By GARRY RAYNO, InDepthNH.org
CONCORD — After more than an hour of fine-tuning the proposed overhaul of the rules governing the state education minimum standards, the State Board of Education unanimously adopted its controversial proposal Wednesday.
The board’s work is not over, as the “back section” of the proposed rules has yet to be adopted and contains some of the most controversial aspects of the changes sought by the state board and Education Commissioner Frank Edelblut.
Wednesday there was little public discussion about the rules critics say will lessen requirements, remove local control and conflict with existing law despite significant changes when they were first proposed and continue to make what were requirements into recommendations by changing the word “shall” to “may.”
The initial rules drew considerable criticism from the public as well as educators and local school elected officials as rule writers sought to move the rules toward a competency-based program for student assessment, something state lawmakers adopted several decades ago, and would have long-term impacts on the state’s public education system including the state’s constitutional requirement to provide and pay for an adequate education for all its students.
While the approved rules are an improvement, they do not go far enough to maintain the quality education the state has long cherished, critics contend after the board’s vote.
“New Hampshire’s public schools have long been the pride of our communities and held to high standards that have resulted in rigorous, meaningful educational opportunities for all of our students,” said Nicole Heimarck, Executive Director at Reaching Higher NH, a pro-public education organization. “This proposal could put our public schools on a very different path, one with lower expectations for students and public schools. Granite State students, families, and educators deserve standards that reflect the very best of us, but there are a lot of open questions and concerns with this proposal that we’ll be watching as the rules go to the next phase of the process.”
The state’s two largest teachers unions also were critical of the rules adopted by the board Wednesday saying the board and education commissioner are trying to reshape education in ways that are detrimental to traditional public schools.
“Public schools are the great equalizer – and the 306 Rules are intended to hold our state to that. Educators fought for a seat at the table in the public school standards revision process to share our experience and expertise,” said Megan Tuttle, President of NEA — New Hampshire. “Unfortunately, not all of our concerns have been addressed, especially regarding class sizes and curriculum. As the 306 Rules revision process continues, public education leaders will continue to hold lawmakers accountable and work to ensure New Hampshire maintains strong standards for strong public schools because our students deserve it.”
Deb Howes, President of AFT — New Hampshire said the board is attempting to make major changes to education in the state for years to come through rule making in ways the legislature has rejected.
“If these rules are adopted as passed today, students could face larger class sizes, fewer course offerings and fewer qualified educators to help them learn and thrive. The State Board has already been alerted that this rules proposal conflicts with existing state law in many ways,” Howes said. “They should have taken more time and carefully considered the mountain of feedback they have already received from Granite Staters who value robust public schools for all before plowing ahead and voting to approve this proposal.”
Long-time state educator Christine Downing of Goshen headed a group of educators who worked with the department and the board to make changes in the proposed rules and she suggested some last-minute changes to the board Wednesday including technical changes and others to bring the rules in line with state statutes.
Board chair Drew Cline thanked Downing for the tremendous amount of work she did even if the board did not adopt all of her proposed changes as well as others who collaborated on the final product.
The proposed “306” rules now go to the Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules for its review.
Many of the late changes Department of Education attorneys reviewed with the board Wednesday came from attorneys for the legislative committee and largely concerned conflicts with existing statutes.
Several times Cline said the changes were in fidelity to state statutes and did not want to do something that would cause JLCAR to reject the rules.
One instance involved kindergarten curriculum and removing math from the rules because it is not in law, but Cline asked that math be included in the rules and suggested lawmakers make the change in statute to reflect what is in the state’s academic standards.
Rep. David Luneau, D-Hopkinton, who serves on the House Education Committee told the board they were not in fidelity to the statutes because the proposal had not been reviewed and recommended by the Joint Legislative Education Oversight Committee.
He said the committee met in June and worked for two hours on the proposed rules and made it through only two pages.
“If you want to be consistent with Legislative intent, you need to follow that process,” Luneau said.
Before the vote on the proposal, Edelblut claimed the three-year process was the most transparent ever held on the rules with three or four public hearings instead of one and the involvement of educators and the public in the process, which delayed adopting a final proposal to ensure more input.
The process was criticized for the lack of educators and public involvement early on when the initial proposals were presented.
Edelblut said a great deal of time was spent ensuring the rules aligned with existing law.
“This is a proposal we all should be proud of,” Edelblut said, noting it reflects the concept of student competency based on learning in and outside the classroom, and builds on that philosophy.
He said local school districts are the best judge of their communities’ needs without the heavy hand of the state weighing in.
Cline noted a lot of time was spent consolidating the rules that over time have become disjointed and confusing to make them easier to follow.
“This update consolidates and streamlines the minimum standards in a manner that educators can easily understand, while also enhancing a system where students demonstrate desired learning outcomes that prepare them for the real world,” said Cline. “We are confident that these improvements further align the rules with the goal of competency-based learning.”
However, critics say the rules continue to fall short.
Reaching Higher NH outlined areas of concern with the adopted rules that remain despite the changes touted by Cline and Edelblut:
Weakening requirements
The proposed rules remove requirements for curriculum and programs and would make them optional by shifting language from “shall” to “may.”
The proposed rules remove “courses” throughout the document and replace the term with “learning opportunities,” a vague term that could diminish academic rigor and lead to inconsistency between school districts.
Class size requirements
The rules remove maximum class sizes, replacing it with a student-teacher ratio based on the number of students per teacher in the district. The JLCAR attorney flagged the removal of maximum class sizes as being “very broad,” contrary to the state’s obligation to offer a constitutionally adequate education, and noting that it would have fiscal implications, and could not be uniformly enforced.
Alternative courses of study
The new rules broaden the definition of “alternative programs” and would require the school district to pay for the alternative if a student chooses to pursue it.
Student instructional needs
The new rules remove the requirement for school boards to adopt policies requiring that schools meet the instructional needs of each individual student.
And the organization says “the latest proposal includes several new concepts for which the State Board of Education has not received public comment, including the establishment of state academic standards, making changes to the configurations of schools, and including ‘mastery’ as an aspirational statement, rather than a requirement for a student’s academic progress.”
The Department of Education hired the National Center for Competency Based Learning of Durham, headed by former State Board of Education Chair Fred Bramante, to develop a draft for the state board, which was completed last year.
The process was criticized for the lack of outside input and the board and center held additional meetings with the public and educators to refine the proposal.
“This is a consequential document. I am very excited about the changes that have been made to the minimum standards and what they will mean for the continued support of students in our state,” Bramante said after the vote. “I believe they will have an important impact in moving competency-based learning forward and moving education forward in New Hampshire.”
The rules adopted by the board Wednesday are expected to go before JLCAR at its next meeting at 9 a.m. Sept. 19, usually in Rooms 306 and 308 of the Legislative Office Building.
The committee could approve the new rules, send them back to the Department of Education for changes, or issue a preliminary objection, which would pause the process.
If the committee issues a final objection, that does not prevent the rules from taking effect, but moves the burden of proof from the legislature to the department in any legal action.
The committee could also decide to introduce a joint resolution into the legislature which would delay final adoption of the rules until action is taken on the joint resolution, which if passed would prevent the rules from being adopted.
The state board is expected to follow a similar process on the “back section” of the 306 rules which may come before the board in some form at its next meeting Sept. 12 at its building on Hall Street in Concord.
Garry Rayno may be reached at garry.rayno@yahoo.com.
