A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for

Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | June 19, 2014 | Committee Room | Appropriations Education

Full MP3 Audio File

Let's everyone take their seats so we can get started. The Chair wants to get out of here as quick as he can so let's hurry up so we can get started, please. There may be somebody else in here that would like to do that, too. You're just going on? I'd like to call the meeting to order and we're going to do this out of order as far as the agenda sheet that you've got. We're going to start with Ensuring Privacy of Student Records first and Senator Barefoot, if you'd come up. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you members of the House Education Committee. The bill before you would require the State Board of Education to make publicly available information regarding the student data system, otherwise known as PowerSchool, to create rules and plans to ensure privacy and security of individual student data in the student data system, restrict the collection of certain data in the student data system. The proposed legislation would also require local boards of education to provide notice of parental rights and opt-out opportunities regarding student records and participation in certain surveys. As we continue to move forward with putting more technology into the classroom, uploading more of our information that we collect on students into data systems that can be accessed online, I think it's very important that we make sure that those systems are secure and that our parents know what's going on. Today in the mail I got my State Legislator's National Conference of State Legislators Magazine, the focus is the identity thieves stealing the information of children and part of the reason why that has become the new frontier of identity theft has a lot to do with the fact that they have really good social security numbers, no bad credit. It's a kind of a jackpot for thieves out there and that's just one example. So what we want to do here in North Carolina is make sure that we continue a legacy of having the best contracts, the best protections for our students and if you do not mind I'm going to, if it's okay to ask staff to walk through some of the provisions of the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff? Kara's going to do it I think. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mm-hm. Kara McCraw, Research Division. The bill is divided into two parts. The first part, as Senator Barefoot indicated, is the obligations of the State Board. They would be to create a data inventory and data elements of all the things that are included in the student data system. They would also be required to develop rules that would comply with state and federal privacy laws and policies that would conform with FERPA and other state laws and this would include restrictions on access to personally identifiable student data in the student data system. It would specifically prohibit transfer of personally identifiable student data unless it's otherwise allowed by law. It requires the state board to develop a data security plan that would include things like audits, breach planning, and data retention disposition policies. It would require DPI to ensure ongoing compliance through performance of compliance audits. It would require that contracts that are developed concerning databases, assessments, or instructional supports that includes student data that are outsourced to private contractors would have to have express provisions safeguarding privacy and include noncompliance penalties within the contracts. And finally, it would require the State Board to notify the General Assembly and the Governor when new student data is to be included. This section also specifically prohibits inclusion within the student data system of information about the student or the student's family regarding biometric information, political affiliation, religion, or voting history. The last section are obligations for local boards of education to annually provide notice of parents through a method that would reasonably provide actual notice regarding parental rights under federal and state laws regarding student records, including the opportunity to opt-out of directory information as well as the opportunity to opt-out of certain surveys that are covered under federal law. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. Senator? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. This bill has been the product of quite a few months worth of work. It was also a recommendation of the Joint IT Oversight Committee. I know of no opposition to the bill. We've worked diligently with the School Boards Association and the Department of Public Instruction as well as many of the partners that we partner with with the state of North Carolina with our information and

...thank you for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbitt. [SPEAKER CHANGES] For a motion, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hold on, let's see if there's anybody that has any comments or requests. Representative Brandon. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a quick question. What are the records that are to be publicly disclosed? I'm hearing two things. One, we're trying to keep private but then I see in the bill that we are trying to...is there an effort to get something out publicly or not? Not in an individual...maybe I'm reading it wrong, but I'm just need to ask the question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Student records are not public records. There are some records that can be made public. I'd like to defer staff to that. There's a list of them. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brandon, under the Federal FRPA law, student records are entirely confidential; however, the Federal law permits that a school may make public what's called directory information. That's typically things like names, addresses. It can include things like extra-curricular activities and information about student athletics. If the school is going to make that information public, they must disclose that this information will be included as directory information and they must give parents annually an opportunity to opt out and say I do not want my child's information included in that directory information. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Anyone else? Representative Meyer. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Barefoot, thank you very much. This looks like a very good protection of students and families. Could you or staff just give me an example of the type of survey that could be opted out of under the final provision in that section? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll just give you an example of one. There's a survey that is conducted by the Center for Disease Control annually. Local LEA's can opt into them. Students have the ability to opt out of them. It's not a scientific survey. It has no Federal dollars attached to it. But quite frankly, I think that it asks questions that may be inappropriate for some of the children that are taking it. All we want to do here is give the parents a heads up to let them know that if they don't want their children to answer some of those very sensitive questions about sexual history, drug history, they don't have to do that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Saine. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Senator, for a very good bill. This did come out of the IT Oversight Committee, an idea that you've put forward and really do appreciate all the hard work. Just commentary that you did put a lot of hard work, travel and time getting everyone to the table and getting a very good bill and I thank you for doing that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I follow Representative Saine's comment. There have been a lot of states that have worked on this but I think this is an outstanding bill and a really good combination and in a very tough arena to negotiate everybody's interest. On that last question with regard to B5, I like the provision. That's actually how Cumberland is operated on that as an opt out just because of the nature of some of that survey that you indicated, and others. I think giving students and parents that capacity still will allow a lot of people who want to participate and give good data but for those who don't. I commend you on the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As an editorial comment, staff worked really hard. Ms. McGraw worked really hard on this. This is a new and emerging area for a lot of states. Quite frankly, I think this is going to be a new standard for other states across the nation. North Carolina has had a good reputation with their data management because of our relationship to our research universities over the years that help pave the way for this. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Torbitt, I'm ready for the motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. For a brief remark and a motion. Good job, Senator. Motion that the House Committee on Education report out favorable Senate Bill 815. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Everyone hear the motion? All in favor of the motion say aye. All opposed no. The ayes have it and the motion carry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. Our next bill is the Charter School Modification Senate Bill 793. Senator Tillman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Some sanity. Mr. Chairman I'm going to digress for a minute. A little girl in Kindergarten went to school and on the first day of school, had a big picture of a whale up on the bulletin board. And said tomorrow we're going to talk about mammals. And the little girl came back ?? smart little girl and said I know about mammals, teacher. A mammal, that's a whale, and a whale can swallow a man. He said no no, honey a whale can't swallow a man. The little girl said well I know. They're a big animal, the teacher said, but they've got a real small throat. And she said I know they can because in the Bible it said that the whale swallowed Jonah. And for you all that are really technical about that, the Bible called it a big fish. However, everybody refers to it as a whale. And the teacher said no that didn't happen. The little girl said I know it did. She said when I get to heaven, I'm going to ask Jonah. The teacher said well, sister, what if Jonah is not in heaven? And she said well then teacher, you'll have to ask him. [LAUGHTER] I guess that got her. This charter bill modification, simply we've had a new born baby over there called the charter advisory board. We set it up about a year ago and they've been functioning and they've had growing pains and I think the process has not been one that was fully thought out and I think a lot of people were denied without a chance for any discussion or any appeal or anything. And I don't think that was fair, whether good or bad or indifferent, if you got an application before them and you a lot of the dynamics in place with funding in the charter board and all that structure in place and then getting denied. To me does not seem fair. So we're putting some rules for them to follow which I think will help greatly and I will say on behalf of the charter schools, they came to me with a list of changes they recognized they were going to need and for the most part we've let them try those for the next several months and see how they work. If they work fine, then we're in good shape. But this is to get us jump started on that. If you have questions, the staff is very good at this and they helped me greatly. Anyway that's what we're trying to do with this bill. There may be an amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I'd like to move adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier moves for adoption of amendment. Explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. This is to change the word on page 3 line 38, deleting the word information and substituting the word records. Records are really how a lot of the documents are defined. I'm sorry, page 1 line 10, deleting the word information, substituting the word records. Again, page 3 line 38. Record is a word of ours with regard to school systems. A lot of what they keep are called records. Information would require a different definition and probably more expense. And I hope it's a consent amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Some people do not have the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This whole side. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, looking at that side, they certainly need it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. Representative Torbett, can I request the title? [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Would it be possible to request the title of the amendment? It has no name after representative. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The one that has no name is Representative Stam. That's his amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, it's ARQ-65 version 1. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] ARQ-65, version 1 is Representative Glazier's. If anybody doesn't have the amendment now? Right now, you in the middle? Now that everybody's got that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you.

Representative Glazier, I had the same amendment as we brought it in a while ago, and we looked at it and you had the same amendment. “Records” is something we know. “Information” is too general of a term and “records” have a defined meaning, and I think it’s a good amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other debate on it? Hearing none, all in favor of Representative Glazier’s amendment, say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, no. The ayes have it and the amendment’s carried. Representative Stam is recognized for his amendment, and then that is ATB 38 version 1. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This just gives an extra 30 days. Frankly I don’t know who suggested this amendment, but I heard the Senator’s in favor of it. I just had it drafted. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well you may hear a lot of things. I’ve heard something about me the other day that I didn’t even believe. I don’t think that’s bad at all. I know there may be a little folks out in the back, quibbling over 30 days here or there. That’s fine with me. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other…? Representative Horn? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just to clarify, since we’re talking about school, let’s have the grammar correct, and I think the word should be “is” instead of “are”. “Process is”, not “process are”. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, it goes back to decisions. On the bill, it goes back to decisions. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think we had it right to start with. You have to agree with the predecessor noun, doesn’t it? It’s correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other debate? Hearing none, all in favor of Representative Stam’s amendment, say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, no. The ayes have it and the amendment passed, and that’s all the amendments I’ve got. Any other…? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair? Mr. Chairman? [SPEAKER CHANGES] How many more amendments have we got coming? [SPEAKER CHANGES] At least one. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, I have an amendment I’d like to send forward. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister sends forth an amendment, ARQ-64 version 2. And Representative Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, I’m not sure if everybody has the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman, we don’t have the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Everybody got a copy of this? Nope. Does everybody now have a copy of the amendment? Representative Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to see if staff would help me explain the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff? [SPEAKER CHANGES] So the amendment amends the bill on page 4, line 1, by rewriting that line, so actually if you start on the very bottom of page 3, this section addresses the state board adopting a process and rules for the competitive bid process for the assumption of a charter school that shows inadequate performance. There is a provision for this that is existing in law right now. What section 6 does is just sort of nudges it along. The state board is required to adopt a process for that assumption, and so this just says “please do that” and provides three specific criteria that must be met as a minimum for any entity that’s interested in assuming a charter school that has inadequate performance. The amendment tightens up the language to track the existing statutes by saying “a school that has inadequate performance and could have its charter terminated and not renewed by the state board”. Again, that tracks existing language in the statute. The second change is on page 4, line 16, where it talks about this is a separate process that the state board…

Must adopt a process and rules for fast track replication of high quality charter schools. The language of the bill says the State Board shall at a minimum require existing charter schools if they want to be eligible for fast track replication to meet certain criteria. The amendment would just say requires the Board of Directors of the charter school to demonstrate one of the following criteria. And then the last two changes are on page 4 lines 18 and 22, so the, one of the two, for each of the criteria it just makes the language a little bit tighter and says the charter school and the state, governed by the Board of Directors, and that the Board of Directors agrees to contract with an education management organization. They are clarifying changes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Hardister. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chair, I move for adoption of the amendment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator Tillman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Sounds like a good one to me. It mainly is conforming to current law and tightening that up a little bit. I like it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any other comment. Hearing none, all in favor of Representative Hardister's amendment, ARQ 64 version 2, say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, no. The ayes have it, the motion's carried. Is that all the amendments now? Any debate on the bill. Representative Glazier. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Just a question to the bill sponsor because I agree with the vast majority of this bill and I think it fixes a lot of problems. The one thing I want to get clear though is section 6.5 and I think I understand, which is to direct the state board to set the rules with respect to fast track replications. It doesn't require a specific rule. It says, as I understand it, except that if it has, if they meet one of those two options then those are things that should trigger the consideration, but it's not as I read it, and correct me if I'm wrong, limiting specific other requirements they may want to put in to deal with whether in state out of state and all the rest of that, to have quality control and to have accountability. Am I correct in that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You read that right. Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for adoption of Senate Bill 793 as amended. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's right and rolled into the Proposed Committee Substitute with a favorable report to the committee and an unfavorable to the original. Is that what you wanted? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I couldn't have said it better. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed say no. The ayes have it. The motion is carried. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ?? here, Representative Horn make a motion, let's let him handle his bill, Mr. Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Great. Now we have before us Senate Bill 815 and we have. [SPEAKER CHANGES] 15, 12 or 16? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senate Bill 812. It happens to be 815 on my sheet here. [SPEAKER CHANGES] That's what time I'm getting up in the morning. [SPEAKER CHANGES] As many phone calls as I've gotten on this, I ought to remember the number then. I think the number was up about 150 [SPEAKER CHANGES] No that's 300. [SPEAKER CHANGES] 350. OK. Representative Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move for a PCS to Senate Bill 812, I think everyone has a copy of it. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Everyone has a copy of 812, right? The Proposed Committee Substitute. Is this the right one? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, sir. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. All in favor of having the PCS before the committee, say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, no. The ayes have it and the motion's carried. And what the PCS does is give us the same bill that we had originally in the House so the wording's exactly the same and I suppose you could spend all afternoon debating it again if you'd like to, but I'm going to let Senator Soucek and Senator Tillman start. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, I'll just make a brief statement and let you all have at it. First time in 12 years I've never received a PCS to my bill until I got here this afternoon late. I'll give you the courtesy of getting any PCS I put out there. That's just courtesy, folks, I believe in

... on that and I’ll do that; however, I want you to know now, there’s no doubt in anybody’s mind except unless the seed is planted otherwise, that both bills repeal common core. They repeal common core. A lot of people don’t want to read that language “repeal”. It’s in both bills, as clear as it can be, and repeal don’t have a double meaning as far as I’m concerned. What your PCS does is it takes you back to the House bill. Now I’ve been working since January with the LRC Committee, had hearings all over the place. Some of you all were involved and we were involved and we came out with a bill that was vetted with the Governor, who was opposed to common core, the chamber, who yes, who was opposed to common core from the get-go, BEST North Carolina, opposed to common core. All of those came to the table with many other people, and we came out with a negotiated bill, which I like, which you’re hearing today, but it’s not that bill – it’s another bill with your PCS. And I’m not going to argue whether the PCS is better or worse; I’m going to let you all have at that and you can vote however you’d like on that, but that’s all I want to say about the bill. A lot of work’s gone into it and repeal is what we were after, and it puts it in our hands; not the conglomerate of states. In our hands with the Standards Commission who may or may not take any standards they want to conform to North Carolina’s curriculum. That’s all it does. We own it and it’ll be ours. That’s all it does. Senator Soucek, I know you’re ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator Tillman. I think you expressed that quite well, and the one thing… one of the pieces of confusion we’ve seen on these bills over and over again – I want to make sure it’s clarified – is that neither of these bills stops us in our tracks and says we have no curriculum for students as they are planning to go back to school in August. Both bills say that we are decoupled from common core from the national consortium, North Carolina owns its standards and will continue to do so, and has an aggressive plan in order to make sure they’re high standards that work well, and the standards they have right now in place that they’ve trained on and implemented for three years will continue forward as we aggressively look at improving what we need to improve and fix. So again that’s really clear, that we’re not in any kind of a limbo, but we are moving forward to ensure North Carolina owns its standards, and they’re rigorous and they are high standards and that they’re training our students for the future. Other than that, you’ve already discussed this bill. You know more about it probably than we do. If you’d like to have any questions, you can talk to the original House sponsors of the bill at this point I believe. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Senator. Representative ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to thank Senator Soucek and Senator Tillman for their hard work. We’ve got a little difference of opinion on some of the wording, but I think the essences of both bills are the same. I’m sure we’ll be able to sit down and work out something that’s going to be good for everyone and that everyone can live with and be proud of, so with that Mr. Chairman, I move for adoption of the PCS… or how do I word this? Favorable report on the PCS, unfavorable to the original, and that the bill be sent to the floor. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Favorable to the bill as amended, rolled into a proposed committee substitute with a favorable report to the committee substitute and unfavorable to the original bill is our motion. All in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All opposed, no. [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Division, please. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Division. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe that we need to call the roll. We’re going to call the roll. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Adams? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Arp? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bell? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Brandon? [SPEAKER CHANGES] No. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Brown? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bryan? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Bumgardner? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Carney? [SPEAKER CHANGES] ?? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Cleveland?