This worries me. Did any of the legislature's lawyers voice concerns about the constitutionality of SB2 before it ran? Could they be called to testify under oath and reveal what discussions they had while drafting the bill? Not if they are safely under the shield as part of the defense's legal team.
The Tribune clearly and rationally explained various possible ramifications of a seemingly small decision about which lawyers can participate in the defense of the SB2 lawsuit. Amen, Trib editorial board...amen.
http://www.sltrib.com/news/ci_10356916
More machinations: Legislators should stay out of SB2 lawsuit
Tribune Editorial
Article Last Updated: 09/02/2008 08:55:59 AM MDT
A lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of an omnibus education bill passed by this year's Legislature has been delayed and muddied by a legislative committee, headed by Senate President John Valentine and House Speaker Greg Curtis, who want to get legislative attorneys involved.
It's a complicated legal maneuver, and we don't pretend to understand all its ramifications and the legal underpinnings. But two things are clear: A legislative committee cannot speak for the entire Legislature (some legislators are plaintiffs in the suit), and the state attorney general needs no help defending the case. Further, involving legislative attorneys in defending Senate Bill 2 could unfairly undermine the lawsuit.
For these reasons, we feel the attorney general's office, alone, should defend the case. After all, the attorney general is, according to the Utah Constitution, the lead defense attorney when a Utah law is challenged. Furthermore, Mark Shurtleff, in his capacity as attorney general, is named as a defendant.
Legislative attorneys work for the Legislature to craft legislation, and their testimony might be valuable to determine the history of SB2 as the lawsuit goes forward. If they are part of the defense team, they probably would be barred from testifying.
And we can believe that might be the motive behind the move by the legislative management committee, since the history of SB2 has been one of back-room political maneuvering from the beginning. Its sponsors have an interest in keeping that history from public view.
Congress has long used omnibus bills to hide undesirable initiatives among many others thrown together at the last minute. Utah legislators unwisely followed that model, introducing the huge education bill two days before the session ended.
Many of its 12 portions had already been debated and voted on as separate bills before SB2 lumped them together. There was no good reason to package them except as a way for the legislative leadership to get unpopular bills passed that otherwise would have been, or already had been, defeated.
Omnibus legislation is a devious way to govern, lumping bills together so they are not debated and voted upon on their own merits. The way this omnibus bill was passed is an underhanded way to make public policy, and so is the attempt to thwart the legal challenge against it.
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Search terms
I saw Bob post something months ago about the search terms that led to his blog.
Last week, someone found me with the query "How long has Utah been a country?"
We'll skip the snarking over whether this person was educated in private or public school and just enjoy the diversity of the electorate.
Last week, someone found me with the query "How long has Utah been a country?"
We'll skip the snarking over whether this person was educated in private or public school and just enjoy the diversity of the electorate.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Educational Research and Research in General
Now this may be obvious to some, but I gained a new perspective on research, studies, and "proof" this summer. Saying that I’m cynical about research wouldn’t be accurate, but I definitely feel that I see research in a larger context now. Major issues of reliability and validity are prevalent, and any studies involving people rather than physical things like battery life or something are inherently less definitive.
There are frequent arguments about the findings of studies and I was well aware of biased research done in the past, especially about the voucher issue. But I thought of the research world as a generally dependable bunch except for a few screwballs with agendas (looking at you Jay Greene) and self-justifying studies done by companies pushing a product. That generalization mostly sorta holds true, but the research landscape is much more free-flowing, personality driven, and scattershot than I had previously conceived it. Individual, institutional, and regional biases, current hot topics, media, politics, and of course profit, strongly affect which fields of research are heavily pursued and which are not. Many different avenues exist to get published or “validate” your research, and the differences in credibility are not immediately apparent to the average reader, or more likely the average newspaper or magazine writer who then passes their take on the gist of the study to their readers. Many, many different publications, both in print and online, publish research in every imaginable field. There are prestigious, peer-reviewed journals with relatively high standards, mid-level journals with differing levels of standards, and then plenty of other printed journal-type publications looking for interesting writing, or just whatever is submitted (Kind of like those lame flyers you’d get in high school advertising that “Who’s Who” book of students that claimed to help with college and job applications, but was actually just a catalogue of the parents gullible or desperate enough to pay to get their kid’s photo in and then pay more for expensive books the family looked at once, and the colleges not at all). And even in some of the better journals, it is possible to find “holes” in many studies—variables that are unaccounted for or things left unexplained that should be explained to make the findings more credible.
This applies to all research, but especially research on people whether it be educational, psychological, behavioral, or even medical research. Almost nothing about people can be neatly buttonholed into definitive rules--we're just too uniquely weird. There are prominent recent examples of medical studies that were rushed through limited population studies and botched in the name of profit, triggering huge lawsuits afterwards (I love the movie The Fugitive….). And a body of research can strongly suggest certain effects, but the medicines and procedures are approved based on an arbitrary FDA standard of “safe enough” because nothing is absolutely certain when it comes to unique individuals. Side effects vary, vaccinations sometimes don’t work, patients react differently to identical procedures, and the same drugs, even safe and common ones like acetaminophen, don’t work for everyone. Research just leads us to the most likely best treatment, not the absolute “best.”
These same limitations and more apply to education research because it deals with psychological and social aspects of a student’s make-up, as well as biological. Our professors discouraged us from using the word "prove" when talking about education research. Every study has limitations. It was conducted by a specific person who is a member of a specific organization or university with a specific research culture and various funding pressures. The subjects of the study are in a specific place with certain teachers, schools, and curriculum and each has a unique background, learning style, and personality. I realize this could seem obvious, but even studies that are conducted with rigorous scientific standards and randomly sampled from large diverse populations only tell us so much. There is nothing definitive. Nothing. The results may show "strong tendencies," or be "generalizable," but that at best means the findings will be true for many kids in many contexts. With the diversity of individual students, it cannot mean it will hold true for all students in all contexts, even among a relatively homogenous population like Utah Valley.
Viewing research as an evolving body of literature rather than definitive snapshots that prove certain points of view is necessary to find defensible “best practices” that have shown repeated positive effects. In other words, you need to look at an entire body of research to begin to understand a subject. A meta-analysis is a study that gathers as many relevant studies as possible on a topic and then runs statistical analyses on the combined numbers to find the consensus. I have a book detailing effective teaching practices where each chapter is based on the results of a meta-analysis on a certain practice. Looking at the charts detailing the findings of the individual studies within each meta-analysis shows a lot of variance in the results. One particular effective practice had a chart showing some studies with extremely high effect sizes, others with medium or small effects, still others that found gains that were barely statistically significant, and one study with a fairly large negative effect. In other words, the students in one study scored measurably worse when taught with the prescribed method that was so effective in other settings and others showed almost no improvement. There are numerous factors that could be responsible for the discrepancies, and even researchers cannot always pinpoint the reasons for differing results from similar research. That’s par for the course as researchers, educators, and parents muddle through trying to find the best ways to teach our diverse children.
Both school systems and school critics have sometimes overused “Research shows” or “if you read the research” as justifications for practices that were speculative, and single studies as arguments against larger bodies of research. (I need to post about the hour I spent listening to Carolyn Eager, the home researcher buddy of Margaret Dayton who is an “expert” on such topics as home school and the IB, being interviewed by Gayle Ruzicka on 630 AM while I drove home from the airport a few weeks ago. It had to be some sort of record for unsupported claims of “If you read the research, you’d find…”) I know I’ve heard it in professional development meetings in public school, and charter or private schools will sometimes search out the studies justifying their founders’ opinions on the “right” curriculum or methods to use.
So I’m not saying disregard education research. I am saying that any one study needs to be approached with a critical eye and possibly a grain of salt, and that even an educational method or curriculum with a well-documented positive effect in multiple studies does not by definition have that effect on all students—the positive effect comes from statistical analysis on the net results from a large sample of students and may not have the same benefit for an individual student or class.
There are frequent arguments about the findings of studies and I was well aware of biased research done in the past, especially about the voucher issue. But I thought of the research world as a generally dependable bunch except for a few screwballs with agendas (looking at you Jay Greene) and self-justifying studies done by companies pushing a product. That generalization mostly sorta holds true, but the research landscape is much more free-flowing, personality driven, and scattershot than I had previously conceived it. Individual, institutional, and regional biases, current hot topics, media, politics, and of course profit, strongly affect which fields of research are heavily pursued and which are not. Many different avenues exist to get published or “validate” your research, and the differences in credibility are not immediately apparent to the average reader, or more likely the average newspaper or magazine writer who then passes their take on the gist of the study to their readers. Many, many different publications, both in print and online, publish research in every imaginable field. There are prestigious, peer-reviewed journals with relatively high standards, mid-level journals with differing levels of standards, and then plenty of other printed journal-type publications looking for interesting writing, or just whatever is submitted (Kind of like those lame flyers you’d get in high school advertising that “Who’s Who” book of students that claimed to help with college and job applications, but was actually just a catalogue of the parents gullible or desperate enough to pay to get their kid’s photo in and then pay more for expensive books the family looked at once, and the colleges not at all). And even in some of the better journals, it is possible to find “holes” in many studies—variables that are unaccounted for or things left unexplained that should be explained to make the findings more credible.
This applies to all research, but especially research on people whether it be educational, psychological, behavioral, or even medical research. Almost nothing about people can be neatly buttonholed into definitive rules--we're just too uniquely weird. There are prominent recent examples of medical studies that were rushed through limited population studies and botched in the name of profit, triggering huge lawsuits afterwards (I love the movie The Fugitive….). And a body of research can strongly suggest certain effects, but the medicines and procedures are approved based on an arbitrary FDA standard of “safe enough” because nothing is absolutely certain when it comes to unique individuals. Side effects vary, vaccinations sometimes don’t work, patients react differently to identical procedures, and the same drugs, even safe and common ones like acetaminophen, don’t work for everyone. Research just leads us to the most likely best treatment, not the absolute “best.”
These same limitations and more apply to education research because it deals with psychological and social aspects of a student’s make-up, as well as biological. Our professors discouraged us from using the word "prove" when talking about education research. Every study has limitations. It was conducted by a specific person who is a member of a specific organization or university with a specific research culture and various funding pressures. The subjects of the study are in a specific place with certain teachers, schools, and curriculum and each has a unique background, learning style, and personality. I realize this could seem obvious, but even studies that are conducted with rigorous scientific standards and randomly sampled from large diverse populations only tell us so much. There is nothing definitive. Nothing. The results may show "strong tendencies," or be "generalizable," but that at best means the findings will be true for many kids in many contexts. With the diversity of individual students, it cannot mean it will hold true for all students in all contexts, even among a relatively homogenous population like Utah Valley.
Viewing research as an evolving body of literature rather than definitive snapshots that prove certain points of view is necessary to find defensible “best practices” that have shown repeated positive effects. In other words, you need to look at an entire body of research to begin to understand a subject. A meta-analysis is a study that gathers as many relevant studies as possible on a topic and then runs statistical analyses on the combined numbers to find the consensus. I have a book detailing effective teaching practices where each chapter is based on the results of a meta-analysis on a certain practice. Looking at the charts detailing the findings of the individual studies within each meta-analysis shows a lot of variance in the results. One particular effective practice had a chart showing some studies with extremely high effect sizes, others with medium or small effects, still others that found gains that were barely statistically significant, and one study with a fairly large negative effect. In other words, the students in one study scored measurably worse when taught with the prescribed method that was so effective in other settings and others showed almost no improvement. There are numerous factors that could be responsible for the discrepancies, and even researchers cannot always pinpoint the reasons for differing results from similar research. That’s par for the course as researchers, educators, and parents muddle through trying to find the best ways to teach our diverse children.
Both school systems and school critics have sometimes overused “Research shows” or “if you read the research” as justifications for practices that were speculative, and single studies as arguments against larger bodies of research. (I need to post about the hour I spent listening to Carolyn Eager, the home researcher buddy of Margaret Dayton who is an “expert” on such topics as home school and the IB, being interviewed by Gayle Ruzicka on 630 AM while I drove home from the airport a few weeks ago. It had to be some sort of record for unsupported claims of “If you read the research, you’d find…”) I know I’ve heard it in professional development meetings in public school, and charter or private schools will sometimes search out the studies justifying their founders’ opinions on the “right” curriculum or methods to use.
So I’m not saying disregard education research. I am saying that any one study needs to be approached with a critical eye and possibly a grain of salt, and that even an educational method or curriculum with a well-documented positive effect in multiple studies does not by definition have that effect on all students—the positive effect comes from statistical analysis on the net results from a large sample of students and may not have the same benefit for an individual student or class.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Grad school, chance encounters with Bob Aagard, and researcher/practitioner tension
I started grad school a couple of weeks ago and it is kicking my butt. I’m learning a lot about research and education, and it’s a lot of reading. The other aspects of my life have been extremely busy as well, so I haven’t commented on various important educational topics that have come up in the past month. I want to. I’ve got a short “break” between summer and fall classes that happens to overlap with the hectic beginning of my school year. I’m aiming for some daily posts then.
I’ve run into Bob Aagard twice on campus and felt kind of dumb about it. He’s a total stranger, yet I know his face well and kind of feel like I know him–blogging is weird that way. So I was in a hurry (that’s a theme the last two weeks) and almost ran into him as I walked out of the bathroom and gave him a really weird look. He paused and in that split-second when you’re confronted with an unexpected situation and thoughts run through your head like “It doesn’t matter,” “Introduce yourself,” “No, play dumb,” “He’s probably busy and doesn’t care,” “I’ve got to be somewhere in 15 minutes,”etc., I managed:
Now I feel dumb for not introducing myself, but it was just one of those awkward moments when my brain was totally taken by surprise in the midst of trying to organize a huge to-do list while hurrying home. So good to see you Bob.
I also think I saw Alex Kirry from the Nightside Project walk by at the balloon festival in Provo on the morning of the 4th of July, but I’m not sure.
Now for something relevant to education. It has been interesting to see the tension between my professors and what they perceive as shortcomings in schools. My professors all taught in the public schools for some time before getting their Masters and Doctorates and moving to the university level. They all read and conduct educational research frequently. They’re not ranting passionately or anything, but in the course of discussion, various professors have brought up that they don’t feel that teachers pay enough attention to research or respect the findings of the overall field. They have been a little defensive as being perceived as living in the ivory tower and not remembering the realities of the classroom. And they're right that teachers often do think that certain studies or attitudes are not realistic.
I think that is an interesting dichotomy and that there’s some truth in what the professors are saying…but I also feel that they are inherently removed from classroom reality to a degree. From my vastly knowledgeable perch as two-week grad student and less-than-ten-year classroom teacher, I think that teachers do at times get caught up in day-to-day practicalities and lose sight of big picture type goals and what research has found. AND I think the researchers lose sight a little bit of how hard it is to implement ideal ideas with real classes of unique personalities. One professor said “You just don’t forget what teaching was like.” I totally agree, but you still start to gradually have other priorities and feel the burdens of your current situation while the memories of past obstacles fade by degree.
The professors also have a better grasp of the overall body of research rather than isolated studies from a media report or a professional meeting. They are not thrown when a study shows something seemingly odd or conflicting because the body of evidence will slowly point to a best practice. So there is often a difference in what a certain professor or body of researchers and currently practicing teachers believe about the “best” way to accomplish certain tasks in education. And the professors, national “experts,” different schools, and various studies within the body of research differ too. There are very few unanimously accepted ideas on literacy teaching, math teaching, character education, ESL teaching, school structure, etc. I think this stems partially from the impossibility of quantifying some things about teaching classes full of unique individuals. This uncertainty can be exciting as we find out more and improve, but it can also make people cynical as they hear differing ideas of “good” teaching from year to year or report to report.
I would think that tension would exist in all fields as new research points to better methods, but some specific ideas end up discredited after initial excitement, which sometimes leads to distrust or excuses about the other good ideas that represent changes in the normal way of doing things.
I think I’m rambling a little bit, but hopefully you can see what I’m saying. There are many commonly agreed-on principles in education, but there are many, many, many disagreements on everything from specific programs to larger methods and styles of teaching to the effectiveness of specific tests to underlying principles of how humans attain knowledge. This maybe shows why merit pay is not just an easy fix to the bad teachers out there. Some are lazy and they know it, but other perceptions may arise from honest differences in opinion about best practice. I’m not saying merit pay is impossible, but I am saying it’s complicated and that teachers are not just whiny obstructionists when they express concerns about exactly how they will be evaluated. I’m glad the legislature put the implementation in the hands of the districts to give local voices more input—that was a good move as long as they were throwing it in on the second-to-last day with minimal debate.
I have been planning on writing more about merit pay for months, but I will have to get to it soon with the new programs starting up. I also would like to write more about research and why it is often misread and misused. And UVU…and teacher political involvement (way less than Greg Curtis and Paul Rolly would have you believe)…and district split issues…and extended school year…and social promotion…and my interesting conversations with neighbors about education…and referendum restrictions in SB53 and SB54…and further discussion on how WPU, MSP, and other school funding is distributed… We’ll see how it goes.
I’ve run into Bob Aagard twice on campus and felt kind of dumb about it. He’s a total stranger, yet I know his face well and kind of feel like I know him–blogging is weird that way. So I was in a hurry (that’s a theme the last two weeks) and almost ran into him as I walked out of the bathroom and gave him a really weird look. He paused and in that split-second when you’re confronted with an unexpected situation and thoughts run through your head like “It doesn’t matter,” “Introduce yourself,” “No, play dumb,” “He’s probably busy and doesn’t care,” “I’ve got to be somewhere in 15 minutes,”etc., I managed:
“I know you from the bloghive.”That is probably not word-for-word perfect recall, but it was something to that effect.
“Oh. I could tell you looked at me funny.”
“Yea. It was because I recognized you.”
“Oh.”
Now I feel dumb for not introducing myself, but it was just one of those awkward moments when my brain was totally taken by surprise in the midst of trying to organize a huge to-do list while hurrying home. So good to see you Bob.
I also think I saw Alex Kirry from the Nightside Project walk by at the balloon festival in Provo on the morning of the 4th of July, but I’m not sure.
Now for something relevant to education. It has been interesting to see the tension between my professors and what they perceive as shortcomings in schools. My professors all taught in the public schools for some time before getting their Masters and Doctorates and moving to the university level. They all read and conduct educational research frequently. They’re not ranting passionately or anything, but in the course of discussion, various professors have brought up that they don’t feel that teachers pay enough attention to research or respect the findings of the overall field. They have been a little defensive as being perceived as living in the ivory tower and not remembering the realities of the classroom. And they're right that teachers often do think that certain studies or attitudes are not realistic.
I think that is an interesting dichotomy and that there’s some truth in what the professors are saying…but I also feel that they are inherently removed from classroom reality to a degree. From my vastly knowledgeable perch as two-week grad student and less-than-ten-year classroom teacher, I think that teachers do at times get caught up in day-to-day practicalities and lose sight of big picture type goals and what research has found. AND I think the researchers lose sight a little bit of how hard it is to implement ideal ideas with real classes of unique personalities. One professor said “You just don’t forget what teaching was like.” I totally agree, but you still start to gradually have other priorities and feel the burdens of your current situation while the memories of past obstacles fade by degree.
The professors also have a better grasp of the overall body of research rather than isolated studies from a media report or a professional meeting. They are not thrown when a study shows something seemingly odd or conflicting because the body of evidence will slowly point to a best practice. So there is often a difference in what a certain professor or body of researchers and currently practicing teachers believe about the “best” way to accomplish certain tasks in education. And the professors, national “experts,” different schools, and various studies within the body of research differ too. There are very few unanimously accepted ideas on literacy teaching, math teaching, character education, ESL teaching, school structure, etc. I think this stems partially from the impossibility of quantifying some things about teaching classes full of unique individuals. This uncertainty can be exciting as we find out more and improve, but it can also make people cynical as they hear differing ideas of “good” teaching from year to year or report to report.
I would think that tension would exist in all fields as new research points to better methods, but some specific ideas end up discredited after initial excitement, which sometimes leads to distrust or excuses about the other good ideas that represent changes in the normal way of doing things.
I think I’m rambling a little bit, but hopefully you can see what I’m saying. There are many commonly agreed-on principles in education, but there are many, many, many disagreements on everything from specific programs to larger methods and styles of teaching to the effectiveness of specific tests to underlying principles of how humans attain knowledge. This maybe shows why merit pay is not just an easy fix to the bad teachers out there. Some are lazy and they know it, but other perceptions may arise from honest differences in opinion about best practice. I’m not saying merit pay is impossible, but I am saying it’s complicated and that teachers are not just whiny obstructionists when they express concerns about exactly how they will be evaluated. I’m glad the legislature put the implementation in the hands of the districts to give local voices more input—that was a good move as long as they were throwing it in on the second-to-last day with minimal debate.
I have been planning on writing more about merit pay for months, but I will have to get to it soon with the new programs starting up. I also would like to write more about research and why it is often misread and misused. And UVU…and teacher political involvement (way less than Greg Curtis and Paul Rolly would have you believe)…and district split issues…and extended school year…and social promotion…and my interesting conversations with neighbors about education…and referendum restrictions in SB53 and SB54…and further discussion on how WPU, MSP, and other school funding is distributed… We’ll see how it goes.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Good election night for education--two moderates beat out ultra-conservatives and Doogie Howser C.P.A. loses
Way to go Weber and Davis counties! We couldn't quite get the moderate Republican candidates over the hump at the county convention here to even hold primary elections, but two challengers from the northern Wasatch Front beat out two of the same ol' pack of far-right, voucher/omnibus/stadium, power-abusing crowd in the legislature.
Ryan Wilcox surprisingly put the hurt on Glen Donnelson with 61% of the vote.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/29000.html
And Becky Edwards pulled out a close one with Paul Neuenschwander.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/30006.html
And most satisfyingly, though still scratching my head on how this even happened, Richard Ellis defeated Mark Walker for the Republican nomination for State Treasurer with 59% of the vote.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/30000.html
I still can't figure out exactly why all of the leadership was gunning for the treasurer position. I hope word leaks on what proposals they were considering that would require the acquiescence of a 32-yr-old salesman managing 12 billion dollars of state investment funds without even being able to accurately understand (about half way through his long interview) basic investment concepts.
The whole bribe thing was a sideshow, though it does show how desperate Walker was for the help of the qualified man he was criticizing. Seriously...what were they thinking? I'm sure Speaker Curtis, President Valentine, and Attorney General Shurtleff would not allow Walker to manage their personal portfolios, so why allow him to manage the state's multi-billion dollar portfolio?
Ryan Wilcox surprisingly put the hurt on Glen Donnelson with 61% of the vote.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/29000.html
And Becky Edwards pulled out a close one with Paul Neuenschwander.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/30006.html
And most satisfyingly, though still scratching my head on how this even happened, Richard Ellis defeated Mark Walker for the Republican nomination for State Treasurer with 59% of the vote.
http://electionresults.utah.gov/xmlData/30000.html
I still can't figure out exactly why all of the leadership was gunning for the treasurer position. I hope word leaks on what proposals they were considering that would require the acquiescence of a 32-yr-old salesman managing 12 billion dollars of state investment funds without even being able to accurately understand (about half way through his long interview) basic investment concepts.
The whole bribe thing was a sideshow, though it does show how desperate Walker was for the help of the qualified man he was criticizing. Seriously...what were they thinking? I'm sure Speaker Curtis, President Valentine, and Attorney General Shurtleff would not allow Walker to manage their personal portfolios, so why allow him to manage the state's multi-billion dollar portfolio?
Monday, June 23, 2008
I'm back and a dead guy's campaign sign
I'm back after visiting some family and some heavy encouragement to relax a little from so much reading/blogging. I'll be busy now, but have a lot of things I would like to write about. We'll see.
An annoying, but darkly amusing incident: A gentleman down the street died a couple months ago. (That's not the amusing part.) He didn't have much family and several people from the neighborhood have been helping his sister who lives out-of-state with various things around the house as she tries to figure out what to do with it. She has been stressed out during her brief visits and is definitely NOT interested in local politics. I got back from my trip and a Chris Cannon sign has appeared on the lawn........I hate politics!
An annoying, but darkly amusing incident: A gentleman down the street died a couple months ago. (That's not the amusing part.) He didn't have much family and several people from the neighborhood have been helping his sister who lives out-of-state with various things around the house as she tries to figure out what to do with it. She has been stressed out during her brief visits and is definitely NOT interested in local politics. I got back from my trip and a Chris Cannon sign has appeared on the lawn........I hate politics!
Friday, June 6, 2008
A list of the bills contained in SB2, the omnibus education bill, that shows the majority would have passed easily on their own
This is my last omnibus post for awhile…probably. I compiled this list of the separate bills that were wrapped up into SB2, the education omnibus bill, that shows the dates of important actions taken by the House or Senate on these bills prior to their being reconstituted as part of SB2. 7 of the 13 component bills had passed a House or Floor vote unanimously and where stalled either after reaching the Senate, or in the House or Senate Rules Committees waiting for the day when bills requiring large amounts of money can be passed. Two more had passed a House or Senate vote by a smaller margin, one had only been been passed in committee, and three had failed votes either on the House floor or Senate Education Committee. I don’t know how the winds were blowing on Senator Stephenson’s SB 35 when it disappeared; I know there were a lot of concerns with the bill. However, the other 8 bills awaiting a final vote would have passed easily if allowed the chance.
Senator Bramble claimed the fiscal note rule was why they waited on many of the bills. Bills with a Fiscal Note of $10,000 or more cannot be passed until the 40th day of the session, which fell on Wednesday, Feb. 27th this year. (Most of the SB2 bills fit this category. I marked bills costing at least $10,000 with a triple asterisk.) If a bill costing more than $10,000 passes all of its votes but the last, previous to the 40th day of the session, it is sent to wait in the House or Senate Rules Committee until that day (Feb. 27th) when it becomes eligible to be called back with a motion and voted on. SB 35 disappeared Feb. 5th until mysteriously getting a fiscal note March 3rd just before being put into the omnibus, HB 67 and HB 270 never emerged from the Rules Committee after receiving unanimous votes up to their tabling on Feb. 14th, and the other bills passed votes no later than Feb. 25th. They could have been voted on more simply and with greater chance of individual public scrutiny on Feb. 27th rather than keeping the bills hostage in order to pass the controversial HB 200 and HB 278. I also think these key legislators knew something was up, because I don't believe Rep. Dougall, Rep. Hughes, head of the Conservative Caucus, and Rep. Last, the House Majority Leader, would have just let their popular bills just sit their un-acted upon for days without reassurances that their bills would be passed.
Each bill will be followed by the dates of action on the bill. Generally, a bill has to pass 1 committee vote and 1 floor vote in the House, and 1 committee vote as well as 2 separate votes on the Senate floor as it is read the 2nd and 3rd times. If the House or Senate amends the bill, it also goes through a Coordinating Committee and has to be voted on again. However, some of the intermediate steps are sometimes skipped through suspensions of the rules. I don’t know specifics on why certain bills were rushed through the process or not, unless it was the last day. (Many vote totals will have different numbers because representatives and senators often miss votes in committee and on the floor.)
1. H.B. 67 ***
Extended Year for Special Educators -- Menlove, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0067.htm
1-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-0
1-30 Passed House Floor Vote 62-0
2-7 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 4-0
2-14 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 22-0
2-14 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
2. H.B. 270 ***
Utah Science Technology and Research Initiative Centers -- Bigelow, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0270.htm
1-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
1-31 Passed House Floor Vote 73-0
2-6 Passed Senate Workforce Services and Community and Economic Development Committee Vote 3-0
2-14 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 22-1
2-14 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
3. S.B. 61 ***
Financial and Economic Literacy Education -- Jones, P.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0061.htm
1-28 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 7-0
2-5 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 24-0
2-6 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 28-0
2-18 House Education Committee Vote 11-0
2-18 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
4. S.B. 118 ***
Education Transportation Amendments -- Peterson, D.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0118.htm
Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 5-0
2-4 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 23-0
2-5 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 26-0
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 12-0
2-19 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
5. H.B. 212 Second Substitute ***
Educator Salary Adjustments -- Dougall, J.
(Teacher Raises)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0212S02.htm
2-15 Passed House Education Committee Vote 15-0
2-22 Passed House Floor Vote 66-0
2-22 Sent to Senate where …. mysteriously, no action of any kind is taken on unanimously passed teacher raises until they reappeared attached to failed bills.
6. H.B. 419
Public School Textbook Evaluation Amendments -- Froerer, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0419.htm
2-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 9-0
…sound of wind blowing…tumbleweed rolls by…
7. H.B. 329 ***
High-ability Student Initiative Program -- Last, B.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0329.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-1
2-25 Passed House Floor Vote 64-0
2-26 Sent to Senate
…nothing…crickets…
8. H.B. 278 Substitute
Charter School Funding Amendments -- Bigelow, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0278S01.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 8-1
2-25 Failed House Floor Vote 33-41
2-26 Passed Motion to Reconsider
2-26 Circled
9. H.B. 363 Substitute ***
Beverley Taylor Sorenson Elementary Arts Learning Program -- Hughes, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/status/hbillsta/hb0363s01.htm
2-13 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
2-21 Passed House Floor Vote 71-0
2-22 Sent to Senate
2-25 Sent to Senate Education Committee
2-27 Returned to Rules Committee
10. H.B. 436 ***
English Language Learner Family Literacy Centers Program -- Hughes, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0436.htm
2-22 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
2-27 Passed House Floor Vote 55-9
2-27 Sent to Senate and read 1st time (Introduced)
11. H.B. 266 ***
Accelerated Learning Program Revisions -- Moss, C.
($300,000 for International Baccalaureate Program)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0266.htm
1-30 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-1
2-8 Passed House Floor Vote 72-0
2-21 Failed Senate Education Committee Vote 3-3 (Featuring the infamous anti-American agenda remarks from Senator Dayton)
12. H.B. 200 Substitute
Early Childhood Learning and Evaluation -- Last, B.
(Laptops and software for pre-schoolers)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0200S01.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-2
2-29 Failed House Floor Vote 31-37
13. S.B. 35 Substitute ***
Differentiated Pay for Teachers -- Stephenson, H.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0035S01.htm
1-22 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 5-1
1-30 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 23-5
2-5 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 19-7
2-5 Sent to House
2-27 Sent to LFA for Fiscal Analysis
3-3 LFA sends note (results?) to sponsor
Senator Bramble claimed the fiscal note rule was why they waited on many of the bills. Bills with a Fiscal Note of $10,000 or more cannot be passed until the 40th day of the session, which fell on Wednesday, Feb. 27th this year. (Most of the SB2 bills fit this category. I marked bills costing at least $10,000 with a triple asterisk.) If a bill costing more than $10,000 passes all of its votes but the last, previous to the 40th day of the session, it is sent to wait in the House or Senate Rules Committee until that day (Feb. 27th) when it becomes eligible to be called back with a motion and voted on. SB 35 disappeared Feb. 5th until mysteriously getting a fiscal note March 3rd just before being put into the omnibus, HB 67 and HB 270 never emerged from the Rules Committee after receiving unanimous votes up to their tabling on Feb. 14th, and the other bills passed votes no later than Feb. 25th. They could have been voted on more simply and with greater chance of individual public scrutiny on Feb. 27th rather than keeping the bills hostage in order to pass the controversial HB 200 and HB 278. I also think these key legislators knew something was up, because I don't believe Rep. Dougall, Rep. Hughes, head of the Conservative Caucus, and Rep. Last, the House Majority Leader, would have just let their popular bills just sit their un-acted upon for days without reassurances that their bills would be passed.
Each bill will be followed by the dates of action on the bill. Generally, a bill has to pass 1 committee vote and 1 floor vote in the House, and 1 committee vote as well as 2 separate votes on the Senate floor as it is read the 2nd and 3rd times. If the House or Senate amends the bill, it also goes through a Coordinating Committee and has to be voted on again. However, some of the intermediate steps are sometimes skipped through suspensions of the rules. I don’t know specifics on why certain bills were rushed through the process or not, unless it was the last day. (Many vote totals will have different numbers because representatives and senators often miss votes in committee and on the floor.)
1. H.B. 67 ***
Extended Year for Special Educators -- Menlove, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0067.htm
1-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-0
1-30 Passed House Floor Vote 62-0
2-7 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 4-0
2-14 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 22-0
2-14 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
2. H.B. 270 ***
Utah Science Technology and Research Initiative Centers -- Bigelow, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0270.htm
1-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
1-31 Passed House Floor Vote 73-0
2-6 Passed Senate Workforce Services and Community and Economic Development Committee Vote 3-0
2-14 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 22-1
2-14 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
3. S.B. 61 ***
Financial and Economic Literacy Education -- Jones, P.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0061.htm
1-28 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 7-0
2-5 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 24-0
2-6 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 28-0
2-18 House Education Committee Vote 11-0
2-18 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
4. S.B. 118 ***
Education Transportation Amendments -- Peterson, D.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0118.htm
Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 5-0
2-4 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 23-0
2-5 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 26-0
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 12-0
2-19 Sent to Rules Committee because of $10,000 cost
5. H.B. 212 Second Substitute ***
Educator Salary Adjustments -- Dougall, J.
(Teacher Raises)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0212S02.htm
2-15 Passed House Education Committee Vote 15-0
2-22 Passed House Floor Vote 66-0
2-22 Sent to Senate where …. mysteriously, no action of any kind is taken on unanimously passed teacher raises until they reappeared attached to failed bills.
6. H.B. 419
Public School Textbook Evaluation Amendments -- Froerer, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0419.htm
2-25 Passed House Education Committee Vote 9-0
…sound of wind blowing…tumbleweed rolls by…
7. H.B. 329 ***
High-ability Student Initiative Program -- Last, B.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0329.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-1
2-25 Passed House Floor Vote 64-0
2-26 Sent to Senate
…nothing…crickets…
8. H.B. 278 Substitute
Charter School Funding Amendments -- Bigelow, R.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0278S01.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 8-1
2-25 Failed House Floor Vote 33-41
2-26 Passed Motion to Reconsider
2-26 Circled
9. H.B. 363 Substitute ***
Beverley Taylor Sorenson Elementary Arts Learning Program -- Hughes, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/status/hbillsta/hb0363s01.htm
2-13 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
2-21 Passed House Floor Vote 71-0
2-22 Sent to Senate
2-25 Sent to Senate Education Committee
2-27 Returned to Rules Committee
10. H.B. 436 ***
English Language Learner Family Literacy Centers Program -- Hughes, G.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0436.htm
2-22 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-0
2-27 Passed House Floor Vote 55-9
2-27 Sent to Senate and read 1st time (Introduced)
11. H.B. 266 ***
Accelerated Learning Program Revisions -- Moss, C.
($300,000 for International Baccalaureate Program)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0266.htm
1-30 Passed House Education Committee Vote 11-1
2-8 Passed House Floor Vote 72-0
2-21 Failed Senate Education Committee Vote 3-3 (Featuring the infamous anti-American agenda remarks from Senator Dayton)
12. H.B. 200 Substitute
Early Childhood Learning and Evaluation -- Last, B.
(Laptops and software for pre-schoolers)
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/hbillhtm/HB0200S01.htm
2-18 Passed House Education Committee Vote 10-2
2-29 Failed House Floor Vote 31-37
13. S.B. 35 Substitute ***
Differentiated Pay for Teachers -- Stephenson, H.
http://le.utah.gov/~2008/htmdoc/sbillhtm/SB0035S01.htm
1-22 Passed Senate Education Committee Vote 5-1
1-30 Passed Senate 2nd Reading Vote 23-5
2-5 Passed Senate 3rd Reading Vote 19-7
2-5 Sent to House
2-27 Sent to LFA for Fiscal Analysis
3-3 LFA sends note (results?) to sponsor
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
