changes procedures for relating to the renewal of a charter. Requires a charter school organizer to submit a statement of economic interest for each organizer board member. Requires an authorizer that is a state educational institution to assign authorization responsibilities to another entity. Makes changes to a provision relating to the qualifications of full-time teachers. Makes changes to a provision relating to the distribution of state funds to a charter school that does not have its charter renewed or terminated. Makes changes to the definition of a virtual charter school. Requires a virtual charter school to adopt a student engagement policy. Provides that the organizer's constitution, charter, articles, or bylaws must contain a clause providing that an authorizer may require the removal of a board member of the organizer in certain circumstances. Makes changes to which innovation network schools can receive a grant from the innovation network school grant fund. Provides that a governing body may enter into an agreement with an organizer to reconstitute certain schools as a participating innovation network charter school or to establish a participating innovation network charter school at a location selected by the board within the boundary of the school corporation. Provides that a participating innovation network charter school may be eligible for innovation network school grant funding. Repeals a provision that provides that the state board of education may require an authorizer to appear at a hearing conducted by the state board if the authorizer has renewed the charter of or failed to close a charter school that does not meet the minimum standards in the charter agreement. Repeals a provision establishing the charter school review panel. HB 1383 - Elementary school teachers. Provides that, not later than July 1, 2019, the state board of education shall adopt rules to establish one or more elementary school teacher content area licenses that must, at a minimum, include a content area license in the subject matter of math and science. This bill makes no sense. Why would a general elementary teacher have a content area license? HB 1384 - Various education matters. Provides that in the case of a high school student who has not attended the same school within the school corporation for at least 90% of a school year, the department shall assign the student to the high school at which the student was enrolled for the greatest proportion of school days during the school year for purposes of calculating a school's graduation rate. Provides that before July 1, 2018, the state board of education (state board) shall establish a definition of a high mobility school for schools with a high concentration of mobile students. Provides that, after June 30, 2018, the state board shall, in addition to placing a school in a category or designation of school improvement, assign a school grade for a high mobility school. Provides that the grade calculated is for informational purposes only and may not be used to calculate a school's category or designation of school improvement. Provides that $50,000 is the maximum grant a school corporation or charter school may receive under the dual language immersion pilot program. Provides that appropriations to the department of education to provide grants to school corporations for high ability students must be for expenditures beyond those for regular educational programs. Provides that the state board may accredit a nonpublic school that enters into a contract with the state board to become a freeway school at the time the nonpublic school enters the contract. Provides that a choice scholarship school may submit a request to the state board to waive or delay certain consequences if it is placed in the two lowest categories or designations of school improvement for a particular school year. Provides that the state board may grant a request to an eligible school that requests a delay or waiver if the choice scholarship school demonstrates that a majority of students in the eligible school demonstrated academic improvement during the preceding school year. Requires a school corporation to issue, upon request of a parent, a posthumous diploma to a student who: (1) dies while enrolled in grade 12 of a school in the school corporation; and (2) was academically eligible or on track to meet the requirements for the diploma at the time of death. Makes changes to the composition of the board of trustees for Ivy Tech Community College of Indiana. Makes technical corrections. Read this article about the concerns of HB 1384. HB 1386 - Competency based education. Establishes the competency based education pilot program (pilot program). Provides that the department of education may award grants under the pilot program for competency based education programs from the innovation network school grant fund. Makes conforming amendments. HB 1449 - Teacher induction pilot program. Makes changes to who may submit a plan to participate in the career pathways and mentorship program. Establishes the Indiana new educator induction program (program) to give new teachers, principals, and administrators mentoring support. Provides that grants for the program may be made from the system for teacher and student advancement grant fund. Provides that, not later than July 1, 2018, and each July thereafter, the state board of education shall submit a report to the governor and the general assembly regarding the status of the program. Establishes the Indiana educator residency pilot program. Urges the legislative council to assign the issue of teacher residency programs to the appropriate study committee. Urges the legislative council to assign to an appropriate study committee for study during the 2017 legislative interim the topic of whether it is appropriate to require teachers to participate in a new educator induction program before being eligible to receive a practitioner license. Dear Friends,
Efforts in the General Assembly to give more and more public money for private school vouchers are relentless. House Bill 1384, to be voted on Wednesday (March 29, 2017) at 1:30 p.m. in the Senate Education Committee, would allow new private schools to get vouchers the first year without waiting a year to get accreditation as they do now. In addition, it would give voucher schools making D's and F's two years in a row an appeal procedure to allow them to avoid current accountability rules and keep receiving new voucher students, a loophole that could help as many as nine low-rated voucher schools. Ask Senators on the Senate Education Committee to oppose House Bill 1384 giving more public money for the fast-track expansion of voucher schools and for low-rated voucher schools. The members of the Senate Education Committee to contact before Wednesday at 1:30 are: Republican Senators Kruse, Raatz, Bassler, Crane, Freeman, Kenley, Leising and Zay Democratic Senators Melton, Mrvan and Stoops (Or paste the list below into the "to" field of your email.) [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected] Privatization of Schools: From Stable Centers of Community Life to the "Wild, Wild West" One great attribute of public schools that Indiana has experienced for over 160 years is their stability and their function as community centers that bring together people of all walks of life. Voucher advocates are trying to change that climate by marketing new private schools hyped with attractive advertising. House Bill 1384 would allow new private schools to get vouchers in the first year of their existence. Under current law, private schools have to go through their first year in order to establish performance data for use in receiving accreditation, a prerequisite for receiving voucher dollars. HB 1384 would fast-track the process to allow new private schools accreditation and voucher money in the first year of operation. Joel Hand, our lobbyist for the Indiana Coalition for Public Education, testified against the bill and was quoted on the front page of the Indianapolis Star (March 27, 2017): "One of our fears is by opening up our voucher program to schools that have not been in our state before, have not previously been accredited here, is we could be opening it up to the wild, wild west. We already have an issue with a number of private schools that accept vouchers that aren't performing well. Now we're talking about potentially bringing in schools from out of state that have no record here in Indiana giving them a free reign to vouchers right from the get go." Well said, Joel! Lowering the Standards for D and F Voucher Schools House Bill 1384 also allows voucher schools making D's and F's a pathway to more voucher money. Currently, if a voucher school receives a D or F for two years, they can't enroll new voucher students although they can receive voucher money for current voucher students. This point of strong accountability was used to sell the voucher program to the General Assembly in the historic voucher debate in 2011. HB 1384 makes a waiver appeal available through the State Board of Education to get around the two-year rule. Public school advocate Sally Sloan of the American Federation of Teachers - Indiana testified against this concept and was also quoted in the Indianapolis Star (March 27, 2017, page 8A) saying that the state has gone back on its word to ensure voucher schools provide top-tier education: "When vouchers first came into being, we were told it's important that these private schools get the opportunity because they're going to provide so much better education." Well said, Sally! Contact the Senate Education Committee by Wednesday, March 29, 2017, 1:30 p.m. Contact the members of the Senate Education Committee listed above to let them know you have seen enough efforts to expand unaccountable voucher schools while public schools get little attention from the General Assembly. Ask them to defeat House Bill 1384 and then give more support to public schools. Thank you for your support of public education in Indiana! Best wishes, Vic Smith [email protected] Dear Friends,
This morning, the Senate Rules Committee decided that even though the bill to appoint the State Superintendent was "decisively defeated" on February 20th, they could revive it this session by amending it. The amended bill passed the committee 8-4 on a party line vote. Check out the confusing new amendment, which is quoted below. Ask your Senator and all Senators to stop diminishing the voter's role in our democracy by maintaining the powers of Hoosier voters to elect the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. House Bill 1005: The Governor Wants to Appoint the State Superintendent Let's review the story of HB 1005: After 166 years, Speaker Bosma and the Governor really want to end the power of the voters to elect the State Superintendent. The Senate voted down the bill to do so 23-26 on February 20th. Senate Rule 81E (as quoted in the IndyStar) says when a bill is defeated "that exact language or substantially similar language shall be considered decisively defeated and shall not be considered again during the session." All four Democrats on the Rules Committee today made comments objecting to the way Senate Rule 81E is being skirted. Senator Lanane made an impassioned statement that the changes being offered to get around Senate Rule 81E were just "window dressing." "The heart of the bill" he said is to appoint the State Superintendent. He said this action is "diminishing the rule!" He said "This should not have been considered." Senator Randolph said this move to get around the Senate rule would hurt the "Senate's credibility in the public eye." Chairman Long ruled against all objections and called on Speaker Bosma to present the bill and on Senator Hershman to present the amendment to HB 1005 which would allow compliance with Rule 81E. The amendment changes the starting date to 2025, rather than 2021. Secondly, the amendment reinstates the residency requirement: "has resided in Indiana for at least two (2) years before the appointment." Thirdly, the amendment sets qualifications. This needs to be quoted in its entirety for you to see the confusion that is possible when you take the power out of the voter's hands: "(2) has demonstrated personal and professional leadership success, preferably in the administration of public education;" (Editorial note: "preferably"???) "(3) possesses an earned advanced degree , preferably in education or educational administration, awarded from a regionally or nationally accredited college or university; and" (Editorial note: "preferably" again???) "(4) either: (A) at the time of taking office is licensed or otherwise employed as a teacher, principal, or superintendent; (B) has held a license as a teacher, superintendent, or principal, or any combination of these licenses, for at least five (5) years at any time before taking office; or (C) has a total of at least five (5) years of work experience as any of the following, or any combination of the following, before taking office: (i) Teacher. (ii) Superintendent. (iii) Principal. (iv) Executive in the field of education. I had to quote the exact language of the amended bill for you to understand my question: Is this confusing list what we have come to after 166 years of letting the voters sort it all out in the process of our democracy? Can't we instead trust the voters to select a qualified State Superintendent? Isn't that what our democracy is all about? Concerns about the New Amendment This amendment is not ready for prime time! The word "preferably" has no meaning under the law. It can obviously be ignored. It is surprising that such a word is used in the bill. Using "preferably" means that it is not necessary to appoint an educator to be State Superintendent. Similarly it is not necessary to appoint someone with a degree in education or educational administration. My impression is that the amendment was written so that an MBA from the business world could fill the position after being employed as a superintendent. Superintendents are no longer required to have a superintendent's license in Indiana. Another concern is whether it was written for a higher education official to be appointed. No reference to K-12 experience or degrees is included in the amendment. Let your Senators know how you feel about the new amendment. Let them know how you feel about taking the power to select the State Superintendent away from voters and giving it to the Governor. If all 26 Senators maintain their no vote, the power of voters will not be diminished. They need to hear from voters loudly and clearly on this issue, and soon. The leadership is likely to seek action on the floor of the Senate this week. Once again, the 26 Senators who voted no on February 20th are as follows: Senators Becker, Glick, Leising, Stoops, Bohacek, Grooms, Melton, Tallian, Breaux, Head, Mishler, Taylor, Crane, Kenley, Mrvan, Tomes, Crider, Koch, Niemeyer, Young, Doriot, Kruse, Niezgodski, Ford, Lanane, Randolph (Copy & paste these addresses into your "to" field:) [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected] The 23 Senators who voted yes on February 20th but now should be asked to take a principled stand on Senate Rule 81E to call this bill "decisively defeated" are as follows: Senators Alting, Charbonneau, Houchin, Ruckelshaus, Bassler, Delph, Long, Sandlin, Boots, Eckerty, Merritt, Smith, Bray, Freeman, Messmer, Walker, Brown, Hershman, Perfect, Zay, Buck, Holdman, Raatz One Senator who was excused and did not vote on the bill was Senator Zakas, who should also be contacted on these points. (Copy & paste these addresses in your "to" field:) [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected]; [email protected];[email protected];[email protected];[email protected] Contact Senators to Keep the Power in the Hands of Voters If you want to maintain your power as a voter in our democracy, it's time to go to work. Contact any and all Senators to: Tell them how you feel about keeping or losing the power to elect the State Superintendent of Public Instruction. Tell them how you feel about the wording of the new amendment cited above. Tell them how you feel about Senate Rule 81E and the Senators' rationale to pass a "decisively defeated" bill. Will Indiana voters defend their powers? It's up in the air. Voters are about to lose a big one if they are not heard loudly and clearly in the next few days. I was one of four speakers who spoke against the bill this morning, while three spoke for the bill. The Senators need to hear from the voters. In this era of activism, the voters of Indiana who don't want to lose their powers in our democracy need to go to work! Thank you for actively supporting public education in Indiana! Best wishes, Vic Smith [email protected] |
Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
Friends
|
RSS Feed
Proudly powered by Weebly