Meeting Public Comments

Julie Zaugg [citizen, retired teacher]

It is hard to understand why a bill about transparency in education is being debated in the appropriations committee. The majority of what this asks for is already being done, which makes this bill look frivolous and repetitious. The first section concerns syllabus which are already published by schools in student handbooks and/or online to help students decide what classes to take. The section asking for a description of how classes meet educational standards was met several years ago by every teacher at every level. These were commenced at workshops led by AEA staff and completed during professional development time.The section asking for a list of all books, articles, handouts, websites and so on to be published by August 23 and January 15 each year is an impossible task. There is no way to know in advance what types of handouts, graphic organizers or outlines will be most effective with the incoming class, and what will need retaught in different ways to help all succeed. This would also require a rookie teacher to complete this work for fall semester before they are under contract. How many teachable moments will be lost when a student wants more information, but I can't offer them something that was not preapproved? In addition, is there software available to make these items sortable by class, grade and teacher? The section on social studies is a case of micromanagement. Did it really need to be put into code that the U.S. Constitution should be taught in government class? That is already a standard set forth by the Department of Education as is much of what is listed in this bill.There is little that is new or necessary about this bill and none of it has to do with appropriations.