Thread: Second subcommittee hearing on education kicking off. Lots of teachers here. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/video/stream.php?key=9869&audio=0

@GregHembree says this is a “modernization bill”. In that spirit, I would suggest not introducing specifics like “elements of literacy” that will likely be debunked by ongoing research before the bill is passed.

This is what’s being discussed: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/CommitteeInfo/SenateEducationCommittee/419R001.SP.GH_PDF%20for%20Committee%20mtg%2011%2013%2019.pdf

Sen. Hembree says senators won’t vote on amendments today. @vincentsheheen moves to take up the full working document.

@NikkiSetzler asks if document is the same as the one discussed this morning. @GregHembree says it is other than some language about school takeovers by charter management organizations being taken out. Hopefully ALL language about takeovers by non-public entities is removed.

@vincentsheheen says “we have obsessed over standardized testing” and says we can’t use them as an “imprimatur of value”. He points out we know tests don’t improve perfomance. @shanemassey says he doesn’t disagree, but wants social studies to be valued.

@GregHembree suggests various “formative assessments” used by districts are different but that the data could be converted somehow to compare districts. This would seem to be objectively impossible. No explanation was given.

Senator Hembree states that teachers need flexibily and not state mandates. The bill does not bear this belief out: https://www.scstatehouse.gov/CommitteeInfo/SenateEducationCommittee/419R001.SP.GH_PDF%20for%20Committee%20mtg%2011%2013%2019.pdf

Sadly, after some great points about the limits of testing by @vincentsheheen and @shanemassey, @GregHembree says the the bill would still direct literacy coach resources to schools based on student test scores. Overreliance on tests continues to be a major problem.

I have serious misgivings about the legislature defining pedagogical concepts like “the reading process,” especially after almost no consultation with teachers. This seems destined to be out of date by the time it would be passed.

Senator Hembree suggests that a “retired chemist from DuPont” might want to teach. My dad is a retired engineer and a brilliant man. He would need SIGNIFICANT training and support to be an effective teacher, and I’d love a program that did that. I don’t think this is that program

I also wonder what incentives my dad or that “chemist from DuPont” would have to teach under our current system.

@GregHembree gives no explanation for why the amendment removes the requirement and goal of meeting the SE average salary for teachers. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/CommitteeInfo/SenateEducationCommittee/419R001.SP.GH_PDF%20for%20Committee%20mtg%2011%2013%2019.pdf

Again, after good points on the serious limits and “obsession” with testing, the takeover part of the bill defines schools to be taken ovef through, you guessed it, testing, sh in makes up the bulk of state report card data.

This is a good place to point out the data from Tennessee’s attempt to use school takeovers (spoiler: it didn’t work). https://news.vanderbilt.edu/2019/07/16/six-years-later-izone-schools-see-moderate-gains-asd-schools-have-not-improved/

What Senator Hembree calls “the Erskine Amendment”.

@BradHutto asks why future meetings are just being scheduled now, since he has other meetings already scheduled and wants to offer amendments.

Now they’re joking about football. @Paul_Bowers might appreciate this.

@geraldmalloySC wonders if we are limiting the number of students who will get Palmetto Scholarship. Hembree says it will roll back the numbers to pre- grading scale change.

@BradHutto wonders if allowing high performing schools “flexibility” in hiring uncertified teachers at “excellent” schools might be backward, because struggling schools need the flexibility. Obviously, we need to do more to recruit and retain good teachers.