S.B. 58 Public School Attendance Amendments: transcript

I think there have been three substitutes to this bill numbered today, Mr. Uh, chair. So, I'm, I wanna, I'm, I'm gonna speak to the fourth substitute, um, oh, which I now have. Thanks for keeping it interesting. Well, Thank you. And, and again, I i recognizing your time and mine, I wanna present this quickly. Um, so I'll just give you some history. There was an audit, the state board's internal auditor. I presented this bill at the education interim committee at the meeting up, uh, at the Davis County Catalyst Center. You many, most of you guys were there. So you've seen this bill before. Obviously there have been some changes to it. 'cause we have a fourth substitute now. But that substitute is really just kind of a question of legislative back and forth. You know, it's not because there were a ton of changes to this bill, but just changes were being made simultaneously. And it's kind of interesting that I'll go over the history, but in response to the audit, we drafted this bill to create uniformity in definitions, uniformity in reporting requirements, consistency in data. Right. The whole point of this bill is to be able to get consistent, reliable data so that we know what we're doing there. Uh, I I, I don't wanna say there are no policy changes in this bill 'cause there are some minor ones that we can go over. Um, but again, those just have to do with providing a definition. Right? What is, what is it, what is a school day and what does it mean to be attendance validated versus, um, learner validated programs? And so we imported some definitions from the state board because I had a bill open on attendance. School districts asked, could we please put in a provision that, uh, authorized, um, uh, land trust school community councils to use land trust money to address the problems of chronic absenteeism? 'cause there had been some challenges about that. So sure, we put that in. It was consensus. Uh, and then because we were already dealing with land trust, the Land trust Committee came and said, can you please put in this technical fix for charter schools, which we did that to. And then this morning I meet with Paula Plant who's in the audience, and she's a wonderful person. But she says, look, the state board just adopted your language as a rule. So rather than tweak, tweak in statute about what, what can and can't, uh, land trust money be used for, let's let the rule stand. So we'll take that out. So that's all right. We've already solved that problem. The, you know, we were, everybody was unified on the idea that chronic absenteeism is something that needs to be addressed. But in taking that out, we also had to lose the charter school technical fix. Um, and then, uh, subsequent to that, we had some, a message from the State Board of Education that the definition of chronic absenteeism did not comport with federal law when it came to excused absences. And so that is in the fourth substitute as well. So there's the interesting legislative history. A lot has gone on this morning, but we're here ready with a freshly, uh, minted orange fourth substitute. That concludes my presentation.

I didn't, I'm Sorry. You're light. That's okay. Was it blinking? I apologize.

Yeah, thank you. Um, with the sponsor yield, I don't know if we have to do that Here. No. You're authorized to ask your Question anyway. Yeah. So can you explain about the whole excuse absence versus not and what you mean by what needed to change with the federal law?

Certainly, uh, I believe, uh, the state policy as currently drafted, uh, just defines chronic absenteeism as missing a certain number of days. Um, but, uh, I think the fourth, what the fourth substitute would do. And, uh, the sponsor of the fourth substitute is on your committee. So she can address this if she would like to, but it, uh, removes excused absences from that total.

Okay. Yeah. Thank you. That's something that I was worried about. Uh, one of the things that I think we need to be careful about and I, I know has been talked about in the last few years is making sure that parents have the ability to excuse their kids and to have their rights is being able to decide that, um, without it being counted in a punitive manner. Manner. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. I've already asked you this, but now that I'm digesting the fourth sub, um, I will ask again. So, um, right now a lot of LEAs, if there is a snow day, they've gone to making up that snow day with a virtual instruction day, rather than trying to get the kids into the school on a Saturday or on spring break. Does this bill allow them to still do a virtual instruction day to make up for a snow day?

Yes. And can you give 'em a little more details, like, 'cause I know there was concern that that was prohibited. No, under the definition of instruction, but directed line 65 to 67 of the substitute an instructional day, uh, is, doesn't include days where educational services are not actively provided. Um, but if they're doing virtual instruction, then educational services are actively provided. So if they cancel school because of a snow day, and that's it, it doesn't count. But if they replace a closed day with, you'll do learning from home and our teacher will be online and you could join, then that still counts as a day because instruction is being actively supplied.

So the, um, it could the teacher just be online if needed? Or, um, what did it expect?

Um, synchronous learning all day long. Uh, Like they, they'd be given assignments To do at home, teachers available if needed. So if what you're asking is that count is active, can, can, I don't, I don't see that particularly happening on a snow day. Uh, I got the same question from districts that you did verified with the drafting attorney. If you cancel school and provide online instruction, that still counts as a school day. Okay. If what you do is say, we're not gonna hold school this day, but the week before we're gonna send home worksheets, that does not count as a school day.

Got it. 'cause no instruction is being provided. Thank You.

Can you hear me? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so the questions that I have actually are not really related to the new items in the sub, but they're related to the existing, uh, language and changes that were made in the existing bill. So if you go to, in the sub line, which Sub, Well, I guess we better go with the fourth sub. That's what I'm looking at online, but I think it's the, the, this is pretty consistent anyway, throughout the subs. If you go to line 3 36 in the first sub, it should start with a local school board, charter school governing board. Do you find that spot? I see line 3 36, but I don't see that language on that line. Darn it. Then maybe what I have is not accurate. It Okay.

Yes. Thank you. I just wanna make sure I'm looking at the right thing. So when I pull up sub four line lines, 1 49, 1 48, 1 49 still say, has been absent for at least 10% of the days of instruction, whether the absent was excused or not excused, did we take off the not excused part on sub four or, or not? I'm, I'm gonna defer that to sub four sponsor. Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay. If our, Could I answer? Committee member could answer that? Yeah, go Ahead. Oh, okay. Sorry. Lemme get your light on.

Thank you. I apologize. So I guess I did want to talk, um, We were just saving it for later. That's all right. So that portion is the tracking portion. So the, the federal government does require us to track both excused and unexcused. So what the sub four does with regards to any potential penalties from excused absences is it clarifies that those, those will not occur. That it's just for unexcused absences, but that's later in the bill. That's just the tracking portion. So we'll still be tracking excused versus unexcused.

Okay. And can I have a follow up question, Mr. Chair for Yeah, go ahead. Probably the, the amendment sponsor. Is there a cap on how many excused absences? Like if you go on vacation for two weeks and then you're sick for five days, you're technically under that threshold, but now you've missed almost 20 days of school. Is there like a cap on the number of, of excused absences or that's completely parent choice?

That is completely parent choice.

Thank you. I am, I apologize for that. Okay, so now I'm gonna redirect your attention to line three 30 on the sub. If you can find that line. It says, A local school board, charter school governing board or school district may not take punitive action to resolve a truancy problem with the school aged child during the period described in subsection two. And this is crossed out. And the way I understand punitive action would be that it would hurt your grade. Um, is that what we are intending? And then I do have another question after this one as well.

Uh, Mr. Chair and I, I'm gonna ask for Mr. Rose's help on this one. Who with the go hefty?

So, uh, I also saw that and was concerned, but from what my drafting attorneys have explained to me, this is an old outdated provision that was put in law during COVID. And now that that doesn't apply, that is being taken out. So it doesn't represent a policy change. Just a technical change. And if Mr. Rose has color to add, I'd be happy to, to have him explain further.

Go ahead. Fin Rose Policy analyst for legislative research. Yeah, it was just left over from COVID.

Okay. That might've actually spurred on another small question there. And I don't know if this is maybe to Mr. Rose, actually. So, um, are you saying that there aren't, there isn't any kind of language in this bill that is going to suggest to, uh, schools that they need to be changing a person's grade because of absences then? Is that correct?

I'm checking with the drafting attorney. I actually did not work on this policy, so gimme two seconds.

Okay. Thank you. I do have another question while he looks for that, if that's okay. Go ahead. Okay. Thank you. So moving down to line 3 35 to 3 38, that little section that's also crossed there says, notwithstanding this section during the period described in subsection two, a school administrator designee of a school administrator, law enforcement officer acting as a school resource officer or truancy specialist, may not issue or otherwise enforce a notice of truancy. And again, that is also crossed out. So that would suggest to me that there is some sort of enforcement that is being suggested to happen there. And I'm wondering what that is.

Uh, Mr. Chair again, I was, this is all just old outdated language that no longer applies. That was put in in 2020 during COVID.

Okay. That language makes me feel pretty uncomfortable. And so hopefully we can get an answer maybe on what, what is going on there, because I don't think we should penalize people just really quickly. Um, I was the type of student that I was always ahead of things and in all of the accelerated programs and stuff, and by the time I got to my end of my high school, like my senior year, there were only two weeks that I went the whole time and I still pulled four Os and they were all excused, of course, but it was like, I just didn't need to be there. And, and I have mercy on people who are in that same circumstance where they're like going through the hoops, but they, it's, it's like they, they need to do something else that challenges them a little bit more sometimes.

Kaylee. Oh, awesome. So my name is Kaylee McBride and I represent myself. In 2015, my eighth grade year, I sustained an injury during the school year that resulted in 38 missed days of school due to several complications, surgeries, and treatments. One Friday while I was at treatment, my parents received an automated call from the district stating that I had missed too many school days and would be referred to juvenile court. This caused UE stress on my family. Despite 38 missed days, I worked with my teachers, parents and administrators to catch up and get my schoolwork done. Between treatments, I went on to get straight A's that trimester in school year, graduate high school with a 4.0 in honors and graduate from Utah State University with honors. As a good student with good parents, those 38 days did not significantly affect my education. However, despite all this time, I will not never forget the stress surrounding those attendance requirements, even when I was a good student and needed healing. As the 38 miss stays far exceeds the 10% threshold, which includes both excused and non-used absences, the original bill would have affected me and my family greatly. I'm against the bill is written as I see the potential to harm good students and parents who do care about attendance. I ask that members of this committee pass the substitution proposed by Representative Libe or AD protections and provisions which are needed for students and parents. When health issues and other extenuating circumstances arise, or when grades do not indicate the lack, that lack of attendance is an issue.

So, I'm actually here with Paul, but my name is Dustin Monroe. I'm representing myself. Um, my question is based on the fact that you were mentioning the school days being with a snow day or things like that. So would it have to be a mandated that all teachers, um, from the school district participate in the online? Or is it certain teachers if half the teachers are available to teach, you have to attend those classes at those hours that the teacher mandates? Or how does that particularly affect the students?

Um, hi, my name's Wendy Hart. I am a former Alpine School Board member. I served for eight years, and during that period of time, our board unanimously passed a policy that allowed parents to excuse children for whatever reason they deemed necessary, elevating it to an excused absence, a valid excuse under state law. Um, I was also very instrumental during the ESSA passage at the federal level, which is what this reporting is, is coming from. Um, we got five out of six of our federal delegation to vote against the A SSA because it, it, it inserted itself too much into education at the state level. And so I'm asking you to, I either vote this down or separate, um, the excused absences. As Ms. McBride commented, there are tons of problems for parents and families that we don't need to heap upon them more problems when they are dealing with difficulties in their children's lives, especially medical issues. Right. And there is nothing specific, oh, sorry. It did. I apologize. Thank you.

Thank you. I would move, um, sub four. Okay. Would you like, uh, that motion as an order? So you, the motion is to adopt the four substitute to SB 58 public school attendance amendments. Would you like to speak to that? Yes. I really appreciate the sponsors patience with me as I've tried to figure and and navigate as there's, it's kind of been a little bit of a moving target, but understandably so because the policy has evolved in the bill. But basically, um, what sub four does is what this good senator described, but also it, um, it removes from the definition of educational neglect, excused absences. And it also does not punish LEAs for excused absences of students. So it removes NA penalty to the LEA as well for excused absences. And that's all that the addition does.

Just we have a number of subs out there. Yep. Um, what? I'm in favor of this. Okay. I think it's great.

I'll waive. Thank You. All right.

Again, thank you. The only thing I would say is this, this really is not about changing policy, but just about ensuring that we have accurate and uniform data by which to form future policy decisions.

To be with you. See you guys again soon

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, uh, Senate Bill 58 comes to us in response to, um, an audit that the State Board of Education's internal auditor did of local education agencies, uh, attendance policies, practices, uh, it, I, that particular audit identified several shortcomings. And so you're going to see again, uh, several bills trying to tackle this issue. And again, I think I'm taking something of a minimalist approach. Um, so again, working with, um, the, the school Superintendents and School Boards Association have tried to craft this in a, um, in the appropriate way. Uh, the point of this bill is to say that if we're going to be tracking student's attendance, and that that's going to decide decision making, we all ought to agree what attendance means, how it's measured, and how it's reported, and that that ought to be uniform across the state. Um, because I was working, uh, on attendance, I also added, um, something that came again at the request of, uh, I should say it came at the request of my school district. Although I think that the, this is a, a part of the bill that all school districts would like, depending on, on anything else. And that is the ability for schools through their community councils to choose to spend land trust money to combat chronic absenteeism. And so we've inserted language there, and you can see that on Lang, uh, on lines 5 63. But to that end, uh, Mr. Chair, I would like to move a, an amendment, um, one amendment one in my name. So I just met with the land trust section today, and they pointed out, um, what was a, just an oversight on my part, that we had included this new language under the shall category, which basically meant that every district would have to, or every school would have to spend money on chronic absenteeism. And so we've just restructured it. So the same language is there, but it's in a May category, right? So we wanted this to be permissive, to allow school community councils to try to address academic achievement by addressing absenteeism. Um, so you guys take a look at that amendment. It's online. And so it moves lines 5 63 to 5 67 down to lines five 70. Um, and, uh, you know, they'll, they'll be numbered, uh, again, uh, subsequently, but, uh, you can see how the, the, uh, the, it's in a may rather than a a shall. Okay, So, so that is amendment one.

Thank you, uh, to the bill. I just, I, I, I can walk you, walk you through this. So, you know, there are, um, the first sections of the bill beginning at line 40, where it's just definitions. And then there's a second section of definitions starting at line one 40. And that's just where we are, you know, having uniform definitions of what it means to be in attendance or to be absent. Uh, and particularly we're defining for the first time what that means at, uh, a school where attendance is, you know, a traditional school where you show up and they know you're there because you're in your chair, and so they mark you as present. But how does that work at a virtual school or a school where the program is, um, what, what we define here as learner validated, right? Where attendance at a school isn't required, but, so how are we going to measure what attendance or absenteeism is? And so we define, um, an attendance validated program, or a learner validated program. And again, I will publicly say to anybody, I am not positive that these are the perfect definitions here. And that's a silly standard. I don't know that we'll arrive at something perfect, but I welcome feedback on what the dish definition of a learner validated program ought to be. But I will say that I tried to work very closely and solicit feedback from the superintendents and School Boards Association multiple times and incorporated, uh, all of the feedback that they have offered at this point. But just by way of announcement, I'm willing to, uh, amend those definitions as we come up with something better. So please continue to provide that feedback. So after the definitions of those, then we just move on, uh, uh, move on in the bill to where online, 2 95, we're just requiring them to maintain attendance records. I don't think that would be a surprise or anything new to anybody. But then, uh, we've got a new section, uh, beginning at lines four 60, which is where we have the data quality and monitoring requirements. And that's where we set uniform statewide standards for how attendance is counted and reported. That's the bill.

Thank, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I'm looking at line 82. The learner validated program means an education program specific, specifically designed for competency based or self-based learning. It seems almost contrary that we have like a competency based pacing in an attendance bill. I mean, if attendance is required for seat time, would that person then be, um, excluded from the attendance amendments, or is their attendance completely modified because they're just going through a program

Now, Mr. Chair, attendance is just treated differently. And for each of those two programs, which is new to this bill, and it's something that, uh, the, that the audit noted that, uh, in virtual schools, this is not really possible to determine. Um, I shouldn't say that's not true for all virtual schools. Some virtual schools actually qualify as a, as an attended validated program because the, the instruction is provided in a synchronous matter using technology. Um, but here we are just, uh, because they're different, they need to be treated differently. So we're defining them differently and then treating them differently.

Thank You. Thanks. So for clarification, if they are supposed to be, if they're supposed to be moving through this program or a learning, um, sorry, a learning validated program, and they're not moving through it with proficiency and you're not really talking about their C time, it just seems, what would the attendance be for?

I mean, so the student online, 84, a student participation is measured by demonstrated academic progress and completion of learning objectives rather than by attendance at scheduled instructional periods. So if they don't master the content, then their attendance is zero. I would just direct the senator to lines 87 through 94, where it talks specifically about how the LEAs, uh, what kind of policy they need to adopt to determine attendance in a learner validated program.

So they would then continue enrollment measurements. Uh, like, so when you say 89 to 93, what would be the difference? They didn't pass the class even though it was supposed to be a competency BA class. So they would, how would this change the attendance A, B, C, and D? I don't understand that.

And again, I would point to line 87 where that will be determined by LEA policy.

Okay. Because virtual programs are different from district to district or school to school.

Again, some might be attendance validated uhhuh, some might be structured one way where we don't care if you attend or not. We don't care if you watch any videos. We just want you to complete the work. The LEA needs to determine by local policy what that looks like. And, um, forgive me for that. Um, but if, if it's structured differently, they just, the LEA needs to define that by policy. Where prior to this, everything would be treated as if it was an attendance validated program, which means any virtual program that was, uh, that was different than that, they wouldn't be able to take attendance at all. And so the effort here is to recognize those differences, allow for differences in how those things are measured, and allow local districts the flexibility to determine what that is based on the structure of their program.

So if you are someone in this program and you don't succeed through it, and we are, we are funding it, because if it's like a online program and you're getting a WPU for it, but no one's successfully finishing it, you're still gonna say that they've actually completed the course even though they failed. And that every LEA, even though that LEA might be failing kids at a high rate, they're still gonna get that as at a positive attendance rate.

I'm saying under current law. Yeah. That's how it happens. Okay. Under this law, it would be up to LEAs written policy,

But the a, the LEA might be the one that's having the problem. So if you have a school district, a an LEA that's not succeeding, they're gonna write their own policy.

Yeah. This bill requires, uh, LEAs to adopt such a policy.

Okay. I see that as a big hole that we could have a nefarious group create a school that doesn't really do anything, and people fail and like, oh, they showed up. So I, I, I struggle with that part of that. So maybe we can work on that. Thank you. Thank you.

Hello again. Uh, Royce Van Tassel, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. Um, uh, one of the things that I think may be getting lost in the discussion here is that the definitions and the policy that are being adopted with one very minor tweak that actually has nothing to do with the question, Senator Riebe, that you, uh, asked, uh, are really copying existing rule in R 2 7 7 4 19. And so the idea that schools would be receiving a DM for students that are failing in a learner validated program, that that's not happening today. Um, and, and this replicates the structure, uh, along this dimension that exists today for learner validated programs. There are a number of district schools that rely on that, that are a number of charter schools that rely on that. And so, um, I, I don't think on this dimension, the change to actual practice and governing rule, it's been rule now it's gonna be in code, is as significant on this dimension as the discussion has suggested. I think that, that this is not gonna actually change in any meaningful fashion. How learner validated programs generate a DM. Thank you.

Thank you. I move that we favorably recommend whatever bill we're on SB 58. SB 58. SB 50 as amended. As amended. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. President. In response to an audit from the State Board of Education's internal auditor, um, that they released this year, and that we heard in both, uh, the Education Interim Committee and the Public Education Appropriations Committee, they found, uh, you know, several, uh, problems with the way that attendance was counted and reported in the state inconsistencies, um, that led to inaccurate data. Um, you know, chronic absenteeism has been a growing problem for five or six years, uh, in our schools. Um, and you know, when when students are absent from school, they have a harder time keeping up with the material. Uh, it it, you know, if they're relying on attending school in order to provide that instruction. So there will be several bills this session dealing with this issue. Uh, this one deals it mostly from a technical standpoint of making sure that, uh, definitions are present in law so that everybody knows what the definitions are and then what the reporting standards are and that reporting is done consistently. So this bill simply provides definitions, most of which are imported from state board rule, and then just set standards by which, uh, attendance will be, uh, counted and reported to the State Board of Education. At the very least, as we tackle that problem, we ought to have consistent and reliable data. And this bill just, uh, addresses it from that standpoint. You will see other bills coming over from the house that take a different approach to try to encourage attendance, um, uh, and provide incentives. But this one is simply a way to, uh, to make sure that, that the definitions are uniform, that the standards are uniform and the reporting is uniform. Thank you Senator Fillmore for the presentation.

Senator Vickers Baldy Aye. Lein Aye. Brammer bus Aye. Comore Escamia Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grover Harper Hankins Aye. Sson Johnson Aye. Quan McKay Aye. Mikel Milner Musselman Owens Pitcher Aye. Plum Rebe Sandal Stevenson Stratton Pickers Weiler Wilson Aye. Winterton President Adams Aye. Senate bill 58, having received 26 yay votes, zero nay votes.

Yeah, Mr. President, the rules committee will be meeting, uh, after we adjourn in the rules room Rules committee meeting immediately after we adjourn, uh, for any other bus.

this bill seeks to come up with common definitions for what attendance is common calendars and standards by which that data is reported, and then common usage for that data just so that, uh, all policy makers understand what we're dealing with as we seek to tackle this issue.

Thank you. I move that Senate Bill 58 pass.

Senator Baldy blew in Brammer. Yes. Bus Colmore Aye. Escamilla Aye. Fillmore Aye. Grover Aye. Harper Aye. Kinins. Aye. Ipson. Ipsen Johnson Quan McKay Mikel Milner Musman Owens pitcher Plum Aye. Sandal Aye. Stevenson Stratton Aye. Vickers Weiler Aye. Wilson Aye. Winterton Pre aye. President Adams Aye. Senate

Fifth substitute Senate Bill 58 Public School Attendance Amendments by Senator Fillmore. This bill was heard in education with a vote of 12 0 3. The house sponsors Representative Thompson, Representative Thompson.

Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro Tim, uh, motion to move amendment one in my name.

I would, yeah, it's, we're just changing one, um, one word on line 4 62, um, where we're, we're referring to conducting an annual internal review versus a full on audit. So it's just a one word change.

Yeah, so this is, uh, this is a, uh, a bill that's dealing with, um, absenteeism, uh, and, and our public schools. As I've, uh, traveled around to different schools and talked with, um, a lot of administrators, a lot of parents, a lot of teachers, one of the biggest concerns is chronic absenteeism. And most of the time that's in the context of our students that are struggling, um, to perform well or hit benchmarks or beyond grade level. So what this bill does is it defines some really important terms within some of our districts. Believe it or not, there's not even standardization for, um, uh, for what an absence is or isn't even within certain school districts. Uh, we had, uh, the, the state school board did a, an attendance audit. The attendance audit, um, showed a lot of inconsistencies in the data. So one of the things that this bill does is that it, um, uh, it, it establishes, uh, requirements for data collection for attendance. It also requires, um, that there's parental notification within two days of an unexcused absence. Um, one of the other things that we've seen with regard to absenteeism is oftentimes there's a problem that starts to manifest itself. There's not notification to parents, um, early enough to get out of and, and potentially correct, uh, correct an issue there. There's also some accountability and transparency requirements for data. And, uh, finally what the, what the bill does is it, uh, addresses kindergarten readiness, specifically making sure that personal care Independence expectations, um, are set, um, with exemptions for anything that would fall under IDEA or protections with federal law or those with disabilities. So with that, uh, Mr. Speaker proto, I'm open to questions.

I move to Concur.

Senator Spry Lewin Brammer Bus Colmore Escamia Fillmore Grover Harper Harper Kinins Ipson Johnson. Juab McKay Mikel Milner Musselman Owens Pitcher Plum Rebi Sandal Stevenson Stratton. I don't Understand. Steve Bickers. Weiler Wilson Winterton. President Adams

Aye. Fifth substitute

Senator Johnson. Um, Motion to concur.