HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION

February 07, 2003 Hearing Room E

1:00 PM Tapes 19 - 20

MEMBERS PRESENT: Rep. Vic Backlund, Chair

Rep. Pat Farr, Vice-Chair

Rep. Elaine Hopson, Vice-Chair

Rep. Brad Avakian

Rep. Billy Dalto

Rep. Mary Nolan

MEMBER EXCUSED: Rep. Wayne Scott

STAFF PRESENT: Jim Keller, Committee Administrator

Jeana Harrington, Committee Assistant

MEASURE HEARD: HB 2371– Public Hearing

These minutes are in compliance with Senate and House Rules. Only text enclosed in quotation marks reports a speaker’s exact words. For complete contents, please refer to the tapes.

TAPE/#	Speaker	Comments
TAPE 19, A
004	Chair Backlund	Calls meeting to order at 1:04 PM. Welcomes colleagues and audience. Opens public hearing on HB 2371.
HB 2371 PUBLIC HEARING
012	Jim Keller	Reads Staff Measure Summary (SMS) on HB 2371.
016	Rep. Tootie Smith	House District 18. Testifies in favor of HB 2371. Explains her reasons for authoring the bill. Describes student portfolios. Details the workload that portfolios create for teachers. Believes student portfolios are a mandate.
066	Rep. Hopson	Asks whether a difference is made if the portfolio is left optional instead of eliminated.
068	Rep. Smith	Believes there is a difference.
077	Rep. Hopson	Adds to previous question.
082	Rep. Smith	Responds the new program would allow for less of a burden as she sees it is a mandate.
088	Chair Backlund	Suspects that they would find ways to reduce burden for teachers. Wonders what the effects of eliminating portfolios would be.
094	Rep. Smith	Responds. States she also has a bill to eliminate the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM) and the Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM) altogether, although she does agree with parts of it. Lists the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) as an area of conflict.
112	Rep. Farr	Clarifies that schools can continue to use portfolios despite passage of HB 2371.
126	Rep. Smith	Replies that schools can continue to collect work samples. Voices concern about the mandated requirements and the ‘burdensome paperwork’.
140	Rep. Farr	Asks about language changes the bill makes with regard to the expectations of portfolios in schools.
150	Rep. Smith	Explains it depends whether this is viewed as an option or a mandate, and that this is the issue. Adds that work samples can be obtained, not prohibited by the statute.
159	Rep. Farr	Comments on this.
172	Rep. Smith	Closes. Relates the portfolio issue to overall education spending. Comments that this is an easy fix compared to other educational dilemmas.
185	Dr. Jerry Wilson	Superintendent, Hermiston School District. Testifies in opposition of HB 2371. Supports retention of portfolios and provides copy of his doctoral thesis on writing portfolios (EXHIBIT A).
235	Rep. Dalto	Asks if his thesis discusses portfolios with regard to higher education and the college application process.
242	Wilson	Responds that the portfolio is part of developing the abilities used in higher education.
247	Rep. Farr	Requests the size of the Hermiston school district.
249	Wilson	Responds concerning the size of the district.
253	Rep. Farr	Asks what resources are necessary to maintain the program.
255	Wilson	Answers $28,000-$30,000 for the district. Implies that the writing portfolio represents a best practice, but may not be so for other subjects.
287	Rep. Dalto	Inquires if teachers are receptive of portfolios.
290	Wilson	Responds there is no prevalent opposition, though portfolios require a different type of work. Points out technological evolution will reduce paperwork and overall workload.
303	Rep. Dalto	Asks how teachers collaborate on portfolios.
306	Wilson	Informs of the training for teachers.
310	Rep. Dalto	Requests what the feedback from teachers was.
312	Wilson	Indicates the response was more training was needed.
333	Michael Mann	Teacher, Gresham Barlow School District. Testifies in favor of HB 2371 (EXHIBIT B). Explains his issues as an educator with the opposition of CIM/CAM and related portfolios.
TAPE 20, A
002	Mann	Continues testimony. Describes student portfolios and their value. Believes elimination of portfolios leaves an incomplete student assessment.
035	Rep. Dalto	Asks how much time he allots to portfolios.
038	Mann	Sees collecting work samples as essential to his job. Adds he would continue the practice whether or not required.
045	Rep. Dalto	Inquires as to where he does work related to portfolios.
047	Mann	Answers that most work is completed during the workday, although he does spend some time on them at home.
049	Rep. Dalto	Inquires what amount of class time is spent on portfolios.
051	Mann	Estimates that students and teachers need to collaborate in the classroom around 3-4 hours during the year.
056	Rep. Avakian	Gathers this method is valuable. Refers to current proposed bill. Asks if elimination of portfolios would make a difference to him.
063	Mann	Provides that if they were not initially required, he would not have begun the practice. Adds that he now believes it is the best practice.
067	Rep. Farr	Clarifies that portfolios were required by the school district.
068	Mann	Answers teachers are required to keep a record of work-sample scores.
071	Rep. Farr	Inquires what happens to portfolios upon graduation.
074	Mann	Answers that middle school portfolios go home with students when they move on. Adds the high school has stated they do not want the portfolios, but they do take the scorecards.
089	Rep. Farr	Remarks that it seems practices are different by school or by district.
092	Katie Wich	Student, Gresham Barlow School District. Testifies in favor of portfolios and their importance in the continuing success of students in terms of work ethic and improvement.
106	Chair Backlund	Asks what views their classmates have on portfolios.
110	Kelsie Blachly	Student, Gresham Barlow School District. Answers that portfolios enable them to see their improvement throughout the years.
113	Rep. Nolan	Observes that their presence alone demonstrates the importance of public speaking, and additionally, bodes well on their teaching.
121	Dave Guile	Testifies on HB 2371. Explains the current statute requirements. Voices concern that use or lack of portfolios results in lack of congruency statewide. States requirements of portfolios are ambiguous. Requests mandates be congruent.
188	Chair Backlund	Comments on his acquaintance with Mr. Guile.
195	Bill Auty	Associate Superintendent, Office of Evaluation and Assessment, Oregon Department of Education (ODE). Testifies about portfolios (EXHIBIT C).
228	Chair Backlund	Poses question regarding the relationship between portfolio standards and others.
231	Auty	Agrees and explains further.
235	Chair Backlund	Clarifies whether they are currently optional.
237	Auty	Responds they are optional now and is unsure of the date they will become required.
241	Chair Backlund	Wonders if the past system would have difficulty operating were the portfolios to be eliminated.
244	Auty	Affirms it would.
250	Decker J.E. Halstead	Retired teacher, Newberg School District. Informs committee of history of the CIM/CAM. Testifies in favor of HB 2371 (EXHIBIT D). Explains his experiences with the portfolios. Lists the reasons he opposes portfolios.
387	Chair Backlund	Clarifies whether he also wants to eliminate CIM/CAM.
392	Halstead	Explains he and fellow teachers also would like the assessments to be eliminated.
399	Chair Backlund	Requests if this was an ongoing aversion
402	Halstead	Affirms.
405	Rep. Dalto	Asks what subject Mr. Halstead taught.
407	Halstead	Answers ‘history’.
409	Rep. Nolan	Inquires if he would mind if other teachers in different districts continued to use portfolios.
414	Halstead	Responds that if it works for students and teachers he would have no opposition.
419	Rep. Hopson	Asks what proportion of the teachers share his feelings.
422	Halstead	Responds that around seventy percent at the high school level do.
TAPE 19, B
002	Rep. Hopson	Requests if it would serve any purpose to pass this as a law.
005	Halstead	States that in Newberg, this was a mandate that did not work. Adds that its removal would reduce its necessity.
010	Rep. Hopson	Asks if he would object to this being an issue of local control.
012	Halstead	Negates.
015	Victoria Lukich	Teacher, David Douglas High School (DDHS). Testifies in opposition of HB 2371. Believes student portfolios are worthwhile as a comprehensive educational tool. Compares DDHS CIM to the state CIM (EXHIBIT E). Addresses concerns with CIM. Points out DDHS has made CIM a graduation requirement. Explains that the process is a tool students can use throughout their lives. Echoes the other teachers in support of portfolios and adds DDHS will continue to use them.
147	Rep. Farr	Asks if middle school students’ portfolios transfer to high school.
150	Lukich	Explains how they conduct this.
165	Rep. Farr	Comments on this.
168	Chair Backlund	Requests her to assess the views of fellow teachers.
170	Lukich	Explains that this work is already incorporated into the curriculum and that it is for the students’ benefit.
192	Rep. Farr	Asks if they have staff dedicated solely to portfolios.
195	Lukich	Answers that each teacher is trained in this and mentors about ten students. References (EXHIBIT F).
210	Rep. Farr	Clarifies as to whether DDHS has found it necessary to have staff solely devoted to portfolio-maintenance like other schools.
218	Lukich	Negates.
219	Rep. Dalto	Asks if students understand the expectations of them.
221	Lukich	Affirms.
227	Lorna Walker	Citizen. Provides history of assessment and relates aspects to collection of portfolios. Outlines the positive and negative aspects of portfolios. Relates portfolios as tools in an overall education, providing accountability and consistency.
TAPE 20, B
002	Walker	States these will be of increasing value in the future as alternative forms of assessment.
055	Rep. Hopson	Comments on her earlier comments regarding data of new students provide by portfolios.
062	Walker	Responds and elaborates on this further.
085	Rob Kramer	Director, Oregon Public Charter Schools. Believes that portfolios have always been utilized as a for of communication of teaching between the educator, student, and parent whether mandated or not. Believes the question is whether portfolio assessments are fair as large-scale, high-stakes assessments. Discusses alternative assessments as being the least reliable, highest costing assessments. Submits that ‘inter-rater consistency’ does not exists unless teachers can be highly trained. Details other problems with portfolios as summative assessments. Discusses cost of implementing assessments and of instructional time. Believes this should be an issue of local control and that it is an unnecessary mandate.
212	Rep. Hopson	Asks for an explanation of the unreliability of assessing pieces.
216	Kramer	Explains he views that inconsistency occurs when scoring guides are used.
225	Rep. Hopson	Requests an alternative to rating speeches.
230	Kramer	Believes the question is whether this should be a part of a high-stakes assessment system such as CIM/CAM.
249	Rep. Dalto	Comments on students speeches as a valuable learning tool. Asks what the concern is.
263	Kramer	Remarks there needs to be a limit and the cost of this activity needs to be considered.
272	Rep. Dalto	Questions if that is a legislative issue.
274	Kramer	Remarks it should be a local issue but the mandates makes it a legislative one.
281	Rep. Nolan	Comments on subjective judgment. Requests an explanation of his concern for this.
301	Kramer	Differentiates grades and assessments. Thinks subjective grading and high stakes assessments should be separates.
310	Rep. Nolan	Requests ways of improving this.
319	Kramer	Explains this has always be a subject of discussion. Reiterates his point that high-stake tests should not be part of subjective tests.
325	Rep. Nolan	Asks if reliability could be improved by assuring the raters had a common training and qualifications, and asks if the TSP process do this
345	Kramer	Answers that the more of the training that exists, the more consistency, but this is high-cost.
359	Chair Krummel	Closes public hearing on HB 2371. Adjourns meeting at 2:53 PM.

EXHIBIT SUMMARY

A – HB 2371, Portfolio Thesis, Jerry Wilson, 10 p.

B – HB 2371, Michael Mann, 2 p.

C – HB 2371, Bill Auty, 1 p.

D – HB 2371, CIM handout, Victoria Lukich , 2 p.

E – HB 2371, CIM handout, Victoria Lukich, 1 p.

F – HB 2371, CIM handout, Victoria Lukich, 1 p.