A searchable audio archive from the 2013-2016 legislative sessions of the North Carolina General Assembly.

searching for


Reliance on Information Posted The information presented on or through the website is made available solely for general information purposes. We do not warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of this information. Any reliance you place on such information is strictly at your own risk. We disclaim all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on such materials by you or any other visitor to the Website, or by anyone who may be informed of any of its contents. Please see our Terms of Use for more information.

House | April 2, 2013 | Committee Room | House Education

Full MP3 Audio File

00:00 today our sergeant at arms [??] Charles [??] and we appreciate them being with us our pages today are Alexis Cooper Guilford and Harrison is the sponsor and [??] Cooper from Guilford and Harrison is sponsor Rob Hodge is the second from Wake Holley is the sponsor and Logan Jackson from Wake Jackson is sponsor thank you for assisting us today. we're going to do the change the calender and do HB 435 first and although both Linda and I are on this she's gonna cheer while I make the presentation for the bill. 435 is a PCS do I have a motion to have it forced representative Cotham..alright go ahead representative Langdon. house bill 435 is a the PCS has reasonably added [??] school as part of that so we'd have all the schools as part of the program for our system this is a look at [??] carefully evaluate schools and actually make sure we have included all of the information that we should coming up with the grades for schools and I think that if you looked at the bill the bill covers those things explisively I think and very carefully to actually end up calculating that grade so that when we actually look at the grades that we give schools they end up showing that the [??] of that school and the general public can look at that or anybody and say that that school is performing or not performing because we got data that backs that up it is a difficult task to come up with a schedule and meet all of the things we want to meet and make sure we fairly treated everybody so what we've tried to do in [??] this bill is we [??] with all the people that'd be affected by this trying to make sure that we covered that so we have talked to our administrators and our board of education DPI NCAE we ahve tried to actually make sure we consulted with everybody and try to come up with a right and good plan for actually doing the evaluation of schools so what that [??] is we'll have [??] scores in Algebra one in [??] for house schools now we'll have presented students [??] higher level of mathematics with a [??] grade percentage of college [??] benchmarks and percentage of students to graduate within four years of entering high school or the four year graduation rate understand that students will demonstrate workplace readiness on national norm test in workplace readiness so trying to include all the things that we need to include to make sure that the score is the right one and that we end up with the right grade for those schools and that we're fair in that and that we've included all the information that should be included so I hope that you will support this and that we will go forth with this plan to actually do this kind of system for our schools. 05:00

[0:00:00.0] Representative Mitchell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chairman. Just a question, I noticed that we wanna assign a letter to the schools A,B,C, D, E or F and… [SPEAKER CHANGES] That is correct. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I’m wondering how you figure the A, B…What's the best mode for giving an A, B, C or D. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I’m not sure what you mean by that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I mean what does A represent, what does B represent, a number or something? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, it is the same thing as A for a student, it is the best is A and B and down that line. And off course ‘A’ means you are failed. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Mitchell, do you want staff to tell you about the bill quarters? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yeah, yeah I’m looking for that Madam Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, that will be ___[01:03]. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative ___[01:05] showed that student test scores would be compared to the state mean for each of those test scores and then the state mean would be placed on Z score which is looking at the standard deviation from the state mean and then that Z score would be translated into the A, B grade and we do have Dr. Timmy Howard from Department of Public Instruction who is the Head of Accountability, if you need more specific explanation. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I would like to have an example. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Howard, is that Howard? [SPEAKER CHANGES] DPI. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Dr. Howard, if you will state your name and your position please? Your mic… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you and excuse me, good morning Timmy Howard, Director of Accountability Services, DPI. For each of the indicators what would happen is we would look at the reform is across the state and we would identify the mean which is the average performance. So, for example with the first indicator listed looking at test scores, so in the average percent that is at the mean and in placing that on a distribution then they would to identify the schools that are well above the mean and the schools that are well below the mean. The schools that are at the extreme right of the mean those are the schools that receive an A for that indicator. The schools that are below would be the ones who are the F, and what this does is this allows us to take where we are in our performance and how it goes and where we want to go overtime. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe you are right, thank you Dr. Howard. Representative Cotham has a comment. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank Madam Chair and Representative Mitchell just to kind of jump in and make this maybe more simpler. [Chuckle] It’s my understanding that this is the houses version of doing it par based on education policy from last session, you may recall Senate Bill 361 which is the originator of the grades A through F, this bill seeks to improve some of that action and to make it I would argue more fair so looking at a high school for example, they would use the end of course test that are currently required by the state. So, if it was algebra, if it was a history, if it was a science part of the problems seems to be in my opinion that’s someone who worked on accountability at a high school, looking at the percentages that was directed by the Senate Bill and how a test scored based from the Senate Bill not from what the department has established from that piece of legislation. So, this bill seeks that I believe to improve that and also it seeks to delay this one year and to add the common core standards because as we all know that is something that is getting ready to start with the school here and to include that piece into this so it would be a delay of a year and to be more accurate because if we start now and then do the common core which we have all agreed along with many other states to do so. The question is, okay then what happens? So, I think that’s the purpose behind this and I think it’s something that’s good for all students and for everyone’s legislative districts. So, I would ask for your support. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Senator clears up your question, Representative Mitchell. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We got it, ___[04:57], delay in that… [0:04:59.4] [End of file…]

[0:00:00.0] Thank you Representative Horn. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair, just two question so that I ensure that I understand, first of all what, first of all what considerations are given for schools that focus on development to say they are part of the public school system in ___[00:25] County we have school which on any tests quite frankly they are not gonna do well at all. So, they would necessarily then follow up the left end of the bill curve but that doesn’t reflect anything ___[00:48] that school. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn anyone pass to address that? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Horn there are alternative assessments call that extend and extend one that students with disabilities, there is also an alternative model for accountability and again representatives from DPI could explain to you how four alternative schools who mainly serve students who are at risk or students with disabilities how their accountability would be calculated but it would follow a different formula. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up, is that’s taking care of this bill? I didn’t see when I look. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I pass the answer. [SPEAKER CHANGES] This bill does not mention the alternative model. I don’t know Madam Chairman if you bond someone from DPI to discuss the alternative model and how that would come into play. [SPEAKER CHANGES] It’s not I need to have the alternative model explained to me. I just wanna ensure that a school like the one I just described doesn’t have to have a big F on front of their school as a failing school when in fact they are not a failing school at all, they just don’t fall into these traditional categories and to know that… [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think they were not addressed because they do fall in a different category, I don’t know if that’s true or not but that was my assumption, is that correct? Do you have another one? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I do have one additional question, as I understand it on page 2 the letter grades are increased under two different circumstances so in fact they could get two bumps on their letter grade, one in paragraph e-line 4 for schools or see growth they get a letter grade increase and then again in F or G if they are at or above 80% they get a letter grade increase. So, a C school could in fact be an A school because they might grow and they might be 80%, is that correct? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Okay, thank you very much. [SPEAKER CHANGES] And the reason for a rational we are trying to do that was to make sure we will credit for that kind of work. So, we could end up be in a positive for the school as total. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Whitmire. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair, several points and I’m not debate in Senate, the Senate Bill’s version of this but on the House Bill I’m trying to emphasize it’s merits over our counterpart on the other side of the chamber. When you look at using a mean and normalize the scores the critics could say, “Oh, you are trying to take whatever the scores are and find some kind of way that make some of them good and make the others look better than they might have been.” But let me say this, “We have done data, testing data year after year after year and with that as you enter into a new way of taking test scores you need to make sure that you don’t have anomalies that are gonna skew the outcome either terribly bad or terribly good.” So, with that one of the key merits of this bill is the fact that it takes the means and uses a common score. The elementary middle schools they are pretty straightforward, we have had inter grade test for years and years and years. On the high school that we have got five criteria and in those criteria we have got a couple of things that are considerably experimental in many ways, you take the ACT criteria, we are testing juniors, we also have in the law right now when we are testing juniors who are not taking college curriculum because their IQ, their special needs are cogently… [0:04:58.4] [End of file…]

[Speaker changes.]...between sixty and eighty and they're getting rolled into that ACT average so it is absolutely essential, until we can fix that discrepancy that we take the means and normalize the ACT scores to...not necessarily give every high school an F on their ACT. Oh by the way, the way the ACT is calibrated and its philosophy is you're gonna do better the more curriculum you have had so by taking juniors instead of seniors to do that, it's essential to follow the merits of how this bill is predicated. And one final point, with the letter grade increases, for years and years we've rewarded growth...that's improvement in layman's terms. How much do we teach a child that's in third grade at day one til the end of the grade? We need to definitely recognize those schools, no matter how they're performing, as to how well they're improving. But, on the other hand, we have had a problem of penalizing schools that perform high. There's a point of diminishing returns that if a school, year after year, is in the upper 80's or low 90's in its performance, you get a point of diminishing returns so the measure that Representative Horn asked for paragraphs F and G, they recognize the high performance schools that have climbed the mountain and stay on top of the mountain. That takes three years of having that grade average to get the potential for having that letter grade upgrade so I ask that you'll support the bill and continue to find if there's anythings we need to improve upon it. [Speaker changes.] Representative Luebke? [Speaker changes.] I thought Representative McManus was ahead of me, ma'am? [Speaker changes.] I'm sorry, I didn't even have her on the list. I'm sorry, go ahead Representative McManus. [Speaker changes.] [INAUDIBLE.] I had several questions. First, you said you consulted with DPI and NPAE on the bill. [Speaker changes.] Could you use the one next to you? Maybe Representative Luebke's? [Speaker changes.] Is that better? [Speaker changes.] Yes. [Speaker changes.] OK..did any of them think that it was a good idea to assign letter grades to schools? Any of those organizations? [Speaker changes.] It is one way and it is a familiar way. I think a number of kinds of things you think about and I liked it because it was familiar and people understand what that actually means in most cases. [Speaker changes.] See, I think that it misrepresents what schools are really doing when you assign a letter grade based on absolute proficiency. Partly because of schools that are producing a lot of growth, as Representative Whitmire acknowledged. Schools that are producing growth but starting with a very low performing population still get punished cause they're gonna be labeled as failing schools even if they're working really hard and getting a lot of growth. I think that we know that poverty is correlated with low-performing schools and I think you're punishing schools in poverty areas by giving them these kind of scores. These are the schools that need our best teachers and I don't know how we're gonna get teachers to choose to go to a school that is getting a D or an F. My daughter teaches in one of these low-performing schools. She has produced more than two years growth in one year with many of her students. It doesn't mean they reach proficiency because of where they're starting. It is a second language school, primarily a Spanish-speaking population. They are a high poverty school. These teachers work really hard but I think we already are dealing with so many moral issues in these kinds of schools and to give them a D or an F, we're not gonna be able to get teachers to go to those schools and then I'm not sure what we're gonna do for that population. You're gonna end up with your weakest teachers teaching your neediest students by giving these letter grades. There's so little...I mean, to raise them one level based on growth...and it doesn't matter how much growth that school has produced cause this is a school that is producing high growth across..all the way across....

[0:00:00.0] …They are just starting from a very low place to begin with. So, this is a school that might have an F and then get bumped up to a D but they are still gonna be labeled as a bad school. Do you not hear this is going to discourage teachers someone in the teacher in the schools. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I knew what you are saying and I don’t think that message already worked that way and the reason being is teachers don’t necessarily go to a school because what the school is and that is making that decision if you were deciding holding up the score is the term whether or not the teacher goes in that school and whether it happens anymore. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I ask another question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have not had these labels… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Please I’m sorry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, you may. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have not had these labels to know whether that’s going to impact what a teacher chooses to do or not. We have not being calling them publicly A, B, C, D, E or skipping A and go straight to F schools. So, there is no way to know how that’s going to impact what a teacher chooses to do and whether they want to go a school that has been labeled as a failing school. [SPEAKER CHANGES] But we have had rating of schools and they have been half performing or not or whatever and that’s being something we have had for years so based on test scores its part of that. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Alright, let me make sure I have everyone because I’m going through this list, people…I’m not catching everyone, I have got Luke, Fisher, ___[01:58], Stam and Brandon. Is that all? Okay, thank you, alright, Representative Luke. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair and let me start and I guess this is a question for staff about an amendment Madam Chair. I’m looking at the description of the bill and I’m looking on the back of page 2 to the very last bullet point which says, low performing schools and in particular it’s says they have less than 50% of their students scores at or above achievement level three and my question is where is achievement level three described in the bill? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Staff… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Luke, you are looking at the background information that described in the old way of how schools are designated under the A, B, C’s Program and if you notice in the background information achievement level three is defined as a proficient so the student as function at grade level for that particular subject say the achievement level three would be reading on grade level and that’s the old way so that was not included in the bill because the bill talking about a new way to grade schools. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Follow up Madam Chair. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So, are you saying that there was in a sense now there was kind of a label that you had to be common education inside or you are familiar with public education of North Carolina really understand what it meant to have a score below achievement level three, was a kind of insight baseball kind of you have to know what the bating average is? [SPEAKER CHANGES] These labels are on DPS website and they have been around for a long time as you can see so every school receive a report card and the state would have a report card that tell how many schools are at each of these levels and they are defined on the website. [SPEAKER CHANGES] If I can just… [SPEAKER CHANGES] You want to make a comment? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, but actually the first question Representative Brandon, Representative Brandon you and I agree on so many things and teacher in the Agriculture Committee where I don’t know very much about agriculture but on this one I guess my specific question is, if we have schools in Durham that were to get an F or in any other school district, it would have make the kids feel bad, the parents feel bad, the teachers feel bad? [SPEAKER CHANGES] You maybe right in the sense so it may but what you are really looking at is… [0:04:59.8] [End of file…]

[0:00:00.0] This is system that’s addresses the issues that, how do we look at school and what we are trying to do with this bill is not determine the A, B, C, D but actually change and improve the system that was already in law. So, I hope that we are doing that and while we are having a debate is we all do not have the scale, we already got the scale and what we are trying to do is improve that with this bill and I recon we could have a debate basically on that but we need another bill to do that, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] May I speak on the bill Madam Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, once more we have a long list. [SPEAKER CHANGES] I actually haven’t spoken on the bill yet, I’m just gonna some questions but to speak on the bill mam, I would say first members, I agree with Representative McManus that this really puts teachers and children who are in high poverty schools and schools where the children generally or overwhelmingly get free lunch to say does use that category. It really puts those schools in a very difficult spot because if I wanna B, if I wanna get an A rating all I need to do is put together not the college teachers are particularly gifted but all I need to do is put together school everyone in the school has parents who have PhDs, and well my school will just go over the top and that has nothing to do with the teachers in that school in my opinion. And on the other hand, it’s really easy to get an F here or these possible gonna have for D and have for C. Based on the distance that children have to go based on the how blessed they were as well but in terms of what their parents were able to teach them before they are close to school. So, I know that this is bipartisan support for the bill but it just seems so unfair and it does make me think if I were a teacher and I hear all this talk about merit pay coming down the road and all that I would go near school that had a D or an F and that’s not what we want, we want our best teachers in the D and F schools and our worst teachers in the A and B schools in my opinion. I just think Representative Lang with all respect this is misguided, I can’t support it, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Fisher. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair, I just wanna get a little more clarity on this and maybe I think in order to do that I might find some help by asking Representative Cotham a question if you would… [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, certainly. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes mam thank you. Representative Cotham, you describe this bill and you are one of the co-sponsors, one of the primary sponsors. You describe this bill as something that would be more in-line with the core curriculum, it’s common core and I would like to hear more about how it sort of ___[03:20] with our change over the common core because I’m tending to I’m hearing what people are saying about how an A is a great reward and an F is very punitive, and I wanna hear how this is going to ___[03:36] with that, thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cotham. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair and thank you Representative Fisher and just to point of clarification that A through F grading is already a current law that is from last session so that is session law. So, today’s debate really should not be about the merits of the A through F system that is something that I personally very much struggle with as someone who is been Principal and a teacher and what would be all F schools? So, that part of the bill that part of this discussion you can either stick to the current system which is session law from last session where in North Carolina when we have 536 high schools, if we stick with Senate Bill 361, 33% of North Carolina’s high schools will receive an F. If out of those 536 North Carolina high schools 40% of them will receive a D, if we stick with Senate Bill 361 this bill seeks to modify and possibly improve some the way that we access and label the schools because that is the law that is what we have to do. My point… [0:04:59.9] [End of file…]

About the common core and other testing measures is the testing world is changing and it is evolving just as the common core standards are just going to be implemented this fall with this new school year's coming. So if we grade right now the fear is once we start the new way of curriculum, a new form of curriculum in these schools, then what happens? And we really don't know the answer to that. Now, I could make a prediction of what's going to happen. I would predict it's going to be very bad. I would predict, also, just from my experience, if you start off at a certain level, just as in economic terms, if you start off at a very, very low level the chances of you improving so quickly are pretty hard. So I think that’s a real key part to this, because the assessment world is changing and its something that we need to be ready for. So this bill delays it a year. This bill does not say A-F is good, it does not say its bad. That's really not the focus of the debate here. It is the focus of, let's delay it and let's make sure we're using the best measures possible when we are assessing these schools. Because it is a big deal if you are labelled an F or a D. That is a big deal, so I think that is something, that is what this committee should be talking about, possibly not A-F, because that is the law as it stands. This is the House's version to help better that law. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. I have seven more and we're running, we have another bill on the calendar, so I ask that you be brief, ??. Representative Stam? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cotham made my point better than I could since the bill drastically improves an existing situation, I vote for it even if I don't agree with the final result. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Brandon? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Same thing. Representative Cotham explained it exactly how I would. Thank you. I support the bill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Gill. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My pleasure. The question I was going to ask has been answered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Glazier? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'm going to follow the line of Representative Brandon and Representative Stam. I think, I fundamentally disagree with A-F. I think it is going to have all the effects that Representative McManus eloquently articulated and were we voting on that I would be voting "no". But this is an attempt to improve a bad situation. It is an ameliorative bill, a mitigating bill, and trying to deal with what we now are looking at, and for all the reasons Representative Cotham and Representative Langdon suggested I'm going to be voting for the bill. Thank you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Adams? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I'll pass on that. Madam Chair? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Oh, sorry. [SPEAKER CHANGES] My question has been answered. [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK. Representative Bryan? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair. I just wanted to make maybe two small points. First, I guess I don't, I fundamentally disagree with the notion that teachers won't go to schools that get D or F ratings. As a Teacher America alum and someone whose actually taught in a high priority school, I actually think that some people love the challenge of going to a school that is struggling and helping those students advance to get up to a higher rating. So I would say that. And frankly, life is full of grading, whether we always want it to be or not. We want that grading to be as accurate as possible though, which I think is part of what this bill is helping to do is to create a better and more accurate system of grading. And finally, with respect to the teachers in particular, when we've talked about merit pay and things like that most of those, most of the ideas around merit pay have had a component that is actually directly related to student improvement. Aside from just whether the students are all being, getting an A. If a student goes from an F to a C, in almost any rubric I've seen we've talked about making sure teachers are paid for that improvement. And frankly, the students get great applause for that improvement as well. Thanks. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Cotham? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Madam Chair. For a motion? [SPEAKER CHANGES] OK, yes. We're ready for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Madam Chair, I move that we give the proposed committee substitute unfavorable to the original bill, what bill number is that?

On house bill 435. [SPEAKER CHANGES] You have a motion before you. All those in favor, favorable report, say aye. Those opposed? The ayes have it. Thank you Representative Langdon. The next bill we'll hear is UNC School of Arts Student Fees. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. 336 we are proud to present on behalf of the North Carolina School of the Arts. This is located in Forsyth County. The house bill is sponsored by all members of the local delegation including myself, Representative Donny Lambeth, Representative Ed Hanes and Representative Evelyn Terry, I don't believe she's here. There is a companion bill in the Senate, Senate bill 424, it's an identical bill also sponsored by the senators by the local delegation, Senator Earling Parmon and Senator Pete Brunstetter. We also have 2 representatives from the School of the Arts here, in case after my presentation there are any questions that I can't answer. They include David English, the Associate provost of the school and also Jim DeCristo who is the director of economic development and external affairs. This bill addresses tuition for high school students. To give you a little brief history here, the school opened in 1965 and it's very unique in the university system in that it has always had a high school competent in addition to the college and graduate level courses. The high school students take the normal courses that would be required for a North Carolina high school diploma which includes 4 years of english, 3 years of math, 3 years of science, 2 years of social science and 2 years of foreign language. Of course the compelling reason that these students apply and are chosen to attend the school of the arts is that they have a great talent or gift in some area of the performing or visual arts which is drama or dance or music. Another key component that adds to the expense of going to the school of the arts is that we have constant performances. We've talked a lot in the last couple months about how we hope that students in our public schools and our university systems are prepared for jobs when they leave their educational experience so the performance is very key and our school of the arts are very proud to have them because of the quality and excellence of their performances and you can imagine particularly with drama and sets and costumes that this is a very expensive component to the high school experience. Up until the year 2000, high school in-state students as well as out-of-state did pay to attend the school of the arts high school. This changed in the year 2000 when the board of governors decided beginning with the 2001 school year that the general assembly would appropriate the full cost for in-state students. Out of state students still continue to pay. To give you an idea of what the tuition is for out of state students their tuition is 10,571 dollars. Their room is 4,824 and their board is 4,326. In recent years the budget challenges that we have faced here in the general assembly and because of that the full cost coverage for in state students has been lacking and I can give you the numbers for this past year. The total billable fees for current in state high school students, and they average about 200 a year, 200 students, was 2.4 million dollars but they only received a little under 2 million dollars so that's almost a 450,000 dollar gap from the appropriations they are receiving from the general assembly and the full cost of these in-state high school students. They've been covering this difference the last few years by using funds that would normally go for the graduate

Graduate programs to fill the gap what this bill proposes and it would start, not this fall, but the following fall for the year of 2013-2014. For the board of the governors, and of the university system, and the board of trustees for the school of the arts to establish a charge for the in-state students. This has been discussed with the student body, and both the board of trustees, the administration, and the board of governors have set this as the priority. I believe there’s a question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Any question? Representitive Fisher. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman. I have a question for the board sponsors. I appreciate the fact that all of the members of the delegations on both the house and the senate side are on board with this, but I’m wondering, how do you think this will look in terms of prohibitting some of our in-state talented students from being able to attend the school of the arts. Will the tuition increase for the out of state students along with this new establishment of tuition for in-state students or will they be paying the same. It’s like a number of questions that are sort of forming as I talk about this, but my concern is that we are going to prohibit some really talented students from attending the school of the arts who live right here in North Carolina. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Well, I’ll try to answer the first and then ask for the representative of school of the arts to add to it. There would be scholarships and financial aid to overcome any difficulties because the school of the arts, which became the university back in 2008, added the university to their title, so that they want the best and brightest. Very competitive to get in there, so I don’t think they see this as a deterent for talented students to be able to attend the school. As far as the out of state tuition, I’ll ask Jim Jicristo. I don’t believe that’s changing but I will ask him to confirm that. He’s right behind you. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you. My name is Jim Jicristo. I’m a director of external affairs at the university of North Carolina school of the Arts. One point of clarification is, I want to make sure tuition is not changing at all in this case. This is strictly about the fee side of the cost, so it doesn’t effect tuition. It effects fees. Now the increases in fees, we’ve looked at it, we’ve done some analysis on this case because one thing we certainly don’t want to do from the school standpoint is decrease access to the school, so what we’ve done is look at our need based financial aid capabilities and so fourth and any in-state student that came that had need would go through our financial aid process and be eligible for need-based aid based on their need. So, we don’t expect that this would, in any way, limit access to the school. As far as tuition, even though this bill doesn’t effect tuition, I would just say that as part of a larger multi-year plan that we’re working on that this is one facet of, we continue to look at tuition, and we have been raising, and would be raising again this year, raising tuition for out-of-state students as part of a sustainability plan that we’re working on at the school moving forward. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Adams [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. I guess I comment in a question. I think I understand that you want to provide a charge for fees, but the gentleman who was speaking back there, can you tell me what’s included in the fees, or the supplies, art supplies ect. [SPEAKER CHANGES] The fees cover everything from room and board for students. They cover things like the art specific fees that go with those art programs, our ed and tech fee. So there are a variety of fees that are charged as part of the schools business that we currently charge the out-of-state students, and we also have a fee structure for our college program, so it would include those kind of arts fees also. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chair. Well, I don’t have any problem supporting the bill, and I’m still in the arts and I know that there are costs that are connected in these areas that you don’t have in others. I don’t think this is going to deter students who are really talented and who want to come to continue to come. I would hope, and I was about to

Applaud the school for not bearing down so hard on out of state students when I heard the cost. And I hope that you really look at that. I think sometimes we think that we can increase the fees for out of state students and that's going to offset for our schools and for our universities. We need to understand that students who come from out of state have the same issues related to finances as students who are in state. I hope that we don't extend problems for those students. But it seems reasonable to me that they not pay these fees. Their costs that are increasing at universities all over so I can support the bill. [speaker changes] Representative. [speaker changes] Thank you mister chairman for motion at the appropriate time. [speaker changes] Okay. We'll hold it, we've got a couple other people. Representative Lucas. [speaker changes] Thank mister [chi]. I had a concern about the fees for indigent students but I think my questions been answered. [speaker changes] Representative Lucas did you finish? Okay. Representative Collins. [speaker changes] I just had a question for Representative Conrad based on a couple of numbers I heard. I think I heard you say that there are 200 in state students now. You mentioned 2.4 million dollars, I don't remember if that was the total fees for those 200 or if that's the shortfall after the state has paid our part. Could you clear up my confusion on that? [speaker changes] The total billable fees, just for the instate students - they also have about 50-70 out of state but that's a separate number - was 2.4 - I'm kind of rounding it - million. But they only received, and this is for the current year, 1.98 million. So there's a gap of about $450,000 dollars. They've been filling that gap by pulling funds from the undergraduate and graduate appropriations, but they feel that that's not sustainable at this point. Of course we want all our universities to be excellent, but school of the arts wants to provide the best training for these students because that's why they go there. Whether they want to become a ballet dancer in a dance troupe later or they're a musician. [speaker changes] Just a follow up one question on that. I'm trying to get some idea of what the fees are we're talking about. I guess if we're just trying to cover the gap then we're talking about roughly $2,000 per each of these in state students in order to cover these fees that aren't being covered now, is that correct? [speaker changes] I had that somewhere. [speaker changes] Representative Collins this does have a referral to finance from here. [speaker changes] Yes, based on this average attendance, if they had been billed this year it would be $2,249. [speaker changes] Representative Michaux. [speaker changes] My question just got answered. $2,200 is going to added to those in state students ??, right? [speaker changes] And this will be - all this bill does is give the board of governors and the board of trustees the authority to implement this. It's under their purview. [speaker changes] Representative [Luebke] [speaker changes] Thank you mister chairman. I guess this is a question for staff. I heard the point that there will be - from a representative of the school of the arts - that there will be needs-based financial aid and I welcome that. My question for staff is: did the board of governors not do something with needs-based financial aid to limit the amount that could be given to lower income students? I thought there was board of governors action that in a sense made it harder for lower income students to get financial aid and I wonder if someone could address that. [speaker changes] Staff. [speaker changes] Denise [Harb], physical research division. I believe your question is whether the board of governors has limited how much financial aid can go.

[0:00:00.0] Out in the terms of for need-base students and I’m not aware of any limitations on how much they can give. You maybe thinking about some recent changes to financial aid of the college level for the balance between need-base and merit-base aid but I’m not aware of any limitations in this sense. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative, follow up? [SPEAKER CHANGES] I think that’s what I’m concerned about this, how much needs-based is potentially reduced so that not everybody who had needs and state students who have needs and couldn’t pay the 2,000 would gonna be hurt. Mr. Chairman may I direct this to staff, I thought that is I think what I’m concerned about is that, as I read the accounts of what the Board of Governors did, it was reducing the amount of aid that could be given to lower income students on the basis of need and increasing the amount of money that would be given to students based on merit. So, my question related to this bill is, would that make it harder for all of needy students that School of the Arts in state to get the financial aid that they need? For staff, or I suppose Representative… [SPEAKER CHANGES] I believe the… [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have someone, Board of Governors to ask that question. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Hello, my name is David English, I’m Associate Professor at UNC School of the Arts. Historically, the Board of Governors has set a floor on need-based financial aid at 25% to each campus and the process of increasing tuition on an annual basis would have to set aside at least 25% of all of the tuition revenues for need-based financial aid, there are discussions this past year about the elimination of that floor and setting a ceiling on the maximum amount of aid that could be allocated. The ultimate decision was that both the floor and the ceiling were eliminated and it was left to each campus to make a determination about how much aid needed to be set aside for need-based aid depending on the population of the school because each campus has such a different population of students with regards to family and ability to pay. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Chairman may I ask one more question? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes. [SPEAKER CHANGES] So, my question is that your intent at the School of the Arts to ensure that 100% of students in need will get the need they need? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes Sir that’s gonna part of our plans from the beginning. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you very much. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Representative Adams, would you wanna ask? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Thank you Mr. Chairman, I was gonna ask somewhat of the same question but let me ask the gentleman, when you say you are going to provide a 100% does that mean that maybe the school will put some funds then you may not have them from the allocated from the Board of Governors? [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, that is correct and for contrast, the outer state students costs about $24,000 a year. So, the $2,400 a year for in-state students heavily discounted rate to begin with. On the campuses in addition to the appropriated need-based state that we receive from the General Assembly through the Board of Governors revenue and that would be a secondary source for need-based aid that we were using a circumstance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Is there anyone else? Now, I’m reading for a motion. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Yes, Mr. Chairman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Mr. Pittman. [SPEAKER CHANGES] A favorable report on House Bill 336 with referral to finance. [SPEAKER CHANGES] We have heard the motion, all in favor say aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] Aye. [SPEAKER CHANGES] All oppose no. The ayes have it, the motion is good. And that is ___[03:48] today so the ___ [Inaudible]. [0:03:49.9] [End of file…]