U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

45–589 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 110–883 

IMPROVING HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES 

AND POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS IN ALASKA 

AND NATIONWIDE: WHAT CAN THE FEDERAL 

GOVERNMENT DO? 

FIELD HEARING 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, 

LABOR, AND PENSIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

ON

EXAMINING IMPROVING HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES AND POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS IN ALASKA AND NATIONWIDE FOCUSING ON 

WHAT CAN THE GOVERNMENT DO? 

NOVEMBER 15, 2008 (ANCHORAGE, AK) 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/senate 

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS 

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut 

TOM HARKIN, Iowa 

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland 

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico 

PATTY MURRAY, Washington 

JACK REED, Rhode Island 

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

BERNARD SANDERS (I), Vermont 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio 

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming, 

JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire 

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee 

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah 

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas 

WAYNE ALLARD, Colorado 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

J. MICHAEL MYERS, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

ILYSE SCHUMAN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(II) 

C O N T E N T S 

STATEMENTS 

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2008 

Page 

Murkowski, Hon. Lisa, a U.S. Senator from the State of Alaska, opening 

statement .............................................................................................................. 1 

Smink, Jay, Ed.D., Executive Director, National Dropout Prevention Center, 

Clemson, SC, ........................................................................................................ 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9 

LeDoux, Larry, Commissioner, Alaska Department of Education and Early 

Development, Juneau, AK ................................................................................... 14 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

Hamilton, Mark, President, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, AK ..................... 22 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 23 

Holloway, Shirley, President/CEO, Avant-Garde Learning Foundation, Anchorage, AK .......................................................................................................... 26 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 28 

Rose, Carl, Executive Director, Association of Alaska School Boards, Juneau, 

AK .......................................................................................................................... 33

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 37 

Winkler, Elizabeth, Finance Assistant, Nine Star Education and Employment 

Services, Anchorage, AK ...................................................................................... 42 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44 

Cashen, Greg, Executive Director, Alaska Workforce Investment Board, Anchorage, AK .......................................................................................................... 45 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 47 

Andrews, Michael, Director, Alaska Works Partnership, Inc., Anchorage, AK .. 49 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 51 

Michels-Hansen, Tina, Elementary and Middle School Programs Manager, 

Cook Inlet Tribal Council, Anchorage, AK ......................................................... 53 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55 

Morgan, Tom, State Director, Communities in Schools of Alaska, Inc., Anchorage, AK .................................................................................................................. 57 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 59 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 

Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.: 

Albertson, LaMont, Executive Director, Yuut Elitnaurviat—People’s 

Learning Center, Bethel, AK ....................................................................... 80 

Atwater, Steve, Ph.D., President, Alaska Association of School Administrators, Juneau, AK ...................................................................................... 80 

Barrans, Diane, Executive Director, Alaska Commission on Post-Secondary Education, Anchorage, AK .............................................................. 82 

Bogart, Debbie, Executive Director, Anchorage’s Promise, Anchorage, AK 83 

Cook Inlet Tribal Council (CITC), Inc., Anchorage, AK ................................ 87 

Grinage, Beverly Patkotak, President, Ilisagvik College, Barrow, AK ........ 93 

Greene-Wilkinson, Denise, Board Member, National Association of Secondary School Principals, Anchorage, AK ................................................... 95 

Letters: 

Alaska Pacific University (APU), Anchorage, AK .................................. 98 

Best Beginnings, Anchorage, AK ............................................................. 99 

(III) 

(1) 

IMPROVING HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION 

RATES AND POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS IN 

ALASKA AND NATIONWIDE: WHAT CAN THE 

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT DO? 

SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 15, 2008 

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS, Anchorage, AK. 

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:00 a.m. in the 

School Board Meeting Room, Anchorage School District Education 

Center, 5530 East Northern Lights Boulevard, Anchorage, AK, 

Hon. Lisa Murkowski, presiding. 

Present: Senator Murkowski. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MURKOWSKI

Senator MURKOWSKI. Good morning. I want to thank our panel 

of witnesses who have joined us. I appreciate it a great deal. I want 

to thank Carol Comeau. I know Carol is right over here. Carol is 

our host this morning here at the Anchorage School District. Superintendent Comeau, I want to thank you for your leadership on 

so many issues. We appreciate the opportunity to be here in the 

room and setting up the video conference for us here today. 

I want to introduce Karen McCarthy, on my staff. Many of you 

may have known her when she was in Juneau, working as a legislative aide on education issues. She’s now in my office in Washington, DC. I know that she has a great network, and I think 

you’re probably all on her e-mail list. If you are not, you’re probably one of a very few in this State, as far as educators, so you 

need to get on Karen’s list. I appreciate all of Karen’s work in helping us this morning. 

The title of the hearing this morning is ‘‘Improving High School 

Graduation Rates and Postsecondary Success in Alaska and Nationwide: What Can the Federal Government Do? ’’ This is an ambitious hearing. Those of you who have looked at the agenda, the list 

of speakers, I think you will agree that this is ambitious. I think 

we also recognize that if we are going to work effectively together 

to address a very, very complex problem facing Alaska and the Nation, it needs to be ambitious, it needs to be aggressive, and that’s 

what we are doing here this morning. 

We had an opportunity, just a few moments ago, to have a press 

conference with some of the members of the panel here and talk 

just a little bit about the statistics. We know the statistics. Those 

of you that are here in the room this morning, whether it’s to speak 

2 

as witnesses or to listen, we know the statistics that we are facing 

here. Those who have a college degree clearly will earn more than 

those who have a high school diploma. Those with a diploma earn 

far more than high school dropouts. High school dropouts are more 

likely to live in poverty, need public assistance, go to prison, get 

divorced, be unhealthy, even die earlier than their peers that are 

in school. We also know that Alaska needs more healthcare workers, teachers, engineers, welders, electricians, a host of other highskill jobs. But, when we look at Alaska, Alaska is really the Nation’s poster-child, if you will, for not getting 9th graders the education that they need to get the good-paying jobs in a 21st-century 

competitive and global economy. 

I don’t like to talk about statistics, when we’re speaking with 

children, because I think that that gets us away from the focus of 

the human side. I think we need to appreciate our statistics, just 

briefly. 

In Alaska, only 6 percent—6 percent—will earn a postsecondary 

credential within 10 years—those who start in 9th grade. This is 

a report from the Alaska Commission of Postsecondary Education. 

In pretty simple terms, ‘‘Of 100 Alaskan 9th-graders, only six will 

earn a college degree within 6 years.’’ So, 38 of these 100 will drop 

out of high school, 34 will finish high school, but not enroll in college, and then, of the 66 who enroll in college, 10 drop out of the 

first year and never return, another 12 will remain in college, but 

not complete a degree after 6 years. Only 6 will earn a degree within 6 years. The bottom line is that 38 percent of today’s 9th graders 

will have no high school diploma, and 56 percent of them will have 

no college degree 6 years later. Now, think about that, a hundred. 

The statistic—and I mentioned this in the press conference 

today—a report by the Education Trust states that the United 

States is the only industrialized Nation in the world in which today’s young people are less likely to have completed high school 

than their parents. 

It takes you back to an appreciation of how huge this problem 

is for us, not only here in the State of Alaska, where our graduation rate is 65.57 percent, as opposed to the U.S. average, which 

is 76 percent. But, put it in the bigger picture of what this means 

for us as a nation in a competitive world. If we don’t have educated, skilled young people going into the workplace, how can we 

possibly be competitive? 

Back in Washington, DC, right now, we’re really keyed in to the 

economic issues that are facing our Nation and how we’re going to 

provide for a level of stability within our economy. But, if we can’t 

educate—if we can’t make sure that we have young people that are 

prepared for that workforce, for those job opportunities, how can 

we be competitive in a global marketplace? 

There was a comment that was made in an article out of the 

Wall Street Journal a couple of weeks ago, and it’s a pretty tough 

statement. But, they’re talking about the economic impact of what 

the graduation rate really means. A statement made by the president and CEO of America’s Promise, and the need to depend on our 

workers to fuel our economy and our future growth, the next generation of workers is not prepared for the 21st-century global economy. She calls the dropouts ‘‘our next class of nonperforming asVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
3 

sets.’’ This is what we’re facing, and this is what we’re doing here 

this morning. 

We know that there are so many different reasons why our students drop out of school. It’s not an event, as somebody has said 

in their testimony, it’s a process. It starts so very early, in many 

cases. Toddlers, whose brains develop without ever seeing a book. 

We’ve got 4th-graders who can’t read, 8th-graders who can’t do 

basic math, 11th-graders who are so far behind in school that they 

don’t see the relevance of what they’re supposed to be doing and 

how education connects with their everyday lives. Kids who dream 

of being carpenters, but aren’t getting the classes that they need 

or the apprenticeships that they need. We’ve got students who 

dream of being scientists, but they can’t access advanced math or 

science classes. Then, we know of so many stories where our young 

people are dealing with emotional troubles, violence in their communities and in their homes, pregnancy, alcoholism, drugs, all 

these barriers to education. 

Today what we’re going to be doing is discussing what the State 

and the Federal Government and the districts and labor and the 

community and the school boards can do for our kids, from birth 

all the way on up, to make sure that they’ve got access to ageappropriate books, mentors, rigorous curriculum, tutoring, the 

early apprenticeship training, and the services to help youth cope 

with the challenges. 

I have asked 10 very distinguished folks to focus on how we can 

move forward, how the Federal Government can help. I appreciate 

the time that they have taken, on a Saturday morning, to join us. 

I would ask that, as I make the introductions of you all—and I’m 

going to abbreviate them, but please know that in the comments 

that are submitted for the records, your background statements are 

magnificent—and I don’t say that, tongue in cheek; I appreciate 

what you bring to the discussion and to the table here this morning. 

We’re joined this morning by Dr. Jay Smink. Dr. Smink is joining 

us by video conference. He’s been the executive director of the National Dropout Prevention Center at Clemson University since 

1998. He’s a professor of education at the College of Health, Education, and Human Development, and he is recognized as a national leader and authority on dropout prevention. He’s provided 

counsel to State education agencies and local school districts, including some of our districts here in Alaska, to develop and implement dropout prevention programs. I appreciate the fact that he’s 

taking time today to be with us. He’s attending the National Dropout Prevention Network Conference, and so, the wonders of video 

conference allow him to join us. 

We are also joined by Mr. Larry LeDoux. Larry is the commissioner of the Department of Education and Early Development. He 

came on in July of this year, and, before that, was superintendent 

out at Kodiak. 

General Hamilton, Mark Hamilton, is the president of the university. A pleasure to have him here this morning. He was appointed the 12th president of the university back in 1998, has an 

incredible background, not only in education, but in the military, 

and I so appreciate his leadership on education issues. 

4 

Dr. Shirley Holloway is testifying today as president and CEO of 

the Avant-Garde Learning Foundation. She founded this in 2005 to 

help the communities and the schools prepare our youth better for 

a successful future. She’s been an educator since 1971, and she is 

a true leader in so many, many areas. 

Carl Rose is with us this morning as the highly respected executive director of the Association of Alaska School Boards. I think 

most of your adult life has been spent on educating—or advocating 

for education for our youth in our public schools, and we so appreciate your leadership. 

We’re also joined by Elizabeth Winkler. She is a finance assistant 

at Nine Star Education and Employment Services here in Anchorage. This is a nonprofit that is dedicated to developing Alaska’s 

workforce through literacy training and job readiness. 

I want to acknowledge and especially thank Elizabeth for agreeing to testify before the committee today and to give us the benefit 

of her experience. Elizabeth is one of those whom we’re talking 

about today. She dropped out of high school before the end of the 

10th grade, got her GED at Nine Star, and is now a working parent of, I understand, a 1-year-old daughter. She was enrolled in 

classes at both UAA and the University of Phoenix, and she is intending to re-enroll later at UAA. I appreciate your willingness to 

provide some real good background, and thank you for being here. 

Greg Cashen is the executive director of the Alaska Workforce 

Investment Board. He’s testifying today on behalf of the Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Department commissioner. We 

appreciate your leadership in so many different areas, Greg, and 

what you can help us with on the efforts related to job training. 

Mr. Mike Andrews is the director of Alaska Works Partnership. 

This is a nonprofit organization established by Alaska’s construction unions to increase the numbers of Alaskans who are employed 

in the construction industry, working with apprentice outreach, 

pipeline construction training, and so many different areas as they 

relate to job training programs, and we thank you for you being 

here today. 

We also have Tina Michels-Hansen. Tina is the elementary and 

middle school program manager for Cook Inlet Tribal Council. This 

is the regional nonprofit council. Tina is the mother of five children, and a military wife, and very focused on the issues as they 

relate to our Alaska Natives and their educational opportunities. 

We appreciate you being here, Tina. 

Finally, at this end we have Tom Morgan, who serves as the 

State director of Communities in Schools of Alaska, focusing on 

brokering existing resources to help our young people stay in 

school, graduate, and succeed in life. Tom has been doing a great 

job with CIS, and I appreciate your leadership and joining us here 

today. 

I do want to note that we have received written testimony from, 

not only the panel in front of us, but we have received statements 

from Abbe Hensley, of Best Beginnings; Beverly Grinage, president 

of Ilisagvik College, up north; Doug North, president of Alaska Pacific University; Debbie Bogart, from Anchorage’s Promise; Steve 

Atwater, of the Alaska Association of School Administrators; and 

5 

Lamont Albertson, executive director of The People’s Learning Center. 

I would invite those who would like to present testimony, written 

testimony—the record will remain open until November 29. 

I do wish that we had more time to hear, just, the commentary 

from others, but this is the nature of the hearings that we have in 

front of us. 

I would ask each of you, as we proceed through the testimony, 

if you can try to limit your comments to 5 minutes. Your full written statement is included as part of the record, but I think it would 

be helpful, for purposes of our discussion, if we can keep to our 

time limits so that we can have the opportunity for greater dialogue and questioning at the end. 

With that, I would like to start with Dr. Smink, and then proceed, beginning with you, Commissioner LeDoux, and going down 

the line. 

I’m hopeful that everyone in the back is able to hear. If you’re 

not, please let us know, up front. 

Again, with that, Dr. Smink, if you would like to lead off, I appreciate you being with us, live and in color, and welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JAY SMINK, ED.D., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

NATIONAL DROPOUT PREVENTION CENTER, CLEMSON, SC 

Mr. SMINK. Thank you, Senator Murkowski and honored guests. 

We are really pleased to be with you. We are honored to be a part 

of this field hearing on this critical issue of high school graduation. 

It truly is critical. 

Let me, probably, do something to start off that’s not normally 

a part of most testimonies. If you can hear and see this, this is an 

antique school bell that was probably used by a teacher in the 

Lower 48, of around 1920, 1930. The question that I have, rhetorically, is, Do you think there was a dropout issue at that time? Was 

it more serious then, or less serious, than now? We can answer 

that, perhaps, later, as we have questions. What I’m attempting to 

do is make the point that there were dropouts then, there still are 

now, and it’s more serious now. That’s the intent of your field hearing. 

Thank you very much for having us be present and allowing us 

to share some of the findings and experiences that we have gained 

since 1986, when the National Dropout Prevention Center was first 

initiated at Clemson University. I was the director, from the beginning of the real programs, in 1988. 

What we’re going to be doing is sharing with you some of our experiences, some of our observations that we’ve learned from across 

the Nation, because we have the opportunity, not only now, to work 

with Alaska, but, at any given time, we’re in approximately 15 to 

16 different States with active research and/or demonstration 

projects. It gives us a vast opportunity to see what’s happening 

across the Nation. I’m sure that’s probably one of the reasons why 

you invited us to be with you, and we appreciate that. 

One of the things that I like to start off with—not only this testimony, but others—is the notion that most laypeople feel that the 

dropout issue is one of local schools, and they should be asked to 

solve it, when, in fact, we know, yes, it is. It is the students that 

6 

drop out mostly between the grade levels of 8, 9, or 10, and it’s 

usually around age 16, 17, or 18. What we really know is, that’s 

an event, and the dropout issue, as you said earlier, is not an 

event. It really is a long process of disengagement in school. The 

evidence—the research evidence clearly says it could, and does, 

start as early as preschool and school readiness, all the way up to 

the ultimate decision for a student to drop out of school, leave 

school. 

That’s the point we want to start with. We feel comfortable, 

working with a lot of State agencies and school districts, that we 

have a perspective that perhaps may be a little broader than some 

of your other expert witnesses today, and hopefully this will fit in 

and confirm some of their experiences that they share with you as 

a result of the Alaska experience. 

One of the things that we like to promote is the notion that policymakers, whether they be at the Federal or State level, that they 

grasp the issue of, What are the root causes of dropouts, and, more 

importantly, what are the program interventions that have been 

proven to be most effective over the years? That’s our specialty. 

Yes, we do know the research, but yes, more importantly, we know 

the interventions that have had an impact over the last two decades. That’s one of the things that we want to share with you in 

our brief moment, but it is also in our written testimony. 

Now, one of the things, though, to set the stage, whenever we’re 

working with any particular group, is to note—and I’m sure the 

other expert witnesses will make the point—that graduation rates 

vary across all the States. They even vary across all local districts. 

We’re not prepared today, although we could, but we’re not prepared today to share that particular set of statistics with you; 

they’re well known. 

What we do want to do is point out where some of these variations are more prominent. And one of the three areas that I’m 

sure you’re aware of, but we’d like to emphasize the point that the 

data is particularly severe with groups—if you disaggregate the 

data, with groups in the area of race and ethnicity, particularly in 

the area of African-American students or Hispanic students, or, in 

your case, Alaska Natives, or, in the Lower 48, the American Indians. These particular segments of our school populations are very 

serious. 

In the area of students with disabilities, also is an area that is 

generally not looked at seriously. There’s a large number of students with disabilities who are also dropping out of our schools. 

The other area that is very evident in the research is—regardless 

of segments of population, it’s the area of the impact that poverty 

has on this particular issue. It cannot be ignored, and we try to 

make that point. 

One of the things that we like to share with you as a result of 

our Center being in Alaska for the last 2 years is, we have had a 

prominent number of—six of our senior people in Alaska working 

with local schools for a total of approximately 90 days, so we have 

a fair amount of activities that we’ve looked at and we understand 

about the Alaska situation. True in Alaska and true elsewhere are 

some certain factors that are very prominent. It’s that the local socioeconomic condition obviously contributes to it. Cultural difVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
7 

ferences contribute to kids dropping out of school. School readiness 

is critical. Poor reading skills are very critical. So is the lack of serious dropout prevention planning, whether it be at the State or 

local level; a lesser degree of looking at career development and 

workforce readiness, and the notion of accountability. 

Now, No Child Left Behind is forcing that issue of making us 

look at accountability a little bit more. We welcome that. We also 

welcome what the Secretary recently released, about 2 weeks ago, 

on a permanent or a more likeable definition for ‘‘school dropouts,’’ 

and particularly with the rates that will be comparable across all 

States. 

One of the things that we want to end with is the notion of providing some suggestions to you and your committee. The emphasis 

points that we would like to make is to continue to build accountability with data-driven decisions, both at the State level, but also 

at the local level, and also, obviously, at the Federal level, with the 

legislation that’s there. 

The other notion that we would like to bring to your attention 

is that State Departments of Education, regardless of their intent, 

need a lot of technical assistance, so that they can, in turn, provide 

a lot of technical assistance to local school districts. We offer for 

your consideration a culmination of almost two decades of research 

where we have taken a look at, What are the intervention strategies that appear to be the most effective? Since 1990 when we first 

published our list of the most effective strategies, to, in 2001 and 

in 2004, we published two publications that take those 15 strategies that have the most impact, whether it be at elementary, middle, or high school, or even at the recovery stage. We invite you to 

take a look at that in more depth, because we think that’s our 

focus. Not just looking at the data, but looking at, What are the 

intervention strategies? 

And, particularly, we’d like to call your attention—in Alaska, one 

of our 15 strategies, for example, is professional development. You 

have one of the leading forces in your State, the Alaska Staff Development Network, that is doing that, statewide. We wanted to acknowledge that, that is one of your homegrown programs that is 

providing significant staff development for teachers, counselors, administrators, and also community leaders who are providing services to youth. 

The other notion that we would like to leave with you and your 

committee as you study these testimonies more in-depth is to ask 

you to avoid the fix-it-fast mentality. Too many times, our legislators, whether they be at the Federal level or at the State level, 

tend to want to develop a piece of legislation to fix it fast. It’ll be 

a single issue, it’ll be a single funding period, for maybe up to 3 

years, and it’ll focus on one particular group. What we really advise 

and suggest that you consider as you put activities together, and 

new legislation, is that you look at several issues, particularly the 

issue of equity in access for all students, but particularly in your 

case, the Native Alaskans. Now, this is particularly critical there, 

but also across the Nation it’s critical. 

One of the things that we find when we talk to students who 

have dropped out is, they’ve never developed a relationship with 

anyone. Some of the embedded programs that we have seen as we 

8 

analyze those in those 15 strategies, we continue to see the need 

for a home-school liaison. We continue to see the notion for graduation coaches. A lot of States—the one we’re in right now, Atlanta, 

has been a leader—I mean, the State of Georgia. 

We’re in Atlanta right now, in Georgia. They have been a leader 

in developing graduation coaches. Other States are following the 

same. We think it’s important to have career counseling. We also 

think it’s important to have advisory groups. We also think it’s important for schools to be full-service centers, not just academic centers. All of these build relationships between adults or peers, but 

with the students who are in need of it most. 

In summary, as I conclude the statements, the dropout issue, as 

many research reports—and I’m sure you have read them, including the Wall Street Journal you referred to—is at a crisis stage. We 

need to act, and we need to act now. The good news, however, is 

that we do know a lot about the issue, not only in statistics, but, 

more importantly, in the intervention strategies. We feel, as a 

group—not only our center, but as a group across the Nation—we 

feel, very strongly, that we do know the successful strategies and 

the successful interventions that will help our school-based, as well 

as community-based, programs. That’s important. We urge you, at 

the Federal level and State level, to understand that also, that 

there are answers available and they are there. 

One of the reasons why perhaps they are not used is because 

they are put in force in an abbreviated way, perhaps in a 3-, maybe 

even a less than 3-year focus, and so, we would urge you, in any 

research area or any demonstration area, that you begin to think 

from a long-term commitment, but also, more importantly, that you 

think about sustaining them, not particularly from the Federal 

level or the State level, but, more importantly, from the local level. 

They must promise a sustained application of those interventions 

beyond the seed-money funding. That’s really important. 

I’m encouraged about what I’ve seen, the last two decades, about 

how State Departments of Education and local education agencies 

have grasped this whole notion of accountability, and the importance. However, there are still very many school districts across the 

Nation, and mostly in rural settings—and obviously Alaska fits 

into that particular category—that may not have the resources, 

may not have the leadership to grasp the notion of accountability; 

more importantly, to grasp the notion of, What should we do, from 

an intervention standpoint? 

I would urge you, at the Federal level or your other colleagues 

there in the State—who are the State level—to develop legislation 

that provides opportunities, first, for research at the Federal 

level—I think the Federal level can do research best on this issue— 

but at the State level, they need to be able to promote interventions that work and provide professional development activities to 

the local districts. That would probably be our ultimate summary 

statement and recommendation, not only to the Federal level, but 

to the local level. 

And the last comment would be that the notion of sustainability 

across all levels is particularly critical, particularly from the notion 

of sustainability for school and community leaders. This is not a 

school issue, which most laypeople think; it is really a school and 

9 

community issue, because when youngsters drop out of school, they 

drop out into the community also and get into trouble, and then 

you have ripple effects in law enforcement, etc, etc. 

The notion of collaborative projects between the school and the 

community cannot be overemphasized. I would close with making 

that point, to look at interventions that work and look at the sustainability and look at the notion of collaboration, because it is not 

just a school issue, it is a school and community issue. 

Thank you very much for the opportunity. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Smink follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JAY SMINK, ED.D. 

Thank you Senator Lisa Murkowski and honored guests at the field hearing of 

the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, for the opportunity 

to address the dropout issue and offer suggestions based on more than two decades 

of focused dropout prevention activities across this great Nation. I am Jay Smink, 

Executive Director of the National Dropout Prevention Center/Network (NDPC/N) 

at Clemson University, Clemson, SC, and I am honored to participate in this field 

hearing. 

UNDERSTANDING THE DROPOUT ISSUE NATIONALLY

Most laypeople and many policymakers have the impression that the school dropout issue is first the school’s problem to solve and next that the problem is primarily 

focused in our high schools. True, most students do leave school between the 8th 

and 10th grades. However, a recent research report from NDPC/N indicates that 

dropping out of school is not really that isolated life-changing event occurring at age 

17 or in the 9th grade (Hammond, Linton, Smink, & Drew, 2007). Research has 

shown that dropping out of school is often the result of a long process of disengagement that may begin before a child enters school. In fact, dropping out is often described as a process, not an event, with factors building and compounding over time. 

These factors have been clearly defined and are evident in four different research 

domains including the student, family, school, and community. Respectively, several 

examples of student factors are poor attendance and low achievement levels in reading. Contributing factors from the family are high mobility patterns or children not 

living with both natural parents. School factors include grade retention policies or 

large class sizes with high-risk students. And community factors include the collective community involvement and support provided to the schools. Also, how the community values the need for the high school diploma as the starting point for a better 

quality of life is extremely important. In fact, both of these community factors contribute to the competitive business environment for the community. 

Policymakers have a huge responsibility to thoroughly understand all the root 

causes and multiple facets of the dropout issue before they begin to consider legislation and regulations for local schools. They must also know about the range of potential interventions available to school and community leaders. However, it is most 

important to understand several basic principles as they design legislation with the 

expectation that favorable change will happen in schools and graduation rates will 

increase. 

Any proposed legislation should stress that State and local program planners 

begin all dropout prevention efforts based on the use of reliable and accurate data. 

Decisions need to have a sound research base with the flexibility at the local level 

to accommodate unique situations and build new school improvement plans on existing strengths. Accountability and evaluation structures along with equity issues 

must be part of all legislation. 

Increased graduation rates are expected from any new legislation but so are other 

accomplishments such as increased attendance and academic achievement levels, 

improved behavior patterns, and increased civic involvement by every student. 

These accomplishments should be rewarded, but any proposed legislation must provide for those school districts with lesser accomplishments to be given additional assistance and every opportunity to succeed before any dramatic change is instituted. 

EXAMINING THE DATA

Graduation rates vary widely across States, from a 60 percent rate in South Carolina to an 88 percent rate in Nebraska (USDOE, NCES Statistics, 2008). However, 

much of the variation has been attributed to the differing interpretations of what 

10 

constitutes a ‘‘dropout.’’ Thus, it has been difficult to make accurate comparisons 

that allow for meaningful interpretation and analysis. As a result of broad public 

consensus that there is a need for a uniform definition and formula to calculate high 

school graduation rates, Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings released a proviso as recently as October 28, 2008, that provides new rules for States regarding 

graduation rates. The new regulations require that all States will use the same formula to calculate how many students graduate from high school on time and how 

many drop out. The final regulations define the ‘‘4-year adjusted cohort graduation 

rate’’ as the number of students who graduate in 4 years with a regular high school 

diploma divided by the number of students who entered high school 4 years earlier, 

adjusted for transfers, students who emigrate and deceased students? (Spellings, 

2008). 

Regardless of the variations in actual numbers, the data relating to school dropout 

and high school graduation are sobering, particularly among minority students. The 

most recent statistics reported by the U.S. Department of Education estimate that 

over a half million students drop out of school each year, which is enough to fill 

12,207 school buses (USDOE, 2008). These data have remained relatively flat for 

the past 30 years, even as spending on education has increased significantly (Heckman & LaFontaine, 2007). As noted above, graduation rates for students of color, 

students with disabilities, and those who live in poverty are significantly higher 

than for white students who live in middle to high family income homes. These 

characteristics are more specifically described below. 

Race/Ethnicity 

Past data have shown a strong association between race/ethnicity and the likelihood of dropping out of school. In particular, cohort studies of national longitudinal 

data for American high school students, such as the High School and Beyond study 

and the National Education Longitudinal Study of 1988, both sponsored by NCES, 

show that Blacks and Hispanics were at greater risk of dropping out than Whites. 

Furthermore, American Indian and Alaska Native students have a dropout rate 

twice the national average—the highest dropout rate of any U.S. ethnic or racial 

group. 

Students With Disabilities 

The most recent special education dropout data indicate that the highest special 

education dropout rate reported for the 2006–07 school year was 33.6 percent 

(NDPC–SD, 2008). However, it is important to note that the definition of ‘‘dropout’’ 

and the data sources currently used by the Office of Special Education Programs 

(OSEP) differs from the definition used by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Common Core of Data (CCD), significantly compromising the capacity 

to make accurate comparisons of special education and general education dropout 

numbers. This exacerbates efforts to chart the necessary and highly important 

progress of students with disabilities in relation to their peers without disabilities 

(Thurlow, Sinclair, & Johnson, 2002). Even so, available data reveal that dropout 

rates vary substantially among the various categories of disability. For instance, the 

dropout rate for students identified with an emotional disturbance is approximately 

51.4 percent, while the rate for those with hearing or orthopedic impairments is approximately 15 percent (NDPC–SD, 2008). 

Impact of Poverty 

High school students living in low-income families are six times as likely as their 

peers from high-income families to drop out of high school. About 10.7 percent of 

students from low-income families (bottom quintile) dropped out of high school; by 

comparison, 5.4 percent of middle-income students dropped out, as did 1.7 percent 

of students from high-income families (USDOE, 2004). In the absence of additional 

measures, family income serves as a good indicator for other social and economic 

factors that are likely to be related to a student’s decision to stay in school or to 

drop out. Clearly, dropout and graduation rate data described above indicate that 

dropout is a national issue that has serious implications for our national security, 

our economic development, and general quality of life for all Americans. 

PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH ALASKA’S HIGH SCHOOL DROPOUT RATE

Through a research-based Program Assessment and Review (PAR) process, the 

National Dropout Prevention Center has become intimately involved with the discovery of Alaskan dropout etiology in the major cities of Fairbanks, Anchorage, and 

Juneau, as well as smaller cities such as Sitka and Ketchikan, focusing specifically 

on the issue of dropout among Alaskan Natives. Additionally, the NDPC/N is working in several other small, rural villages to address dropout among the Eskimo and 

11 

Native Alaskan population through a recently federally funded project termed: 

Rural Alaska Mentoring Project (RAMP) that involves the training and use of peerto-peer mentors via a Web-based mentoring program, as well as face-to-face adult 

mentoring to specifically address dropout. As a result of the extensive work throughout the State, the NDPC/N has data to suggest the following issues are highly associated with dropout in Alaska, particularly among Eskimos and Alaskan Natives. 

• Factors associated with low socioeconomic conditions. These factors include drug and alcohol abuse; lack of support at home, manifested through low expectations built on a history of poor academic engagement and performance by parents and grandparents; a highly transient population; poor health conditions; high 

unemployment; high incidences of incarceration; and single-parent homes. In the 

Alaska Staff Development Network’s (ASDN) statewide needs assessment, Alaska’s 

53 school districts identified dropout prevention as one of the top priorities. 

• Factors associated with cultural differences. Educators and community 

members may exhibit attitudes and behaviors that include subtle and inadvertent 

insensitivity towards those with different cultural backgrounds and experiences. In 

addition, significant inequity exists in terms of equal access to resources, quality of 

instruction, and building infrastructure. 

• Factors associated with school readiness. The lack of State funding for a 

mandated early childhood/kindergarten program has resulted in incidences of 30-40 

percent of students starting school with limited understanding of numeracy and literacy. Furthermore, the statewide school system as a whole has demonstrated a limited capacity to adequately address the needs of students who are behind their 

peers. This is particularly evident at the secondary level, where limited opportunities for credit recovery are in place for students who get behind in credits. Individual and focus group interviews with students have provided data to suggest this 

is a leading contributor to the dropout problem, particularly for Native Alaskan students. 

• Factors associated with poor reading skills. There is a lack of a systemic 

reading initiative in any of the school districts observed to date, particularly at the 

secondary level. Secondary teachers report that low reading levels of students are 

at the heart of poor academic performance, low self-esteem, and ultimate dropout. 

• Factors associated with dropout prevention planning. There is not a coordinated and systemic dropout prevention plan in place by the State that incorporates a high level of accountability and progress monitoring. This is a major hurdle for the State, due to the site-based management infrastructure in place and the 

challenges of a wide range of geographic, demographic, and cultural issues that are 

unique to the State of Alaska. 

• Factors associated with career development and workforce readiness. 

Alaska has an inadequate Career and Technical Education (CTE) model in place 

that is poorly funded and not emphasized as a legitimate dropout prevention strategy. Career development opportunities at the secondary level are predominantly career exploration, at best, with limited State funding to support up-to-date technology 

and resources. 

• Factors associated with accountability. The collection, analysis, and use of 

data for decisionmaking are problematic across the State. There is not a statewide 

data system in place that requires similar hardware and software applications, and 

mandates a specific set of data elements for input. The results are statewide systems of data warehouses that are not integrated and limits the capacity of the Department of Education personnel to collect, analyze, and compare adequately. 

SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS

Policy and program suggestions are offered by NDPC/N to many different groups 

throughout the year. Our approach in response to these requests is usually very prescriptive depending on the needs of the State, school district, or community group. 

However, the suggested solutions offered below reflect a much broader portrait appropriate for policymakers at different levels including several suggestions for program planners. 

1. Build Accountability and Data-Driven Decision-Making Capacity 

At the Federal Level 

• Continue to define and refine data sets to be collected and a uniform definition 

of dropout, graduation, etc. 

• Assist State Education Agencies (SEAs) to help them manage a more robust accountability system, which, in turn, should assist the Local Education Agencies 

(LEAs) to stay focused on accountability at the local level. 

12 

• Develop a stronger support structure at the SEA level vs. LEA level, in order 

to provide for a knowledge base of predictive data and program interventions that 

is consistent and equitably applied. 

At the State Level 

• Develop a statewide data management system that is mandated to be compatible at each LEA or school site. 

• Make use of the Dropout Early Warning System (DEWS) currently being piloted 

in three school districts in the State by the NDPC/N. 

• Examine the data and impact of State policies designed to reduce dropout. Some 

policies may actually be inadvertently pushing students out. 

At the Local Level 

• Use longitudinal, student-level data to get an accurate read of graduation and 

dropout rates. 

• Use data to identify incoming students with histories of academic problems, truancy, behavioral problems, and retentions. 

• Review student-level data to identify students at risk of dropping out before key 

academic transitions. 

• Monitor students’ sense of engagement and belonging in school. 

• Collect and document accurate information on student withdrawals. 

2. Develop a Statewide, Systemic Dropout Prevention Plan 

• Consider the National Dropout Prevention Center’s 15 Effective Strategies for 

Dropout Prevention as a foundation for the development of a dropout prevention 

plan. For example, the Mississippi Department of Education developed a planning 

framework using the 15 strategies and requires every local school district to assess 

current programs and develop new interventions in each of the strategies. Also, the 

Arizona Department of Education is using the 15 strategies as a framework to list 

the successful dropout prevention programs currently operating in local districts. 

• Utilize the components of the Dropout Prevention Practice Guide recently released by the Institute of Education Sciences in any statewide dropout prevention 

plan. 

• Provide incentives for the accomplishment of benchmarks, as well as technical 

assistance and resource support for low-performing LEAs and schools. 

• The Alaska Staff Development Network (ASDN) has partnered with NDPC/N 

and the Central Council of Tlingit and Haida Tribes of Alaska in a 3-year USDOE 

Alaska Native Education grant project designed to increase the high school graduation rate of Alaska Native students in Juneau, Ketchikan, and Sitka. The impact 

of this project should be examined closely for strategies that prove to be effective, 

with consideration being given for wider statewide implantation. 

3. Avoid ‘‘Fix It Fast’’ Thinking and Funding at the State and Federal Levels 

• Realize that the school dropout issue cannot be ‘‘fixed’’ with the passing of a 

single piece of legislation, or with a single project or program, or within a fixed time 

frame of usually 1 to 3 years. 

• Consider a ‘‘multiple-pathway’’ approach to high school graduation that has the 

required components of rigor and relevancy, yet incorporates ‘‘value-added assessment’’ policies and practices—for instance, a wider variety of alternative schools and 

programs such as virtual learning opportunities, work-based programs, career academies, and early/middle college programs. 

• Provide funding for research and demonstration projects that are 5–7 years in 

length vs. 1–3, in order to allow for full program implementation and more accurate 

assessment of outcomes. It often takes a year or more to get necessary components 

of a grant in place before interventions are actually implemented at the local level. 

• Strengthen staff development opportunities and resources, particularly for remote areas of the State. The Alaska Staff Development Network headquartered in 

Juneau is a great resource already in place, and is considered by the NDPC/N to 

be one of the most effective state-level staff development programs in the Nation. 

Its impact is especially felt in the many remote areas of Alaska, where travel in 

and out for staff development purposes is problematic and economically challenging. 

The ASDN has served over 2,500 educators through its Web-based system, and just 

within the past year, 235 Alaskan educators from 73 schools participated in eight 

2-hour webinars sponsored by ASDN. ASDN also conducted statewide Dropout Prevention Symposia in Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Kenai. 

13 

4. More Vigorously Address the Issue of Equity and Access for Native Alaskans 

• The issue of dropout among Native Alaskans is admittedly complicated and 

fraught with historical precedence and highly charged emotions. As such, the solutions must be wide-ranging, creative, and respectful of differing cultural values and 

expectations. The sense of ‘‘hopelessness’’ that is pervasive throughout the Native 

community is a result of real and perceived historic policies and practices, as well 

as the long-term impact of poverty. It appears that the Native community is looking 

for a stronger voice at the State and Federal levels to address the problems associated with school success. • The need for consistent and active relationships is particularly relevant to dropout among all student populations, and especially for the Native Alaskan student. 

Therefore, the following suggestions are worthy of endorsement and support as vital 

components in any Federal or State legislation. • Assign a home-school liaison at every school. • Assign Graduation Coaches for all secondary schools. It should be noted that 

Fairbanks Northstar Borough School District is funding a program to put 

Dropout Prevention Specialists in all schools K–12. • Implement a Career Counselor program that is based on the new model of 

CTE that shifts the focus from requiring students to choose either an academic pathway or a CTE pathway. A CTE pathway is one in which students 

combine CTE course taking with academic course taking within a CTE program of study. • Develop a strong ‘‘Advisory’’ program at all schools that incorporates the involvement of parents and local support agencies. • Consider establishing ‘‘full service centers’’ at local schools that essentially 

creates a ‘‘one-stop’’ center for all Federal, State, and local services. An exemplary model is a local initiative in Dayton, OH, entitled FAST FORWARD. 

SUMMARY

The dropout issue in America is at a crisis stage and requires the immediate attention of policymakers at all levels of government, not only to propose Federal or 

State legislation to address the issue, but to foster an environment for all facets of 

our society to realize just how serious the underperformance of our students—our 

future leaders—is related to the economic competitiveness of the Nation. The good 

news is that the research-based information about effective strategies and program 

interventions available to policymakers and practitioners is sound and offers a great 

deal of promise and hope for State and local leaders to forge ahead with comprehensive plans to increase graduation rates. Also, all proposed Federal legislation must 

preserve the value of State leadership in the education systems yet provide for the 

creativity of local districts to develop sound and comprehensive dropout prevention 

programs that reflect the uniqueness of their students and communities served by 

the schools. 

Thus, all legislation must reflect a full range of strategies and programs addressing the issues ranging from school readiness of our children to the needs of our 

struggling students who elected to leave school before graduation and yet are willing 

to return for another opportunity to earn a diploma. Perhaps more than any other 

suggestion to end this testimony is that we must end the ‘‘fix it, fund it, and forget 

it’’ mentality and realize that the dropout issue is a long developmental process for 

most students. Yet, the dropout crisis can be corrected with a sustained effort at 

all governmental levels and with the total commitments from all school and community leaders working collaboratively. 

REFERENCES

Hammond, C., Linton, D., Smink, J., & Drew, S. (2007). Dropout Risk Factors and 

Exemplary Programs: A Technical Report. National Dropout Prevention Center. D. 

Linton: Communities In Schools, Inc. May 2007. http://www.dropoutprevention 

.org/ndpcdefault.htm. Heckman, J., & LaFontaine, P. (2007). The American High School Graduation Rate: 

Trends and Levels. NBER Working Papers 13670, National Bureau of Economic 

Research, Inc. Available from ftp://repec.iza.org/RePEc/Discussionpaper/dp3216.pdf 

NDPC-SD. (2008). AN Analysis of State Performance Plan Data for Indicator 2 

(Dropout). A report prepared for the U.S. Department of Education Office of Special Education Programs by the National Dropout Prevention Center for Students 

with Disabilities. 

Spellings, M. (October 2008). U.S. Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings Announces Final Regulations to Strengthen No Child Left Behind. Available from 

http://www.ed.gov. 

14 

Thurlow, M., Sinclair, M. F., & Johnson, D. R. (2002). Students With Disabilities 

Who Drop Out of School—Implications for Policy and Practice. Issue Brief, 1(2). 

Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, Institute on Community Integration. 

Retrieved from www.ncset.org/publications/viewdesc.asp?id=425. USDOE. (November 2004). Dropout Rates in the United States: 2001. National Center for Educational Statistics, U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sciences NCES 2005–046. 

USDOE. (September 2008). Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 

2006. National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). NCES 2008053. Retrieved 

from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008053. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Dr. Smink. Appreciate your 

leadership on this issue and the time that you’ve given us this 

morning. 

With that, Commissioner LeDoux, I want to congratulate you on 

the summit that you had convened, these past 2 days. I understand 

there was good discussion and good outcomes, and we’re pleased to 

be the Federal follow-on to that very successful summit. 

Your comments this morning? Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF LARRY LeDOUX, COMMISSIONER, ALASKA 

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND EARLY DEVELOPMENT, 

JUNEAU, AK 

Mr. LEDOUX. Thank you, Senator Murkowski and honored 

guests. 

Governor Palin made it very clear to me when I—— 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Can you push your microphone, just, your 

direction? There you go. 

Mr. LEDOUX [continuing]. Thank you. 

Governor Palin made it very clear to me when I accepted this position that one of my chief responsibilities was to ensure that every 

child in Alaska would find success. The solutions to low graduation 

rates will come from the students themselves, their parents, the 

schools, and their communities. The answers will also come from 

looking at students’ early childhoods and their entire school career. 

Students leave school as teenagers, but every educator will tell you 

they become disengaged from school much earlier in their lives. 

The greatest danger is believing that success is easy or can be 

solved by simple solutions that address one need. Kids fail to graduate based on a number of reasons, and the road to failure—and 

success—starts very early, usually before they enter school. 

In some cases, students leave school because they must earn 

money and take care of themselves or their siblings, or they become pregnant, or parents themselves, or they live with families 

that move a lot and their education has been fractured, or they 

have mental health problems, behavior problems, or learning disabilities that have not been fully addressed by their schools or their 

families. 

Some leave because the pace of learning in schools has not 

changed and the requirements of a modern society require that students graduate with rigor and flexibility and have many, many options. 

In an attempt to craft a broad initiative to increase the success 

of students and accountability for the use of resources, over 450 

Alaskan leaders, parents, students, business and industry leaders, 

early childhood professionals, legislators, university professors, and 

executives from support agencies in our communities came together 

15 

to build an Alaska education plan. It’s the start of a beginning. It 

will continue through revision, refinement, and, most importantly, 

implementation. 

During 2 days of the summit, we defined 40 goals, with many actions on each goal, and we will be working, the next few months, 

to develop action plans to implement so that we can make change 

as early as possible. 

While there is much work to be done, some insights of this plan 

and our discussions can be shared today. I will go through them 

quickly. As you’ve heard before, graduation is an outcome of doing 

many things right. It’s not just one thing, it’s many. The reasons 

kids drop out, as you’ve heard, are not simple, and they’re complex, 

and they must be responded to in a complex manner. 

There must be a coherent system of education support from birth 

to work. Early childhood programs, K–12 programs, public and private education or postsecondary programs, and workforce development must be a part of the solution. 

Early learning is critical. If kids do not enter school with the 

proper oral fluency and some of the social and behavioral skills to 

learn, they fall behind. We know that there’s a direct correlation 

between a child’s reading ability and their graduation from high 

school. 

Students must have the opportunity to explore their talents. Students must have access to quality educators. Students must be 

fully prepared to engage in postsecondary training and college and 

vocational careers. 

Alaska will need to help implement a comprehensive early— 

these are some of the conclusions, since I have 1 minute. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. We’ll let you continue. We’re not going to 

cut you off. 

Mr. LEDOUX. OK, thank you. 

Attention to the importance of family and culture must be a 

foundation to any plan. Many of our students are failing because 

our instructional programs and our goals and objectives are not delivered in a manner that is consistent with our indigenous way of 

learning and thinking. We need to change that. 

Education technology must be integrated into the educational 

framework—not technology into education, but education into technology. Kids are learning in real time, and we’re still teaching in 

seat time. 

School finances and support must be stabilized to facilitate effective management and educational programming. Students must 

feel socially and physically safe so that they can develop the confidence necessary to take risks in learning. 

Alaska’s schools must develop effective partnerships to train students and provide the basis for increased learning opportunities. 

How can the Federal Government help us? We’re going to need 

help developing a comprehensive early-learning environment for 

our kids. Alaska has unique geographical challenges. It’s going to 

be expensive, it’s going to be difficult, and we’re going to need support to do that, but it’s critical to the success of kids, that we implement an early education program. 

We’re going to need funds to help restructure high schools. Basic 

needs will always trump innovation. Administrators, superintendVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
16 

ents and principals have great ideas, and they know what to do, 

but they need support to provide innovative programs. 

The Alaska Native Equity Act has provided funds for Alaska Native organizations and schools to tremendously increase the success 

of students in Alaska. Those kinds of funds need to be available to 

all schools so that the innovative programs can be delivered. Right 

now, there’s not enough money to implement those plans. Flexibility in NCLB regulations—NCLB helped us not leave children behind, but we need a flexible program that will meet the needs of 

our State. Currently, it does not. 

Finally, we need a career and technical education program in 

Alaska. The Federal Government used to be the leader in providing 

funds and support to develop career and technical education in 

Alaska and around the country. For the last 20 years, they have 

not increased support in Carl Perkins, and it has become so complicated that many of our districts refuse to accept the money because the regulations are so extreme that they can’t implement the 

program. 

Finally, again, I would say we congratulate you for all of your 

support, for postsecondary education, the support that you do give. 

We believe that, as our plan is implemented, we will meet the 

needs of all of our students and increase graduation. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. LeDoux follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LARRY LEDOUX

Alaska graduates approximately two-thirds of its high school students. We graduate about half of our Alaska Native students, and about 40 percent of our students 

who experience disabilities. 

Those statistics do not mean that one-third of our students have dropped out. 

Among the non-graduates in any given year are students who will remain in school 

and eventually receive a diploma, or who have left high school for home school and 

must be counted as non-graduates, or who have completed their credits but have 

not passed all three portions of Alaska’s exit exam. Furthermore, a small percentage 

of our students, about 1 percent, take an alternate assessment and are not on track 

for a diploma. 

Scholars can quibble about the best method to calculate graduation rates, but this 

is what it boils down to: Every year, several thousand Alaska students walk away 

from high school without a diploma. 

America is a place for second chances. If we want to encourage students to attain 

their diploma, we should not stigmatize them with the label ‘‘dropout.’’ There are 

many reasons students leave school without a diploma—in some cases, we might 

make the same decision if we were in their shoes—and our goal should be to assist 

these youths, not to judge them. 

In fact, some non-graduates will earn a GED certificate and go on to acquire a 

vocational certificate or a college degree. Other youths return to school and give it 

a second try. Whatever techniques we use to increase the graduation rate will be 

based on respecting students as individuals and as valued members of our society. 

Of course, many students who leave high school without a diploma do not attain 

further credentials. They are less likely to use their talents to the fullest, less likely 

to hold well-paying jobs, and more likely to need social services, more likely to be 

jailed, and more likely to have children who do not graduate from high school. The 

lost opportunities for themselves and our society are tremendous. This is particularly true in an economy in which adults have to be prepared to hold many jobs 

in their lifetime or to compete for jobs that can be filled globally. 

Alaska’s low graduation rate is a very serious problem. 

We live in communities in which well-paying jobs, from nurses to police officers, 

go begging while talented young people are unemployed or underemployed because 

they did not attain their diploma. Where does this disconnect come from? Why 

aren’t more of our students well-prepared for employment, postsecondary training 

or college during their free public education? 

17 

The solutions to low graduation rates will come from the students themselves, 

their parents, the schools, and the broader society. The answers also will come from 

looking at students’ early childhoods and their entire school career. Students leave 

school as teenagers, but every educator will tell you they become disengaged from 

school much earlier in their lives. 

Broadly stated, we believe that more students will graduate: 

1. If their parents are involved in their education and provide a nurturing home 

life; children who have a strong connection to family values, customs and beliefs develop the confidence to ‘‘reach for the stars’’ and the talent to grab a star. 

2. If very young students are well-prepared to succeed at school; 

3. If high school courses interest students because they are relevant to their current lives, the needs of a world-competitive workforce, and their future plans; 

4. And if schools are geared toward removing any barriers that hold back students. 

More precisely, schools have seen greater success graduating students 

when they: 

• Increase academic rigor and expectations, and hold students accountable; • Focus on bringing every child to proficiency in reading by the end of third 

grade; • Identify and remediate academic or behavioral problems early in elementary 

school; • Improve academic rigor, learning experiences, and counseling in the middle 

grades; • Offer significant counseling time, graduation plans/coaches, and career majors 

in high school so that students’ time in high school is seen by them as useful to 

them; • Provide a broad-based leadership activity and athletic program that teaches 

risk-taking, teamwork, dedication, and other work-related skills; • Offer sufficient remediation and credit-recovery options in high school so there 

is always another chance to do better; • Let some students enroll in college courses or ‘‘early college high schools’’ so advanced students aren’t bored; • Pay more attention to high school freshmen so they don’t fall behind in their 

credits; • Understand how to address the needs of students with disabilities, and develop 

and implement viable transition plans that facilitates skill development; • Make parents the partners in their children’s education; • Assess students in ways that show teachers, parents and students their skill 

levels; • Are located in communities with widespread pre-school programs. 

Additionally, in Alaska, schools will graduate more students when they offer 

courses that are relevant to all cultures. 

Let me discuss the issues in greater detail. 

We do not have 21st century schools. We still define learning by the amount of 

time students spend in class, and we do not take into account the ways that youths 

learn in real time. Our schools must use technology to redefine how students learn 

and problem-solve. 

The successful schools in the 21st century will be defined by a new set of ‘‘three 

R’s’’: the relationships they establish between educators, students, parents and communities; the relevance of school to students’ lives and eventual careers; and academic rigor. 

We must look at more than K–12 education. Alaska needs a pre-kindergarten-tograde-20 commission to determine the learning needs of children from their early 

years into careers. Very young children who are not orally fluent have a hard time 

reading well by third grade, and they often never catch up. We need an educational 

path with seamless transitions between pre-school, K–12, and postsecondary training and college, all the way into careers. The success at the end of the system is 

determined at the beginning. 

When students grow up, they will need to be flexible in their careers and in life. 

But our schools are not flexible. To treat all students the same is to treat them inequitably. Twenty-first century schools must meet the needs of students or we will 

continue to lose them. Schools must wrap themselves around the needs of an individual child instead of expecting the children to wrap themselves around a single 

school. 

Commendably, No Child Left Behind has spurred higher achievement in reading, 

writing and math and a greater concern for all students. Many of our own suggestions above are based on the notion that students who are doing well academically 

18 

are more likely to graduate. But in itself NCLB and improved academics are not 

the solution to the graduation crisis. NCLB is one facet of the diamond of success. 

First of all, principals will tell you that some students who leave without diplomas 

are proficient students. Many have passed Alaska’s exit exam. 

Academic competence alone does not guarantee that students will stay through 

12th grade. Some early leavers are bored, unstimulated intellectually by a system 

not perceived as relevant to their needs. We need to get them through high school 

quicker and into college or occupational training sooner in their lives. One promising option is early college high school, which offers students a 5-year program that 

results in a high school diploma and an associate’s degree. Another valuable option 

for combating student disengagement, and one that has receded in recent years 

under budget pressures, is career and technical training, ranging from wood and 

auto shops and cooking courses to computer and health sciences courses. Career and 

technical programs that prepare students for jobs are critical. 

Unfortunately, Federal regulations for Carl Perkins vocational funds have become 

so burdensome and the grants so small that small Alaska school districts no longer 

apply for the grants. The grants literally cost more to administer than the dollar 

value of the grant. We are now seeing middle-sized school districts refraining from 

applying for vocational grants. We recommend more Federal funds for career and 

technical education with fewer strings attached. 

As schools concentrate on the NCLB-assessed subjects, there is less time for the 

arts, sciences, social studies and vocations. Schools must better understand how to 

embed reading, writing and math into a much richer curriculum based on the arts, 

sciences, social studies and vocations. More students will remain in school when we 

meet their individual needs. Such a school offers a broad range of activities, rigorous 

academic and vocational programs, and flexible learning options. Furthermore, students will be better able to succeed in jobs and college if they have learned more 

than what we assess for. They must be capable of creative, ethical and critical 

thinking, as well. Students have deeper needs than solving an algebra problem or 

writing a grammatically correct sentence. 

To further address students’ individual needs, we must encourage the creation of 

alternate approaches, programs and schools for students who are at risk of not graduating. These students may be homeless, or be parents themselves and in need of 

jobs, or be far behind in credits. Precisely because these schools serve students who 

have not been successful, they generally do not have high graduation rates. Yet it 

is commendable that the students continue to plug away and that their district continues to serve them. Every student who graduates from these programs makes 

them worthwhile regardless of the programs’ overall graduation rate. Even students 

who gain one or two more semesters but do not graduate are better off than if they 

did not return to school at all. NCLB expects all schools to meet the same targets 

for graduation rates or face specified mandatory consequences. These consequences 

may throw alternative schools into turmoil and not be in the best interest of the 

students. Alternative schools may need to be held accountable differently than regular schools. 

The curriculum in Alaska’s schools should be rigorous and reflect the learning 

styles, value and meaning of Alaska’s indigenous peoples. Native languages and cultures must be honored and included in the curriculum. The curriculum must be delivered in the context of a child’s learning. Shared bottom-up decisionmaking must 

be nurtured so that school and community values reflect each other. 

Surveys of American Indians and Alaska Natives who left school early reveal the 

same concerns that many students have, but the cultural dissonance between the 

schools and the Native community may heighten these issues. Students spoke of not 

feeling that the teachers cared about them; not getting enough academic help; lack 

of parental encouragement; not seeing school as important for what they want to 

do in life; and not seeing school as important to their cultural identity. 

Schools need to find more ways for all parents to be meaningfully engaged in their 

children’s education. When parents join with other community members and the 

school to determine behavioral expectations and learning goals, they become partners in the children’s education. In Native villages, where the schools experience 

significant staff turnover, it is especially important to have community ownership 

of the schools. 

Some students leave school because they do not feel safe there. They may be harassed or subject to violence or the presence of illegal drugs. Students who feel a 

sense of belonging at school are more likely to graduate. It is the duty of schools 

to make every student safe and welcome. Unfortunately, violence exists apart from 

school, as well. Some students are distracted at school and perform poorly because 

they experience violence at home or in the community. Schools, families and communities have a role to play in a thorough effort to reduce fear and violence. It may 

19 

be desirable to encourage the creation of regional boarding schools for some students 

who are homeless or who face violence at home. 

Some students start school already behind and never catch up. Children who participate in good-quality early-childhood programs have an edge over their peers in 

kindergarten and beyond. Alaska needs the widespread availability of early care 

and learning and of family support and parental education. 

In some cases students leave school because they must earn money and take care 

of themselves or their siblings; or they are pregnant or parents themselves; or they 

live with families that move a lot and their education has been fractured; or they 

have mental health problems, behavior problems or learning disabilities that have 

not been adequately treated, if at all. Schools will need to identify those issues as 

a matter of course and partner with social service agencies to alleviate them. 

The new NCLB regulations regarding graduation rates will not be helpful, although we hasten to point out that we do not argue against the urgency of the issue. 

Nor do we excuse the achievement gap that reveals itself in varying graduation 

rates among subgroups of students. One hundred percent graduation is our highest 

priority. 

We are concerned that the regulations may judge some or all schools by a strict 

4-year graduation rate, which is likely to trim a few points off our graduation rates. 

States would need Federal approval to use other than a 4-year rate for accountability. We believe it is fair to give schools credit for all of their graduates regardless 

of how long it takes students to reach the goal. Education is not a race. 

The regulations will judge schools by the graduation rate for each subgroup of students, given a minimum number of students in the subgroup. Very few schools can 

meet even a 50 percent graduation rate for students with disabilities, for example. 

We do not believe the current graduation rates for all of our subgroups are good 

enough. But setting artificially high targets will not improve the graduation rates. 

Within a few years of the disaggregation provisions taking effect, nearly all sizable 

schools will be in restructuring status for the graduation rate alone. But the restructuring mandates of NCLB might not be the best remedy. Interventions should be 

thoughtful and based on specific data. 

We have sketched out above the sorts of solutions that will help. They are not 

easy or swift solutions. In summary, schools in the 21st century must be refashioned 

to serve the needs of their students, not only academic or career needs, but emotional and social needs. 

TECHNICAL INFORMATION

What follows is information about Alaska’s graduation and dropout rates. Here 

are definitions necessary for understanding the data. 

A dropout is a student who was enrolled in the district sometime during the 

school year and whose enrollment terminated. Dropouts do not include graduates, 

transfers to public or private schools, or transfers to state-approved or districtapproved education programs (such as home-school correspondence programs). Students with absences due to suspension, illness or medical conditions are not reported as dropouts. Students who leave school to be home-schooled and are not affiliated with a district program are counted as dropouts. Students who leave a district and enroll in a new district but do not ask for a transcript from their original 

district are counted as dropouts. 

The dropout rate is an annual rate. It does not refer to a cohort of students. 

The dropout rate is computed by dividing the number of dropouts in the current 

school year by the number of students in grades 7 through 12 on October 1 of the 

current school year. Note that the denominator includes all of the 7th-graders and 

8th-graders, although few middle-school students drop out and become part of the 

numerator. The dropout rate for only grades 9 through 12, therefore, will be higher 

than the rate reported for grades 7 through 12. School year is defined as the 12- 

month period beginning on July 1 and ending June 30. 

From school year 2002–2003 to the current school year, Alaska used the same definition of the graduation rate. The numerator is the number of graduates receiving a regular diploma before June 30, regardless of how many years the student was 

enrolled. In other words, it is not a strict 4-year rate. It credits schools for all of 

their graduates. 

The denominator is the number of graduates, plus the number of dropouts in 

grade 9, 3 years before, plus the number of unduplicated dropouts in grade 10, 2 

years before, plus the number of unduplicated dropouts in grade 11, 1 year before, 

plus the number of unduplicated dropouts in grade 12 in the current year, plus the 

number of grade 12 students who are continuing in high school after the current 

year. 

20 

Students who complete the credit requirements of the State and their district but 

who do not pass all three portions of the State exit exam are counted as if they were 

dropouts. Each year, approximately 250 to 350 students are in that position. Some 

of them will eventually pass the exit exam and receive a regular diploma. 

The graduation data includes the phrase ‘‘LEP students.’’ It refers to students 

with limited English proficiency. 

Preliminary Graduation Rate by Subgroup 

2007–2008 

2008 

High School 

Graduates 

2008 

Grade 12 

Continuing 

Students 

2008 

Grade 

12 

Dropouts 

2008 

Grade 

11 

Dropouts 

2008 

Grade 

10 

Dropouts 

2008 

Grade 9 

Dropouts 

2008 

Graduation 

Rate 

[In percent] 

AK Native/Amer. Indian ................................. 1,508 464 351 281 278 284 47.6 

Asian/Pacific Islander ................................... 568 111 63 59 29 37 65.5 

Black .............................................................. 257 86 43 50 32 27 51.9 

Hispanic ......................................................... 386 68 60 35 20 27 64.8 

Mixed Ethnicity .............................................. 362 107 49 46 17 281 42.0 

White .............................................................. 4,715 713 397 354 334 5 72.3 

Students w/Disabilities ................................. 532 391 125 114 104 59 40.2 

Students w/o Disabilities .............................. 7,264 1158 838 711 604 602 65.0 

LEP Students ................................................. 612 276 136 125 98 97 45.5 

Economically Disadvantaged ......................... 1823 650 318 284 241 138 52.8 

21 

2007–2008 Enrollment Totals by Grade* Dropout Rate by Ethnicity Dropout Rate as a Percentage of 

Total Dropouts 

Race/Ethnic Group 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total 7–12 7–12 [In percent] Dropouts Count 7–12 Dropouts 7–12 [In percent] Dropouts Count 7–12 Dropouts 7–12 [In percent] 

AK Native/Amer. Indian .......................................... 2,226 2,312 2,768 2,530 2,320 2,213 14,369 23.2 1,228 8.5 1,228 37.4 Asian/Pacific Islander ............................................ 712 705 727 747 768 764 4,423 7.2 213 4.8 213 6.5 Black ....................................................................... 364 348 400 373 419 390 2,294 3.7 162 7.1 162 4.9 Hispanic .................................................................. 541 526 591 562 510 536 3,266 5.3 179 5.5 179 5.5 Mixed Ethnicity ....................................................... 550 501 531 507 491 494 3,074 5.0 188 6.1 188 5.7 White ....................................................................... 5,428 5,561 5,703 5,920 6,092 5,693 34,397 55.6 1,313 3.8 1,313 40.0 

Statewide Totals ................................................ 9,821 9,953 10,720 10,639 10,600 10,090 61,823 3,283 5.3 3,283 

22 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate 

your comments. 

We will next go to the president of the University of Alaska, Mr. 

Mark Hamilton. 

Thank you, Mark. 

STATEMENT OF MARK HAMILTON, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY 

OF ALASKA, FAIRBANKS, AK 

Mr. HAMILTON. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

I’ve tried to chop out everything that’s already been said, so I’ll 

flip through and see if I can add something good. 

First of all, let me just say this. Thank you so much for not sitting in Washington, DC, because, even as brilliant as you are, the 

chances of your deciding precisely what has to be done all by yourself is not possible. You know that, and that’s why you’re here, and 

I’m grateful that you’ve come to listen to us. 

Let me start with some good news. There’s great news here in 

Alaska about lots of programs. This year, the University of Alaska 

attracted 63 percent of college-bound students. That’s up from 44 

percent, about 8 years ago. That’s almost a 50-percent increase. 

We’re still dead last. Now, statistics that show where you are, are 

important. Statistics that show where you’re going are important. 

I just shared that with you. It means we’ve got to try harder, we’ve 

got to work harder to get those youngsters there. 

Of course, when you’re attracting high school graduates, you understand the pool that you’re dealing with. At that stage of the 

game, it seems to me, and to the Board of Regents, for whom I 

work, that you’d better get involved in the pool, you’d better get involved very, very deeply and quickly, in doing everything you can 

to affect the continuum of education, which means that, as a university president, I’ve got to believe, sincerely believe, that if a 3rdgrader can’t read or a 6th-grader can’t do math, it’s my problem. 

It’s my problem as an Alaskan, it’s my problem as the university 

president. 

When I look at the high school graduation rates, you can’t feel 

any tremendous pride, but I look, as well, at college graduation 

rates, and find we’re not 8th from the bottom, we’re absolutely last 

in baccalaureate graduates in 6 years. I’ll be honest with you, when 

I hear that statistic, I want to be defensive and say, 

‘‘Wait a minute. Come on, we’re an open-admission institution, we allow anyone to come in. We are also the community 

college in Alaska, so a huge percentage of my young students 

have no intention of getting a baccalaureate degree in 4 years, 

6 years, 10 years, or 12 years.’’ 

OK. And after I get defensive, I say, ‘‘The only thing that matters 

is the product.’’ To have that work-ready product, to have that baccalaureate product, to have that certificate, to have that 2-year associate-degree product to go and work in the Alaskan workforce. 

While, frankly, being last doesn’t concern me, not doing as much 

as we can for this State bothers me a great deal, and we will continue our efforts and diminish our defensiveness about something. 

Our very first testifier today did mention something I thought 

was terribly important. He talked about the need to do something 

quick, not necessarily for a short period of time. There was a story 

23 

I told at the summit that I do dearly love, and I’m going to share 

it with you. 

Louis XIV, when he was designing the Garden of Versailles, 

looked out at the reflection pool, and said, ‘‘I want this pool to be 

lined with 50-foot maples.’’ And the gardener said, ‘‘My Liege, 

that’ll take 150 years.’’ He said, ‘‘Oh, in that case, plant them 

today.’’ 

[Laughter.] 

I encourage you to plant this today. 

It’s strikingly obvious to all of us that the difficulties here begin 

very, very early. And in that regard, it seems to me the university’s 

got to be involved very, very early. 

This is not a relay race, where K hands off to middle school, 

hands off to high school, hands off—it’s more like a dogsled race. 

We have different leaders and different wheel-dogs, but, at every 

stage of the journey, all of us have to be pulling in the same direction. 

There are some things that can be done. Money isn’t the answer 

to everything, but it helps in a number of areas. 

Financial aid, in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act, we need to get that moving and have that available 

for Alaskans. Increases to Pell Grant. Maybe a more user-friendly 

FAFSA application. And very, very important, we have three other 

specific—very specified, thorough programs that need attention: 

Alaska Native Education Equity Act, the Alaska Native Serving Institution Program, and Future Teachers of America. 

Let me just give you another piece of—I said, outside at the 

press conference, that we’re not helpless, we just need help. There 

has been, in the last 10 years, a 108-percent increase of Alaskan 

Natives receiving baccalaureates at the University of Alaska. I’m 

very proud of that, until I realize how much more there is to do. 

Let me close with a statement I find myself making in venues 

large and small, within the university and outside of it. Like so 

many Alaskans, I was not born here, but I will die here. I’m committed to this university, the State of Alaska, the people of Alaska, 

to make the education landscape better than when I got here. I do 

this for all of Alaska’s children, including my own. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hamilton follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MARK HAMILTON

Senator Murkowski, guests, and distinguished leaders, thank you for your time 

and for the opportunity to testify before you today. As president of the University 

of Alaska, I am deeply concerned with the success of students at all educational levels—K–12 and postsecondary. In many ways the educational success of our students 

is a bell-weather for how well prepared the State of Alaska will be able to meet the 

economic challenges of the future. 

My purpose before you today is three-fold—one, to help define the problems associated with Alaska’s high school and/or postsecondary drop-out rate; two, to suggest 

solutions; and three, to describe how the Federal Government can help. 

DEFINING THE PROBLEMS

First, some good news: the University of Alaska now attracts 63 percent of our 

State’s college-bound high school graduates. This was unheard of a dozen years ago, 

when only 44 percent chose to stay inside Alaska for vocational and career training, 

community college or a university education. Back then, the majority of our collegebound high school graduates opted for schools ‘‘Outside.’’ That meant Alaska lost out 

24 

on keeping its own talent while Alaska businesses had to import workers, driving 

up costs. 

The increase to 63 percent indicates we are moving in the right direction, however 

the important part of that metric is described by the words high school graduates. 

Realize that there is a cohort of students out there whom, for innumerable reasons, 

are not completing their secondary education. It is that cohort that we turn our collective attention to through this hearing and our future efforts. Let me be clear: we 

are not simply looking to produce more high school graduates to look better statistically, we should be producing more high school graduates because in doing so we 

set in motion a cascade of positive events that would go something like this: 

• Graduating from high school leads to; 

• Attendance in a postsecondary program in the State which leads to; 

• Working in the State; 

• This in turn helps the State meet its future workforce and economic challenges. 

This is a future we must commit to. 

But let’s not deceive ourselves. The challenge before us is great. Nationally, we 

rank eighth from the bottom for high school graduation. Less than a third of those 

graduates continue to postsecondary education, here or elsewhere. It is from that 

small pool, that the University of Alaska draws the 63 percent. 

This must change. Alaska is not in danger of falling behind. We are behind and 

the distance we must make-up grows each day, month and year that we fail to act. 

As we look to the future, I can tell you the university is fully committed to increasing the retention of not only our own university students but to helping our 

colleagues in K12 find success in retaining their students as well. The commitment 

to work with K–12 on this, and other, issues is reinforced by the strong leadership 

of our Regents, three of whom have their teaching credential and a strong foundation in the K–12 system. 

K12 is not alone in their struggle to produce graduates. Alaska finds itself in the 

unenviable position of last place when it comes to producing baccalaureate graduates in 6 years. The next closest State, Nevada, is 16 percentage points above Alaska. No doubt we have our work cut out for us. 

SOLUTIONS

Where to begin? Perhaps the question is not where but rather when to begin? To 

that I say, early, as early as possible. 

In Alaska and across the country we need to promote a culture that values learning—that continuous learning is a quality of life issue and not simply a means to 

an end. When we look at the students who are deficient in the skills necessary to 

succeed in K–12 it is strikingly obvious that the challenge began at an early age 

for many of them. The answer is not to delay their learning and put up additional 

humiliating hurdles in their academic memory, but to engage them at an earlier 

and earlier age when they are developmentally absorbing the educational tenets 

they can rely on and will need for future success. Reaching Alaska’s youth early 

with productive enrichment opportunities will help these students enter education 

and be successful from grade school through high school graduation and consequently will help them to be successful in their postsecondary careers as well. 

Let me continue on this theme of culture. Our statistics indicate Alaska does not 

have a culture that fully values education. We don’t even have a culture that values 

a high school diploma at the same level that other States enjoy. 

Perhaps this is because our past provided plentiful jobs in construction, oil, fishing, mining, timber and other blue-collar sectors. Those jobs are still out there, but 

many of them are changing. Technology used across all sectors requires more training, not less. 

A recent report for the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE) 

offers five recommendations: 

• Create a statewide college-going culture; 

• Establish kindergarten through college partnerships; 

• Establish peer mentoring programs; 

• Build up financial aid awareness and opportunity; and 

• Focus attention on college access by creating a governor’s K–16 council. 

The university supports the recommendations of ACPE. The university, in partnership with ACPE, starts its outreach efforts in second grade, with a colorful book 

called ‘‘I Know I Can.’’ In sixth grade, we send a fun poster to every child, noting 

what they have to do to be successful after high school. In ninth grade, we reinforce 

that message with a colorful brochure, packed with tips and advice. We’ve pumped 

up financial aid informational campaigns. We offer bridging programs, to rural 

25 

youth especially. And we’re now offering high schools e-transcripts, so their graduates can submit transcripts to the university campus of their choice online. 

Partnerships such as this are critical if we are to substantially change the college 

going culture in the State. There are great people at the State and within our UA 

system whose job involves partnerships with K–12, and the other State agencies 

such as DOL, Health, and EED. These partnerships have gone far beyond MOA’s 

and a hand-shake and include: 

• Work on affordability (with the Alaska Commissions on Postsecondary Education); • The Alaska Mentor Project; • K12 Outreach (Alaska Teacher Placement, Future Teachers of Alaska, Preparing Indigenous Teachers and Administrations for Alaska Schools—called 

PITAAS); and • Alaska Workforce programs. 

We will continue to work and collaborate with all stakeholders who have a vested 

interest in helping students find success in their educational pathways. 

Together we must do a better job of adequately preparing our young people for 

college and work. We must encourage more of them to not only finish high school, 

but do very well in high school. They must reach beyond the ‘‘exit exam,’’ which is 

a floor, not a ceiling. At the university, we must do more to support our students 

who come to us, with better academic and financial aid counseling. To this let me 

add comments that my colleague Doug North, President at Alaska Pacific University 

sent me recently for his recommendations for improving High School Graduation 

and Post-Secondary success. Dr. North believes we must: 

• Reduce class sizes; 

• De-emphasize testing except as a diagnostic; 

• Emphasize stand-and-deliver forms of education; 

• Increase project-based and other creative teaching strategies to engage and enhances student curiosity and learning; 

• Reverse the ethic, especially among males, that it is not cool to be smart or 

achieve academically; 

• Increase both challenge and support of students; and 

• Measure school success in part by how many students want to, and love to, go 

to their schools. 

I agree with his points and would only add that his recommendation regarding 

reaching males is poignant and one that we all should be concerned with as the 

number of males that seek postsecondary education continues to decline in Alaska. 

Perhaps the tattered argument, ‘‘not everybody’s college material’’ is partly to 

blame. I suggest let’s get rid of that term. The term ‘‘college’’ means far more than 

4-year degrees, especially in Alaska. A good portion of what the University of Alaska 

provides is vocational and career education, typical of a community college. These 

include 1- and 2-year programs, plus certificates that can be earned within months. 

We must make success in K12 and postsecondary a top priority for our State. The 

Nation’s Secretary of Labor has predicted two-thirds of all new jobs in the next 10 

years will require some level of training and education beyond high school, or considerable on-the-job training. Talk to employers. They’re hard-pressed to find qualified people to hire from within our State. 

Finally, the university is so committed to our partnership and support of K12 we 

have made K12 Outreach our top budget priority for fiscal year 2010. Last year we 

requested funding from the State for some of these things we believe would positively impact student success, but didn’t get it. That’s hard to understand, when you 

know Alaska’s rather alarming statistics. We’re trying again this year. 

How the Federal Government Can Help 

Just as I am convinced that earlier is key to reaching Alaska’s youth, I am equally 

convinced that unfunded mandates are not effective. Unfunded mandates often force 

good people and even better programs to cease, as institutions reorganize around 

the mandate. What is needed is both sound policy and adequate funding. 

Senator Murkowski, I would like you and the Senate committee to look at establishing a program and funding stream through the No Child Left Behind Act—to 

encourage and assist postsecondary institutions across the country, to do what we 

are embarking on at the University of Alaska: reaching out and into the K–12 environment. The Federal Government can set the stage and promote the mindset that 

the issues with K–12, should be owned by every tier in the educational system. 

States with significant challenges in rural areas, low college attendance rates and 

low graduation rates could be targeted under such a Federal effort to ensure resources are steered toward those States that most need them. Activities such as 

26 

partnerships with State Departments of Education, school districts, summer bridging programs, middle college programs, career awareness, special education teacher 

training and early testing, assessment and placement. The goal of such efforts 

would be to introduce more K12 students to postsecondary education and the value 

of a higher education. Such Federal support, if conducted on a national scale, could 

have tremendous benefits on both the retention of K12 students and the success of 

postsecondary students in States needing the most help. 

No discussion on what impacts the success of postsecondary students can go very 

far without mention of financial aid, specifically, needs-based financial aid. The reauthorization of the Higher Education Opportunity Act holds much promise for students in Alaska and across the Nation. Increases to the PELL grant and a more 

user-friendly FAFSA application process should help a student’s ability to afford an 

education. However, in Alaska, efforts at a State needs-based aid program have not 

been widely supported. The exception is ACPE’s Alaska Advantage Grant—which is 

for the most part self-funded. Any effort our congressional delegation can apply toward helping the State develop and fund a needs-based aid program—or enhance 

and more adequately fund the ACPE Alaska Advantage Grant program—would help 

postsecondary students succeed. 

I would be remiss not to mention three other Federal programs that need continued funding in the future. Those are the Alaska Native Education Equity Act, the 

Alaska Native Serving Institution programs and Future Teachers of America. 

In closing, money alone will not ensure success. It will take commitment and action by concerned educators, parents, business and civic organizations. Perhaps 

most importantly our elected leaders must provide policy and funding that will enable success in all levels of education in this great State. 

Let me close with a statement I find myself making in venues large and small, 

within UA and outside of it: I was not born here—but I will die here. I am committed to this university, the State of Alaska and the people of Alaska to make the 

education landscape better than when I arrived here. I do this for all Alaska’s children including my own. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, President Hamilton. I appreciate you pointing out that we do have some successes, but, even 

with those successes, we’re starting down so low, so far, that it requires us to even work harder. But, we don’t forget to celebrate 

those successes that we have, so I appreciate your comments. 

Dr. Shirley Holloway, thank you. 

STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY J. HOLLOWAY, PRESIDENT/CEO, 

AVANT-GARDE LEARNING FOUNDATION, ANCHORAGE, AK 

Ms. HOLLOWAY. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

Really, it’s a privilege to be here today. I’m going to keep this 

very brief, because you do have my written comments. 

I told these gentlemen to my right that I would just say ‘‘Ditto.’’ 

I’m saying ‘‘ditto’’ to the fact that it’s absolutely essential that we 

have an early learning system that supports families and parents 

long before the children come to our schoolhouses. 

I’m so glad that Abbe Hensley submitted her written testimony. 

The efforts that she is leading in this State are critical to our future success. It starts there. 

I hope that the Federal Government could be a partner in helping us to learn how to go about that in the best practices, because 

we’re talking about how we support children early on, before they 

ever come to school, and families early on, so that they’re prepared 

and eager and ready to learn when they come to that first kindergarten class. Hopefully we can have a preschool program in this 

State, like other States have, that really help prepare youngsters 

to be ready for school, and schools get ready for them. I want to 

emphasize that so much. 

The other thing, we have been supporting some research with 

ISER, and we have that ready. We called it ‘‘Connecting a DisVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
27 

jointed System: A First Look at Aligning Education in Alaska.’’ It’s 

our first effort at looking at those transitions from home to school, 

from early K–3 to the intermediate level, and then from the intermediate level to middle school, and middle school to high school, 

and high school to work or postsecondary. The data is sketchy, but 

it’s a first start. It’s online at the ISER Web site. People can add 

data that they have. 

I have to tell you that one of the gems you have is that lady sitting next to you. She sends us research. She helps in so many 

ways. And I just want to say to Karen how much I appreciate her 

and what a jewel she is to all of us here in Alaska. 

Finally, I’d like us to take a look at what other States are doing, 

in terms of putting the system together. I’m not sure that a P–20 

or a P–16 task-force commission is the answer. Other States have 

been doing it and looking at it, and I think that it’s time for us to 

do that. 

We have to get out of the silos. That was the strength of the education conference, is that people were talking to other people. I 

heard one of the superintendents say that it was so refreshing to 

sit and talk to a medical person about some community issues, and 

get some new perspective. I’m thinking about, across many, many 

disciplines, coming together and looking at the whole system, from 

preschool, or birth, through whatever. 

Just to give you an idea, when we looked at this, the areas of 

mutual interest were really fun: 

Early learning and K–12: expanding access to early learning 

for all children; creating linkages between early learning and K– 

12; improving school readiness; promoting meaningful assessments; 

building relationships between families and schools. 

The early learning postsecondary areas of mutual interest: 

enhancing preparation and professional development of early learning professionals; researching and disseminating strategies for developmentally appropriate learning; creating finance models for 

systems with universal access. 

K–12/postsecondary areas of mutual interest: upgrading 

teacher preparation; professional development; aligning high school 

exit, college entrance, and course-placement exams; phasing out remedial education for recent high school graduates; improving college readiness and college success; recalibrating grades 11 through 

14—the need for a different perspective on education for students 

late in their high school careers is being recognized; why not provide a variety of learning options, such as internships or apprenticeship programs or early enrollment in college, technical training 

and certificate programs; sharing academic performance data. 

Some of the States are doing some very exciting things. A good 

example is, in California, CSU has an early assessment program of 

juniors in high school, including 11th-grade testing prep opportunities for those kids who want to go on to college. 

Oregon has a P–20 finance model. The Oregon Business Council 

examined the State’s P–20 budgets as if they were one document, 

and found areas of disparity in funding and areas where funding 

could be better coordinated to support students. 

28 

In Indiana, Indiana’s 21st Century Scholars Program targets 

low-income 8th-grade students who—they sign a pledge to earn a 

C average or higher throughout high school. 

These are just some ideas. I think it’s time that we sit down, 

across those silos, across those systems, and that we align it so 

young people can see a pathway, can find out how they can get 

from where they are to where they want to be. 

I guess I would close with the idea that—I’ve given you several 

ideas in my written statement—but, we all need to work in conjunction with one another. The old reality of Alaska public education needs to make way for the new realities of the 21st century. 

Clear communications and better articulation between educational 

partners, a clear set of high expectations for all, along with the 

necessary tools to help students reach those expectations, is what 

is required now. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Holloway follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY J. HOLLOWAY

The Avant-Garde Learning Foundation is a nonprofit 501(C)(3) organization 

founded in January 2005 by Dr. Shirley J. Holloway. The foundation is dedicated 

to improving teaching and learning in Alaska, with a particular emphasis on rural 

Alaska. Avant-Garde is currently working in schools and communities in 11 Alaska 

districts including Aleutians East, Anchorage, Bristol Bay, Galena, Kenai, Kodiak, 

Lake and Peninsula, Lower Kuskokwim, Nome, North Slope and Northwest Arctic. 

The foundation, through Federal funding for the 2008–2009 school year is providing 

online learning tools through Skills Alaska that address diagnostic and remedial 

issues for students from elementary to high school. The foundation also provides an 

online student repatriation program for high school students to a small number of 

students through a program called Advanced Academics. In addition, Avant-Garde 

is working with five school districts to improve student performance in science and 

math through a relationship with the National Science Resource Center and the National Geographic’s Jason Project. This particular professional development effort is 

funded by Shell Oil, as are several other Avant-Garde projects. 

From January to May of this year, Avant-Garde gathered 30 Alaskan educators 

and community leaders in a design team process that created a performance-based 

teacher education program primarily for Alaskan Natives living in rural Alaska. 

The design team was funded by Shell and in October Avant-Garde received funding 

for the first cohort of prospective teachers in the program. That cohort will begin 

its coursework in January 2009. 

Perhaps most pertinent to this committee’s work is an Alignment Study commissioned by Avant-Garde and conducted by the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Alaska Anchorage. The purpose of the Alignment 

Study was to investigate how well integrated the expectations are between the K– 

12 education system and the postsecondary education system in Alaska. As an initial study, the current document raises many pertinent questions about how well 

connected the two systems are regarding course work, pedagogy, curricula and assessments. Perhaps the larger question is one of expectations, both of what is asked 

of high school students, as well as those asked of entering college freshmen. 

The Alignment Study points to several important areas that beg to be addressed, 

some of which need to be examined closely in order to better understand the scope 

of the problem. Overall, there appears to be a lack of alignment between home and 

early childhood education, between elementary and middle school, between middle 

school and high school and between high school and postsecondary. The study does 

suggest that the greatest alignment gap exists between high school and postsecondary education. Sixty percent of Alaska’s recent high school graduates take developmental classes in college. Seventy-six percent of recent Alaska Native high 

school graduates take developmental classes. These are courses designed for remediation in mathematics and English language skills, which leaves open the question 

as to why high school graduates are not already proficient in these areas. Why do 

so many of our graduates come unprepared for entry-level college coursework? What 

are the academic expectations of postsecondary institutions? 

Outside the purview of the Alignment Study lie the troubling number of high 

school dropouts and the relatively low graduation rate for Alaska’s high school senVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
29 

iors. Even more troubling is the high number of Alaska Native dropouts and low 

percentage of high school graduates. For instance, the 2006 graduation rate for 

Alaska Natives from the Anchorage School District was 42.72 percent. The graduation rate slid to 31.63 percent in 2008. Thousands of Alaska’s students do not complete their high school education or they do so through the GED, which is administered by the Alaska Department of Labor and for which good numbers are not readily available. Statewide for the 2007 school year, 3,434 students were officially listed 

as dropouts. 

The Alignment Study speaks to the efficacy of quality pre-school education. Research in the past few years has indicated that the most crucial time in life in terms 

of brain development and readiness to learn occurs in early childhood. Quality early 

childhood learning opportunities both at home and in a more formalized school setting have been shown to result in higher rates of high school graduation; higher 

rates of enrollment in postsecondary institutions; lower rates of grade retention; 

fewer special education placements; fewer number of dropouts, arrests, teenage 

pregnancies and welfare recipients; and higher employment rates as teens and 

young adults. Alaska is 1 of only 12 States that currently is not funding early childhood learning programs for students before they enter kindergarten. Early childhood 

education in Alaska is defined as Head Start, private schools, and child care environments. 

Overall, the alignment question in Alaska needs to be directly addressed. The 

need for quality early childhood education with programs geared to the specific 

needs of those children is great. Well-trained and qualified early childhood teachers 

working in rich learning environments with world-class materials is a must. Studies 

clearly show that preparedness for entry into school is a key to later academic and 

career success. Student preparedness for postsecondary education is also critical. 

The data indicate an urgent need for better high school education with an emphasis 

on those skills necessary for college and career success. The Alaskan K–12 system 

and our postsecondary institutions must work together to create greater opportunities for our high school graduates. Too many of our young people are either dropping 

out of school or arriving at their next destination ill-prepared for the challenges they 

face. This is an academic emergency that will not solve itself. It will require a true 

investment in dollars, political will and intensification of effort on the part of parents, students, educators and policymakers. 

The Federal Government’s role in taking steps toward addressing these needs 

should be one of providing financial and technical assistance to districts and schools 

in Alaska specifically toward creating quality pre-school learning environments and 

in helping districts and postsecondary institutions work more seamlessly together 

on issues of common interest concerning student achievement. Without Federal assistance and support, the State of Alaska will continue to struggle in its efforts to 

create and maintain an educational system second to none. Only through a concerted and purposeful partnership between all entities involved will these urgent 

issues be answered and the needs of our children be met. 

What follows is the first six pages of the Alignment Study conducted by ISER on 

behalf of the Avant-Garde Learning Foundation that speak to the issues already 

mentioned in greater detail. 

‘‘By alignment we mean integrating the expectations of one education system into 

the other and connecting course work, pedagogy, curricula, and assessments.’’ 

(Venezia, Finney, Callan, Ch 3, Common Ground in Minding the Gap; Hoffman, 

Vargas, Venezia, Miller eds 2007) 

Too many Alaskan students leave formal education unprepared for their next 

steps. Too many drop out of high school; too few high school graduates go on to postsecondary education, and too few of those who enter postsecondary education graduate in a timely manner. Among young people who choose to enter the work world 

directly from high school (or after dropping out) employers report that many lack 

the reading, writing and math skills necessary, even at entry level, in many of today’s careers. 

Alaska is not alone in these problems, and many States have begun to address 

these issues by looking at how students progress through the entire education system, from pre-school through college, graduate study, or career training. Ideally, the 

system should be aligned—as a child or young person completes each step, they are 

adequately prepared for the next. In practice, this is often not the case, as parents 

and students may receive inconsistent (or no) information on what knowledge and 

skills are needed to be ready for the next step, and to what extent the student has 

that knowledge and skills. 

This memo reviews the efforts and experiences of other States’ alignment efforts 

and provides a first look at how these issues play out in Alaska. Our initial questions centered on Alaska high school students’ readiness for college or work. We 

30 

added a look at early childhood education and school readiness in response to the 

literature on the value of investment in early childhood education. Although alignment issues can and do arise within educational institutions—for example, whether 

middle schools prepare students to succeed in high school, or whether university 

general education requirements provide adequate grounding for major coursework— 

the challenges are greater between institutions. Early Childhood, K–12 and higher 

education institutions may have no systematic communication links, and may face 

incentives that at best ignore and at worst impede efforts to align course work, pedagogy, curricula, and assessments. Information in this memo focuses on two points 

where students cross into a new educational system: entry into school from home 

or pre-school, and the transition from high school to college or work. 

RESEARCH AND OTHER STATES’ EXPERIENCE

States across the United States have begun examining how they can align education from preschool through postsecondary. Their goals are to help young children 

begin school prepared to learn, increase high school graduation rates, smooth the 

transition between high school and higher education, reduce the number of students 

entering college who need remedial coursework, and increase the number of students graduating from college in a timely manner. States are also concerned with 

addressing U.S. economic needs as an increasing number of jobs in our global economy require skills and training beyond high school. Finally, States are concerned 

with the impacts on democracy of a citizenry that is not leaving high school prepared for the workforce or for higher education. This section reviews the relevant 

research and discusses these State efforts. 

EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND SCHOOL READINESS

The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through Age 27 documents the costs and 

benefits of providing comprehensive quality early childhood education. Parks (2000) 

and the High Scope Educational Research Foundation (2008) summarize the findings, showing academic and social benefits of early childhood education that extend 

well beyond childhood into adulthood. Van de Water, G. & Rainwater, T. (n.d.) detail the economics: 

‘‘The High/Scope Perry Preschool studies show a return on investment of $7.16 

per $1 invested (longitudinal follow up over a two-and-one-half decade shows a 

return of $88,433 on a preschool investment of $12,356).’’ 

In 1996 Fulton found that students who participate in ECE have: (1) higher rates 

of high school graduation; (2) higher rates of enrollment in postsecondary institutions; (3) lower rates of grade retention; (4) fewer special education placements; (5) 

fewer numbers of dropouts, arrests, teenage pregnancies and welfare recipients; and 

(6) higher employment rates as teens and young adults. 

Shonkoff and Phillips (2000) also demonstrate the importance of entering school 

ready to learn in order for students to experience academic success later. These authors include findings from neurobiological, behavioral, and social sciences to show 

the importance of young children’s early life experiences, beginning in the womb 

through entering kindergarten, in influencing their future academic and social outcomes. 

These authors state: 

‘‘It is the strong conviction of this committee that the Nation has not capitalized sufficiently on the knowledge that has been gained from nearly half a century of considerable public investment in research on children from birth to age 

5.’’ 

The authors conclude that ‘‘what is left to discuss is not whether early childhood 

experiences influence children’s futures but what to do about this fact.’’ They make 

several recommendations to support early childhood development and later success 

in life: 

• Funding research on par with current funding devoted to math and language 

arts on helping young children develop curiosity, perseverance, cooperation, empathy, and other critical cognitive and social skills; 

• Fund early childhood initiatives that demonstrate promise in both raising academic achievement and in reducing the inequalities with which children begin kindergarten; 

• Investing in mental health needs of young children; 

• Creating more varied policy approaches for giving parents choice about and access to early childhood care options, including staying at home to raise their children; 

31 

• Spend significant resources, on par with those spent to prevent crime, stop 

smoking, and reduce teenage pregnancy to address ‘‘detrimental environmental effects including toxins and violence in the home,’’ among others; • Increase teacher qualification and compensation with early childhood funding; 

and • Comprehensively re-address Nation’s policies regarding childcare and income 

support with specific goal of improving early childhood conditions. 

Thompson, Tullis, Franke, and Halfon, (2005) authored a document based on 

UCLA’s work with the First Five Ventura County Strategic Planning, Funding, and 

Evaluation that is an evidence-based guide linking related early childhood strategies 

with successful school readiness outcomes. The document includes a comprehensive 

literature review. Strategies recommended include supporting parents in areas of 

mental health, breastfeeding, and parenting skills; and supporting children inside 

and outside the early childhood classroom. 

Burkham and Lee (2005) analyzed data from the U.S. Department of Education’s 

Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Cohort (ECLS–K). Their analysis 

examined young children’s school readiness upon entering kindergarten. Their findings included a clear difference in kindergarten entry test scores SES: ‘‘Before even 

entering kindergarten, the average cognitive scores of children in the highest SES 

group are 60 percent above the scores of the lowest SES group’’ and that lower-SES 

children ‘‘begin school at kindergarten in systematically lower-quality elementary 

schools than their more advantaged counterparts.’’ They also found that race and 

ethnicity are linked to SES status. Burkham and Lee also concluded that, while the 

impacts of race and SES on cognitive skills are larger, that family structure and 

educational expectations are associated with SES, race/ethnicity, and with test 

scores of young children. These authors also include in their report methods for reducing the inequality with which children start kindergarten, such as making center-based preschool programs before kindergarten available and reducing inequality 

of school resources. 

Echoing recommendations of other researchers, the Education Commission of the 

States ‘‘(2008) recommends policies that focus on creating healthy environments (biological and societal) for brain development. These include focusing on improving 

environments for abused and neglected children and providing early intervention for 

children with developmental delays.’’ 

HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATION AND COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS

According to research, 90 percent of high school students today report wanting to 

attend college. But many of these students either are not graduating from high 

school or are graduating unprepared to begin college level coursework after being 

admitted into a postsecondary institution. Many students graduate from high school 

without a clear understanding of college academic readiness standards. Many 

States’ high school exit exams end at 10th grade level work and do not reflect academic standards for college level placement courses, sending students a confusing 

message about college readiness. 

Callan, Finney, Kirst, Usdan, and Venezia (2006) report, 

‘‘The more difficult challenge for students is becoming prepared academically 

for college coursework. Once students enter college, about half of them learn 

that they are not prepared for college-level courses. Forty percent of students 

at 4-year institutions and 63 percent at 2-year colleges take remedial education. 

Additionally, high school students face an incredibly complex system of placement tests and college admissions requirements. These authors report data 

from Measuring Up 2004, the State-by-State report card on higher education, 

showing that when students do reach college, a significant problem is completing a degree in a timely manner.’’ 

ALIGNMENT AS A NECESSARY COMPONENT OF ADDRESSING CHALLENGES

As States begin to address the problems above, their efforts must be comprehensive and must include collaboration between P–16/20 entities. As Callan, Finey, 

Kirst, Usdan, and Venezia (2006) state, 

‘‘Reforms that focus either on K–12 schools or on colleges and universities are 

likely to perpetuate some of the key barriers to improving educational achievement for students.’’ 

These authors reviewed P–16/20 policies of four States and made the following 

recommendations for States considering alignment: 

• create a statewide student data system; 

• create accountability in the P–16/20 education system; 

32 

• align coursework and assessments between high schools and postsecondary institutions; 

• create statewide finance systems for an aligned education system. 

According to Van de Water and Rainwater (n.d.), among the major goals of a 

P–16 system are: 

• Expanding access to early learning for children ages 3 to 5, and improving their 

readiness for kindergarten. 

• Smoothing student transitions from one level of learning to the next. 

• Closing the achievement gap between white and minority student. 

• Upgrading teacher education and professional development. 

• Strengthening relationships between families and schools. 

• Creating a wider range of learning experiences and opportunities for students 

in the final 2 years of high school. 

• Improving college readiness and college success. 

Instead of separate committees addressing Pre-K, K–12, and HE issues, P–16/20 

work creates opportunity for State legislatures to streamline policymaking and funding decisions for P–16/20. State K–12 and HE Boards of Education as well as political and business leaders have opportunity to work collaboratively. States are finding it crucial that governors and other high level officials either initiate or fully support the State’s P–16/20 efforts. 

Venezia (2006) cautions that, 

‘‘Convening a commission and holding cross-system discussions may be helpful, but these steps alone will not create meaningful K–16 reform. To be lasting 

and effective, the deliberations must be anchored in policy and finance reform 

and must reflect each State’s culture and history.’’ 

P–16/20 researchers also point out the importance of these councils having specific 

tasks to keep them focused and moving forward and so they don’t get mired in discussion without action. 

Building a P–16 System Recommendations from Van de Water, G. and Rainwater, T. (n.d.): 

• May begin with point of entry issue to focus and to avoid overwhelming (i.e. 

teacher prep). 

• Or work on legislation to address multiple issues at all three levels simultaneously. 

• Need team of governor, legislators, community members, business leaders. 

• Find areas of mutual interest across all levels (see next section). 

• Work to build seamless system of all three levels into one, building on these 

mutual areas of interest. 

What States are doing: (synthesis from articles on ECS Web site and on States’ 

Web sites; see accompanying Excel spreadsheet for detailed state-by-state foci, goals, 

successes, and ‘‘how it works’’ ) 

• P–16 or P–20 councils composed of State officials, business reps examining 

these issues. 

• Research to analyze issues. 

• Legal statements (mission statements, etc.) language revision around student 

learning and standards. 

• Student data gathering and tracking P–16/20 Teacher prep and cert programs 

evaluations and redesigns, including K–12 standards in curriculum. 

• Pay incentives for mentoring Pay incentives for National Board Certification. 

• Focusing on Early Childhood for K–12 school readiness. 

• Aligning HS grad requirements with higher education admission requirements, 

with a focus on preparing students for entry into college-level coursework, NOT remedial coursework. 

• Streamlining college admissions exams and requirements. 

Specific State Examples (see Excel spreadsheet for more information and more 

examples). 

• California.—CSU Early Assessment Program in CA for juniors in HS: includes 

11th grade testing, prep opportunities for HS juniors, and PD for teachers; community colleges not on board so statewide impact will be limited because many HS students enroll in community colleges. 

• Oregon.—Oregon’s P–20 Finance Model: The Oregon Business Council examined the State’s P–20 budgets as if they were one document and found areas of disparity in funding and areas where funding could be better coordinated to support 

students. (For more info see Appendix in Callan, P., Finney, J., Kirst, M., Usdan, 

M. & Venezia, A. (2006). Claiming common ground: State policymaking for improvVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
33 

ing college readiness and success. National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. San Jose, CA.) 

• Indiana.—Indiana’s 21st Century Scholars Program targets low-income 8th 

grade students. Students who sign a pledge to earn a C average or higher throughout high school, to remain drug and alcohol free, and to enroll in an Indiana postsecondary institution within 2 years of graduating high school will receive up to 100 

percent of tuition costs for college. 

• Georgia.—Georgia’s HOPE Scholarship Program promises paid college tuition 

to Georgia public postsecondary institutions to any student who maintains a B average or better throughout high school. 

• Several States (see Excel for specific info).—These States are creating small 

(typically not more than 400 students) early college high schools that provide academic guidance and paid tuition to high school students to complete their first 2 

years of college coursework while still in high school and earning their high school 

diploma. 

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

In order to address these issues, we make the following recommendations and believe the Federal Government needs to be a partner in helping make them possible: 

1. Establish a voluntary system of early childhood education opportunities in 

Alaska. Too many of our children arrive at school unprepared to meet the challenges 

they face. The research is clear that quality early childhood education makes a distinguishable difference in future academic achievement, especially for those young 

people who come from economically disadvantaged homes. 

2. The Federal Government, working in conjunction with researchers, educators, 

parents and policymakers, should establish national standards for mathematics and 

language arts. Currently, each State establishes its own standards, devises its own 

assessments, and establishes its own ‘‘cut’’ scores for examinations, and they are inevitably at variance from State to State. A comprehensive set of standards would 

make it possible for mobile students to face the same expectations no matter where 

they are, and the crazy-quilt nature of state-by-state standards, which causes much 

needless confusion, would be replaced by comprehensible and uniform national 

standards. 

3. Extend standards into the first 2 years of postsecondary education. The need 

for greater alignment between P–12 and postsecondary could be addressed in part 

by a continuation of established standards in mathematics, language arts and 

science into college and university settings for the first 2 years. 

4. Create a P–20 task force or council that will ensure a seamless educational system that will support student achievement from early childhood through graduate 

school as well as early childhood through entering the workforce. The council must 

be structured and based on the cautions that we have leaned from other States that 

have initiated this journey, as stated by Venezia, 

‘‘Convening a commission and holding cross system discussions may be helpful, but these steps alone will not create meaningful K–16 reform. To be lasting 

and effective, the deliberations must be anchored in policy and finance reform 

and must reflect each States’ culture and history.’’ 

One of the key elements made possible by such an alignment is a commitment 

to a new way to conduct teacher education. What is called for is a partnership between schools and higher education that will forge a stronger commitment to shared 

responsibility for curriculum, meeting standards and teacher preparation. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Shirley. I appreciate your comments and your leadership within Avant-Garde and so many other 

areas. 

Next, we will turn to Mr. Carl Rose, Executive Director of the 

Alaska Association of School Boards. 

Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF CARL ROSE, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ASSOCIATION OF ALASKA SCHOOL BOARDS, JUNEAU, AK 

Mr. ROSE. Thank you, Senator, and welcome home. 

I have sent in written testimony, and it appears that much of 

what we are going to share today is going to overlap, so I’m trying 

34 

to keep my comments to just a few observations. I think I’m in 

agreement with much of what’s being said. 

I think we can acknowledge that the dropout is not the root of 

the problem, it’s simply a result of the process, as Dr. Smink had 

mentioned earlier. 

In Alaska, we need look no further than the 3rd-grade benchmark to identify young people who are testing at or beyond grade 

level to determine their ability to cope with an increasing complex 

curriculum. Those students who test below grade level are at risk, 

simply because they are not prepared to deal with an acceleration 

of curriculum. To put it another way, students at grade level will 

have the benefit of enjoying an educational system. Those who test 

below grade level will experience a remedial system, one that too 

often devalues their unique qualities and gifts, and replaces them 

with labels, negative reinforcement, and disapproval. 

One hears, with some frequency from our professionals in our 

schools, and they have stated, many times, ‘‘You can identify kids 

coming to kindergarten who will not make it in school.’’ I don’t believe this, entirely; however, if there’s a shred of truth to it, why 

would a teacher or a system not intervene with needed supports 

and assistance at the point of identification? Why would a system 

wait until the 3rd-grade benchmark to verify what we knew was 

possible as many as 3 years earlier? Why would we, as Alaskan 

leaders and community members, not take action earlier to ensure 

that children enter school ready to learn? 

Sadly, by the time young people drop out of school, many have 

endured years of struggle, disappointment, and disengagement. 

When we move to the solutions, I think we mentioned earlier— 

Dr. Smink mentioned earlier, the need for collaboration, and, during our comments at the press availability—this is a shared responsibility. I think that we need to share the responsibility for 

successful development of our communities’ young people. This is 

a community issue. 

I’m heartened to see an increased focus across growing numbers 

of disciplines on a strength-based approach to positive youth development. I appreciate the fact that you asked us to comment specifically on the Alaska Initiative for Community Engagement. Much of 

what we do, and much of what we find, is that we have quite a 

bit of influence during the time that we have kids in school. We 

can also have—when I say ‘‘we,’’ I mean our communities and our 

citizens—a tremendous influence on the environment in which our 

kids come from and go home to. It’s really simple, in the fact that, 

for many of us, it had never occurred, of the small things that we 

can do in a young person’s life that has a positive—a reinforcing 

effect on how young people feel about themselves and the challenges that they face. 

We put together a book, ‘‘Helping Kids Succeed.’’ You’ve seen this 

book. For many of us in Alaska, these books are in schools, doctors’ 

offices, public clinics, parenting classes, in homes, airport waiting 

rooms, and businesses. They’re all over the place. They simply 

point out what Alaskans have said they want for their kids, and 

how they might be engaged to make that a reality. 

From that book came the Initiative for Community Engagement. 

Community engagement is an intentional act or actions by groups 

35 

and individuals, working together to create a healthy environment 

for supporting the growth and development of young people. 

This initiative has had a profound impact in many of our communities. The intent was not just to engage communities; the intent 

was to improve student achievement and engagement. 

What we’ve done at the association is, we’ve put together some 

efforts. One was the ‘‘QS2,’’ Quality School, Quality Students. 

Through this effort, what we tried to do was create an initiative 

that would go into a community, we’d talk about what the aspirations were in that community for their young people, and take advantage of the resources that they had available to take a look at 

issues of governance and leadership in aligning curriculum, to 

State standards, as well as identifying resources. But, we found out 

real quick that doing that in isolation in the school needed another 

component, so we included the Initiative for Community Engagement with this effort to address student achievement. 

It wasn’t really a surprise; we thought that’s what would happen. 

We find that, in our schools and in our communities, when they’re 

working together and they understand the impact that they can 

have, students’ academic improvement shows up. We have the 

facts. 

We are engaged right now with a survey that we use for School 

Climate and Connectedness. It’s a survey that we put out in a 

number of schools across the State. It simply helps gauge how people feel about their schools. We’re asking staff and we’re asking 

students, ‘‘Just exactly how do you feel about your schools? Do you 

feel like you’re connected? Do you feel like people care about you, 

personally? Do you feel safe? ’’ What happens is, as a result of this 

survey, we find out, firsthand from students and staff in schools, 

how people feel about the school. By having this kind of data, we 

can see the kind of things that we can do very easily to improve 

that connectedness and climate. The data is coming back and showing us that there’s a decrease in conduct problems, there’s a decrease in emotional distress, there’s improvement in attitude, improvement in social and emotional skills, improvement in school 

and classroom behavior. This is good news. These are the things 

that we do for ourselves, simply by being aware of our environment. 

As we move to Federal support and you ask what the Federal 

Government can do, these initiatives, like this Initiative for Community Engagement, we need to help people understand the tremendous influence they could have at the community level, and to 

be more collaborative in our approach. Schools appear to be—and 

it’s been our experience—they’re not very welcoming places for the 

general public, and specifically for parents. The reasons why are, 

many parents have had bad experiences in schools. We can intentionally change that. I think we are. 

As we get to the Federal Government, I don’t think that the Federal Government can do some of these things, but I think it can 

support the efforts of the people who can. The three recommendations I’d have with you is to continue the long-term funding for the 

Alaska Native Education Equity Program included in No Child Left 

Behind. I think that this is a critical component, because, in many 

of our school districts that we work with, the lion’s share of the 

36 

population are Native, and the improvements that we’re showing 

show that the Native populations in these school districts are 

achieving at a higher rate than the general populace that are not 

engaged in these programs. We’ve had that information, and we’ve 

made those things available to you every year. The 2007 report is 

out. 

The next issue would be to target intervention and support toward children most at risk of starting school behind. As I shared 

with you earlier, many of our young people who are coming to 

school, for an assortment of reasons, are not prepared to take advantage of this system that we’ve built. We have a wonderful system of education, K–12 through university. A tremendous investment has been made, and I think that an assumption has been 

made that, ‘‘We will build this system and they will come.’’ Unfortunately, many of our people, at very young ages and throughout 

the stages of their advancement through our school system, are not 

getting the benefit of what we had intended. So often our intentions and our behavior sometimes result in outcomes that were unintended. 

I think we need to focus on some of those things, and I think we 

need to focus early and often. If we can help, before kids come to 

school, with those people who are at risk; if we can reinforce, with 

early intervention, early, when issues are identified, with some 

support; if we can provide encouragement, both at home and in 

school, for kids to understand—I believe, if kids understood the statistics of what lay ahead of them if they partake, or if they do not— 

if they had that kind of information, I think it would affect their 

decisions. 

Last, I think you want to hold steadfast to the idea put forward 

by No Child Left Behind. I know it’s difficult, but I don’t believe 

that No Child Left Behind was put in place to sanction our schools; 

it was put in place because many of those subgroups—you’re looking right into the eyes of our dropout problem. When you take a 

look at the issues of ethnicity, English-language proficiency, disability, and socioeconomics, the kids who fall in those categories 

are part of the problem, and they don’t see a future for themselves. 

Before I go into my conclusion, I would ask that you give me a 

little bit of leeway. This is not something that comes easy for me, 

but I will share this with you. I was born and raised in Hawaii. 

I’m half Hawaiian, a quarter Chinese. The area that I grew up, in 

Kihei, was where migrant workers were, in the Filipino camps and 

the Chinese camps, in the sugar industry. The language we spoke 

there was pidgin English. It’s a conglomeration of English, Hawaiian, Chinese, and Filipino. English proficiency was nonexistent for 

the people I grew up with. 

I am dyslexic. I have learned to decode, down through the years. 

I do have a disability. It was identified very early. 

I was a stutterer. There was a teacher who came to our schools 

and—an itinerant teacher, every Wednesday, and I was sent there 

in the afternoon. 

I came from a socially/economic-challenged family. 

I was in all four subgroups. 

I will share with you that I was a blue-chip athlete, and I was 

identified early; and therefore, they gave me the support I needed, 

37 

1The Education Trust, Counting on Graduation, 2008. http://www2.edtrust.org/NR/ 

rdonlyres/6CA84103-BB12-4754-8675-17B18A8582AC/0/CountingonGraduation1008.pdf. 2 Education Commission of the States, ‘‘The Progress of Education Reform 2007,’’ July 2007, 

p. 2 quote from Alliance for Excellent Education, 2006. 3 Ibid., p. 2 quote from Center for Benefit-Cost Studies, Teachers College, Columbia University, 2007. 4 Alaska Dept. of Education and Early Development, ‘‘High School Dropouts: The Silent Epidemic,’’ Dropout Prevention State Guidance Team Meeting, April 18, 2008. 

and I was able to finish, not only elementary—I was sent away to 

Honolulu for my secondary schooling. I went through the service, 

went back and attended the University of Washington and got my 

degree and moved to Alaska. 

My point is not me. My point is that if there was support for one 

person, like me, who was a member of all four subgroups, we can 

do this for all of them. We ought to be. That’s the point. 

You know, I don’t single myself out to tell my story. This is the 

story of the subgroups. That’s why No Child Left Behind is here, 

and we cannot retreat from those kids who need us most. 

With that, I think I’ll close my testimony by simply saying we 

have partners across the State who are engaged in community engagement. This is long-term stuff. Some of the communities we go 

into, we have to start a very basic level of capacity-building. Once 

they find out that it can have an impact on their kids and their 

futures, they’re willing to go all-in to help. 

We have many, many success stories, and my intention here 

today was to share with you that there’s great hope in Alaska. 

Thank you, President Hamilton, for bringing that up. But, I remind 

you that hope is not a strategy. We have to do some things, with 

all intent of making improvements. I think this is not our problem, 

as schools; it’s our problem, as citizens of the State of Alaska. 

I want to thank you for this opportunity to share my thoughts. 

Thank you. 

[Applause.] 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Rose follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARL ROSE

Thank you, Senator Murkowski, for holding this field hearing and for this opportunity to provide written testimony to the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and 

Pensions Committee. I appreciate your bringing us together to focus on what we can 

and must do not only to reduce the number of dropouts, but to ensure that ALL 

our young people graduate with the skills, knowledge, and opportunity to succeed 

in the 21st century. There is nothing more important to Alaska’s, and the Nation’s, 

long-term success. I especially welcome your invitation to discuss AASB’s Initiative 

for Community Engagement. 

THE PROBLEM

We have all seen the statistics about dropout rates and the staggering costs to 

society when we fail, not only in dollars, but in human terms. A new study by The 

Education Trust indicates that today’s high school students are less likely than their 

parents to graduate from high school.1 The United States is the only industrialized 

Nation where that is the case. 

Nationally, high school dropouts: 

• comprise 75 percent of State prison inmates 2

• comprise an overwhelming proportion of Medicaid recipients and a substantial 

proportion of welfare recipients 3

• are disproportionately minority, poor, come from fatherless homes, and have 

disabilities 4

38 

5 Nelson, A. Closing the Gap: Keeping Students in School, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development Infobrief, Summer 2006. 6Moretti, E. ‘‘Does education reduce participation in criminal activities? ’’ Paper presented at 

symposium on the social costs of an inadequate education, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY, Sept. 2005 (See http://devweb.tc.columbia.edu/manager/symposium/Files/ 

74lMorettilSymp.pdf). 7 Alaska Dept. of Education and Early Development, ‘‘High School Dropouts: The Silent Epidemic,’’ Dropout Prevention State Guidance Team Meeting, April 18, 2008, Alaska Dropout 

Numbers and Related Statistics. 8Quoted from other sources in: Klein, L. and Knitzer, J. ‘‘Promoting Effective Early Learning: 

What Every Policymaker and Educator Should Know,’’ National Center for Children in Poverty, 

Columbia University, January, 2007. (www.nccp.org/publications/publ695.html). 9 Raver, C. and Knitzer, J. ‘‘Ready to Enter: What Research Tells Policymakers About Strategies to Promote Social and Emotional School Readiness Among Three- and Four-Year-Old Children,’’ National Center for Children in Poverty, Columbia University, July 2002. 

• made significantly less in wages in 2002 than in the early 1970s (in constant 2002 dollars): males $35,087 (1971) and $23,903 (2002); females $19,888 (1972) and 

$17,114 (2002) 5

• commit more crimes than graduates (one economist estimated increasing graduation rates by only 1 percent would produce 100,000 fewer crimes per year, with 

an associated cost savings to society of $1.4 billion per year) 6

In Alaska, in the 2006–2007 school year 7: 

• 3,434 (5.5 percent) 7–12th grade students dropped out; • 1,299 (38 percent) were Alaska Native (25 percent of Alaska’s school population 

is Alaska Native); • 1,274 (37 percent) were classified as ‘‘economically disadvantaged’’; • 1,850 (54 percent) were male; and • the graduation rate was 63 percent (70 percent nationally). 

But those are abstract numbers. In human terms, these are the young people who 

live in our homes, in our neighborhoods, in our communities; they are going to be 

parents of the next generation of Alaskans. Each child who doesn’t reach his or her 

full potential is a tremendous loss to our State. 

What these dropout statistics reflect is that too many young people cannot envision a successful future for themselves when they consider their past experience in 

school and home environments; they can’t see the immediate and future path to success. They fail to see viable options for themselves and get very little encouragement 

and support to pursue and complete their high school diploma. 

I think we can all acknowledge that dropping out is not the root problem. It is 

simply the end result of a process over time of students disengaging from school and 

often, but not always, failing academically and floundering socially and emotionally. 

In Alaska, we need look no further than the third grade benchmark to identify 

the young people who are testing at or beyond grade level to determine their ability 

to cope with an increasingly complex curriculum. Those students who test below 

grade level are at risk simply because they are not prepared for an accelerating curriculum. Put another way, students at grade level in the third grade will have the 

benefit of our educational system. Those who test below grade level will experience 

a remedial system, one that too often devalues their unique qualities and gifts, and 

replaces them with labels, negative reinforcement and disapproval. 

To address the dropout rates, we need to address school readiness and healthy 

development for the children who are most at risk: 

• Before entering kindergarten, the average cognitive scores of pre-school age 

children in the highest socioeconomic group are 60 percent above average scores of 

children in the lowest socioeconomic group. 

• At age 4 years, children who live below the poverty line are 18 months below 

what is normal for their age group; by age 10 that gap is still present. For children 

living in the poorest families, the gap is even larger. 

• By the time children from middle-income families with well-educated parents 

are in third grade, they know about 12,000 words. Third grade children from lowincome families with undereducated parents who don’t talk to them very much have 

vocabularies of around 4,000 words, one-third as many words as their middleincome peers.8

• Thirty-two percent of young children are affected by one risk factor (e.g., low 

income, low maternal education, or single-parent status), and 16 percent are in families with two or more socio-demographic risks.9

One hears with some frequency that professionals in our schools have stated: ‘‘You 

can identify the kids entering kindergarten who will not make it in school.’’ I do 

not believe this entirely, however, if there is a shred of truth to it, why would that 

39 

teacher and the system not intervene with needed supports and assistance at the 

point of identification? Why would a system wait until the third grade benchmark 

to verify what we knew was a possibility as many as 3 years earlier? Why would 

we, as Alaskan leaders and community members, not take action earlier to ensure 

that all children enter school ready to learn? 

Sadly, by the time young people drop out of school, many have endured years of 

struggle, disappointment, and disengagement. 

THE SOLUTIONS

The solutions mostly lie way upstream from the final step of leaving school. And 

they must involve all of us—students, families, educators, schools, school boards, 

businesses, community organizations, health and social service providers, public policymakers, and everyone of us—each of us has both an individual role and a professional role to play. WE need to take a shared responsibility for the successful development of our community’s young people . . . there is no THEY to whom we can 

point as being responsible. It has to be WE, and it has to involve changing how our 

institutions work together, how our communities support young people, and how 

each of us behaves in our daily lives as community members, parents, and role models. 

It will take institutional and individual action to change the environment for our 

young people into one where they are and feel supported, where they feel valued 

and respected, where some young children don’t start school behind their peers. 

I think we know what the solutions are. We know they need to include the continuum from early childhood to post-graduate; families, schools and communities; 

education, health, social services and workforce development. 

Each of us whom you have invited here today has a responsibility for a particular 

part of this continuum, and if we align our efforts, we will all see greater impact 

on the success of our young people. 

I believe we need to focus our efforts all along this continuum—not just on preventing problems, but more on providing the skills, knowledge, supports and opportunities that our kids need to succeed. As Karen Pitman of the Forum for Youth 

Investment says: ‘‘Problem-free is not fully prepared, and fully prepared is not fully 

engaged.’’ 

Our goal must be fully engaged and fully prepared youth who can thrive in our 

fluid 21st century environment. Our goal should be broad and holistic; it goes beyond passing benchmark tests, or avoiding risk behaviors. It must be the healthy 

development of each and every young person so they have the academic and workforce skills, and the healthy life skills needed to succeed and thrive. And this means 

we must have high expectations for all our young people, and we must enlist entire 

communities in support of them. 

I am heartened to see an increased focus across a growing number of disciplines 

on a strength-based approach to positive youth development. It is what lies at the 

foundation of AASB’s Initiative for Community Engagement, or Alaska ICE. 

ENGAGING OUR COMMUNITIES

I know you have seen this little book, Helping Kids Succeed—Alaskan Style, and 

you will find it all over Alaska . . . in schools, in doctors’ offices and public health 

clinics, in parenting classes, in homes, in airport waiting rooms, in businesses. It 

was literally created in 1998 ‘‘by and for Alaskans’’ through a series of community 

visits, where everyday Alaskans described what they wanted for their kids, and they 

very eloquently described what kids need from adults in order to succeed. These can 

be called ‘‘assets’’ or protective factors, resiliency, traditional Native values . . . they 

have many names but the principles are the same. How are assets built in children 

and youth? Through positive relationships with caring adults. What kids need is the 

time, attention, respect, encouragement, support, and high expectations of the 

adults around them in their families, their schools, and their communities. 

Born out of this little book was a far-reaching initiative that set out to change 

the environment for Alaska’s young people, and to enlist all Alaskans in building 

healthy communities that provide what kids need to succeed. Alaska ICE is a statewide initiative of AASB that encourages and supports youth success through a 

statewide network of partners and local community initiatives. Federal support of 

this initiative through the Alaska Native Education Program in No Child Left Behind has enabled us to work with school districts, communities, organizations, and 

individuals throughout the State to promote the shared responsibility that each and 

every one of us has to help kids succeed. 

40 

10This national research cuts across various disciplines, including education, psychology, public health, behavioral health, juvenile justice, neuroscience, etc. (Blum, The Case for School Connectedness, Educational Leadership, April 2005; Freudenberg & Ruglis, Reframing School Dropout as a Public Health Issue, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Oct. 2007; Wilkenfeld, 

Moore and Lippman, Neighborhood Support and Children’s Connectedness, Child Trends Fact 

Sheet, Feb. 2008. 11Wand, Haertel, and Walberg found that social and emotional factors were among the most 

influential factors on student learning, based on evidence from 561 educational researchers and 

91 meta-analyses (1997). 

Community engagement is the intentional action of groups and individuals working together to create healthy environments that support the growth and education 

of children and youth. 

Our Alaska ICE initiative has many strands and facets; I will provide you with 

a copy of our 2007 Progress Report that reflects how those many partnerships and 

collaborations create a web of support for Alaska’s young people. Community engagement will look a little different in every community as people and organizations 

tailor it to their priorities and goals. 

A few snapshots from Alaska ICE’s community partners, made possible because 

of our funding support through NCLB’s Alaska Native Education Program, show 

how the simple principles of asset-building, healthy and supportive youth-adult relationships, and intentional community engagement can flourish in every community. 

• Parenting classes in Yup’ik and English in Lower Kuskokwim School District, 

through a partnership with the tribe. 

• Community-school art projects that build supportive youth-adult and schoolcommunity partnerships in Yukon Flats villages. 

• Weekly asset messages developed by youth and adults and delivered in English 

and Russian by teens over the community radio station in Delta, and youth-adult 

community choir and theatre productions. 

• Student-produced TV shows addressing substance abuse issues in Unalaska, 

and targeted efforts to improve school and community climate. 

• Schools that are more welcoming to parents and community members in the 

Pribilofs, and collaborative school, tribe and community efforts to build culturally 

responsive social and emotional learning skills and positive peer climate among students. 

As part of our overall efforts to effectively engage adults in positively supporting 

young people in Alaska’s communities, we also put significant focus on improving 

the school environment by helping schools apply these same principles. Today I 

want to focus in on creating school environments where all children can succeed. 

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND ENGAGEMENT

Over the last 5 years, AASB has aligned our school improvement initiative (Quality Schools/Quality Students, or QS2) and our community engagement initiative 

(Alaska ICE). Begun as separate initiatives, it became apparent that to make the 

greatest impact on academic achievement, we needed to target both efforts towards 

assisting school districts and communities in improving supports for youth in both 

environments. 

Through QS2, we assist school districts in improving their leadership and governance capacity, aligning their curricula with State standards, and targeting resources 

effectively towards identified priorities. Through Alaska ICE, we engage individuals, 

families, schools, organizations, businesses, faith communities, and young people 

themselves in building sustainable community networks to support, encourage, and 

provide meaningful opportunities to our young people that will prepare them to 

thrive in the 21st century. 

When young people feel connected to school and have support from family, teachers, and other caring adults, academic achievement improves and risk behaviors decrease.10 When students have strong social-emotional learning skills,11 they do better in school and life. There is a growing body of national research to support this, 

and we now have data to show this in Alaska. AASB has developed a student and 

staff survey to gauge student and staff perceptions of climate and connectedness, 

and an increasing number of schools are participating, including 242 schools in 33 

districts in 2008, comprising over 30,000 students and almost 5,000 staff. 

Districts that have worked with AASB on community engagement and school improvement have shown: 

• greater academic achievement as measured by Standards Based Assessment 

(SBA) proficiency gains than the statewide average; 

41 

12 Collaborative for Academic, Social and Emotional Learning Research Brief: Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) and Student Benefits: Implications for the Safe Schools/Healthy Students 

Core Elements, 2008. 

• even greater proficiency gains by Native students in those districts, and greater 

gains than Native students statewide; • persistent improvements in student ratings for school climate and student connectedness over the last 3 years across all aspects of climate and connectedness; and • improved overall staff ratings of school climate across most subscales. 

Other key findings of AASB’s School Climate and Connectedness Survey include: 

• Key factors of school climate and connectedness are related to student performance on Alaska’s SBAs: high expectations, school safety, parent and community involvement, and social-emotional learning were found to have significant positive relationships with scores on reading, writing and mathematics. • Staff ratings for school climate were consistently and strongly related to student 

performance in reading, writing and mathematics’ SBAs. • There have been significant negative relationships between student risk behaviors and school climate and connectedness ratings each year: the more students reported that there was a positive climate at their school and that they felt connected 

to school, the lower the number of incidents of delinquent behavior and drug and 

alcohol use they reported seeing among peers at school or school events. • Students who reported that they had someone available outside of school to help 

them with homework and students who had an adult who knew what they did with 

their free time gave consistently higher ratings for connectedness to school and 

more favorable ratings of their school climate than did students without outside 

support and supervision. 

As more districts participate in the survey and use the results to improve school 

climate and increase student connectedness, we are seeing growing interest in the 

area of social and emotional learning, and how schools, after-school programs, and 

families can work together to promote social and emotional development. A 2008 

meta-analysis of over 700 studies of family, school and community interventions 

found a broad range of benefits for students 12: 

• 9 percent decrease in conduct problems (e.g., classroom misbehavior, aggression); 

• 10 percent decrease in emotional distress (e.g., anxiety, depression); 

• 9 percent improvement in attitudes about self, others, and school; 

• 23 percent improvement in social and emotional skills; 

• 9 percent improvement in school and classroom behavior; and 

• 11 percent improvement in achievement test scores. 

A growing number of Alaska school districts are focusing on improving students’ 

social and emotional learning as an effective way to improve student success. The 

Anchorage School District is viewed as being at the leading edge of this national 

effort, and AASB is assisting a number of other Alaska districts. 

FEDERAL SUPPORT

It is clear that lowering high school dropout rates is necessary, and that it will 

only be accomplished if we align our various efforts to support children and families 

more effectively. We need to actively enlist families, schools and our communities 

to ensure that some children don’t start out behind, and that if they do, we have 

effective ways to very quickly close that early gap so they can all get the benefit 

of our education system. We need to ensure our schools offer engaging, rigorous, and 

relevant curricula, provide safe, caring environments where students feel connected, 

have high expectations for all students, and provide the appropriate supports that 

will enable students to meet those expectations. We need to make sure that our 

communities provide a positive environment where young people feel valued and 

have meaningful opportunities for involvement. 

Through initiatives like Alaska ICE we need to help people understand the important role we each can play in our homes, in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in 

our businesses, in our communities. We need to encourage adults to feel and then 

act on a shared responsibility for creating the kind of supportive environment that 

young people need. Every one of us has opportunities in our daily lives to interact 

with young people, and what both common sense and research tell us is that the 

cumulative impact of those small interactions is profound. We can each decide to 

be intentional in those interactions, and use them to engage positively with kids, 

to be interested in them and what they think, and to give them opportunities to be 

a valuable part of our communities. 

42 

The Federal Government can’t do these things. But there are many ways that it 

can support the people who can do these things: 

• Continue long-term funding for the Alaska Native Education Equity 

Program in NCLB. AASB’s Alaska Initiative for Community Engagement is an example of how Federal funding can be used effectively to spark the initiative and capacity in each of our communities to actively work together to better support young 

people. The Alaska Native Education Equity funding targets Alaska Native student 

achievement, dropout reduction, and school readiness. There is improvement, but 

significant disparities persist. 

• Target early intervention and support towards the children most at 

risk of starting school behind. This should include intentional, sustained strategies (statewide, district-wide, and community-wide) that start at an early age, include families, and continue into preschool and early elementary school. When we 

do that in an intentional and coordinated way, we will vastly simplify the other 

steps we can and should take to improve schools to meet the needs of older students. 

• Hold steadfastly to the ideal put forward in NCLB that all children 

should get the best education we can give them. As we go forward with improvements in NCLB, we should retain accountability for all the subgroups that we 

know are lagging behind. If we focus our attention on supporting these children, and 

preparing all children for school, we will address the root causes of the dropout 

problem. 

CONCLUSION

AASB is working with partners across Alaska to change the environment in which 

children and youth live. Engaging individuals, organizations and communities is 

long-term work and sometimes requires starting at a basic level of capacity-building. 

The great thing is that when people understand how their personal, everyday actions, however small, can positively impact a young person, they are very willing 

to do it over the long term. And those small actions, repeated across the State, will 

help build healthy communities and in turn healthy young people. 

We know a lot about what we need to do. We need to gather the collective will 

and commitment to do it before another generation of our children drift off to underachieving lives. 

Senator Murkowski, thank you for your time. I know I am preaching to the choir 

here. I want to thank you for your strong and sustained support for Alaska’s children, for education, and for our community engagement initiative. I invite you to 

call on me and the Association of Alaska School Boards to assist in this effort in 

whatever way would be helpful. 

For more information about the Association of Alaska School Boards’ Initiative for 

Community Engagement (Alaska ICE), visit: www.alaskaice.org. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, I thank you. I thank you for your 

thoughts and for your personal story. I think you’re absolutely 

right; if we can provide for a person, as you have identified, in all 

of these categories, where—you know, the odds were against you, 

and—look at where you are today, serving us. We appreciate it. 

Next, we’ll hear from Elizabeth Winkler, who is also here today 

to share her personal story. 

Elizabeth, we thank you for being here with us this morning. 

STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH WINKLER, FINANCE ASSISTANT, 

NINE STAR EDUCATION AND EMPLOYMENT SERVICES, 

ANCHORAGE, AK 

Ms. WINKLER. Thank you, Senator Murkowski, for allowing me 

to have the opportunity to speak on behalf of those that are in 

similar situations as myself. 

I see many high school dropouts walk through Nine Star’s door. 

They’re trying to do what I’ve done: complete their high school education and attempt to move on to bigger and better things. What 

I mean by that is, they want to get a better-paying job and/or further their education. 

43 

There are many barriers that youth have to endure while they’re 

finishing school. One major barrier is peer pressure. Youth are easily distracted by their peers. Youth are also going through puberty, 

which causes a lot of confusion; and then, youth have a lot of builtup emotions because of their confusion. Youth make bad choices because of these pressures and distractions. These barriers ultimately 

affect youths’ education. 

I know, because I’ve experienced this. As soon as I got into middle school, I started to experience peer pressure. My friends were 

way more important than my education. I also had a lot of builtup anger because of the way my life was going. I let this anger out 

through the bad choices that I made. 

I made it to high school on time and had an even more difficult 

time. I truly didn’t care about the world around me, and I allowed 

the barriers in my life to affect me to a point where I couldn’t focus 

on my education. I gave up. Six days before 10th grade ended, I 

decided to drop out of school. I told my mom exactly what was 

going on, and she supported my decision. 

The 2 years that followed, I got into a correspondence school that 

I did fairly well in. The school got shut down, due to funding reasons, so I had to find another correspondence school. I did. It was 

an online school, but that didn’t work for me, either. I told my 

mother that I wanted to get my GED and move on to college. Once 

again, she supported my decision. I just wanted to finish my high 

school education so that I can move on to college and make something of myself. 

In 2005, I finished all of my GED tests within a month and a 

half, and received my diploma that December. For me, it was one 

of the greatest achievements in my life. Now it was time to move 

on to college. 

Excuse me, this is a bit emotional for me. 

I started taking classes at the University of Anchorage in 2006, 

and finished my first semester of my freshman year. I started 

classes in my second semester, and, within a month’s time, withdrew from my classes because of life situations that took an emotional toll on me. My nephew passed away, January 3, 2007, and, 

after his death, I was depressed. On March 14, 2007, I found out 

that I was pregnant. I stayed out of school because I didn’t want 

to go through any more hardships. I was also put on financial suspension. 

In January 2008, I started going to an online school, the University of Phoenix. I was doing extremely well with my classes; however, in May 2008, I found out I was pregnant again and started 

doing poorly in classes. Eventually, I got dropped from one of the 

classes and failed two others. After the classes ended, I received my 

grades, and the school told me that I could not attend the college 

again until I dealt with my financial suspension. 

I paid UAA the money that was due to them, and I am in the 

process of paying University of Phoenix. I’m also working on getting back into UAA. 

It’s my goal to stay in college and work on my degrees that I 

want to obtain so that I can better my and my family’s situation. 

44 

The barriers that I will have while I’m going to school include 

finding childcare for the time that I’m in school and being able to 

keep focused so that I can do really well in my classes. 

I want to become successful in life, and that means having a college education and being able to offer the world more than what 

the next person can, and that’s knowledge and wisdom that I hold 

because of my personal life experiences and college education. 

I’m not a perfect person and accept the fact that some of my 

strengths need to be developed further. I’m a very detailed and organized person; for the most part, I’m always on time. I am patient 

and willing to wait for someone, if needed. I’m an understanding 

person, always willing to provide words of encouragement. If I do 

not understand something, then I will inquire about what’s at 

hand. I’m a good communicator. I’m also down-to-earth. I’m known 

for my integrity. 

I’m also a stubborn, hard-headed, and persistent person. 

That means that I learn life the hard way. No matter how difficult these life experiences have been, I have the strength to always walk forward in life and take the experience as a hard lesson 

learned. An experience that is understood can empower one to 

change, and, in return, that experience will provide wisdom and 

knowledge. Such an experience was my extended effort to earn my 

GED diploma. Such an experience was my initial work in finance 

as a trainee. Some things seemed clear to me from the start, some 

things I had to repeat many times in order for me to understand 

some of the reasons of the how and why of the way these things 

were done. Such an opportunity—such an experience was assuming 

site management responsibilities from my company. Such a thing 

was my occasional supervision of other company staff. My greatest 

lessons have come in caring for my child, whose importance to me 

is beyond measure. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Winkler follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ELIZABETH WINKLER

I see many high school dropouts walk through Nine Star’s door. They’re trying 

to do what I’ve done—complete their high school education and attempt to move on 

to bigger and better things. What I mean by that is they want to get a better paying 

job and/or further their education. 

There are many barriers that youth have to endure while they’re finishing school. 

One major barrier is peer pressure. Youth are easily distracted by their peers. 

Youth are also going through puberty which causes a lot of confusion and then 

youth have a lot of built-up emotions, because of their confusion. Youth make bad 

choices because of these pressures and distractions. These barriers ultimately affect 

youth’s education. 

I know, because I’ve experienced this. As soon as I got into middle school, I started to experience peer pressure. My friends were way more important than my education. I also had a lot of built-up anger; because of the way my life was going. I 

let this anger out through the bad choices that I made. 

I made it to high school on time and had an even more difficult time. I truly didn’t 

care about the world around me and I allowed the barriers in my life to affect me 

to a point where I couldn’t focus on my education. I gave up. Six days before tenth 

grade ended I decided to drop out of school. Most of my teachers felt it was necessary for me to sit in the principal’s office for the entire class period because of 

how disruptive I was. I told my mom exactly what was going on and she supported 

my decision. 

The 2 years that followed, I got into a correspondence school that I did fairly well 

in. The school got shut down due to funding reasons, so I had to find another correspondence school. I did. It was an online school, but that didn’t work for me eiVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
45 

ther. I told my mother that I wanted to get my GED and move on to college. Once 

again, she supported my decision. I just wanted to finish my high school education 

so that I could move on to college and make something of myself. In 2005, I finished 

all of my GED tests within a month and a half and received my diploma that December. For me, it was one of the greatest achievements in my life. Now it was time 

to move on to college. 

I started taking classes at the University of Anchorage in September 2006, and 

finished my first semester of my freshman year. I started classes in my second semester, and within a month’s time withdrew from classes, because of life situations 

that took an emotional toll on me. My nephew passed away January 3, 2007 and 

after his death I was depressed. On March 14, 2007 I found out that I was pregnant. I stayed out of school, because I didn’t want to go through ANY more hardships. I was also put on financial suspension. 

In January 2008 I started going to an online school, the University of Phoenix. 

I was doing extremely well with my classes, however, in May 2008 I found out I 

was pregnant again and started doing poorly in classes. Eventually I got dropped 

from one of the classes and failed two others. After the classes ended and I received 

my grades and the school told me that I could not attend the college again until 

I dealt with my financial suspension. 

I paid UAA the money that was due to them, and in the process of paying University of Phoenix. I’m also working on getting back into UAA. It’s my goal to stay in 

college and work on my degrees that I want to obtain so that I can better mine and 

my family’s situation. 

The barriers that I will have while I’m going to school include finding childcare 

for the time that I am in school, and being able to keep focused so that I can do 

really well in my classes. I want to become successful in life and that means having 

a college education and being able to offer the world more than what the next person can and that’s knowledge and wisdom that I hold because of my personal life 

experiences and college education. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Elizabeth. Your story—your 

certain determination, I think, will serve as a role model for others. 

As you raise your child, I think that she will look to you for the 

determination—you call it ‘‘stubbornness.’’ It’s whatever causes you 

to move forward positively—— 

Ms. WINKLER. Right. 

Senator MURKOWSKI [continuing]. And you’re clearly doing that. 

So, we—— 

Ms. WINKLER. Thank you. 

Senator MURKOWSKI [continuing]. Thank you for that. Thank you 

for your testimony. 

Next, we’ll go to Mr. Greg Cashen, who is the executive director 

of Alaska Workforce Investment Board. 

STATEMENT OF GREG CASHEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ALASKA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, ANCHORAGE, AK 

Mr. CASHEN. Thank you, Senator Murkowski, for inviting the Department of Labor and Workforce Development to testify before 

this committee. 

The programs we are adopting to engage high school students 

and young adults are best illustrated in the experiences of a student named Zach. 

Instead of dropping out of his Juneau-Douglas High School, Zach 

found a metals class, where he learned to weld. 

He took another shop class, then another. With the guidance of 

the Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development, Zach 

discovered school through apprenticeship. After graduating, last 

May, Zach is on his way to becoming a certified plumber and pipe 

fitter. 

46 

One of the reasons the United States emerged as the economic 

superpower of the 20th century was a quality workforce. As a State 

and as a Nation, we have veered off that course. But, the tide is 

turning, and we can succeed by working together, building strong 

partnerships with industry, labor, and education. 

Our efforts are focused on replacing an aging workforce and providing skilled workers to build a gas line and other significant economic development projects on the horizon. 

Apprenticeship as a pathway to a career or higher education is 

one of the most effective methods of delivering a trained workforce. 

If we embrace this model of partnership with business and industry, we will improve Alaska hire and give hope to our most valuable asset: our youth. 

We have 25 newly trained apprenticeship specialists in the Department of Labor, located statewide in the job centers throughout 

the State, who are reaching out to high-demand industries in Alaska that are well-suited to apprenticeship, ranging from healthcare 

to mining, transportation to forestry, and manufacturing to oil and 

gas industries. 

The Youth First Initiative prepares youth and young workers up 

to age 24 to be job-ready. Youth First’s statewide career guides, including eight who travel throughout rural Alaska schools throughout the regions, work with youth and young adults to create interest and provide support in learning about the job market, researching occupations, and applying for jobs and training programs. The 

guides establish a working relationship with the school, Native organizations, community service organizations, and employers in 

their communities. 

Another Alaska Youth First program provides teacher 

externships in three target industries of healthcare, construction, 

and resource development. 

A partnership with industry created the Alaska Construction 

Academy. More than 2,300 middle and high school students, along 

with 320 adults, are learning how to build new skills, such as carpentry, plumbing, and drywall finishing. Begun as a pilot program 

in Anchorage to attract and train youth and adults to, first, jobs 

in the Alaska construction industry, the academies are now in the 

Kenai Peninsula, Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan and Mat-Su. Satellite academies will be created statewide, as needed. 

The Denali Commission is a vital partner in extending the 

Denali Training Fund to youth workforce preparation programs in 

rural Alaska. Last summer, 32 high school students attended the 

Galena and Kotzebue Summer Health Career Academy and earned 

six credits at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks, and received an 

emergency trauma technician training certificate. 

The department is beginning to coordinate the efforts of the regional training centers in Alaska, including the department’s 

AVTEC Center in Seward, to deliver services more efficiently, helping to address the highest rates of unemployment that exist in 

rural Alaska, where many of the centers are located. 

Beginning January 1, education tax credits will be extended to 

include secondary vocational programs and state-operated vocational and technical schools in Alaska. 

47 

Our Workforce Investment Board is the primary policymaking 

board for workforce development in Alaska. The Workforce Investment Board is leading a State initiative to create career pathways 

in vocational education programs, working with business and education consortia to establish and implement standards for Alaska’s 

training programs. 

The department will continue to work toward increasing awareness of job-training opportunities to create tomorrow’s workforce. 

That includes paying attention to today’s students by expanding career and technical education, in partnership with the Department 

of Education and Early Development, which is part of our AGIA 

(Alaska Gasline Inducement Act) training plan. 

Much of the successes the Department has achieved would not 

have occurred without the support of our Federal Government and 

the active engagement of our congressional delegation. Many of our 

new state-funded initiatives were initiated, thanks to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Federal Workforce Innovation Grants. 

Senator, much work remains to be done, and we hope to continue 

our dialogue with you and the rest of our congressional delegation 

as the Department seeks continued support for Alaska’s Workforce 

Development Initiatives. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Cashen follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GREG CASHEN

Senator Murkowski, thank you for allowing the Alaska Department of Labor and 

Workforce Development to testify before this committee today. 

The programs we are adopting to engage high school students and young adults 

in career training, and to assist them in persisting until they earn a diploma, certificate, or degree are illustrated by the experiences of Zach. 

Early in his high school career, Zach was bored with his traditional classes and 

considering dropping out. But a brush with vocational education in his Juneau high 

school intervened. 

Instead of hitting the streets, Zach found a metal class where he learned to weld. 

He learned to build a tool box and soon went on to other projects. He took other 

‘‘shop’’ classes and, with the guidance of an Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development staffer, Zach discovered apprenticeship. After graduating last 

May, Zach is now on his way to becoming a certified plumber and pipefitter. 

Through a school-to-apprentice program he earned 500 hours credit—about 3 

months of work—for his high school shop classes. 

The Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development is working to provide alternatives to the thousands of students like Zach who reach a crossroad and 

decide to leave school. 

One of the reasons the United States emerged as the economic superpower of the 

20th century was a quality workforce. As a State and as a Nation, we have veered 

from that course. But the tide is turning and our success will depend on all of us 

working together—in Alaska that means building strong partnerships between the 

Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development, industry, labor and education—to build a future with a trained workforce. 

Although the partnerships vary in scope, and the objectives and goals vary based 

on who is involved, the outcomes benefit all of Alaska. 

Alaska is focusing on training to replace an aging workforce and provide skilled 

workers to build a gasline and other significant development projects on the horizon. 

We are taking a vision of creating a broad-based registered apprenticeship program that helps produce an Alaska workforce consistently trained at the highest 

levels—and beginning to make it a reality. Apprenticeship, as a pathway to a career 

or higher education, is one of the most effective methods of delivering a trained 

workforce. If we as a State embrace this model of partnership with business and 

industry, we will be on the pathway to improving Alaska Hire and giving hope to 

our most valuable asset—our youth. 

48 

In school-to-apprentice programs, high school students receive up to 500 hours 

(about 3 months) of credit when they are enrolled in a registered apprentice program. Apprentices can also earn up to 38 credits through the University of Alaska 

System toward a degree. 

The department is reaching out to other high demand industries in Alaska—ranging from healthcare to mining, transportation to forestry, and manufacturing to oil 

and gas. These industries are well-suited to the apprenticeship movement. 

Registered apprenticeship programs will develop a skilled, competitive, diverse 

and sought-after workforce—and help provide a world class, industry-driven, postsecondary education system. 

The department now has 25 newly trained Apprenticeship Specialists, located 

statewide in our Alaska Job Centers, who link with career guides in Alaska secondary schools. They are helping provide a full line of resources such as the Alaska 

Career Ready program, employer incentives and assessments for apprentices. 

The Alaska Youth First Initiative, operated by Alaska Department of Labor and 

Workforce Development with State General Funds, is a strategic effort to prepare 

youth and young adults up to age 24 to be job ready. This is a great example of 

how we can put people to work when government, industry and education create 

unique partnerships to accomplish our mutual goal—achieving workforce excellence. 

Youth First provides career guides across the State, including eight that travel 

to rural communities and schools throughout their regions. Career Guides work 

with youth and young adults to create interest and provide support in learning 

about the job market, researching occupations, and applying for jobs and training 

programs in high demand industries. 

The guides are successful because they establish a working relationship with the 

schools, Native organizations, community service agencies and employers in their 

communities. Career Guides help youth register for the online systems AKCIS and 

ALEXsys. They also assist with the application process for apprenticeship programs, 

employment, job shadows, internships, vocational training programs and more. 

Career guides at the Alaska Department of Labor’s Youth Hiring Center in Anchorage invited 71 seniors in good standing to a late spring hiring event that is part 

of the Job Club. The Club is a partnership with the department’s career guides, 

members of the construction industry, the Anchorage Home Builders Association 

and the Associated Builders and Contractors Inc. To be in good standing, seniors 

have to sign up to join the club and they are required to attend two employability 

workshops that includes resume writing and other job-seeker skills, and register in 

Labor’s ALEXsys—Alaska’s Job Bank online. 

Of the 71 students, 47 are now working in construction-related positions, 7 are 

going into the military in construction-related fields such as combat engineer and 

welder, 3 are in registered apprenticeship programs, 3 are continuing their education at university and AVTEC, and 4 are working in other fields. Career guides 

worked with the remaining students to place them in construction industry jobs 

when they turned 18. 

Another Youth First program provides teacher externships—a program in which 

our teachers are finding there’s a lot to learn about what skills our students will 

need to be a successful part of Alaska’s workforce. Overall, 49 teachers completed 

externships in three target industries including healthcare, construction and resource development—with an impact on more than 2,000 students. 

A partnership with industry created the Alaska Construction Academy. More than 

2,300 middle and high school students, along with 320 adults, are learning how to 

build new skills—such as carpentry, plumbing, electrical, welding and drywall finishing. Begun as a pilot program in Anchorage to attract and train young people 

and adults to find jobs in the Alaska construction industry, the academies are now 

in the Kenai Peninsula, Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan and Mat-Su. Additional 

academies will be created throughout the rest of the State. Graduates will help fill 

the 1,000 construction jobs that are needed annually. 

Significantly, the Denali Commission has become a vital partner in extending the 

Denali Training Fund to youth workforce preparation programs in rural Alaska. 

Last summer, 32 high-school students attended the Galena and Kotzebue Summer 

Health Career Academy. Through the joint program with the department’s Denali 

Training Fund Youth Program, they earned six credits at the University of Alaska 

Fairbanks and received an Emergency Trauma Technician Training Certificate. Additional partners in this program were the U.S. Department of Labor, the Alaska 

Department of Education and Early Development and the Tanana Chiefs Conference. 

We are partnering with other State agencies, for example creating the Alaska Career Ready program with the Department of Education and Early Development. The 

program is available to employers, students and workers to help assess and prepare 

49 

them for jobs. Employers can send current or prospective employees to any Alaska 

Job Center to take an assessment that provides a snapshot of current skills. After 

taking the assessment, students and workers can attain certification. 

The department is beginning to coordinate the efforts of the Regional Training 

Centers in Alaska, including the department’s Alaska Vocational Technical Center 

(AVTEC) so they can deliver services more efficiently, helping to address the highest 

rates of unemployment that exist in rural Alaska, where many of the centers are 

located. 

Beginning January 1, education tax credits, which cover contributions up to $150,000, will be extended to include secondary school vocational programs and 

state-operated vocational and technical schools in Alaska. The credit had been only 

for contributions to 2- and 4-year colleges and universities. The credit can now be 

used against additional taxes: insurance, corporate income, oil and producer, oil and 

gas property, mining license, fisheries business or fishery resource landing. However, not all vocational and technical schools in Alaska are state-operated, thus they 

are not eligible to benefit from this program. 

Our Workforce Investment Board is the primary policymaking board for workforce 

development in Alaska. Citizens from all across Alaska serve on the board, representing many different organizations and industries. AWIB is leading a State initiative to create career pathways in vocational education programs, working with 

business and education consortia to establish and implement standards for Alaska 

training programs. 

The department will continue to work toward increasing awareness of job and 

training opportunities—creating tomorrow’s workforce. That includes paying attention to today’s students by expanding career and technical education—which is part 

of our AGIA training plan—in partnership with the Department of Education and 

Early Development. 

Much of the successes the department has achieved would not have occurred without the support of the Federal Government and the active engagement of our congressional delegation to secure funds for workforce development targeting our youth. 

Many of our new state-funded initiatives were initiated thanks to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Federal workforce innovation grants. 

Much work remains to be done and we hope to continue our dialogue with you 

and the rest of our congressional delegation as the department seeks continued support for Alaska’s workforce development initiatives. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Greg. 

Let’s, next, go to Mr. Michael Andrews, who is with the Alaska 

Works Partnership. 

Mr. Andrews. 

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL ANDREWS, DIRECTOR, ALASKA 

WORKS PARTNERSHIP, INC., ANCHORAGE, AK 

Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. It’s a pleasure to 

be here today, particularly with this distinguished panel and on 

this very, very critical topic. 

I’ve been asked to bring testimony specifically regarding the experiences of Alaska’s union training programs in the K–12 and 

postsecondary education systems, and to offer some recommendations from these experiences to help improve the high school completion rate and advance Alaska’s youth into and through postsecondary technical training or college. 

Alaska’s trade unions have more than 50 years of experience 

working directly with schools to attract students to trade apprenticeship. Many years ago, educators, trade unions, employers, and 

the Federal Government agreed that completing high school should 

be the basic requirement for even applying to an apprenticeship 

program. Today, there are more than 800 employers in the union 

construction training industry system who are anxiously waiting 

for new graduates to enter their apprenticeship programs. 

The high school dropout rate significantly impacts the construction industry. Alaska’s high schools are the main supply of new apVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00053 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
50 

prentices. Fewer high school graduates means fewer new workers 

ready to learn trade skills. As a result, apprenticeship programs 

today are competing harder than ever with other industries, postsecondary technical schools, colleges, universities, and the military 

for those graduates. 

We have a pipeline to build, a natural-gas pipeline to build, and 

we need high school graduates who can learn those skills to do that 

work. 

The good news is that unions and their apprenticeship programs, 

industry associations, school districts, the University of Alaska, 

and others are finding many new ways to encourage students to 

stay in school and go into pathways that include postsecondary degrees and certifications. 

I’d like to just mention two important career initiatives that I did 

submit as part of my written testimony. Greg Cashen mentioned 

the Alaska Construction Academies. These have been very successful models, in terms of getting community partnerships with school 

districts and industry and others to attract, as he mentioned, over 

2,300 students right now, into elective programs after school, because of their great interest in the construction industry and getting ready for the pipeline. 

Another, of course, that was mentioned, was the Denali Commission and their Rural Youth Initiatives. Every year, we’re offered 

the opportunity to provide rural construction academies at regional 

learning centers for students in the Bethel, King Salmon, and St. 

Mary’s/Nome delta areas, for example. This year we concentrated 

on developing youth as pipeline welders’ helpers, so they can follow 

a pathway into trade apprenticeship, learn some basic skills, so 

they can go to work on the North Slope. 

Just last week, we graduated 121 apprentices in our annual pipeline construction program. They’re on their way to the North Slope, 

because the jobs are—there’s many, many jobs in demand up there 

now. We know there’s great pathways for rural and urban students 

to get engaged. 

I’d like to just quickly move to what I think are some suggestions 

that may be helpful to you and your committee. 

Now, one thing—and I believe the research came from the National Center for Dropout Prevention—was that it came to me that 

there is a great wealth of research out there that points out that 

in States or in school districts where there are strong vocational 

education career technical programs, where students can take two 

or more classes, let’s say, in health or in construction or other 

areas—they’re going to have higher high school completion rates 

than their counterparts who don’t take vocational education. In 

fact, there’s research that shows, in some school districts where 

there are strong vocational career and technical education programs, that their graduation completion rates have risen 10 percent. If we look at Alaska, at 65-or-so percent, the national rate at 

75 percent, it’s always been my view that we could go from the bottom to the top in short order if we really got back into concentrating more on offering career and technical education inside the 

high schools. It would improve math scores, it would improve 

science scores, it would help students move on to postsecondary 

education and advance through college. There’s nothing new under 

51 

the sun. I think we need to go back and look at some of those ways, 

because students learn differently, and they—a lot of times, the 

shop class, so to speak, is one of the reasons they would go to 

school and stay in school. 

My recommendation is also that—it was mentioned earlier—the 

Carl Perkins Act is great, but it’s burdensome, it’s meager, it 

doesn’t really meet the needs in Alaska for many school districts. 

We get calls from small school districts who are basically saying, 

‘‘We’re ignoring our $15,000 Carl Perkins grant, and we’d like to 

work with you and the Denali Commission on something more substantive.’’ I mean, I’ve been to school districts where the only vocational education is basically office technology online. There needs 

to be more done. 

I would suggest that possibly something new that would offer 

dedicated, flexible funding for high schools who have partnerships 

with industry, postsecondary, and college for career paths, and are 

vital careers that are needed for our national and our State economy. Again, something not quite Carl Perkins, but something that 

others can really use. 

I would also make a pitch that we do need to help the U.S. Department of Labor expand apprenticeship and school to apprenticeship and other initiatives. I served for 2 years on the Federal Committee for Registered Apprenticeship, years ago, and there were basically no resources, there was no power, because it was just an advisory group. We strongly encouraged the Department to try to find 

more resources so that every State could create initiatives that 

reached deeper into the schools and prepared students earlier for 

some of the vital careers needed in the trades and technical occupations. 

I really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you today and 

offer what I can. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Andrews follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHAEL ANDREWS

The Honorable Senator Murkowski & committee members, I have been asked to 

bring testimony specifically regarding the experiences of Alaska Union training programs in K–12 and postsecondary education, and to offer some recommendations 

from these experiences to help improve the high school completion rate and advance 

Alaska’s youth into and through postsecondary technical training or college. 

Alaska Works Partnership, Inc. was formed in 1997 as a not-for-profit by Alaska’s 

Construction Trade Unions and their Joint Administered Apprenticeship and Training Trusts, commonly referred to as JATC’s. Alaska Works was created to attract 

and prepare Alaskan’s for jobs and careers in construction. Our more than 10 years 

of experience of reaching out to schools and students, employers and industry associations, Alaska Native organizations and others to build that workforce do provide 

some insights for increasing the retention of Alaskans students in life-long learning 

from K–16. 

Alaska’s trade unions have more than 50 years of experience working in schools 

to attract students to trade apprenticeship and career training. Once a student completes high school they have met the 1st requirement for applying to these coveted 

and highly competitive positions. 

Alaska’s trade union apprenticeship programs, collectively, are the States largest 

private-funded industry training partnership in Alaska. Over the past decade, union 

members and employers have invested more than $60 million in training Alaskans. 

This year their apprenticeship programs will invest more than $10 million for industry training. No other industry has invested as much or worked as long to develop 

sustainable partnerships with secondary and postsecondary education in Alaska. 

52 

There are 31 Joint Administered Apprenticeship and Training Trusts operating in 

the State and they teach over 20 specific construction crafts and trade skills. There 

are more than 800 employers contributing funds to the system for every hour a 

union member works. JATCs own and operate 14 fully staffed trade schools where 

course-related instruction takes place and are building one new training center a 

year for the past 5 years to meet the ever growing needs of their programs. 

Their combined capital assets in facilities and training equipment are estimated 

at over $30 million. Today they train more than 2,000 registered apprentices, which 

is more than 80 percent of active apprentices registered in the State. These schools 

turn out more than 95 percent of the Alaska journeymen certified by the U.S. Department of Labor and have for many decades. 

The high school drop-out rate significantly impacts the construction industry, particularly as it continues to aggressively recruit new workers to meet growing job demand, to replace retiring skilled workers, and to replace trades workers advancing 

into supervisory and management positions. Adding to the skills gap, currently 80 

percent of those employed in Alaska’s construction industry are non-residents who 

come here to earn the high wages. We’d like to see more of Alaska’s high school 

graduates get those jobs. 

The drop-out challenge strikes at the very core of a strong construction industry 

because Alaska’s high schools are the main provider of workers for the supply chain. 

Many years ago educators and trade unions and the Federal Government agreed 

that completing high school should be a basic requirement for applying to a JointAdministered apprenticeship program. Educators, unions and employers agreed setting graduation as the bar would keep more young people in school and better prepare them for success after school. 

The reduced supply of talent ready to learn a trade skill means the construction 

industry must compete harder with other industries, postsecondary technical institutions, colleges and universities, and the military for future workers. Supplying a 

new construction workforce to meet increasing job demand to build Alaska and build 

the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline is a daunting challenge. But we are finding new 

ways to turn that around and keep kids in school by getting them into vocational 

training. I am providing two documents to the committee which help further explain 

what I mean about those new methods. 

I am confident today that through the great relationships established by and between labor and education at all levels, particularly with the university of Alaska 

and School Districts, we can make a difference. These new initiatives and expanding 

industry education and labor partnerships have only been possible through investments by the Federal and State government, which is explained in the documents 

I have provided. 

One thing is evident. Students need education that is relevant, flexible and career-oriented. We need to start vocational and career education activities earlier in 

the education process. Students de-select careers at an early age. They need to have 

some career awareness and career activities to keep them informed about the jobs 

educators are preparing them for. 

We need to bring more applied math and technical reading into every classroom. 

We did in the old days through vocational education and co-operative learning. This 

will improve math and science scores and help students who learn in different ways 

get the knowledge they need to advance. For many, it will become a reason they 

go to school. 

We need to offer public secondary and postsecondary schools flexible and dedicated long-term funding specifically for career and technical training in conjunction 

with industry partners. Somewhat like Carl Perkins but not as cumbersome, costly 

to the schools, or meager from the source. These should be grants that align secondary and postsecondary credit with industry certificates and college degrees, and 

put students in jobs and careers vital to the regional economies. 

I commend to the committee, the Alaska Construction Academies, as explained in 

one document before you, the partnerships and results of working with Alaska’s 

high schools as one program that can bring insights for success in other areas. 

I hope my comments have been helpful. I look forward to the opportunity to participate with the panel in this important discussion. And I thank you for providing 

me an opportunity to testify. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mike. 

Let’s, next, go to Tina Michels-Hansen, at Cook Inlet Tribal 

Council. 

Welcome. 

53 

STATEMENT OF TINA MICHELS-HANSEN, ELEMENTARY AND 

MIDDLE SCHOOL PROGRAM MANAGER, COOK INLET TRIBAL 

COUNCIL, ANCHORAGE, AK 

Ms. MICHELS-HANSEN. Good morning, Senator. Thank you for the 

opportunity for me to be here on behalf of Cook Inlet Tribal Council. It’s an honor to be here with you all. 

My grandparents are Bill Hoogendorn, a retired Dutch gold 

miner, and Lena Iutok, an Inupiat elder of Nome, AK, which is the 

same place that I was born and raised. I’m here today to share my 

personal and professional thoughts on the state of improvements 

for Native education within our State. 

I am a product of both small and rural schools and a small college. I have come to value the need for community-based education. 

As Native people, we have an inherent sense of community. It 

does, after all, take a village to raise a child. Yet, our children 

today are faced with mainstream pressure to live in only one world, 

rather than two, a world of glamour and glitz that promises everything based on looks and what a person owns, rather than what 

they do, know, or do for others. 

Communities don’t fight back against this pressure. They, too, 

are trapped in trying to keep up with the Joneses. Here, we see 

students losing their connection to their roots, that which defines 

their sense of self and their value in their community. 

We’ve all seen the data. Our schools and communities are failing 

our Native students at frightening rates. Kids would rather drop 

out than feel like failures or be disengaged at school. As long as 

they have material items, they still feel like they can be a success. 

This is not a Native or a tribe’s problem, this is a community problem, rural or urban, and it’s everyone’s problem to resolve. 

When I grew up, I was among the top of my class, academically. 

I was athletic, involved in church, arts, cultural activities, and student government of a school of 200. Overnight, due to circumstances beyond my teenage control, my understanding of place 

and sense of self would change forever. I had to move to Fairbanks 

for my senior year of high school. There my school had nearly 2,000 

students. My comfort zone of school and notions of success were 

now replaced by this frightening institution of learning, where I 

was no longer a person with a name, but a number. I remember 

thinking, ‘‘How is it possible for a student to even feel invisible? 

Don’t teachers see me? ’’ In fact, they never did. 

For 3 months, I didn’t even know where my locker was. I attended only two classes, and didn’t care that it was 40-below outside. I was willing to brave the cold and endure frostbite than feel 

like I was invisible. 

After one semester, I couldn’t handle it any more and returned 

home. Though this experience was brief, it has stayed with me for 

all of these years. 

I then spent 2 years failing at UAA, with no support; Again, feeling invisible and having experienced prejudice for the first time in 

my life. 

The story does not end with me. There are kids every day who 

walk into our schools, who feel invisible, like I did. No one should 

ever have to feel so dispirited. Our schools have become institutions that are underfunded, classes are overcrowded with maniacal 

54 

focus on high-stakes testing and led by often ill-prepared teachers, 

many who lack thorough multicultural training or who feel they 

simply do not have enough time to be compassionate. They have 

become factories, and their products lack many of the basic skills 

for today’s markets and industries, factories that are often 

unapproachable by parents, factories that communities passively 

accept. 

I believe that the faults of our schools today do not solely lie with 

one person or entity; rather, the fault is all of ours. We all are failing our kids, and we should be ashamed of ourselves. 

Those students who experience successes are not celebrated adequately by the community and are often overshadowed by thousands. They, too, need to be embraced and supported for their continued success, not sent out to sea like a lonesome fish, and simply 

forgotten. We need to ask our successful students, What is it that 

worked for them? 

I also believe it is possible for communities to be involved in creating great places to learn. I’ve seen it happen when all stakeholders unite with intention and respect. It takes a plan, people 

willing to put their necks out on the line, tireless efforts to outreach to the community, continuous self-reflection, sharing best 

practices, building partnerships with all stakeholders and key partners, nurturing them, day after day after day, raising the bar, but 

staying rooted in community values—compassion, patience—and, of 

course, sustainable funding. It can happen, it should happen. We 

cannot afford to wait any longer. 

Very quickly, my time at CITC has been enriched by the opportunities to work with many brilliant and compassionate people. 

Thanks to the Alaska Native Educational Equity funding, we can 

partner daily with Anchorage School District, UAA’s ANSEP Program—the Alaska Native Science and Engineering Program—and 

other various people and entities. Building and nurturing assets 

within our Native youth is the foundation for which our department is built upon. We intentionalize our efforts to create safe, 

positive, culturally focused learning environments for nearly 1,000 

Native students across 10 local K–12 schools. It is in these classrooms where students have the opportunities to reconnect with 

their roots, reaffirm their sense of self as a young Native person, 

and experience successes, both great and small. 

For some of our students, they have been consistently supported 

by a program, and they’re college-bound and eager. Others, their 

greatest achievement for the day may be that they made it to 

school. Despite their peaks and valleys, we value every single one 

of them equally. 

We have urban-raised students and rural-raised students, with 

very different life experiences, yet one common identity. Often it’s 

when the kids work together that the magic happens. They mentor 

one another in ways that few textbooks could grasp. We have 

smaller class sizes and stronger student-to-teacher ratios. We meet 

the students where they are academically when they walk through 

our classroom doors, utilize culturally relevant materials and methodology, strive to instill a love of lifelong learning by providing experiential learning opportunities for students, alternative ways of 

assessing them, include deliberate efforts to provide youth with the 

55 

transition skills they need to navigate life and school, tirelessly encourage and provide opportunities for parental involvement, keep 

traditional Alaska Native values central, encourage stewardship, 

maintain high standards, topped with patience and a whole lot of 

compassion. 

Our mission has been to work in partnership with our people to 

help them achieve their endless potential—not a handout; rather, 

a hand-up. It’s about reciprocity. We invest in our Native people so 

they, too, can continue to invest in future generations. At CITC, we 

partner with Anchorage School District in a way that is often enviable to Lower 48 tribal entities. Our partnership is strong, yet we 

are grant-driven. 

CITC tries to do what we can for our Native students, but there 

is only so much even we can do. Creating successful schools and 

successful students is possible, but it’s not just one person’s responsibility, again. It’s—or one neighborhood’s responsibility, or one 

tribal entity’s responsibility—it’s a community responsibility. 

Mine is only one Native perspective, but I am humbled by the 

opportunity to share my story and my thoughts with you today. We 

look forward, at CITC, to continue to work with others as a community to make our communities and schools be the deserving 

places for our kids, where kids can grow up to be strong, capable, 

caring, optimistic, and prepared for their futures. 

I also need to mention that the other day, Dr. Walter Sobilov 

celebrated his 100th birthday, and I think it’s absolutely important 

to mention that he is a tremendous example to us all, that it is possible to exist and live in two very different cultural worlds, but it 

takes a community of people to encourage you and to support you, 

and that it is possible. 

Quyana. 

[Applause.] 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Michels-Hansen follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TINA MICHELS-HANSEN

Good morning, Senator Murkowski. Thank you for the opportunity to be here 

today, as it is an honor. As stated, my name is Tina Michels-Hansen. My grandparents are Bill Hoogendorn, a retired Dutch gold miner, and Lena Iutok, an 

Inupiat elder, of Nome, AK—the same place I was born and raised. I am here today 

to share both my personal and professional thoughts on the state of, and improvements for, Native education in Alaska. 

A product of both small and rural schools and college, I have come to value the 

need for community-based education. As Native people, there we have an inherent 

sense of community, it does after all take a village to raise a child. Yet our children 

today are faced with mainstream pressure to live in only one world, rather than 

two. A world of glamour and glitz that promises everything based on looks and what 

a person owns, rather than what they know or do for others. Communities don’t 

fight back against this pressure, they too are trapped in trying to keep up with the 

Joneses. Here we see students losing their connection to their roots . . . that which 

defines their sense of ‘‘self,’’ and value in their communities. 

We have all seen the data. Our schools and communities are failing our Native 

students at frightening rates. Kids would rather drop out than feel like failures or 

be disengaged at school. As long as they have material items they still feel like they 

can be a success. This is not a ‘‘Native’’ or a tribe’s problem, this is a community 

problem, rural or urban, and it’s everyone’s problem to resolve. 

When I grew up I was among the top in my class academically. I was athletic, 

involved in church, art, cultural activities and student government in a school of 

200. Overnight, due to circumstances beyond my teenage control, my understanding 

of ‘‘place’’ and sense of ‘‘self ’’ would change me forever. I had to move to Fairbanks 

my senior year of high school. 

56 

In Fairbanks, my high school had nearly 2,000 students. My comfort zone of 

school and notions of success were now replaced by this frightening institution of 

learning where I was no longer a person with a name, but a number. I remember 

thinking, ‘‘how is it possible for a student to feel invisible? Don’t teachers see me? ’’ 

But they didn’t. 

For 3 months I didn’t even know where my locker was. I attended only two classes 

and didn’t care that it was ¥40° outside, I was willing to brave the cold and endure 

frostbite than feel like I was invisible. After one semester I couldn’t handle it anymore and returned home. Though this experience was brief, it has stayed with me 

all these years. I then spent 2 years failing at UAA with no support. Again, feeling 

invisible and having experienced prejudice for the first time in my life. 

This story doesn’t end with me, there are kids every day who walk into our 

schools who feel invisible like I did. No one should ever have to feel so dispirited. 

Our schools have become institutions that are underfunded; classes are overcrowded; with a maniacal focus on high stakes testing; and led by often ill-prepared 

teachers, many who lack thorough multicultural training, or feel they don’t have 

enough time to be compassionate. They have become factories and their products 

lack many of the basic skills for today’s markets and industries. Factories that are 

often unapproachable by parents. Factories that communities passively accept. 

I believe that the faults of our schools today do not solely lay with one person 

or entity, rather the fault is all of ours. We all are failing our kids and we should 

be ashamed. Those students who are experiencing success are not celebrated adequately by the community and are often overshadowed by the thousands. They too 

need to be embraced and supported for continued success, not sent out to sea on 

their own like fish and simply forgotten about. We need to ask our successful students, What is it that worked for them? 

I also believe that it is possible for communities to be involved in creating great 

places to learn. I’ve seen it happen when all stakeholders unite with intention and 

respect. It takes a plan, people willing to put their necks out on the line, tireless 

efforts to outreach to the community, continuous self-reflection, sharing best practices, building partnerships with all stakeholders and key partners, nurturing them 

day after day, raising the bar but staying rooted in community values, compassion, 

patience, and of course sustainable funding. It can happen, it should happen, and 

we cannot afford to wait any longer. 

My time at CITC has been enriched by the opportunities to work with many brilliant and compassionate educators. Thanks to the Alaska Native Educational Equity 

funding, daily we partner with the Anchorage School District (ASD), UAA’s Alaska 

Native Science & Engineering Program (ANSEP), and other various people and entities. Building and nurturing ASSETS within our Native youth is the foundation of 

which our department is built upon. 

We intentionalize our efforts to create safe, positive, and culturally focused learning environments for our nearly 1,000 Native students across 10 K–12 local schools. 

It is in these classrooms where students have the opportunities to reconnect with 

their roots, reaffirm their sense of ‘‘self,’’ as a young Native person, and experience 

successes both great and small. For some of our students they have been consistently supported by our program and are college bound and eager—others, their 

greatest achievement for the day may be that they made it to school. Despite their 

peaks and valleys, we value every one of them equally. 

We have urban-raised students and rural-raised students with very different life 

experiences but a common identity. Often it’s when the kids work together that the 

magic happens. They mentor one another in ways that few textbooks could grasp. 

We have smaller class sizes and stronger student-to-teacher ratios. We meet the 

students where they are academically when they walk through our classroom doors; 

utilize culturally relevant materials and methodology; strive to instill a love of life 

long learning by providing experiential learning opportunities for students and alternative ways of assessing student success; include deliberate efforts to provide 

youth with the transition skills needed to navigate school and life; tirelessly encourage and provide opportunities for parental involvement; keep traditional Alaskan 

Native values central; encourage stewardship; maintain high standards, topped with 

patience and a whole lot of compassion. 

Our mission has been to work in partnership with Our people to help them 

achieve their endless potential. Not a hand out, rather a hand up. It’s about reciprocity. We invest in Our Native people so they too can continue to invest in future 

generations. At CITC we partner with the Anchorage School District in a way that 

is often enviable to lower 48 tribal entities. Our partnership is strong, yet we are 

grant-driven. 

CITC tries to do what we can for our Native students but there is only so much 

even we can do. Creating successful school and successful students is possible, but 

57 

it’s not just one person’s responsibility, one neighborhood’s responsibility, or one 

tribal entities’ responsibility, it’s a community responsibility. 

I would be remiss if I did not take a moment to recognize Dr. Walter Soboleff who 

recently celebrated his 100th birthday. He is a wonderful example that Native students/people can exist in two very different cultural worlds and be successful, but 

it takes encouragement and community. 

Mine is only one Native perspective. Yet I am humbled by the opportunity to 

share my story and my thoughts with you today. I look forward to working with 

others, as does CITC, as a community, to make our communities and schools be the 

deserving places for our kids—where kids can grow up to be strong, capable, caring, 

optimistic and prepared for their futures. 

Quyana. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Tina. Your comments are most 

eloquent, most appreciated, not only for your personal perspective, 

but for reminding us that we do have some successes to look to, 

and we must always be asking, What is it that makes us successful? Your story was most appreciated, and your testimony very 

much appreciated. 

Our final participant on the panel today is Mr. Tom Morgan, who 

is the State director of Communities in Schools. 

STATEMENT OF TOM MORGAN, STATE DIRECTOR, 

COMMUNITIES IN SCHOOLS OF ALASKA, INC., ANCHORAGE, AK 

Mr. MORGAN. Thank you, Senator. 

I have prepared remarks, as well, which, if you know me, is a 

good idea; it’ll keep us on time and on schedule. 

[Laughter.] 

I feel like I should really toss these away, because I started to 

say that—how honored I was to be with you, and I mean that; but, 

my goodness, I’m humbled to be here, because we’re truly blessed 

to have good people doing good things to help us attack what really 

is an epidemic in the dropouts. I thank you, but I will continue 

with the prepared remarks. 

[Laughter.] 

Again, Karen McCarthy, I want to thank you for your help. You 

told me not to single you out, but I didn’t listen to you, because 

you make this happen, and I know that the Senator appreciates 

what you do, and makes your job easier; and for that, we thank 

you. 

Senator Murkowski, it’s with great respect that I recognize your 

outstanding leadership, not only to the Nation, but to our great 

State of Alaska. Thank you for being here. 

I’m truly pleased to be here today to represent Communities in 

Schools of Alaska and our role of making a positive difference in 

the dropout epidemic. 

I know that you all share the concern about the dropout crisis, 

a topic that touches all Alaskans, particularly Alaska Native students, at a disproportionally higher rate. 

CIS offers an integrated student support delivery system that 

provides schools and prevention services and individual students 

with case management individual services. Like glue, we mobilize 

and connect resources with schools, better enabling students to 

stick with it and stay in school. 

As a statewide network in dropout prevention, we are committed 

to success through collaboration. Let me say that again. We are 

58 

committed to success through collaboration. That’s the only way 

we’re going to get this job done. 

Now, how do we know that we are helping kids learn, stay in 

school, and prepare for life? We evaluate our efforts by tracking indicators of student success: attendance, stay-in-school rates, improved academic performance, and improved behavior. 

Since our inception, we have worked with thousands of students 

at risk of dropping out. The majority of those students have stayed 

in school and improved their attendance, behavior, and academic 

achievement. 

Preliminary results from the Communities in Schools’ National 

Evaluation initiative, an independent third-party evaluation, indicated that the CIS model does make a positive difference in decreasing the dropout rate, increasing the graduation rate, and improving student achievement. These results are based on the indepth analysis of 1,766 CIS schools and comparative analysis of 

outcomes from more than 1,200 CIS and non-CIS comparison 

schools over a 3-year period. That’s the last time I’ll throw numbers at you. 

We are not another social service agency. We broker and mobilize, in an effective and coordinated way, existing—say again—existing community services through the schools, saving valuable dollars while improving efficiencies of delivery of services to children 

and youth. 

Just in the 2007–2008 school year, in just five affiliates—Anchorage, Bethel, Juneau, Mat-Su, and Nome—our minimum leverage 

services and resources were estimated in excess of $1.5 million. Inkind contributions and revenue from other sources, just in the past 

year, were approximately $900,000. The amount of dollars to support is very small when compared to the successful outcomes it provides and the resources we’re able to leverage. 

Through school-based affiliate programs and statewide initiatives, CIS Alaska is creating a network of social services, businesses, community resources, and volunteers that work together to 

break down barriers, to ensure that even the most vulnerable of 

our children have access to these basic and core needs. 

Our statewide initiatives create opportunities in conjunction with 

Department of Labor, an active distance learning career exploration program targeted at rural youth, and the Dolly Parton 

Imagination Library and Early Literacy Program for Children 

Birth to Five are being well received. 

Our dream, our call to action, is to formulate support to implement the CIS model and provide a dropout prevention specialist, a 

resource specialist perhaps, a graduation coach, a CIS coordinator—it doesn’t matter, the name—the challenge is to get that resource person in every school in Alaska, where its children’s needs 

can be met to help keep them in school and teachers are free to 

teach. 

We believe youth do not drop out of school necessarily because 

of the school. We believe, and research supports, youth drop out 

due to pressures outside of the school. Educators cannot and should 

not be expected to have knowledge of the many community resources available to help them and help those students stay in 

school. That is where CIS comes in. As one principal told me, ‘‘You 

59 

allow me and my teachers to teach. We need to clone the CIS coordinator.’’ 

As stated earlier, like glue, we mobilize and connect resources 

with schools, better enabling students to stick with it and stay in 

school. 

Support by the Federal and the State government will allow us 

to expand our existing sites and offer the opportunity for many 

more communities, especially rural communities, the ability to experience the positive outcomes that we can provide for you. 

We have a program that has proven success in preventing dropouts. For every dollar invested through building collaboration, 

brokering services, and leveraging community assets, CIS of Alaska 

adds value to build return on investment. 

The paid political announcement: For a more in-depth look, 

please check our Web site at CISAlaska.org. 

In closing, Senator Murkowski, you know, dollar for dollar, CIS 

of Alaska offers the right investment in our children’s future. We 

look forward to partnering with you, doing what we do best: connecting the dots, coordinating and leveraging the existing resources 

to keep youth in school, and preparing them to succeed in life. 

Thank you, again, for allowing me to be here today. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Morgan follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF TOM MORGAN

Good morning Senator Murkowski and staff. I am honored to be here today on 

behalf of Alaska’s young people. It is with great respect, Senator Murkowski, that 

I extend my deep appreciation of and support for your outstanding leadership to our 

great State, and our Nation. 

I. STATEMENT OF NEED/DROPOUT PROBLEM DEFINITION

I am truly pleased to be here today to represent Communities In Schools (CIS) 

of Alaska and our role in making a positive difference in the dropout epidemic. National research has shown that students who do not finish high school earn less, 

pay less tax, rely more on public health, are more involved in the justice system, 

and are more likely to use the welfare system. I know that you all share the concern 

about the dropout crisis, a topic that touches all Alaskans, particularly Alaska Native students at a disproportionally higher rate. 

II. OUR SOLUTION/OUR MODEL & RESULTS

CIS of Alaska strives to work closely with school districts around the State to address the alarmingly high rate of high school dropouts. We offer an integrated student support delivery system; providing schools with prevention services and individual students with case management and intervention services. Like glue, we mobilize and connect resources with schools, better enabling students to ‘‘stick with it’’ 

and stay in school. As a statewide network in dropout prevention, we are committed 

to success through collaboration. 

How do we know that we are helping kids learn, stay in school, and prepare for 

life? We evaluate our efforts by tracking indicators of student success like: attendance and stay-in-school rates, improved academic performance and improved behavior to determine the impact of our programs. Since our inception, we have worked 

with thousands of students at risk to dropping out; the majority of those students 

have stayed in school and improved their attendance, behavior and academic 

achievement. In the last 3 years, Communities In Schools has helped to put developmentally appropriate books directly in the hands of thousands of children and families across the State. (For a more in-depth look at CIS of Alaska programs and initiatives, please visit www.cisalaska.org) 

III. PROGRAM SPECIFIC INFORMATION

CIS of Alaska is part of the nationwide network of Communities in Schools. Nationally, CIS is the largest provider of integrated student services in the country 

60 

and has an opportunity to both serve 1.2 million students with high quality services, 

as well as make the policy case for including integrated student services as a fundamental part of the solution to lowering dropout rates and improving graduation 

rates in America. Preliminary results from the Communities In Schools National 

Evaluation initiative (an independent, third-party evaluation) indicated that the CIS 

model does make a positive difference in: 

• decreasing the dropout rate, 

• increasing the graduation rate (specifically, the ‘‘on-time’’ graduation rate, 

meaning within the traditional 4-year schedule) and, 

• improving student achievement [Generally speaking, the more ‘‘high implementing’’ the school site (meaning incorporating all aspects of the CIS model in a 

mid to high degree at the school site), the higher the outcomes.] 

These results are based on an in-depth analysis of 1,766 CIS schools and comparative analysis of outcomes for more than 1,200 CIS and non-CIS comparison 

schools over a 3-year period. The CIS National Evaluation concludes that: 

• Among dropout prevention programs using scientifically based evidence, the 

CIS Model is one of a very few in the United States proven to keep students in 

school and is the only dropout prevention program in the Nation with scientifically 

based evidence to prove that it increases graduation rates. 

• When implemented with high fidelity, the CIS Model results in a higher percentage of students reaching proficiency in fourth- and eighth-grade reading and 

math. 

• Effective implementation of the CIS Model correlates more strongly with positive school-level outcomes (i.e., dropout and graduation rates, achievement, etc.) 

than does the uncoordinated provision of service alone, resulting in notable improvements of school-level outcomes in the context of the CIS Model. 

The CIS National Evaluation is being conducted by ICF International, known for 

its high standards of rigor and comprehensive research designs. (Source: ‘‘CIS National Evaluation Policy—Communities In Schools and the Model of Integrated Student Services: A Proven Solution to America’s Dropout Epidemic.’’ For further information on this report, view it on the Web site at www.cisalaska.org, under What 

We Do/Results.) 

Organized in 2003 to serve at-risk students in rural Alaska, CIS of Alaska is 

founded on the recognition that most students who drop out of school are dealing 

with a variety of obstacles that present barriers to their education, and that only 

a few of these are school-related. Most stem from overarching family and community 

issues like poverty, alcohol and drugs and violence. We recognize that numerous 

public and private services already exist in our communities to help children and 

their families overcome these obstacles. However, given the difficulty of deciphering 

the maze of resources available, and, the time and transportation necessary to reach 

them, services are nearly inaccessible for those children and families who need them 

most. 

We are not another social service agency. We broker and mobilize in an effective 

and coordinated way, EXISTING community services through the schools. Through 

school-based affiliate programs and statewide initiatives, CIS of Alaska is creating 

a network of social services, businesses, community resources and volunteers that 

work together to break down barriers to ensure even the most vulnerable of our 

children have access to these basics and core needs. 

CIS of Alaska also provides a cutting-edge, distance learning Career Exploration 

Opportunities (CEO) program (aligned with State Educational Standards), targeted 

at rural high school students. CEO is a blended learning program, combining 

videoconferencing and Internet connectivity. Alaskan business executives interact 

with students face to face via the videoconference twice each month, providing students with information regarding careers and preparation beyond their communities. Students are focused on the 16 High Needs Alaskan Career Clusters including resource development (oil industry), construction trades, technology, health service and others. They learn about opportunities, career preparation and application/ 

interviewing skills. Students are also responsible for job shadows, career projects 

and presentations and developing leadership skills. 

Additionally, CIS of Alaska works in a coordinated effort with Best Beginnings 

and partners with the Dollywood Foundation to facilitate replication of Dolly 

Parton’s Imagination Library to interested communities statewide. [Best Beginnings 

has evolved from the Alaska Ready to Read; Ready to Learn Task Force.] As you 

may know, the Imagination Library Program is an early literacy program that puts 

quality, age-appropriate books directly in the hands of our children ages birth to five 

and their families across the State. 

61 

With CIS of Alaska sites in Bethel, Anchorage, Mat-Su, Nome, and Juneau, we 

are making remarkable progress in positively affecting the high school dropout rate. 

With greater support, evidence demonstrates that this success can be implemented 

across the State. 

Consider the following specific examples of our programs and results. 

Last year, the CIS of Alaska network served 5,279 children/youth. 

• CIS of Bethel is working with the District Court, the community of Bethel and 

its neighboring villages to address tremendous issues with underage drinking. • CIS-Juneau has been operating a very successful care coordinator program that 

provides at-risk students with needed services to help them stay in school. Since the 

inception of the program 2003/2004, we served over 500 students through 2007/ 

2008. Ninety percent of our students are Alaska Native. Of those students, less than 

5 percent dropped out of school. The program works! • CIS of Mat-Su referred to the Mat-Su Day School’s Alternative to Suspension 

(ATS) program. Last year, 31 students were referred to CIS/Mat-Su Day School’s 

Alternative to Suspension (ATS) program due to long-term suspension or expulsions—of those, 27 students enrolled. Of the suspended or expelled students who enrolled, only 2 dropped out. This group of 27 is at very high risk of dropping out of 

school. We were successful in helping them continue their education and worked to 

transition them back to their boundary school. • Reading is fundamental. Dolly Parton’s Imagination Library, an early prevention program to combat illiteracy, started with a pilot program in Nome. The Nome 

elementary principal stated that children were reporting to Kindergarten unprepared, especially in the area of reading. The program quickly spread to Juneau who 

has signed up over 600 children where there are 2,000 additional children eligible 

but lack of funds has slowed signups. Wainwright, Wrangell, Ketchikan and Fairbanks also have active IL programs with Mat-Su, Mt. View, Petersburg and 

Girdwood poised to come on line. Statewide, almost 4,000 children birth to five are 

enrolled, including the First Family’s newest addition, Trig Palin. A recent survey 

(in Juneau) saw the number of parents reading to their children jump from 50 percent to 75 percent in 1 year! The Imagination Library is a proven effective program 

that helps children start school ready to learn. 

The Imagination Library has been adopted by Best Beginnings as a component 

of their early learning program, and CIS of Alaska is excited to be working in alignment with Best Beginning to expand the great work accomplished to date. Tennessee has implemented a statewide Imagination Library initiative through their 

Governor’s Books from Birth Foundation. Results are showing clear improvements 

in the average scores of pre-K and kindergarten children whom are enrolled in the 

Imagination Library, including increases in reading skills, speaking skills, thinking 

skills, and social skills, as compared to the non-enrolled children. Based on results 

to date, the belief is as more children are enrolled in the Imagination Library at 

the earliest possible opportunity (ideally at birth), the abilities gained from participating in the program, already apparent in their 2007 findings, will be ever more 

noticeable. (Source: Impact of Tennessee’s Imagination Library on Pre-K and Kindergarten Students from a Fall 2007 Survey of Teachers Administered by the Tennessee 

Board of Regents.) 

For as little as $30/year per child, we could be making remarkable progress in 

engaging our families to better prepare our children to be ready to learn and be successful in school. 

• CEO (Career Exploration Opportunities) has grown this year to 8 different 

school districts and 12 school sites across the State and has served nearly 400 students (predominantly rural youth) since coming under the umbrella of CIS of Alaska 

in 2006. 

Communities In Schools of Alaska is focused on the priorities of the Federal and 

State Government: Education, Literacy, Graduation, and Career Readiness. CIS of 

Alaska is making a difference. 

IV. HOW THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN HELP

Our dream, our call to action, is to formulate support to implement the CIS model 

and provide a ‘‘drop-out prevention specialist’’ in every school in Alaska; whereas, 

children’s needs can be met to help keep them in school and teachers are free to 

teach and children are present, in a viable State to learn, are motivated to stay in 

school through graduation, and are ready to pursue the immense career opportunities Alaska has to offer them. 

CIS brokers existing services and resources, saving valuable dollars while improving efficiencies of delivery of services to children and youth. While we do not yet 

have numbers for the present year, during the 2007/2008 year, in just five sites, our 

62 

minimum leveraged services and resources estimated $1,476,459. In-kind contributions in revenue from other sources (last year) were approximately $882,000. The 

amount of dollars for support is very small when compared to the successful outcomes it provides and the resources we are able to leverage! 

Support by the Federal (and State) Government will allow us to expand our existing sites and offer the opportunity for many more communities, especially rural 

communities, the ability to experience the positive outcomes we can provide for 

youth. 

We have a program that has proven success in preventing dropouts. For every dollar invested, through building collaboration, brokering services and leveraging community assets, CIS of Alaska adds value to build return on investment. 

Dollar for dollar, CIS of Alaska offers the right investment in our children’s future. We look forward to partnering with you, doing what we do best; connecting 

the dots, coordinating and leveraging existing resources to keep youth in school and 

prepare them to succeed in life. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Tom. Appreciate your leadership there. 

Well, we are scheduled to wrap things up, believe it or not, at 

noon, and it’s almost a quarter of, and we haven’t even gotten to 

the discussion. I’m prepared to stay here all afternoon. I don’t know 

about the rest of you. I don’t know, Carol, how long we have the 

building for, but for those of you who were going to stick to a 

schedule, you can move on out when you need to. I would like to 

go over our time, if that is acceptable with our panelists here. I 

apologize that we ran late, but I didn’t want to cut any of you off. 

I think the information that we’re gathering here today is important, and I appreciate the opportunity to listen to you. 

I’d like to note that we have with us this morning Senator Bettye 

Davis, who has been, long, a leader in education policy in the Legislature. I think I also saw Peggy Wilson in the back, Representative Wilson, from Wrangell. I’d invite both of you to join me up 

here at the dais, if you’d like. You get a better view of what’s going 

on. If you wanted an opportunity to ask any questions, I’m certainly eager to have my colleagues up here. I don’t know whether 

Representative Seaton is here also. He was—I know he was at the 

summit yesterday. Again, I’ll extend that offer. If you’re comfortable in your chairs—I don’t see any takers, but thank you for 

being here. 

[Laughter.] 

I’ve got tons of questions that I want to ask, and I’m just not 

even certain where we would begin. I think what I’m going to do 

is direct a question to you, Dr. Smink. I know that your schedule 

doesn’t necessarily allow you to be with us all afternoon, so after 

you field my question, if you need to sign off, we certainly understand that. It’s a question that I will make available to the rest of 

you, as well. 

You’ve recommended to the State that we review, at the State 

level, certain policies that may inadvertently be pushing our students out of schools. Can you identify any specific policies that you 

feel may actually be counterproductive? Are there counterproductive policies that we need to change at the Federal level— 

for instance, within the NCLB statutes? We mentioned some of the 

successes, and you always want to highlight the successes, but, on 

the other hand, if we have policies in place that are not helping us, 

are not helping our students, we need to look to eliminate them. 

Can you identify anything in that area? 

63 

Mr. SMINK. Well, there are a few. One of the areas is in the area 

of accountability. One of the areas of most difficulty for all of us 

is to have some universal accounting. Now, hopefully, what Secretary Spellings did a few weeks ago will help us put it in the proper direction. However, within that announcement, she did offer 

some variability for additional years, whether it be the summer or 

whether it be an additional 1 year, or a case could be made for— 

by any State—for adding, not only the fifth year, perhaps the sixth 

year. If that’s allowable—and I’m not so sure whether it should or 

shouldn’t be—it almost puts us back to where we were, years ago, 

where you had this waiver going away from a 4-year graduation 

rate. We also know that some youngsters will not graduate in 4 

years; they may need the summer, they may need the fifth year. 

That’s going to be a tough decision for us for the foreseeable future. 

Another area, particularly at the State level, is the notion of accountability among the LEAs, among the local education agencies. 

Even if there were a Federal statute, and even if there were a 

State statute, local school districts may not have the resources for 

proper accounting. That’s very difficult, and particularly in the 

area of expulsions or suspensions or even attendance and tardy. 

Now, they’re very critical issues that a State may have a regulation 

on, or a local school board may have a regulation on, and they tend 

to, quote, ‘‘push kids out of school.’’ 

The area that probably bothers local folks more than anything 

are the different variables on grading. There may be some local 

provisions that, if you make a 60, or whatever grading policies 

there is, you’re going to fail that course. That’s very difficult to get 

universal use, whether it be in a State or even at the Federal Government. 

These are just among some of the very issues that are very critical to local administrators on, How do they put together the plan 

that has some accountability with equal standards, not only across 

each State, but across even every district as—How do they maneuver that? 

There was one other area that I think Dr. Cashen and I talked 

about. I’m going to let him share it with you for a moment, because 

we think it fits into this category also. 

Mr. CASHEN. Are we down here, Jay? Is this—— 

Mr. SMINK. Well, it’s the notion of zero tolerances. This has been 

an issue of, How does the school handle zero tolerance? Whether 

it comes out of Federal legislation or State legislation or local policies, where is that defining notion between, When do you expel or 

suspend a student on the notion of either drugs or weapons? I appreciate the notion of zero tolerance; but, if you do ask a student 

to leave school, suspended or expulsion, what do you do for them? 

That’s an issue that is extremely important, because if you do nothing for that youngster, that person is clearly going to be a dropout 

and clearly going to get in the law enforcement and every other social agency for the rest of their life. 

I’m not suggesting that we don’t have a zero tolerance policy, but 

what I’m suggesting, that, when that student is asked to leave 

school, that there be some provision for their continued education 

once they leave the official educational environment. 

64 

There’s some that local school folks, as well as State agencies are 

wrestling with on a continual time. 

The other area, particularly—and this is at the Federal level and 

at the State level—is the area of students with disabilities. The 

Federal agencies—and you well know this—define ‘‘students with 

disabilities’’ in 13 different categories, and the dropout rates are 

rather significant, but they’re not universal among all 13 categories. Some students need more assistance to stay in school than 

others. 

What we’ve learned from this—students with disabilities, and 

particularly from the Office—what’s called OSEP, the Office of Special Education Programs, at the Federal level, their package of— 

and their group of centers, of which there are approximately 50 different technical education centers with different responsibilities, 

from dropout prevention to all aspects that serve students with disabilities—that’s a wonderful model. One of the things that we can 

probably take some learnings from is to look how the OSEP, Office 

of Special Education Programs, and U.S. Department of Education, 

has packaged this array of technical assistance centers to serve 

students with disabilities. Perhaps we need something similar to 

that with our regular students, because if we don’t serve the regular students, they’re going to be dropping out, too. I think that’s 

a model we may want to take a look at. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask you, Commissioner LeDoux, 

Are there any State policies or any policies that we have that you 

feel are pushing our kids out, that are counterproductive? 

Mr. LEDOUX. Well, most policies are based on the local-control 

school district. I think, particularly with discipline and maintaining 

safe environments, even some academic attendance policies can be 

used to invite students to leave. There is no typical student anymore. They don’t look a certain way, a certain ethnicity or language. Successful schools are able to wrap the program around the 

needs of the child. When they don’t do that, when they look at the 

student, and they apply the discipline without looking to the needs 

of the student, then you could lose them. 

To treat all children the same is to treat them unfairly. I think 

anytime we use any policy or procedure without looking at the individual needs of the student, we essentially dis-invite them. 

On the other hand, some things can’t be allowed in the regular 

school. You can’t tolerate harassment and violence against other 

students. There are alternatives for those students, that can allow 

them to be successful. They don’t have to be thrown away, because, 

again, there are no throw-away students. 

I think that, as long as we’re flexible, we look at the individual 

needs of students, and we hold them accountable for their actions— 

they go together—they can be successful. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask about the—just, the situation 

with the silos. There were several of you that—I know, Dr. Holloway, you certainly mentioned it, and—just, a recognition that in 

order to deal with the student as a whole person, and education as 

kind of the full spectrum. It’s not something that—you have elementary, middle school, high school, college, vocational education, 

that there has to be a continuity there, there has to be an alignVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00068 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
65 

ment, and our need to kind of break out of these silos in order to 

better address the problems that we’re facing. 

Are we making progress? I’m going to pose it to you, Dr. Holloway, kind of speaking from the earlier years, and then—and you, 

President Hamilton, because you’ve got the other end of that spectrum. What can we be doing better to deal with the fact that we 

have a regime or a structure that has typically not allowed for a 

continuation or better alignment is—‘‘alignment’’ is the terms that 

you used. 

Dr. Holloway. 

Ms. HOLLOWAY. Well, I think the last 2 days were a good start, 

where we put so many different people together to talk with one 

another. I think we’re going to have to do something more systemic, and that is to formalize some group of folks, P through 20, 

and begin the conversation. One of the pieces of research that we 

looked at really cautioned us, in terms of how to do that. It could 

become a very productive group, but it could be, also, a place just 

where people come and gnaw on the same issues over and over 

again. The recommendations are pretty strong that you need to 

start looking at policy and that you need to look at financial structures across those silos. When you do that, these kinds of conversations will help to break down some of those barriers. 

The other thing is that you need to look at the alignment of what 

we expect young people to know and be able to do. There is this 

huge gap between what young people know and can do when they 

leave high school and when they enter the workforce or whether 

they enter the postsecondary programs. All we need to do is look 

at the developmental courses. Sixty percent of our youngsters who 

enter college here take developmental courses, which means they 

were not prepared to take college courses. We can fix that through 

working together on the alignment. What is it that we are not preparing them to know and be able to do? Only through conversations with postsecondary people who teach those courses and secondary people who teach those courses are we going to be able to 

close that gap. 

Mr. HAMILTON. Well, Shirley is absolutely right. It’s one of the 

reasons that I’ve said I always have difficulty with this metric that 

says K through 16, K through 20, or whatever. Unless every piece 

of it is involved in every piece of it—this is why it’s not a relay 

race. Everybody’s got to be pulling together across the entire board. 

Let me just mention one thing, because so often we actually define a little fork in the road and we start talking about voc-tech. 

Let me pick on the Zach story for a moment, because I don’t want 

this misunderstood. 

Here’s my problem with the Zach story that you’ll recall. To be 

accepted as an apprentice in the pipefitters union, Zach had to 

have a math resume that’s about one math class short of what is 

required to enter as an engineering major at the university. 

My point here is this—because I celebrate Zach and his accomplishments, and I don’t say that Zach should have come to the university—what I say is, if we don’t understand this, we make voctech seem somehow to be less of a scholastic achievement. Fact: If 

Zach were not a good student, he would not be in the union. 

66 

Voc-tech is not an alternative to scholastic achievement, it’s another outcome of scholastic achievement. 

I tell people all the time—this is an important thing to understand—77 percent of the jobs in America do not require a 4-year 

degree. Well, why would a college president tell you that? It’s because a huge percentage of the 77 percent, about two-thirds of 

them, according to a national figure, whose name I can’t recall at 

the moment—about two-thirds of those jobs not requiring a 4-year 

degree require some postsecondary education. Much of it is union. 

We work very closely with the union. But, I’ll tell you, it isn’t just 

going to college. We have a course at the university—of course, understand, we do embrace the community-college mission here; we’re 

all one here. OK? We have a course that’s called ‘‘Math for the 

Trades.’’ OK? These are individuals who have graduated from high 

school, who do not currently have the math skills necessary to 

enter into the trades. All of us, at every level—at the 4-year college 

level, at the community college level, at the union apprenticeship 

level—need the same level, or very, very closely the same level, of 

academic achievement. It’s just a very important thing. 

Always, we make that, ‘‘Well, you can go to the university, you 

can go to voc-tech.’’ Well, if you trace it back down the pipeline, the 

skills are going to be very, very similar. There are some people who 

don’t want to get a 4-year degree, but that—see, here’s the horrible 

phrase. We’ve got to get this out of our vocabulary. ‘‘College isn’t 

for everyone.’’ Stop it. We just need to stop that, dead. Because— 

forget about the word ‘‘college.’’ It scares people sometimes and— 

postsecondary education is for nearly anyone. I mean, I’ll just tell 

you, unless your goal in life is to be the head fry guy at McDonald’s 

you’re going to take some postsecondary education, to include, if, 

God bless you, you take—unions are a very, very technical, very 

difficult position, and I think we have missed, in America, this, 

kind of, generational gap. It was only one generation ago. Alaska 

is full of them, of great, vibrant individuals who came up here, got 

a tremendous job, made a good paycheck, absolutely fabulous 

achievement. But, their child can’t do it with the same academic 

skill set that their parent was able to do it. We’re miss—‘‘Aw, come 

on, you know, Dad did a great job and, you know, college isn’t for 

everyone.’’ I’ll guarantee you, Zach made a choice, because he had 

a choice. If he went into the pipefitters apprenticeship program— 

that is a smart young man with a whole lot of math background 

who could have done anything he wanted. And he did. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. You raise an excellent point here about the 

need for rigor within the academic curriculum. If we kind of let our 

kids go down a track and say, ‘‘Well, you’re not meant for college’’— 

and I agree with you, we need to rephrase that—it’s not to suggest, 

then, that you can have a career in the trades and blow off, basically, your academic credentials. You’ve got to have those skill sets. 

And talking with those that are bringing together these in the apprenticeship programs, you do have the ability to kind of pick and 

choose between some young people that are able to make it because 

of the background that they have received in school, and then others, they just don’t have what it takes to make it through. If we’re 

letting them believe that, ‘‘Well, if you’re not on the college track, 

that you can go and get a job building our gas line,’’ that’s not 

67 

being fair to them, because they—and this is where I think we 

need to make sure that our young people understand that, when 

you make that decision 6 days before completing your 10th-grade 

year, what that means to you as an individual and your options, 

moving forward. I’m not so sure that we’re being as honest and as 

open as we need to be with them. 

Carl. 

Mr. ROSE. Senator, I want to go back a little ways to your first 

question that you asked of Dr. Smink. 

How many of us would entrust our 16-year-olds to make lifechanging decisions? We have a mandatory-attendance law that 

says you have to be in school until you’re 16. What is the message 

that that sends? They are prepared now to face the world, at age 

16? I think we need to re-look at that. That’s one of those inadvertent laws that pretty much give people the option to say, ‘‘At 

age 16, I can make a choice.’’ Many of them will make a bad choice. 

Two additional years of school could be the difference between 

whether they graduate or not. If it’s not mandatory—you know, 

right now we don’t have the wherewithal to enforce truancy laws 

at 16. When you say ‘‘16,’’ you say, ‘‘It’s OK.’’ The State says, ‘‘It’s 

OK for you to leave school.’’ I don’t think it’s OK. I think we need 

to take a look at that. 

Another issue that we touched on is this collaboration across the 

spectrum. P through 20, for example. There’s a lot of turf here, 

there’s a lot of governance issues, there are going to be finance 

issues, there are going to be a lot of things that people say why 

you can’t. The issue right now is, Why should we be looking at 

some sort of an effort that would coordinate? 

If you looked it up—at some sort of a council that would provide 

some kind of oversight, and you take some of the most influential 

people in your State and talk about what kids need from the very 

beginning through their entire career, to take a look at the gaps 

that may be there, and to make recommendations to school boards 

or the Board of Regents or whoever the governing bodies may be, 

I think there’s some value there, because right now when we talk 

about silos, we operate independently, and what we need to do is 

take a look at—I mean, we’re not here to operate our systems independently, we’re actually here for the students that we serve. 

So often when you take a look at the statutes that we have to 

comply with, it’s very easy for people to become distracted. We 

start to look at our work and some of the pressures that we face 

and the financial commitments that are made, and all of a sudden 

we’re not thinking about kids anymore, we’re thinking about our 

individual jobs, what we need to do to comply inside of our silos, 

and the people who really are not served are the students that 

we’re all designed to serve. 

I think we need to consider—if we can’t do this for ourselves, we 

should be working toward some sort of an overseeing council that 

would bring these issues to the appropriate decisionmaking bodies 

so we can deal with them. 

Last, one of the comments that came up, for young people, the 

lack of reinforcement of the options that are available to them, 

coming not just from schools, but from their parents and when you 

take kids who come from families or communities that are socially 

68 

and economically challenged, they don’t get the same kind of reinforcement that kids who come from educated parents, middle-class 

families, get. 

All of us have to take a look at what kind of options are available, because I do believe, even if you’re a fry cook at McDonald’s, 

you will receive some instruction on quality control. 

[Laughter.] 

All of us are going to receive some additional instruction, in 

whatever job that you take. 

I would encourage us to take a look at these things. Some of the 

things that we say and do in statutes—nobody intends for kids to 

leave school at 16. Well, why would you have a statute that said 

it was OK? 

Senator MURKOWSKI. It’s a message that is sent. When you talk 

about, just, the whole issue of relevance—‘‘Why should I—why 

should I be—why should I stay in school? I’ve hit 16, you know, I’ve 

passed the high school exit exam, I’ve got other things that are distracting me, I’m not challenged’’—we need to really look at the relevancy aspect of it. 

In this Wall Street Journal article that I mentioned earlier, the 

reason the article struck me was because it was entitled ‘‘Mayors 

Go Door to Door,’’ personally encouraging students to stay in the 

game for their own good and for the sake of the city. The U.S. Conference of Mayors was focusing on what’s going on with the dropout 

rate throughout the United States. It was mayors in Houston, in 

Texas, Atlanta, Milwaukee, and Kansas City. I mean, they’re literally going to the students’ homes and doing a one-on-one intervention. 

You talk about, well, how can we be that community support, 

how can we make sure that, when you’re making a decision, that 

you think, at 16 or 17, that you’ve had enough—how can we be intervening, how can we get these counselors in the school to do this 

intervention that we need to do? 

That’s one aspect of the spectrum. My focus in just about everything that I do, whether it’s healthcare or education, it’s all about 

prevention, and it goes back to what we’re doing early on, when 

you’ve got toddlers, when you’ve got kids that are, in 5th-grade, deselecting their career choices. Let’s talk a little bit about this issue 

of relevance and how we are better connecting with our young people. 

Throwing it out to you guys. Recognizing that we’re well over our 

time limit already. 

Commissioner. 

Mr. LEDOUX. Well, I would say—some have said that the new 

three R’s are relevance, rigor, and relationships in schools. A lot of 

times, as we said before, kids leave school for a number of personal 

or family reasons, but many times the playground for them to explore their interests has gotten very small in school. There’s not 

very many electives, there’s very few career educational opportunities for them. The arts have been decreased in many areas so that 

the resources can move toward remediation so that they can meet 

the test score—because they’re judged on their test score, not on 

the quality of what kids learn and what they’re able to actually do. 

They’re not completely coherent. 

69 

The education program has to be relevant to the young people. 

They have to see that it has meaning with regard to where they’re 

going and what they want to do. They don’t know what they want 

to do, usually. They find that out through experiences, by talking 

to people, by having a relevant program for them to engage in. As 

I said earlier, many schools still award credit based on minimum 

competency, not really what they can do and how they can apply 

it. Some of the movements in standards-based education are demanding that kids perform; and if they can perform, they don’t 

have to sit in the seat that long. 

I think we also need a very rigorous program that will demand 

excellence from students. We heard from the university earlier that 

they’re very concerned that the entering freshmen do not have the 

math skills to pick the professions that they need. America and 

Alaska are losing our scientists and our mathematicians and our 

engineers, because we’ve actually never—until the study that was 

being carried out by Avant-Garde, we really haven’t looked at what 

we expect our high school students to look like when they graduate 

and what the college wants them to look like. We’re now actually 

aligning those. We need the rigor. Young people can tell the difference between something that is—where they’re held accountable 

and where they’re not. 

I also would say that schools have to develop relationships to 

kids. Kids have to feel a part of something bigger. They’ll pay any 

price to belong or be connected, and schools have to be places 

where kids can explore their talents, where they feel safe, where 

they’re connected. This is where counselors are important, and 

teachers who actually take the time to work with kids. 

I might point out, though, that all three of these areas of modern 

school—rigor, relevance, and relationships—are severely challenged 

in rural Alaska. We have teachers that are responsible for teaching 

multiple-discipline classes in a single school site. While they work 

hard and they do a great job, kids would benefit from a teacher 

who has a major in math or science or history or social studies. 

Another area is the relevance. For many Alaska Native children, 

the curriculum is not related to how they learn or their knowledge 

base or their indigenous way of looking how information is passed 

on, so it’s hard for them to connect with the relevance, and it’s 

hard for them to have the playground, if you will, to explore their 

interests. They don’t get an opportunity. 

Relationships are severely compromised sometimes because we 

have so many teachers coming and going in rural Alaska, that, just 

when the young people and their parents start developing meaningful relationships, the teacher leaves and another teacher comes 

in and they have to develop new relationships. 

As Alaska, we must find a way to increase our relevance, rigor, 

and relationships in all of our schools, particularly—— 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask you, Tina and Elizabeth—I 

mean, Tina, you spoke about literally feeling invisible. When you’re 

invisible in a school, there is no relationship, and it makes you 

wonder or question the relevance of your being there. Elizabeth, 

you mentioned that, with other things going on, it just didn’t feel 

like you needed to be there, so the relevance was lacking. So, 

how—if you care to comment on that aspect of it. 

70 

Tina. 

Ms. MICHELS-HANSEN. I’m just taking some notes here as other 

people are speaking. In a couple of things that come to mind is, we 

prepare ourselves, at CITC, right about this time of year, to see an 

influx of students come into the Anchorage area. I mean, it’s been 

in the news, we’ve all heard about it. We’ve all either known somebody or heard of somebody who has moved into town, for a variety 

of reasons. I can tell you that one of the challenges with—when 

working with our students and their families, to help them keep 

the notion of education as central in their lives, and that it’s just 

as valuable as their personal security is, they are—when you look 

at, you know, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, they are functioning 

right now at the basic level of survival. A lot of people have made 

the choice to move based on economics. If they are simply focused 

on—I shouldn’t say ‘‘simply,’’ but if their primary focus, on a daily 

basis, is consumed and just, ‘‘Where am I going to stay? Where’s 

my next paycheck going to come from? How can I afford to keep 

the lights on and the heat on, let alone feed my child? ’’ you know, 

the idea of going to school and participating actively is really low 

in their list of priorities. That’s the reality that we face, not just 

in Nome or Kwethluk or Anchorage or, you know, Klawock. It’s 

across the entire State. It’s a tragedy that’s happening to our people. 

Another thing that I think we need to add, that I really don’t 

hear much mention to, and we absolutely cannot turn a blind eye 

to it, is that we do have those high-functioning students out there. 

We have wonderful Alaska Native students who are participating 

in high-level math classes, pre-calculus. They’re looking at trade, 

they’re looking at high advanced biology classes. It’s through small 

partnerships, like ANSEP at UAA, that we’re able to build that. 

But, they have the sense of community, they know that it takes 

multiple people, multiple entities, and tons and tons of energy to 

make education relevant to our students. 

There’s a story, though, that—and I’ll make it very brief—that 

I want to keep in the back of your minds. The notion of prejudice 

is still very much alive, and it’s very much alive not just for our 

Native students, but for our Hmong students, our African-American students. We lack, as a State, as far as our education system 

is concerned, in my personal opinion, a strong sense of valuing diversity. Our teachers are ill-prepared, when they come into the 

schools, to have a good, solid background in multicultural training 

and education, understanding. They have to complete a couple of 

credits. Well, that doesn’t make it thorough, and it doesn’t make 

it personal for them. 

We had a young girl—her parents called us the other day and 

said, ‘‘You know, my daughter’s not in your class, but I really could 

use your help.’’ This girl was enrolled in a pre-calculus class, and 

her test scores proved that that’s where she belonged. She’s a very 

motivated individual. She was on the right track for accomplishing 

the goals that she wanted in life. She entered into her classroom 

on day one, there were eight students in that class. The teacher 

looked at her, recognized she’s the only person of color in the room, 

only minority within the room, pulled her out into the hallway and 

said, ‘‘I’m sorry, but there must be some mistake. You can’t be in 

71 

here.’’ What message does that send to that child, to her peers, to 

her parents, to her larger community, if our teachers, our professional educators, do not understand and do not accept diversity? 

Yet, they are persisting with the notions of prejudice. 

I didn’t know what prejudice was until I came to college, because 

I grew up in a small-knit community, where everybody knew that 

I was part Inupiat, even though I didn’t look like it. We were all 

related. Well, I came here, and the answer was, ‘‘How could you be 

Native? You’re too white to be Native. You’re too gussuk.’’ It’s not 

the color of your skin, it’s the values that you hold inside, it’s the 

relevance of things in life that make you who you are. We need to, 

not just as schools, but as every single stakeholder involved in education, prioritize the diversity, prioritize the diverse needs, and 

wrap around together to raise our kids up. 

Mr. SMINK. Senator, may I add to the question about relationships? 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Oh, I’m looking for you, Jay. 

[Laughter.] 

Yes, go ahead. 

Mr. SMINK. OK. 

If you recall, near the end of my verbal comments and in the 

written testimony, we highlighted the value of home school liaison, 

graduation coaches, career counselors, etc. That was in direct response to the need for relationships that students who drop out 

tend not to have. These were solutions and strategies that we’re 

seeing across the Nation. 

Let me reinforce that with one other notion, and that is, there 

is currently, in numerous States, the mandate for having an individual graduation plan which every—for example, South Carolina 

is just one of several States that are doing this—and every 8thgrade student must build, before they enter 9th grade, an individual graduation plan that says, ‘‘I will select one of these 16 career clusters, and it will be my guideline for my course selections 

from grades 9 through 12.’’ 

Now, more importantly there, they are beginning to not only look 

at career technical education, that individual graduation plan must 

be discussed and signed by the student, the counselor, and a parent, or both parents. That’s building a relationship between all 

three that is important. In some cases, they’ll even invite in a business entity that may serve as an intern opportunity later in the 

high school career. 

There are even some school districts—for example, St. Paul, Minnesota—that has carried this notion of a 4-year graduation plan to 

6 years, where the student will build not only the 4-year graduation plan for high school, but look beyond high school for the next 

2 years, whether it be a community college or the first 2 years of 

a 4-year college. I think this speaks to relevancy in a little bit different way, but it reinforces the notion also of collaboration. 

Thank you. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes, I appreciate that input. 

Elizabeth, would that have made a difference for you? You’re just 

about getting through 10th grade, if you had had some kind of a 

plan—— 

72 

Ms. WINKLER. I believe that if I did have a plan, similar to what 

Dr. Smink was talking about, that I would have been more focused 

and understand that education is important. My father went to college, my mom was a civilian in the Air Force, but there wasn’t very 

much talk of how important education was and what it could or 

couldn’t do for you. I had a lot of misunderstandings about that as 

I was growing up, and simply didn’t care. 

Where I come from—I’m around a lot of troubled youth that don’t 

know where they’re going in life, what they want to do, or how are 

they going to get there. Plans like that would, I believe, would really help, a lot of youth, a lot. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Dr. Holloway. 

Ms. HOLLOWAY. Well, I’d like to address the commissioner’s 

‘‘rigor,’’ because, as you may recall in our written testimony, we 

stepped on probably something that would be one of those holy 

grails, Commissioner LeDoux. We suggested that we might look at 

national standards for reading, writing, and math. The reason is 

that we have every State spending lots and lots of money developing standards, developing assessments, and each State decides 

how good is good enough. Is there really a difference in how well 

we want a student to read in Kaktovik or the student in Biloxi? 

I mean, I really think, you know, who is benefiting from all of this 

are the testing companies. They’re making out like bandits. That’s 

money that could be spent on all of the things that we’re talking 

about here, in terms of school improvement. I know the local control argument, but I’m only talking about those essential skills that 

every student needs in order to be a successful learner. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask a question, probably to you, 

Greg or Mike, in talking about the career training—the career and 

technical education aspect of it and the barriers, I think, that we 

have effective career training opportunities. You’ve mentioned— 

several people have mentioned Carl Perkins and the fact that, in 

many cases, people aren’t even bothering, because it’s just as difficult as it is, and it’s basically costing you more to apply for it than 

you actually are able to receive. What other barriers do we have 

out there, when it comes to the career and technical education? 

I’d also like you to comment—Lamont Albertson, from The People’s Learning Center, in his testimony, written testimony that he’d 

submitted, had suggested to me that expanding regional training 

centers would be a big part of addressing the high school dropout 

rate in some parts of rural Alaska. Can you speak to that as a suggestion, as well? 

Mr. ANDREWS. Thank you. 

In terms of the, let’s say, barriers for career and technical education, things have changed over the years now. There is a blur between academic and career and technical education training. That’s 

why I say it needs to be integrated back into the high schools, because more and more—there’s more and more need for students to 

understand technology and science and math and other areas as it 

applies to work, and students are eager to learn that. 

It also takes more dollars to do that, because you need modern 

equipment, you need instructors who are up to date with industry 

standards and also academic standards. There needs to be a real 

strong commitment from the State or from the local education comVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00076 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
73 

munity. Let’s say, for example, out in Mat-Su, where they bonded 

and created a state-of-the-art career and technical education high 

school. It’s fabulous. I think we need one in every community, if we 

could, in the State, but that would take an awful lot of money and 

a lot of resources. 

We need more instructors—and that’s why partnerships are 

working, because they’re bringing in folks from industry to work 

with students after school over in the classroom, and just more and 

more of that effort. 

In terms of Perkins—and I’m no expert in Perkins; we’ve operated a few Perkins grants, etc; they’re well-intended. Years ago, 

you could do a lot more with them, now they’re very, very restrictive, and they’re such an administrative burden and a reporting 

burden that that’s why I’m hearing smaller school districts are opting out or joining with other school districts to try to get something 

that’s meaningful and sustainable for schools, particularly in rural 

Alaska. I’ve been in former vocational education shops in rural 

Alaska that are now warehouses or offices. So, we need to sort of 

look at that. 

The other issue of expanding regional training centers in my 

view—people need a place to learn these new skills closer to home, 

so we have learned over many years of working with regional 

learning centers, that it’s more cost-effective, it’s more relevant for 

local folks to learn in their region, and you can do very good, intensive work, and—what you need is something that follows up behind 

that, like a job or continuing education, connection to a degree program with a university, such as with health, out at Yuut, etc. 

Each one of those, from my experience—and I’ve worked with 

most of them for a long period of time—is that they all are sort of 

different animals, they’re different entities themselves. Some have 

great partnerships with school districts, some, based on the nature 

of their funding, may not necessarily have a great relationship with 

the school district, or there may be other, let’s say, turf barriers 

or—particularly fighting for resources, because it is so tough to put 

together a building that’s open and available for people, to keep the 

lights on and—there also are not any standards, that I know of, 

and I’ve been encouraging the Alaska Workforce Investment Board 

and the Department of Labor to look at this, that there needs to 

be some standards to say, What really is a regional learning center, 

what is a regional training center? Because there are some things 

that you have to have in a learning environment to make sure students are getting the information well enough to apply outside of 

school. 

I think that regional learning centers are becoming more and 

more relevant to the State, but I think that we still have difficulty 

defining them, and we don’t have standards across them. I would 

encourage each one of them to be a center of excellence; for instance, where they could do construction truck driving and pipeline 

welding, or they could do health or other areas, so people from 

around the State, particularly rural students looking for those challenges, would go there. 

We also would like to point out that—in my trips to Galena, 

Mount Edgecombe, Sitka, and Chugach school districts—we have 

fabulous statewide high school programs out there that maybe peoVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00077 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
74 

ple don’t know enough about. These students are high achievers, 

they do really well in those settings, and they choose to go to these 

places to learn. I’m just amazed, every time I stop by and talk to 

those students—high quality. So, they know what they want. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Yes, they are good. 

Greg, do you want to add—— 

Mr. CASHEN. Senator Murkowski, I was just going to mention, in 

a followup to Mike’s discussion on regional training centers, the 

Department of Labor has been meeting with the regional training 

centers for about the last year and a half as part of our AGIA 

training plan, and there are strategic elements within the training 

plan that do address regional training programs and regional training centers. The one thing that we need, of course, is additional 

funding. That was part of our appropriation request last special 

session, to fund our AGIA training plan, which regional training 

centers were a part of. 

I agree with Mike, we need to ensure that we don’t have redundant programs somewhat throughout the State, and more of the 

centers-of-excellence model, focusing on certain programs that each 

school can conduct efficiently, like diesel mechanics or commercial 

drivers licenses or welding or electrical work, carpentry, etc. But, 

we are working with Mr. Albertson and Yuut, as well as SAVEC 

and Alaska Technical Center and Galena and AVTEC, as well. 

Thank you. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. We are well over our time here today, but 

I want to make sure that everybody feels like they’ve had an opportunity to say that one thing that’s just been burning inside you and 

I haven’t asked you the question or I skipped over you. Tom hasn’t 

had an opportunity on the hot seat at all to talk about some of the 

wrap-around services. You don’t have to add anything as, kind of, 

your final wrap-up, but I give you this opportunity. 

Tom, I’ll start with you first to see if you’ve got any. 

Mr. MORGAN. Thank you, Senator. Time is such a valuable commodity, I’m sitting here, and I’m thinking, ‘‘Gee, what could I possibly say that would add to what has already been put forward.’’ 

I’d be remiss if I didn’t also acknowledge and say thank you to Senator Bettye Davis for all that she has done for this State and certainly for education. Senator, thank you for that. 

I’d also be remiss if I didn’t acknowledge that a couple of hardworking volunteers are making time to be here today, and that’s 

a couple of my board members, Bobby Olsen and Sue Hennessy. 

Seated directly behind me is the superintendent from Mat-Su, 

Dr. George Troxel, and Lucy Hope, the director of student support 

services, one of our affiliate sites. They get it. Maybe that’s the 

glue I was talking about. They get what Communities in Schools 

can do. 

I’m actually emboldened by the comments today, because I 

walked in here thinking, ‘‘OK, we just came off a 2-day education 

summit. What else can we say to build upon that? ’’ I’m thinking, 

you know, and I’m getting raspy-voiced because we’ve been saying 

a lot over the last 2 days, and a lot of good things, but I really believe more strongly now—and Dr. Smink has said it, too—Communities in Schools, agencies like ours, models like ours, they work. 

As the two folks here have said, we can’t allow people to drop 

75 

through the cracks, we can’t allow invisible students there. We 

have the resources at our fingertips to bring to bear and help these 

folks. We can do that. We can’t rely, and we should not rely, just 

on the education system to make that happen. They’re busy doing 

a lot of other things that we’ve asked them to do. As a taxpayer, 

that’s what we’re asking that they do. 

We can do more with less with the existing resources. Give us 

an opportunity to do that. Today is one of those opportunities. 

Thank you. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Who else wants to add their final thoughts 

into the mix? 

President—— 

Mr. SMINK. Senator—— 

Senator MURKOWSKI [continuing]. Hamilton. 

Mr. SMINK [continuing]. Senator, whenever you’re finished there, 

I’d like to add one example of some of the things that we’ve been 

doing. You can go on with your other guests there and save me for 

later, whatever your timing is. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Dr. Hamilton. 

Mr. HAMILTON. Just one quick note, that we didn’t mention that 

is a real obstacle in dealing with all of these issues that we’ve discussed, is this notion of equity. I mean, there are circumstances 

that exist in Alaska that are extraordinarily difficult to overcome. 

Larry mentioned the importance of having a teacher with a degree 

in the discipline taught. That would quite literally result, in several cases of Alaska, of having more teachers than students. Clearly, it’s not going to ever be done. 

I think maybe one of the biggest ones, and maybe there is a Federal piece of this, it’s this huge and growing bandwidth disparity. 

In Alaska, the famous ‘‘last mile’’ is 500 kilometers long. Until we 

can get connected and be able to maybe distribute or redistribute 

existing materials, existing experts, and really take advantage of 

what bandwidth can ultimately do, that gap will just simply continue to grow. Maybe it’s possible to do something in this extraordinary circumstance. We have to modify some existing E-Rate 

things and the like. I mean, for instance, the university can’t use 

E-Rate. I understand that. I understand why that’s a good one-sizefits-all. When the last mile is 500 kilometers long, maybe we ought 

to take another look at that. We could reach people in existing 

bandwidth that we’re not allowed to in this. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. It’s an excellent point, one that I’ve had an 

opportunity, speaking with folks up north at Ilisagvik College, recognizing what that could do for them and their ability to provide 

for greater levels of communication and teaching. 

Let’s go to Dr. Smink, and then we’ll come back to you, Dr. 

Holloway. 

Mr. SMINK. Thank you, Senator. 

We completed, 2 years ago—the National Dropout Prevention 

Center, in collaboration with Communities in Schools headquarters—we completed a year-long significant study on the risk 

factors that we know are found with students and with families, 

that—in fact, there were 25 of those risk factors of why youngsters 

drop out of school. The good news, we can define those, and we 

76 

know that. We can design intervention programs to address those. 

And we do that, also. 

Let me share with you an experience that I had yesterday illustrating the point that community involvement and collaboration is 

extremely important. 

Knowing that information, I was in the meeting yesterday with 

hospital administrators, and we posed the problem to them, as, 

‘‘How can you be a better collaborator with educators on addressing 

this issue of dropouts? How can you make people more aware of the 

issue? How can you gain parental support, etc.? ’’ Again, the question was addressed to hospital administrators. Now, what I want 

to share with you is some of their ideas, which reinforces the notion that collaboration, beyond the school walls with just school 

staff, is important. 

They offered—what an opportunity for a new mother, usually in 

a hospital, to provide that new mother with a package of materials 

that would help that mother and parent be better. 

For example, we know kids drop out of school because of nutrition. What a wonderful time to give them some information about 

nutrition, that new mother, and what they need to do with the 

baby. 

We know that kids drop out of school because of drug abuse and 

because of shaken-baby syndrome and others. What a wonderful 

opportunity to give that new mother some information about, 

‘‘Please stay off drugs, as a mother.’’ 

Also, we know it’s important that a youngster be read to, even 

before they get to first or second grade. Literally being read to during the first 36 months of their life. What an opportunity to tell 

that mother about the value of that, and give that mother some 

reading materials. 

I could go on with health prevention. I could on with ways that 

a mother—a new mother, or a father, could give support to that 

youngster. 

What I’m trying to illustrate is that community collaboration for 

awareness and increasing the level of education, value in education, is important. 

Furthermore, the administrators reminded me of a school, that 

I was familiar with, where the superintendent of a county school 

district sends one of their staff-persons to every new mother and 

gives a mother a package of information, much like I just said, including a certificate for a seat in the graduating class 18 years 

down the line. Doesn’t that send a very powerful message to that 

mother? That illustrates the notion of community collaboration 

with groups that are not normally in our array of relationships as 

educators. 

I simply close with that to let you know that, yes, kids do drop 

out of school, but they drop into the community, and the community has to be a part of jointly understanding it, but also jointly 

putting together interventions that work with our youngsters who 

are struggling to stay in school. 

Again, I’m going to close by just thanking you for the opportunity 

to be with you today, and I welcome being with you more as you 

pursue this particular committee or other activities at the Federal 

level or at the State of Alaska level. 

77 

Thank you very much. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Dr. Smink, and we look forward to working with you. Both my office, most certainly, and, I’m 

sure, many who are in the room here will be seeking your advice 

and counsel. 

I think it’s a great reminder—you’re dropping out of school, but 

you’re dropping into the community. Talk about responsibility. 

That’s a keeper that we can use repeatedly. 

Dr. Holloway. 

Ms. HOLLOWAY. Well, I want to thank President Hamilton for 

bringing the technology issue up, because many of the innovations 

that we’re a part of really are using technology to make it happen. 

It’s really critical to some of the exciting things that we’re able to 

do. One of them has to do with the virtual high school and how, 

through a virtual high school program, you can have them drop 

back in. 

The virtual high school doesn’t have to be done by the school, it 

can be done in a community center, it can be done in the Boys and 

Girls Club, it can be done in lots of places. We have lots of examples of bringing young people back in to prepare themselves for 

work or additional training. 

So, I think that this piece is so critical. Our teacher initiative, 

our Alaska Native Teacher Initiative, is all being delivered by distance. Having the high-quality technology is critical to the success 

of that program. 

So, thank you very much. It’s been a wonderful day. I’ve learned 

a lot from all of you, and some wonderful ideas that I hope we can 

continue to talk about in our P–20 council. 

If I may, Senator Murkowski, I’d like to introduce Don 

Shackelford. He’s sitting behind me. He’s my colleague in AvantGarde, and does a lot of work. We’re just pleased to have been part 

of this. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, thank you, we appreciate it. 

Welcome to you, Dr. Shackelford. 

Commissioner. 

Mr. LEDOUX. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

I just want to say thank you to all the many wonderful educators, teachers, and principals, who are heroes every day across 

Alaska. Many kids are graduating because of superhuman efforts 

in time and compassion and hard work. 

While, many times, when we focus on what needs to be done— 

and we should, we should always go looking for the ones who are 

lost—but, we have so many wonderful assets in Alaska that are 

producing outstanding graduates who are successful all over the 

country, who are leading—I believe you’re a graduate of an Alaska 

institution, as am I and many in this room, and I am proud to be 

an Alaskan educator. I think we are up to the challenge. 

When those people came by, the last 2 days, to try to build a 

plan, they left behind their interests, the organizations they 

worked for, they rolled up their sleeves and were committed to, not 

only respond to the challenges that we see right now, but to look 

to the future to see the challenges that our kids are going to have 

to face, and to predict what we’re going to do. They paid their own 

78 

way there, they put themselves up. It reflects incredible interest in 

the kids and the success of Alaska. 

As we talk about all the challenges, I just want to recognize that 

we are where we are because really great people are working hard 

all across Alaska—not just teachers; communities, politicians, leaders throughout the State. I’m proud to be an Alaskan, and I’m 

proud to be an educator. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Well, we thank you all. It was wonderful. 

Yesterday, I got off the airplane and went over to the Dena’ina 

center just as you all were breaking, and I kind of figured I would 

be looking at some draggin’ individuals after 2 days of a real intense conference. What I saw were smiles and a level of energy and 

enthusiasm and, you know, ‘‘We’ve got work to do, but we’re going 

out there and we’re going to make it happen.’’ I think that’s certainly a reflection on those of you who kind of led the agenda with 

a positive outlook as to how we confront our challenges and view 

them as opportunities. These kids that we’re all working for, this 

is what should be getting us all up in the morning and getting us 

energized. 

I think it’s so important for us to recognize that it’s not just the 

teachers, the administrators, those within the schools. Each and 

every one of us has responsibility for the children that we encounter, whether it’s somebody’s kid that you know at work, somebody 

in your church, the families that we have around us, or the kids 

that we have around us. We should all be looking to see what we 

can do to provide for that level of encouragement, to make sure 

that no child feels like they are invisible within their school or 

within their community. To just accept responsibility for my own 

children is not sufficient, it’s not right. That’s what we’re all doing 

here together. 

Now, I didn’t want to do any closings here, but I wanted to make 

sure that anybody that had a final opportunity to speak up has 

their final chance. 

Mr. MORGAN. Yes. Senator, I have an alibi. I learned that in the 

Army ranks—thank you, General Hamilton—that when you forget 

something, you just say, ‘‘I have an alibi.’’ So, I have one. 

[Laughter.] 

Dr. Smink reminded me about hospitals and other groups and 

roles that can be played. One of the programs we got involved in, 

going statewide here, and hopefully we can go statewide with it, is 

the Dolly Parton Imagination Library Program. It’s one of those 

programs that doesn’t try to be more than it is. It says that putting 

books in the hands of children at an early age, birth to 5, is a good 

thing. If we do that, that’s when they’re sponges, they’re going to 

really learn, and it has all kinds of add-on types of pluses. 

We started pilot programs in Nome and also Juneau, Fairbanks, 

and just—in Juneau, for instance, Bartlett Memorial Hospital actually has signed on, and they foot the bill, sign up every child born 

that wishes—their parents wish—to be enrolled in the Imagination 

Library Program from day one of their birth to age 5. 

There are other agencies standing by, ready to do that. Lucy, I 

mentioned earlier, is working with a hospital out in Mat-Su. It’s 

just a matter of having enough time in the days. 

79 

Again, it’s another way that other entities, other agencies, other 

resources can come to bear to help in the overall process, and that 

is to provide good opportunities for our youth. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to be here. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you. 

I want to thank you all. You have overextended. We greatly appreciate that. I appreciate you taking your time on a Saturday. I 

think we all recognize the importance of what it is that we are 

doing, the work that we have in front of us. 

We are going to be working, back in Washington, DC, as we go 

into a new Congress, to try to focus on this dropout piece and how 

we can better address it. We need your input, we need your help. 

So, on this Saturday afternoon, I’m giving you all assignments. 

You’ve got homework. I need you to work with us as you develop 

some of the ideas, at the very local level, at the State level, within 

all aspects of what it is that we do. Let’s really be partnering on 

this. Let’s not just talk about breaking down the silos, let’s be 

working together. 

When I extended the invitation, to our legislators that are here, 

to be part of this—I mean, we’ve got to kind of put aside 

everybody’s hats and titles and areas of jurisdiction if we’re really 

going to be providing for a full alignment for these kids. They don’t 

care whether it’s a Federal issue or a State or whether it’s something that happens within the private community. All they know 

is whether or not they are feeling loved and respected and feel like 

they have a sense of self-worth and something that they can contribute. So, it’s our job to kind of put it all together. Let’s be really 

working on this. Help us with this, back East, and we will help you 

with it here in the North. So, we’ll keep working. 

I appreciate, so much, the passion that you all clearly have for 

our greatest resource, which are our kids. So, we’ll be working together. 

And, with that, we stand adjourned. 

[Additional material follows.] 

80 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LAMONT ALBERTSON, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, YUUT

ELITNAURVIAT—PEOPLE’S LEARNING CENTER, BETHEL, AK 

Here’s basically what worked for us in Aniak in years gone by and what will work 

throughout rural Alaska. Note that I do not distinguish between native and white 

students. If the Caucasian students in urban areas were exposed to the same stultifying NCLB curriculum as our rural high school students, the dropout ratio would 

be no different, regardless of race. There is a fundamental inequality of educational 

opportunity in rural Alaska as contrasted with what exists in urban Alaskan communities. 

Depending on the parameters of your research, it can be argued that the rural/ 

urban effort by the State is equal but even that argument is reduced quickly to a 

comparison of apples and oranges to the informed observer. 

The most critical element in keeping our rural students in school through high 

school graduation is an appropriate curriculum which should include a broad swath 

of vocational, hands-on type courses open to both female and male students. Those 

courses should be available to the academically oriented student as well as those 

interested in focusing on the vocational crafts. And those vocational crafts should 

not be just for the construction trades. They should include broad health career and 

home trade training as well. 

Second, principals need to be conditioned to expect students to stay in school and 

not buy into this growing tendency on the part of rural educators to accept a high 

dropout rate as being an acceptable norm. Principals, school district personnel, and 

rural university campus staffs need to work in concert with their community and 

tribal councils to establish common goals fashioned to discourage student dropout. 

The role of the individual principal should not be underestimated in its influence 

on whether students stay in school or choose to dropout. 

Counselors should be used extensively to channel our students to an appropriate 

career choice. School districts should have full-time activity coordinators planning 

robust activities such as basketball, wrestling, X-country skiing, NYO, academic rodeos or even outside the school competitive engagements in subsistence activities. 

Students will not dropout when the show at school surpasses anything in town or 

the region for entertainment. 

To summarize, (1) curriculums have to be broadened both in their offerings and 

to whom they are open to, (2) principals, regional educational leaders and community leaders expectations have to be changed from the current acceptance of our 

dropout rates; principals should be working with families of/and potential drops on 

an individual basis (3) full-time counselors and activity coordinators need to be used 

to make our total school programs enticing, irresistible. 

These changes will cost money and require a recommitment, perhaps a rechanneling and configuration of the allocation of resources. But if reducing the dropout 

rate is our goal, these suggestions are proven. They have worked in the past and 

will still work if we will but put our resources where our stated intentions are. It 

has to be emphasized that funding to school districts has to be increased to appropriately broaden the curriculum. 

If broad, wholesale curriculum changes cannot be made in individual community 

schools, then we need to seriously consider using our new Rural Training Centers 

(RTCs) as vocational magnet schools. These institutions could actually prepare our 

students for the world of work and at the same time in concert with their respective 

school districts and our rural University campuses, address academic and developmental education needs. 

They could provide the necessary counseling and, most importantly, RTC’s could 

be operated in conjunction with State of Alaska, DOL JOBS centers. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF STEVE ATWATER, PH.D., PRESIDENT, ALASKA ASSOCIATION

OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS

Chairwoman Murkowski, as president of the Alaska Association of School Administrators (AASA), I respectfully submit this written testimony in response to your 

hearing on what the Federal Government can do to improve the high school graduation rate and postsecondary success in Alaska and nationwide. I feel that it is fair 

to state that all of Alaska’s school districts are working hard to improve their graduation rates and are devoting more attention than ever before to help their students 

have success after leaving school. Thank you for considering this testimony; I know 

that Federal support plays a significant role in helping our districts’ improvement 

efforts. 

81 

1Stanley, K.R. and Plucker, J.A. (2008). Improving High School Graduation Rates. Education 

Policy Brief, Center for Evaluation & Education Policy, 7 (6), 1–11. 

Recent research on why students are not graduating from high school found that 

students are likely to stay in school when they feel that they are a part of the school 

community, understand that what they are learning is relevant and are challenged 

intellectually.1 I use these three elements as the basis for the following recommendations for how Federal support can improve graduation rates and student 

success after school. 

ESTABLISHING SCHOOL COMMUNITY

Working to help students feel that they are a part of a school community includes 

a strong parental presence in the school and providing students with a variety of 

learning opportunities. While the engagement of parents in the schooling process is 

a local concern, I feel that Federal support of early childhood education can help 

to ensure that students are exposed to a comprehensive curriculum. For the past 

several years, the Lower Kuskokwim School District (LKSD) has studied their incoming kindergarten students’ school readiness skills and then used this data to 

predict their future academic success. The district has learned that many of their 

students who enter school with low skills are never able to catch up and are by default, in jeopardy of not graduating. This situation is of course, not unique to LKSD; 

it exists in many of Alaska’s school districts where there is a high level of poverty. 

Schools with students who fall into this category are forced into the predicament 

of offering this group a seemingly endless array of interventions, e.g., 2 hours/day 

of reading instruction. The downside of this is that school for these young children 

lacks much of what is important to early learning. In sum, when teaching the basics 

consumes the school day, there is little or no time for instruction in the arts. As 

a way to help avoid this scenario, the Federal Government can work to improve student readiness for school by increasing the funding for Head Start programs and 

by requiring that Head Start align its learning goals with those of the local school 

district. With more funding, Head Start can recruit a more qualified staff and offer 

more training opportunities for its employees. An improved Head Start Program 

would better prepare more of Alaska’s and the country’s impoverished children for 

school. This would help schools to avoid the limitations of the catch-up conundrum 

and in turn, contribute to establishing a positive school community that is an important part of helping students to stay in school. 

Recommendation 1: Support early childhood learning through increased 

funding for Head Start and/or other grants for preschool. 

RELEVANT LEARNING

While I know that all of AASA’s members embrace the need for schools to be held 

accountable, I also know that few agree that the current practice of determining 

school quality on an annual test in math and language arts is appropriate. Due to 

the pressure for positive test results, many high schools are limiting course offerings 

in content areas with a real-life application, e.g., Career and Technical Education 

(CTE), to instead focus on language arts and math. The consequence of this approach is that students may deem school that is lacking in these courses to be irrelevant to their lives. It is ironic then, that a school’s well-intentioned effort to make 

AYP may indirectly contribute to a lower graduation rate. A solution for how to 

maintain school accountability and also improve graduation rates is to allow and 

then encourage States to redefine their accountability plans to include assessments 

that test the application of work readiness skills. Alaska’s Career Ready Certificate 

is an example of one such assessment that would serve this purpose. This broadening of academic focus could well help students to maintain their interest in school. 

A State’s accountability plan with a tiered assessment system that measures academic basic skills for elementary students and applied skills for secondary students 

would cause schools to expand their curriculum offerings and thus help to address 

this oft-cited problem of school not being connected to real life. 

Recommendation 2: With the reauthorization of NCLB, allow States, as 

part of their accountability plan, to include an assessment of work readiness skills. 

Schools across Alaska are at varying stages of offering Career and Technical Education (CTE). As we plan for how best to prepare our students for a highly technical 

world of the future, it is imperative that we do more in the area of CTE. The Federal Government can help districts to expand their offerings and in some cases 

rethink what CTE can be, by increasing the Carl Perkins funding and relaxing some 

82 

of the Act’s compliance requirements. At present, most of the small districts in Alaska qualify for such a small amount of Perkins funds, that their impact is minimal. 

Recommendation 3: Increase Carl Perkins funds to help schools provide 

applied learning opportunities. 

INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE

When examining traits of the Kenai Peninsula Borough School District’s dropouts, 

the district’s administration was surprised to discover that many of this group 

scored at the proficient or advanced level on the State’s required assessments. The 

cited research found this to be common among many of the Nation’s dropouts. One 

can infer that these capable students are dropping out because they are 

disenfranchised with school and not because school is academically too difficult. The 

traditional way of accommodating such students is to offer an alternative or optional 

program places an emphasis on collaboration and projects. The Federal Government 

can help districts establish such programs through grants that provide the needed 

start-up money. Federal support should also be made available to support innovative programs that are helping students graduate and to then go on to college. 

Project Grad is one such program that deserves Federal money; it is having success 

with Kenai Peninsula Borough School District’s students. 

Recommendation 4: Offer Federal support for innovative alternative programs that follow a rigorous curriculum. 

For the past several years all of us in education have heard that our high school 

graduates are not prepared for postsecondary schooling or for the world of work. 

Many of the remedies for this problem include implementing national standards 

with high quality assessments and making work readiness training a mandatory 

part of high school. Although these proposed solutions would likely raise the level 

of academic achievement and lead to more success for the entering workforce, they 

may not help the students who are at risk of not graduating. I believe that a way 

to both increase graduation rates and ensure greater postsecondary success is for 

schools to employ a more strategic use of technology. While the use of technology 

for school administration has blossomed in the past 10 years, I don’t believe that 

the technological component of instruction has followed suit. That is, much of the 

use of this medium is little more than an electronic transfer of written information 

and not, as is needed in the world of work, a way to creatively solve problems. The 

Federal Government, with private industry as a partner, should offer schools a clear 

roadmap and support for how to train staff so that they are better able to teach 

problem solving with technology skills. With Federal guidance and continued strong 

fiscal support through the Schools and Libraries Program and other Federal funds, 

schools can realize this needed instructional improvement. 

Recommendation 5: Ensure that the Schools and Libraries Program funding is not reduced and provide grant monies for training teachers in how 

to provide instruction that utilizes innovative problem solving. 

In closing, I want to thank you for your past and on-going commitment to improving the education of our Nation’s students. The members of the Alaska Association 

of School Administrators welcome the opportunity to work with you in pursuit of 

the goals of increasing graduation rates and improving postsecondary success. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DIANE BARRANS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ALASKA COMMISSION ON POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION

Thank you for this opportunity to provide input relative to what the Federal Government can do to improve high school graduation rates and postsecondary success 

in Alaska. 

As you are aware, the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary Education (ACPE) is 

Alaska’s State higher education agency, charged with increasing Alaskans’ access to 

the benefits of higher education. To meet that mission, ACPE provides our State’s 

citizens with AlaskAdvantage Programs, a suite of programs and services that provide: 

• Outreach to underserved populations, and early awareness of and preparation 

for higher education; 

• Financial aid for postsecondary education and training; 

• Advocacy for Alaska colleges and postsecondary career education opportunities; 

and 

• Education consumer protection through institutional authorization and consumer complaint investigation. 

83 

The Alaska Student Loan Corporation (ASLC), a public corporation and instrumentality of the State of Alaska, finances these core programs and services which 

comprise the AlaskAdvantage Programs. By leveraging the receipts and income of 

this State enterprise agency in this way, Alaskans benefit from ACPE’s services and 

programs without appropriations from the State General Fund. 

Through participation in the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP), 

ASLC is able to further leverage its programs with Federal lender payments to offer 

Alaska’s students the lowest cost financial aid packages in the Nation. In the 7 

years since joining FFELP in 2001, ASLC has provided Alaska borrowers with over 

$21 million in cumulative education loan cost savings. Additionally, program economies of scale leveraged through FFELP participation allow ASLC to fund the 

AlaskAdvantage Education Grant program, which annually provides over 500 needy 

Alaska students with grants of up to $2,000. 

Along with financial aid, ACPE offers outreach and early awareness programs and 

services intended to increase Alaskans’ awareness of the importance of academic 

preparation and financial planning to ensure both access and success in postsecondary education. ACPE seeks to provide every State resident with informational 

tools to understand that postsecondary education is vitally important and possible 

for all Alaskans—regardless of their economic or social status. 

Most recently, when Alaska was faced with the loss of its Career Information System (AKCIS), ACPE was able to leverage ASLC resources to make this vital tool 

available to all Alaskans at no charge, including all teachers, counselors, and student mentors in Alaska. AKCIS is an interactive, Alaska-centric Web-based tool that 

‘‘connects the dots’’ between academic preparation, higher education, and career success. 

There remains, however, much more to be done. Alaska has the lowest collegegoing rate among its youth of any State in the Nation; a high-school dropout rate 

of 48 percent, and the second highest unemployment rate in the Nation among its 

high-school dropouts. Of even greater concern, the fastest growing population segments in Alaska are those with the lowest family income, lowest graduation and 

highest unemployment rates. Unless we take efficient, effective, and timely action, 

the demands on Alaska’s social service and public facilities will take a tremendous 

toll on our State support infrastructure, especially during this time of nationwide 

economic retraction. 

To address this issue, ACPE commissioned a study by the Institute for Higher 

Education Policy (IHEP), and identified a three-pronged, cost-efficient strategy 

leveraging existing programs to create new partnerships and expand program reach. 

However, erosion of partnerships with Federal programs puts these opportunities at 

risk. 

The most important thing the Federal Government can do to improve high school 

graduation rates and postsecondary success in Alaska is to thoughtfully support 

state-focused programs such as FFELP that leverage Federal/non-Federal partnerships in ways that expand our joint reach without expanding our individual costs. 

Legislation and programs that recognize the value-added services of non-profit/state 

agency FFELP participation provide clear positives for our shared State citizen customers, allowing us to customize Federal program benefits to make them Alaskacentric and specific to our Alaska students’ unique needs. 

I urge Congress to develop and support State-Federal partnerships which are inherently state-centric and flexible to ensure knowledge of local cultures and issues 

inform the design and delivery of services, but which are also accountable for demonstrating both efficiencies and effectiveness. State-Federal partnerships leverage 

the efficiency of national initiatives and apply that national agenda and model in 

ways that increase effectiveness by adapting delivery to the specific needs of each 

State’s varied and diverse target populations. Specifically, Congress should provide 

assistance, relative to the current liquidity crisis, for state-based FFELP lenders, 

such as ASLC, that are committed to originating and servicing customers’ loans 

throughout their lifecycle. This form of commitment to the students and borrowers 

we serve means that we may not sell these loans under the U.S. Department of 

Education’s purchase program or any other. 

On behalf of the members and staff of the Alaska Commission on Postsecondary 

Education, I offer our thanks to Senator Murkowski for her efforts to address this 

critical State and national challenge. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DEBBIE BOGART, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, 

ANCHORAGE’S PROMISE

We believe that the issues surrounding High School Graduation Rates and Postsecondary Success in Alaska and Nationwide can not be successfully identified or 

84 

addressed without first understanding the historical influences, cultural diversity 

and economic differences that impact the State of Alaska. These differences are 

deeply embedded within our communities and impacted by the services that our 

young people must receive in order to affect their ability to successfully engage socially, emotionally and academically. 

Children and youth who attend school hungry, without adequate health care, or 

the support of a caring adult are significantly more at-risk of failure. Research completed by America’s Promise Alliance, Every Child, Every Promise, shows a strong 

correlation between children who experience what the Alliance calls the ‘‘Five Promises’’ and their ability to become successful adults. These Five Promises are caring 

adults, safe places, a healthy start, effective education, and opportunities to help 

others. Research shows that the more support youth have, both inside and outside 

the classroom, the more likely they are to stay in school. ‘‘We must invest in the 

whole child, and that means finding solutions that involve the family, the school, 

and the community.’’ (Grad Nation Guidebook to Help Communities Tackle The 

Dropout Crisis, 2008.) 

Investing in the whole child and providing support inside and outside the classroom requires that as a state Alaskans be allocated fiscal support, given dedicated 

staff time and guidance in strategic planning to develop a detailed understanding 

of why our students are dropping out. This includes building an even stronger alliance among educators, community-based program services, and postsecondary education to convey to our communities that the dropout crisis is a real and significant 

problem, one that affects the whole community, but it is solvable with sufficient 

community effort and foresight and is dramatically impacted through the support 

youth receive both inside and outside the classroom. 

The Alliance for Excellent Education reports that: 

• Approximately 4,100 students did not graduate from Alaska’s high schools in 

2007. 

• If Alaska’s high schools graduated all students ready for college, the State 

would save almost $672 thousand a year in community college remediation costs 

and lost earnings. 

• The lost lifetime earnings in Alaska for that class of dropouts alone are more 

than $1.1 billion. 

• Alaska would save more than $57.2 million in health care costs over the lifetimes of each class of dropouts had they earned their diplomas. 

• Alaska’s economy would see a combination of crime-related savings and additional revenue of about $19 million each year if the male high school graduation 

rate increased by just 5 percent. (February 2008) 

Research is strong, to meet the needs of our young people, we can no longer work 

independently to address the issues that are surmounting and rapidly growing beyond the point of being out of control. As a nation and as a state, we must work 

together to identify and address the needs of our young people. We must work together to provide strong supports both inside and outside the classroom. 

Our ability to identify solutions and build successful partnerships between schools 

and community services can be accomplished through strong alliances, and with an 

adoption of a collective mission, one that is directed towards addressing the needs 

of the whole child. 

As an organization whose mission is to build on the collective power of local and 

State partners to align services for youth people, fulfilling the Five Promises, we are 

recommending that through Federal support, the following three focus areas could 

impact the lives of Alaska’s young people and make a substantial difference in improving high school graduation rates and postsecondary success. These recommendations are substantiated through national research and through the collaborative work that our organization has been involved in locally and across the State 

of Alaska. 

Addressing the current level of Medicaid and SCHIP funding that Alaska 

receives. Moving forward not only in adopting new legislation, but increasing funding that would provide additional support to our State, providing medical coverage 

for children who desperately need health care. Currently, Alaska has approximately 

18,000 children who are uninsured and another 22,227 who receive services through 

the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (Denali KidCare). Across the Nation, 47 million Americans lack health insurance, 9 million are children. (Center on 

Budget and Policy, 2008). While healthcare coverage is a nationwide issue, it is an 

issue that impacts the success of each young person, and their ability to thrive and 

remain healthy. Without preventative care and health care coverage, Alaska’s youth 

are at risk of failure physically, mentally and emotionally. 

85 

Uninsured children are much less likely to receive treatment for easily curable 

conditions that can affect long-term health as well as performance in school. 

‘‘From 2006 to 2007, the number of America’s children that live in poverty grew 

by nearly half a million. Indeed in 2007, the child poverty rate reached a level, 18 

percent, not seen in this country for more than a decade. Furthermore, the number 

of children who live just above the poverty line (between 100 percent and 125 percent of the Federal Poverty Level) also grew by about 100,000 children from 2006 

to 2007. All told, last year more than 13.3 million children in America were living 

in poverty with an additional 4.3 million living just above the poverty line.’’ (First 

Focus, 2008). 

Within the State of Alaska, 182,788 children, 11 percent, live in poor families with an average income of $21,200. Thirty-seven percent (21,484) of Alaskan children 

under the age of 6 live in low-income families and thirteen percent (7,712) live in 

poor families. Fifty-three percent (29,464) of low-income families and seventy-eight 

percent of poor families are headed by single parents. Seventy-three percent (6,322) 

of children whose parents do not have a high school degree live in low-income families, while 36 percent are among poor families. (National Center for Children in Poverty, 2008) 

Current legislation and levels of funding both at the Federal level and within our 

State must be addressed. Additionally, access to health care, expansion of provider 

services, reimbursement of costs to the provider and out-of-pocket expenses expected 

by caregivers must become transparent and fluid to allow for greater coverage and 

access to health care for Alaska’s children. 

Increasing the number of safe places our children and youth can access 

before and after school, during vacations and holidays. Addressing and solving issues that limited the amount of time local schools are open and available for 

community use, especially for children and youth. Every school day, when the last 

bell rings students are released back into the community. A far greater number of 

students are returning to homes without parent supervision, exploring unsafe places 

and engaging in activities that are poor choices. 

Research provided through the National Institute on Out-of-School Time, David 

J. Shernoff and Deborah Lowe Vandell State, ‘‘We found that there were significant 

differences in the use of time and the quality of experience when students were at 

the programs compared to when they were elsewhere after school. While attending 

the programs, program youth reported spending a higher percentage of time in organized sports, academic and arts enrichment activities, and completing homework 

than when they were elsewhere. Students in other settings reported spending a good 

deal of time watching TV and eating or snacking after school. Students in programs 

rarely reported engaging in these activities. Students in other settings also reported 

being alone or in ‘‘self-care’’ a substantial percentage of the time. Not once did a 

student report being alone when at a program. (Youth Engagement and Quality of 

Experience in Afterschool Programs, Fall 2008). Engaging students in quality programs and services during the out-of-school time can have an even greater impact 

on the level of success socially as well as academically. 

In Alaska there are 633 licensed providers with 17,189 slots available for children 

birth to age 12. (Child Care Connection, 2008). Unfortunately, annual fees for full 

time infant/toddler care are $9,480, an increase from $1,780 since 2005. (Alaska Department of Public Assistance; Child Care Assistance, 2008) In comparison, the annual cost of college tuition for a full-time resident student in Alaska is $4,530 (University of Alaska Anchorage Web site, 2008). For a family of four with an annual 

income of $21,200, the cost of licensed day care will most likely require a caregiver 

or parent to stay at home, use an extended family member for support or even rely 

on an older sibling to provide care before and after school so that one parent family 

members can work when children are not in school. 

Afterschool programs provided by Campfire, Boys and Girls Clubs, 21st Century 

Community Learning Centers, and faith-based community partners have increased 

the number of quality programs and services available for many of our school age 

children. However, there is still a great need for more options that are affordable 

and provide quality care. Through the support of local education, corporate, nonprofit and government partners we can address this need and provide integrated 

support and opportunities for our youth to succeed. 

In 1953, with the help of Michigan State University, a model we in Alaska and 

across the Nation fondly called ‘‘Community schools’’ quickly became the focal point 

for delivering a wide range of neighborhood services. Well coordinated and community active models evolved, that included providing opportunity for the entire community, not just the school and its after-hours recreation programs, to became a 

part of providing services for children, youth and families. This model was first 

brought to the attention of the Mott Foundation through a local educator, an indiVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00089 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
86 

vidual who saw a need, at a time when—economically—support for social programs, 

recreational services and extended education opportunities were not provided or 

even thought of. Often called the ‘‘Founder of Community Education,’’ Frank Manley 

was devoted to improving the quality of life for young people and adults through 

academic and recreational programs in schools. 

As an early change agent, Mr. Manley’s work has continued to impact communities and citizen involvement. Utilizing public schools as a hub, community schools 

bring together many partners to offer a range of supports and opportunities to children, youth, families and communities—before, during and after school, 7 days a 

week. These partners work to achieve these results: 

• Children are ready to learn when they enter school and every day thereafter. 

• All students learn and achieve to high standards. 

• Young people are well prepared for adult roles in the workplace, as parents and 

as citizens. 

• Families and neighborhoods are safe, supportive and engaged. 

• Parents and community members are involved with the school and their own 

life-long learning. 

This past year, a Federal Act provided a limited number of grants to local partnerships, composed of local school districts and community-based organizations, 

nonprofit organizations, and other public/private entities, for purposes of coordinating at least three services at a school site, providing an exciting opportunity for 

those communities who received funding. Through expanded fiscal support, matched 

by both Federal and State dollars, communities across Alaska can work together to 

develop full service community schools that provide early childhood programs; literacy/reading programs for youth and families; parenting education activities; community service/service learning; job training/career counseling services; nutrition 

services; primary health and dental care; and mental health preventive and treatment services. 

Supporting legislation and increasing funding within No Child Left Behind increases meaningful opportunities for elementary, middle school, 

high school and college-age youth that enables them to link and partner 

within their communities through service-learning and community volunteer opportunities. Service-learning is a philosophy, a pedagogy, and a model for 

community development that is used as an instructional strategy to meet learning 

goals and content standards. It is a strategy that can be adopted within the classroom and in community-based programs such as Campfire, Boys and Girls Clubs, 

Communities In School and through the 21st Century Community Learning Center 

programs. August 25, 2008—The National Youth Leadership Council released service-learning standards that came from a nationwide effort involving input from key 

stakeholder groups, including teachers, service-learning specialists, policymakers, 

administrators, and students. They are based on a body of research from the service-learning, education and youth development fields. They offer educators, schools, 

and community organizations a guide to ensure that service-learning can achieve 

the academic and civic engagement outcomes that this powerful teaching method 

promises. The K–12 Service-Learning Standards for Quality Practice include eight 

standards that ensure high-quality service-learning experiences for all involved— 

teachers, students and include; meaningful service, link to curriculum, reflection, diversity, youth voice, partnerships, progress monitoring and duration and intensity. 

Identify and define actions within language that can be interpreted and 

understood by all who are involved. The result of this will enable each community to rally around the issues that impact student success and will develop an understanding of the dimensions of the dropout challenges in our State. To develop an 

effective plan, one that will combat the high school dropout rates and prepare youth 

for advanced learning in and after high school requires strong partnerships, those 

that can make a lasting change. 

For example, the Five Promises are the framework that align with the 40 Development Assets and provide a common language that often connects with organizational goals and mission statements found in most organizations that provide services for children and youth. Safe places, caring adults, healthy future, effective education and opportunities to serve are easily understood and can be aligned collaboratively to build coalitions and partnerships. 

We can turn the trend if we remember that our communities are complex and diverse in social and economic representation, inclusive of different languages and 

level of education. Improving High School Graduation Rates and Postsecondary Success in Alaska and Nationwide requires the involvement of those who care about 

young people and are committed to helping make a lasting change. 

87 

Daily in our work with community partners, youth, educators and families, Anchorage’s Promise understands the value of working within a collaborative environment to strengthen the power of the Five Promises for Alaska’s children. Through 

the involvement and commitment of community partners we collectively provide opportunity each year for over 30,000 youth to become engaged in volunteer service 

and leadership opportunities that have enriched their own life and have provided 

valuable results within their own communities. 

Annually, through the support of community partners, our organization has 

worked to provide an opportunity for the Five Promises to come alive during an 

event called KidsDay. A time when children are valued by all, are given an opportunity to explore and learn about positive choices and are engaged with at least one 

caring adult in exploring creative and fun activities. On this day as a community, 

Anchorage comes together to wrap support and services around children and young 

people. We believe valuing our children within our homes, community and schools 

is essential in building a foundation within which our young people can thrive and 

succeed as they grow and become mature, productive and caring adults. 

‘‘We must invest in the whole child, and that means finding solutions that involve 

the family, the school, and the community.’’ (Grad Nation Guidebook to Help Communities Tackle The Dropout Crisis, 2008.) 

As a nation, and as a state that values children, within our communities and in 

our homes we must work together to identify ways that we can improve, intensify, 

expand or significantly integrate existing efforts to provide the support that youth 

must have, both inside and outside the classroom that will encourage each student 

to stay in school and succeed in high school and postsecondary education. 

ABOUT ANCHORAGE ’S PROMISE

Anchorage’s Promise, an affiliate organization of America’s Promise, is a part of 

a national alliance made up of nonprofit groups, corporations, community leaders, 

charitable foundations, faith-based organizations and individuals. Through increasing awareness, advocating for children and engaging in local initiatives, we use the 

strength of our partnerships and our association with America’s Promise, to more 

effectively and strategically bring the power of the Five Promises to Alaska’s children—enabling them to have the resources they need to lead happier, healthier, 

more productive lives and build a stronger future. Founded in 2003, Anchorage’s 

Promise has emerged as the largest and most effective mobilizer of youth-led activities in Alaska. Annually, Anchorage’s Promise with support from partners touched 

the lives of 30,000 young people and their families throughout the State of Alaska. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE COOK INLET TRIBAL COUNCIL, INC. 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Through the reauthorization process of No Child Left Behind (NCLB), Congress 

has the opportunity and responsibility to expand upon existing models that lead to 

increased Alaska Native, American Indian, and overall student achievement. 

2. The Alaska Native Educational Equity, Support, and Assistance Act (NCLB, 

Title VII, Part C) addresses the holistic educational needs of Alaska’s first peoples, 

throughout the continuum from early childhood to postsecondary education. Cook 

Inlet Tribal Council (CITC) has discerned through examination of Alaska’s statewide Adequate Yearly Progress data that when Alaska Native students are thriving 

in school, all students are thriving. 

3. Through the funding provided by Alaska Native Educational Equity, Support, 

and Assistance Act, within the framework of NCLB, CITC demonstrates that a successful educational program integrates the following core elements: 

• Rigorous curricula and high academic expectations, 

• Innovative public-private partnerships, 

• Positive youth development, 

• Family/community involvement in education, and 

• Culturally responsive practices. 

Alaska’s Vision of Success for its Native Students 

In 2006, First Alaskans Institute (FAI) interviewed 45 Alaska Native leaders, legislators, state officials, school district staff, and community members to produce a 

report on Alaska Native Student Vitality that reflects the perspectives of Alaska’s 

diverse educational stakeholders. In this report, FAI defined a successful Native student as ‘‘one who can set and achieve goals because he knows his own 

worth and value, understands his responsibility to his community, and is 

prepared to pursue whatever life path he chooses.’’ CITC exhorts Congress to 

88 

reflect upon this vision of success for students across the Nation as it reauthorizes 

NCLB and charts the future of education in America. 

THE CHALLENGE

The data is unassailable: far too many of our youth are dropping out of school, 

and even more youth leave our K–12 educational system ill-equipped to make meaningful life choices regarding their postsecondary education opportunities, their future careers, and their personal well-being. As Senator Murkowski noted on her 

Web site, this ‘‘limit[s] Alaska’s ability to develop its economy and limit[s] our Nation’s ability to compete on the world stage.’’ 

Congress has already articulated the challenge and set forward some of 

the key ingredients needed for achieving success, as follows: 

NCLB, TITLE VII, PART C, SEC. 7302. FINDINGS. 

Congress finds and declares the following: 

1. The attainment of educational success is critical to the betterment of the conditions, long-term well-being, and preservation of the culture of Alaska Natives. 

2. It is the policy of the Federal Government to encourage the maximum participation by Alaska Natives in the planning and the management of Alaska Native education programs. 

3. Alaska Native children enter and exit school with serious educational handicaps. 

4. The educational achievement of Alaska Native children is far below national 

norms. Native performance on standardized tests is low, Native student dropout rates 

are high, and Natives are significantly underrepresented among holders of baccalaureate degrees in the State of Alaska. As a result, Native students are being denied 

their opportunity to become full participants in society by grade school and high 

school educations that are condemning an entire generation to an underclass status 

and a life of limited choices. 

5. The programs authorized in this part, combined with expanded Head Start, infant learning, and early childhood education programs, and parent education programs, are essential if educational handicaps are to be overcome. 

6. The sheer magnitude of the geographic barriers to be overcome in delivering educational services in rural Alaska and Alaska villages should be addressed through 

the development and implementation of innovative, model programs in a variety of 

areas. 

7. Native children should be afforded the opportunity to begin their formal education on a par with their non-Native peers. The Federal Government should lend 

support to efforts developed by and undertaken within the Alaska Native community 

to improve educational opportunity for all students. 

MEETING THE CHALLENGE

CITC is a tribal social service nonprofit organization in Anchorage, AK that works 

in partnership with the community to provide opportunities for Native people to fulfill their endless potential in four core areas: K–12 education; workforce development and employment; child welfare and family services; and recovery from addictions. 

While CITC recognizes the tumultuous history of Native education in Alaska, and 

the residual apprehension or mistrust of schools that it may engender in our people, 

we also want to emphasize that education is a traditional value that our Native community holds in high regard; we know that education is the key 

to our people’s success both now and into the future. CITC is partnering with 

the U.S. Department of Education, the Anchorage School District, our students and 

families, and our community to ensure that our Native students receive a quality 

education that prepares and empowers them to set and achieve their life goals. 

At CITC we believe that in order to achieve the desired academic outcomes and 

goals of NCLB, our schools must provide all students with educational opportunities 

that holistically strengthen and support youth as our most valued resources to be 

nurtured and developed—rather than using the dominant, deficit-based framework 

of viewing our students and their achievement as problems to be solved. While all 

of CITC’s educational services target dropout prevention, we directly address this challenge through the concept of developing lifelong cultural, social, emotional, and academic success in our students. 

CITC respectfully submits these comments through the lens of our educational services, which we have found to be effective for Native students 

and, by extrapolation and as demonstrated by research, effective for all 

students. 

89 

CITC provides strengths-based, core content classes and supportive services to 

over 1,000 K–12 Native students and their families across the Anchorage School 

District. Our external evaluations indicate that the longer students are involved 

in CITC’s educational services, the better their performance in school. 

‘‘Among the [Alaska Native/American Indian] students in [CITC’s educational services], less absences, higher GPA, higher Standardized Base Assessment test scores 

in reading and writing, and greater rates of graduation were related to more frequent participation in the program . . . With regard to changes in actual SBA test 

scores, students in the [CITC] Program improved markedly in their reading and 

math test scores, and these improvements were substantially greater for CITC than 

for non-CITC [Native] students.’’ (Excerpts September 22, 2007 letter from CITC external evaluator, Spero M. Manson, Ph.D; Professor and Head of American Indian 

and Alaska Native Programs; School of Medicine; University of Colorado Denver.) 

CITC recommends that all early childhood, K–12, and postsecondary educational systems be firmly rooted in and accountable to the following core 

concepts: 

• Innovative Public-Private Partnerships 

• Rigorous Curricula and High Expectations of Students 

• Positive Youth Development 

• Family and Community Involvement in Education 

• Culturally Responsive Practices in the Classroom 

Innovative Public-Private Partnerships 

The education of our youth is a shared responsibility that extends beyond our 

school systems’ purview; every community member has a role to play in contributing 

to the success of our youth. Now more than ever, we as a community must ensure 

that we are effectively leveraging our resources and aligning our educational and 

social services to best meet the needs of our people. Through CITC’s unique partnership with the Anchorage School District (ASD), we have created a successful model for widespread community collaboration in Native education 

that can be replicated across Alaska and nationwide. This collaborative relationship is designed to produce positive educational and social outcomes for youth 

while being mutually beneficial to all parties involved. 

With funding from the U.S. Department of Education (ED), CITC supplements the educational services offered within ASD by providing teams of CITC staff 

working in 10 ASD public schools. These schools are identified by ASD and CITC 

based upon high numbers of Native student enrollment and Native student achievement. CITC works with ASD leadership to establish a ‘‘school within a school’’ 

model for Native students in each location. 

The CITC education teams are composed of: 

• Certified Teachers are ‘‘highly qualified’’ per NCLB, and teach core content 

classes (in Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, and Physical Education) for Native students in ASD. These teachers are trained in Native traditions and learning 

styles, and they integrate Native culture into the content and the methodology of 

their classes. 

• Assistant Teachers provide individualized instruction and tutoring, homework 

assistance, small group instruction, after school activities, family activities and communication, curricula development, field trip coordination, and other associated educational duties. The Assistant Teacher position is a stepping stone for aspiring 

teachers to develop their classroom skills within a supportive environment. 

• Family Advocates serve as a culturally responsive bridge of ongoing communication between home and school, helping families to advocate for their child’s 

needs. They also refer students and families to other community resources. 

• Academic Counselors assist students to stay on track for graduation from high 

school through individualized education, career, and life planning. 

Overall, ED provides funding for CITC to hire 51 full-time educational professionals to ensure that Native students’ academic and social-emotional needs are met 

within the 10 ASD schools in which CITC has a presence. While CITC currently receives competitive grant funding from the ED Office of Indian Education and the 

ED Office of Safe and Drug-free Schools, the majority of CITC’s educational 

funding (76 percent) is awarded through the Alaska Native Educational Equity Act. CITC relies on this funding stream to serve our students. We cannot overstate the importance of this funding to both CITC and to the entire 

State of Alaska. 

Beyond our foundational tripartite partnership amongst CITC, ASD, and ED, 

CITC cultivates numerous other partnerships that contribute to student success, 

such as: 

90 

• Within CITC, all departments collaborate to provide wrap-around services and 

opportunities for students and their families in employment and training, recovery, 

and child/family welfare; • CITC partners with the University of Alaska Anchorage’s highly lauded Alaska 

Native Science and Engineering Program (ANSEP) to provide ongoing high-end 

math and science tutoring to CITC youth, and to smooth the pathway for Native 

students to pursue postsecondary education and careers in science, technology, engineering, and math; • CITC works with the Alaska Native Heritage Center to provide cultural 

trainings for staff and special events for students and/or the community at large; • CITC students produce multimedia public service announcements and documentaries for public events and other social service entities, including: Covenant House’s 

Candlelight Vigil for Homeless Youth, Alaska Native/American Indian Heritage 

Month, Anchorage Youth Court, Alaska Native/American Indian Aids Awareness, 

among others; • CITC students work with Koahnic Broadcast Corporation to produce public 

radio pieces for distribution nationwide through National Native News; CITC students produce a live, weekly radio show on the University of Alaska Anchorage’s 

radio station, KRUA; and CITC staff members regularly serve as featured guest 

panelists on the nationally syndicated Native America Calling; and • CITC’s educational services partners with numerous other individuals and social service organizations across Alaska and the Nation to ensure that we are collectively identifying, responding to, and meeting the needs of our youth and their families. 

In addition to our ongoing outreach and sharing within the Anchorage community, over the past year CITC has been invited and/or selected to present our 

innovative educational partnerships at the following local and national 

educational events: 

• Bilingual Multicultural Education and Equity Conference in Anchorage, AK; • Office of Indian Education Partnerships for Indian Education: Students— 

Schools—Family—Community Annual Conference in Rapid City, SD; • Office of Indian Education Annual Grantee Meeting in Washington, DC; • National Indian Education Association Annual Conference in Seattle, WA; and • White House Compassion in Action Roundtable in Washington, DC. 

Rigorous Curricula and High Expectations of Students 

Educational leaders set the tone within schools, and teachers set the tone within 

classrooms for expectations regarding student achievement. All educators must 

fully believe and embrace the core concept that all students can learn; however, unintentional biases and/or cultural misunderstandings can lead to low expectations for student achievement, especially for Native students. When students 

feel respected and supported in the classroom, they are willing and capable 

of rising to and exceeding the academic expectations that are set for them. 

As a result, educators must intentionally examine and re-think the common and inaccurate presupposition that Native students will not fare as well in class as their 

non-Native counterparts because that’s what the data has tended to demonstrate. 

Academic rigor is key not only to our students’ performance on standardized tests 

for Adequate Yearly Progress, but also to their ability to become critical thinkers 

and contributing members of their communities. All of CITC’s core content classes follow established curricula and meet or exceed district and State standards. CITC is proud to offer both basic and advanced math, science, and language 

arts classes, and we strive to cultivate intellectual curiosity and commitment to citizenship within a global context in all our students. 

Positive Youth Development 

Often referred to as ‘‘soft skills,’’ positive youth development and the socialemotional learning that it brings about are the foundational skills for students’ success in school and in life. The Search Institute is a leader in advocating for the power of positive youth development and its impact on student 

achievement and well-being. The Search Institute created a research-based framework of developmental assets, which are ‘‘positive factors in young people, families, 

communities, schools, and other settings that have been found to be important in 

promoting young people’s healthy development. Search Institute’s framework organizes 40 assets into eight categories: support, empowerment, boundaries and expectations, constructive use of time, commitment to learning, positive values, social 

competencies, and positive identity’’ (http://www.search-institute.org/research/insights-evidence). More information about developmental assets is available at 

www.search-institute.org/assets. 

91 

In their October 2003 publication Insights & Evidence—Promoting Healthy Children, Youth, and Communities, the Search Institute stated ‘‘New studies suggest 

that developmental assets play a significant role in students’ academic achievement 

across a wide range of students. In fact, developmental assets appear to have 

as much or more influence on student achievement as other demographic 

factors and school reform strategies. Thus, building developmental assets has 

great promise as a strategy for boosting student achievement.’’ (Quoted words are 

bolded by CITC.) 

CITC builds positive youth development through developmental assets 

into all of its educational services. CITC education staff engages in regular professional development focused on positive youth development. Staff implements positive youth development strategies in our classes, and they inspire our students to 

create cultural analogies about positive youth development. Student analogies include the feathers on an eagle representing the developmental assets and the 

strengths students need to soar to success; the fibers of a basket representing a 

community uniting to support youth; and traditional subsistence fishing as a metaphor for the community identifying the inherent abilities and assets of students. 

CITC staff have participated in and presented at numerous Search Institute national conferences, sharing our culturally based approaches to utilizing the developmental assets framework as a means for improving student achievement and enhancing family involvement in education. 

CITC is grateful to the Association of Alaska School Boards for their exemplary 

work in creating the assets-based publication Helping Kids Succeed—Alaskan Style. Also funded by the Alaska Native Educational Equity Act, AASB’s Alaska Initiative 

for Community Engagement (Alaska ICE) has provided all Alaskans with information, tools and assistance to work together and engage in the shared responsibility 

of preparing Alaska’s children and youth for the future. CITC’s educational services 

have been enriched by the work that Alaska ICE has done to incorporate placebased and culture-based knowledge into the Search Institute’s developmental assets 

framework, making it readily accessible and relevant to our Native students and 

families. 

CITC also commends ASD for recognizing the critical need for accountability to 

positive youth development by adopting district-wide Social-Emotional Learning 

Standards and Benchmarks. ASD defines Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) as 

‘‘the process through which we learn to recognize and manage emotions, care about 

others, make good decisions, behave ethically and responsibly, develop positive relationships, and avoid negative behaviors. It is the process through which students 

enhance their ability to integrate thinking, feeling, and behaving in order to achieve 

important life tasks. Within the school setting, SEL can best be accomplished 

through a layered approach of skills lessons, infusion into the curricula and classroom practices, and an environment of safety, respect, and caring which models SEL 

values.’’ (http://wwvv.asdk12.org/depts/SDFS/SEL/SELlStandards.pdf) CITC 

uses ASD SEL standards in all of our classes. 

Family and Community Involvement in Education 

As research indicates, family involvement in education is a strong predictor 

for student success in school. CITC recognizes that parents and family members 

are our young people’s first and most important teachers—we need our families to 

help us with our educational services. When educators hear the term ‘‘family involvement,’’ they often think of the activities that can be done to involve parents 

in the school rather than involving schools with families. Throughout the school 

year, CITC provides meaningful outreach from the schools and opportunity for family involvement in our educational services: 

• Each CITC school has a full-time Family Advocate dedicated to ensuring individualized opportunities for family involvement to the degree the family is able; 

• Families receive regular communication (phone calls, home visits, mailings) 

from Family Advocates—and are able to call our staff anytime; 

• Families are welcome in CITC classes to share their knowledge and experiences 

with students, and can just visit the classroom whenever they like; 

• Families are encouraged to attend field trips and special events with students; 

• Families are invited to monthly CITC cultural and academic family gatherings, 

trainings, potlucks, guest speakers, and pow wows; 

• CITC welcomes family input and feedback from our families about our educational services at any time, and holds family focus groups twice yearly to learn 

how to improve our services; and 

• CITC encourages and assists (through transportation services and incentives) 

families to attend important school events, such as registration and parent-teacher 

conferences. 

92 

Culturally Responsive Practices in the Classroom 

Nationwide research as well as the Alaska Native/American Indian community have identified the need for improved cultural competence as a primary means to mitigating and alleviating the academic underachievement 

of Native students. CITC classes actively integrate Native culture in curricula, our 

classroom expectations are grounded in traditional Native values, and our teaching 

methodology reflects Native ways of teaching and learning. We provide students 

with a cultural sense of belonging within our core content classes. 

CITC helps to resolve issues in cross-cultural education documented by the Alaska 

Native Education Study: A Statewide Study of Alaska Native Values and Opinions 

Regarding Education in Alaska (First Alaskan’s Foundation, 2001). Key findings in 

the report are as follows: 

• Barriers to Native students’ academic success in Alaska (Section 1, p. 3–4): 

• Curriculum, learning materials and teaching styles do not relate to Native 

culture. 

• Ignorance of Native culture among teachers and other school staff. 

• Role of Language and Culture (Section 1, p. 4): Currently, ‘‘classroom education 

is generally inconsistent with Native culture and a rural lifestyle. To close the divide 

between Western education and Alaska Native culture, experts and parents alike suggest that ‘Native ways of knowing’ will improve Native student’s success.’’ 

• Improving Education for Alaska Native Children (Section 4, p. 19): Alaska Natives value education and want schools to be more relevant for Alaska Native students, as illustrated by their ranking of the following contributing factors: (1) parent 

involvement, (2) better teachers, (3) more Native teachers, (4) Native culture classes, (5) increased academic challenges, and (6) communication with teachers. 

The Northwest Regional Laboratory (February 2003) study, A Review of the Research Literature on the Influences of Culturally Based Education on the Academic 

Performance of Native American Students, supports the role of family and culture 

in education and includes the following findings: 

• Introduction (Section 1, p. 4): Jerome Bruner (a pioneer in cognitive development) states that ‘‘. . . culture shapes mind . . . it provides us with the tool kit 

by which we construct not only our worlds but our very conceptions of ourselves and 

our powers’’ (Bruner, 1991). 

• Definitions of Culturally Based Education Interventions (Section 2, p. 7): Culturally based education programs have six critical elements: 

1. Recognition and use of Native American languages. 

2. Pedagogy that stresses traditional cultural characteristics, and adult-child 

interactions. 

3. Pedagogy in which teaching strategies are congruent with the traditional culture and ways of knowing and learning. 

4. Curriculum that is based on traditional culture and that recognizes the importance of Native spirituality. 

5. Strong Native community participation (including parents, elders and other 

community resources) in educating children and in the planning and operation of 

school activities. 

6. Knowledge and practice of the social and political mores of the community. 

These key Native education studies combined with findings from CITC’s education 

programs, inform the building blocks for CITC’s academic enhancement and dropout prevention efforts. 

RECOMMENDATIONS TO CONGRESS

Echoing Alaska’s vision of success for its Native students, CITC and its Native 

community want Native students and all students to set and achieve goals because 

they know their own worth and value, understand their responsibility to his community, and are prepared to pursue whatever life path they choose. In order to do so, 

CITC submits the following recommendations: 

First and foremost, CITC exhorts the U.S. Senate Health, Education, 

Labor, and Pensions Committee and Congress at large to continue to support and to further strengthen the Alaska Native Educational Equity Act 

language within NCLB. The funds provided through NCLB Title VII, Part C are 

important to CITC and to all of Alaska. Alaska’s educational system perpetually 

faces funding challenges, which are compounded by the increasing energy crisis that 

Alaska faces. Approximately 80 percent of Alaska’s communities are remote/rural 

and lie off of the ‘‘road system,’’ meaning that they rely upon petroleum products 

for heating, electricity, and transportation—as a result, many rural school districts 

93 

are struggling to keep their doors open. These funds allow for an intentional 

focus on educational innovation and excellence beyond the operating costs 

of schools; they fill the gaps in Alaska’s educational systems, with 54 current grantees providing critical educational services ranging from early 

childhood through postsecondary education. If these funds were continued and 

increased, Alaska could experience even greater student success and achievement. 

We remind Congress of the importance of the purpose of this funding through Congress’ own language: 

NCLB, TITLE VII, PART C, SEC. 7303. PURPOSES. 

The purposes of this part are as follows: 

1. To recognize the unique educational needs of Alaska Natives. 

2. To authorize the development of supplemental educational programs to benefit 

Alaska Natives. 

3. To supplement existing programs and authorities in the area of education to further the purposes of this part. 

4. To provide direction and guidance to appropriate Federal, State and local agencies to focus resources, including resources made available under this part, on meeting the educational needs of Alaska Natives. 

Second, CITC also recommends that Congress increase the support of 

and direct accountability to the aforementioned key areas of educational 

systems (Innovative Public-Private Partnerships, Rigorous Curricula and High Expectations of Students, Positive Youth Development, Family and Community Involvement in Education, and Culturally Responsive Practices in the Classroom), requiring educational systems nationwide to demonstrate their proficiency in these 

areas as part of their NCLB reporting requirements. This broad-ranging accountability is also essential at the State, district, school, and classroom levels to ensure 

that teachers are utilizing individualized, culturally relevant, differentiated instruction and multiple forms of assessment to more accurately gauge and support holistic 

student achievement. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BEVERLY PATKOTAK GRINAGE, PRESIDENT, 

ILISAGVIK COLLEGE, BARROW, AK 

Today, Native American college graduation rates are the lowest of any racial or ethnic group in America. As president of the only Alaska Native-controlled College in Alaska, and the only recognized tribal college in the State, I would 

like to provide the committee with a rural Alaska Native perspective on this issue. 

Everyone involved in education in Alaska is numbingly familiar with the dismal 

educational statistics of rural Alaska, especially among Alaska Natives. 

‘‘. . . the Education Department data show that Native American students are less 

likely than other students to be enrolled in or to graduate from college,’’ (inside 

highered.com/news/2005/08/26/indian). 

The same report shows Native Americans with a Bachelor’s degree comprising the 

lowest of all ethnic or racial groups at 15 percent, as compared to the national average of 45 percent. Native American faculty members make up less than 1 percent 

of the total in higher education facilities. 

Alaska Natives and Native Americans are being left behind. One of the 

ways to improve postsecondary success in Native Americans both in Alaska and nationwide is through tribal colleges. According to Paul Boyer, in Native American 

Colleges, ‘‘Research, site visits, accreditation reports, and government audits all confirm their effectiveness. . . . Their impacts are real. . . . More than any single institution, they are changing lives and offering real hope for Native American communities.’’ A 2007 report from the Institute for Higher Education Policy supported 

these findings about tribal colleges by stating, ‘‘They are the driving force for economic and social development in Native American communities.’’ 

Dr. Gerald Gipp stated that with over 27,000 students enrolled today in 36 tribal 

colleges across the United States and one in Canada, other tribal nations have 

shown great interest in joining this movement. (Tribal College Journal, Fall/Winter 

issue 2005). In 2006, Ilisagvik College took great pride in achieving recognition by 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs as the only tribally controlled college in Alaska. 

Nearly 40 years after the first tribal college was established, the challenges faced by Native American communities continue to be immense. 

The challenges faced by the Inupiat of the North Slope and Ilisagvik College are 

nearly identical to those faced by Native Americans through the country. And the 

forces that gave rise to tribal colleges throughout the United States are identical 

to that which created Ilisagvik College. Local leaders saw the need for a regional 

postsecondary institution where the emphasis was on culturally appropriate instrucVerDate Nov 24 2008 14:23 Oct 13, 2009 Jkt 035165 PO 00000 Frm 00097 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\45589.TXT DENISE
94 

tional programs that would strengthen Inupiat language, culture, values and traditions. 

‘‘The precursors to Ilisagvik College—Inupiat University, the North Slope Higher 

Education Center, the Arctic Sivunmun Ilisagvik College—and Ilisagvik College 

were all created to serve the residents of the North Slope Borough who did not have 

access to the higher education provided by the University of Alaska and others like 

it.’’ (Dr. Edna MacLean, former Ilisagvik College president). She said the hope was 

that Inupiaq people would come to the college for geographical, linguistic and cultural reasons, as well as the fact that they simply did not have ready access to the 

State university system in Alaska. 

Long-time Inupiaq leader Oliver Leavitt stated in a December 2006 meeting that 

Ilisagvik was created for the 70 percent of Inupiat who could not leave home for 

a variety of reasons to get a college education. Leavitt was on the NSB Assembly 

when it approved the creation of Ilisagvik in 1995. 

Former Mayor George N. Ahmaogak, Sr. explained that he fostered the establishment of the college because it was his moral responsibility to do so. He also felt compassion for people who desperately needed the training and education Ilisagvik 

could provide in order to obtain employment near to their homes and culture. 

TCU’s were patterned after the community college model, because they 

most closely matched the needs of tribal members. This does not mean that 

the TCU’s look and act like mainstream (non-Indian) community colleges. 

Their first loyalty is to their tribal members and nations. They pass on Native culture and values, and their mission is to rebuild tribal nations and 

create stronger nations. (Boyer). Boyer went on to say that in many ways, 

TCU’s do follow the model of community colleges. Like community colleges, TCU’s 

also have a policy of open admission; they provide jobs training; they are local, thus 

providing easy access; their programs are relevant to the workforce needs of local 

employers; and many provide basic skills upgrades in their missions. (Capturing the 

Dream). 

Like other tribal colleges, Ilisagvik provides a wide range of support services to 

its students. These services range from tutoring, student advocates who contact 

every student regularly, pre-college math and English courses, student transport 

services, a full-time cultural resources specialist and a dorm parent. This approach 

is supported by research from other tribal colleges. ‘‘Success often depends on the 

institution’s ability and commitment to provide access to those who aspire to enter 

college; provide financial, social, and academic support while the students are enrolled; and help provide opportunities to those who have finished their degrees,’’ (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2007). 

Tribal Colleges and Universities are the most poorly funded institutions 

of higher education in the country. But despite this, tribal colleges create community-based miracles every day. They also developed their own data system for 

maintaining accountability to Federal agencies, their communities, and their students. Although Alaska Natives and Native Americans lag far behind all other ethnic minorities in college graduation rates, tribal colleges currently serve 27,000 students whose presence in an institute of higher education is the best hope to change 

the current dismal statistics. 

The most critical issue facing us is the need to secure full funding for our 

operations. Establishing forward funding is also a priority. Tribal colleges are the 

ONLY schools funded by the Department of Interior that are not forward funded, 

and this means that our institutions must endure extensive funding delays each fiscal year due to the often late congressional passage of the appropriations bill and 

a very slow administrative process. Even if we were funded immediately at the start 

of the fiscal year, we still would not receive funding until a month or more after 

the school year begins. We are asking for a one-time investment of only about $45– 

$50 million. This would have an impact for years to come, and would be tremendously beneficial to all tribal colleges and Native Americans. 

We need support for remedial/developmental education programs, student support services, high school/college bridge programs, facilities, and 

preservation/revitalization of Native Language programs. In all of these 

areas and more, we need programs specifically funded and designed for Tribal Colleges. This country as a whole cannot move ahead unless all its members move 

ahead also. And without support for these programs, our residents are definitely 

being left behind. 

We also need your commitment to work with the Tribal Colleges and AIHEC in 

re-writing and implementing the Executive Order on Tribal Colleges and Universities.

We need funding and assistance with our distance delivery education 

technology. Distant delivery education technology is a major avenue for bringing 

95 

education to even the remotest of sites in a cost-efficient manner. We have seven 

outlying villages on the North Slope that depend on this technology and some go 

without Internet access for up to 4 months at a time. This disruption in service 

greatly hampers our ability to educate and train our people. 

The need for local Alaska Native teachers is reaching a desperate level. 

This is a problem we are currently working on without support from the Federal 

or State governments. Out of the 196 certified teachers employed in our schools on 

the North Slope, only three (3) are Inupiaq. Our children need teachers who understand them and their lives and culture. They need teachers who will be there year 

after year, integrated into the very fabric of the community and not teachers who 

come and go on a yearly basis. If our children are to succeed in life, they must start 

this success in the very earliest years of their education. We need Alaska Native 

teachers instructing Alaska Native students. 

Tribal Colleges are an integral part of the Nation’s higher education system and have demonstrated marked success in educating Native Americans. With Ilisagvik College achieving Tribal College status, Alaskan Natives are 

now being served by a tribal college as well. Tribal colleges have been consistently 

under-funded. This means their financial soundness remains tenuous at best. Although new colleges achieve tribal college recognition from time to time, as Ilisagvik 

did in 2006, appropriations do not recognize this expansion with additional funds. 

Thus appropriations for the existing colleges become more and more stretched to 

meet an ever-expanding roster of tribal colleges. There is a need for a major infusion 

of operating funds for all these institutions, including Ilisagvik. 

We are the best hope for the future of Native Americans in this Nation. 

We need more than your moral support and good intentions. We need your financial 

support in an ongoing, steady and immediate fashion so that we can continue to 

serve one of the most underserved ethnic groups in our Nation today. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DENISE GREENE-WILKINSON, BOARD MEMBER, NATIONAL

ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS

Chairwoman Murkowski and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to share recommendations regarding high school improvement and postsecondary success. My name is Denise Greene-Wilkinson, and I am the principal of Polaris K–12 School in Anchorage, AK, where I have served for 14 years. Today, I am 

appearing on behalf of the National Association of Secondary School Principals, 

where I serve as a member of the NASSP Board of Directors, as well as, a member 

of the Alaska Association of Secondary School Principals. In existence since 1916, 

NASSP is the national voice for middle level and high school principals, assistant 

principals, and aspiring school leaders from across the United States and more than 

45 countries around the world. Our mission is to promote excellence in middle level 

and high school leadership. 

IMPROVING HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATION RATES

Many reports have been issued in the past few years that reveal deep problems 

with the achievement levels of U.S. high school students as well as low graduation 

and college attendance rates for low-income and minority students. More often than 

not, these low rates can be traced back to the large numbers of students entering 

high school reading below grade level. In addition, the vast majority of high schools 

have a climate of anonymity where little focus is placed on identifying the personal 

learning needs of individual students and using such information to foster improved 

teaching and learning. 

Improving education for all students is paramount to strengthening our democracy and preparing our Nation to compete in today’s global marketplace. To that 

end, it is quite necessary for the Federal Government to play an ongoing active and 

supportive role in improving the Nation’s schools by encouraging reform and providing adequate resources to supplement improvement efforts at the State and local 

levels. The role of the Federal Government in education should be one of partnership with the States and local school districts to improve the overall quality of the 

Nation’s schools and to ensure equal opportunity for all students. 

Congress has an opportunity right now to provide middle level and high schools 

with the resources they need to ensure that every student graduates with the skills 

necessary for success in postsecondary education and the workforce. Positive proposals to amend current law include the Striving Readers Act, the Graduation 

Promise Act, and the Success in the Middle Act. 

96 

STRIVING READERS

NASSP urges Congress to authorize and expand the Striving Readers program for 

students in grades 4–12. This vital program will help ensure that the 6–8 million 

students reading below grade level receive the literacy interventions they need to 

earn a high school diploma. 

Nationwide, 29 percent of eighth-grade students read ‘‘below basic’’ on the National Assessment of Educational Progress. These students, who are in the bottom 

quarter of achievement, are 20 times more likely to drop out than students at the 

top. That should come as no surprise. Low literacy prevents students from succeeding in high school in all subjects. And the National Center for Education Statistics found that 53 percent of undergraduates require a remedial reading or writing 

course. In addition, the National Association of Manufacturers reported that businesses spend more than $60 billion each year on remedial reading, writing, and 

mathematics for new employees. 

The Striving Readers Act (S. 958) would create a formula grant program for States 

based on poverty levels according to the U.S. Census. States would develop statewide literacy plans, and districts applying for the grants would use funds to create 

schoolwide adolescent literacy plans that met the needs of all students, including 

students with special needs and English language learners; provide professional development for teachers in core academic subjects; train school leaders to administer 

adolescent literacy plans; and collect, analyze, and report literacy data. 

The goals of Striving Readers are very much in line with Creating a Culture of 

Literacy: a Guide for Middle and High School Principals, which NASSP released in 

2005. This guide was written for principals to use as they team with staff members 

to improve their students’ literacy skills by assessing student strengths and weaknesses, identifying professional development needs, employing effective literacy 

strategies across all content areas, and establishing intervention programs. 

Senator Jeff Sessions (R–AL) and Senator Patty Murray (D–WA) have been true 

leaders in adolescent literacy, and NASSP would like to thank them for their hard 

work in ensuring that the Striving Readers program has a permanent place in the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 

GRADUATION PROMISE FUND

NASSP is a national leader in high school reform and in 2004, created a framework upon which to improve our Nation’s high schools called Breaking Ranks II: 

Strategies for Leading High School Reform. The handbook offers successful researchbased practices, real-life examples of high schools at various stages of reform, a 

step-by-step approach to lead change, obstacles to avoid, and resources from which 

to draw. NASSP offers Breaking Ranks for all high school principals, regardless of 

school size, geographical location, or where they are in the school improvement process. 

High schools have historically been the forgotten stepchild of school reform efforts 

and, for far too long, have not received an adequate share of funding and other resources from the Federal Government. But successful high school reform requires 

real strategies and significant resources for implementing systemic improvement 

and raising individual student and schoolwide performance levels. This is why 

NASSP supports the Graduation Promise Act (S. 1185), which would support the development of statewide systems of differentiated high school improvement that focuses research and evidence-based intervention on the lowest performing high 

schools, and improves the capacity of the high schools to decrease dropout rates and 

increase student achievement. The bill would also provide competitive grants to 

States to identify statewide obstacles hindering students from graduating, and provide incentives for States to increase graduation rates. 

SUCCESS IN THE MIDDLE ACT

Although much attention has been focused on high school reform, NASSP urges 

Congress to also address the more than 2,000 middle level schools that feed into 

the Nation’s ‘‘dropout factories’’—those high schools graduating fewer than 60 percent of their students. High school reform will never succeed in a vacuum, and 

many of these middle level schools are in need of the same comprehensive wholeschool reform that is offered to high schools under the Graduation Promise Act. 

The future success of ESEA rests largely on the shoulders of middle level leaders, 

teachers, and students. Students in grades 5 through 8 represent 57 percent (14 

million) of the Nation’s annual test takers under ESEA, but middle level schools are 

not receiving adequate Federal funding and support to help these students succeed. 

We recognize that the majority of districts choose to funnel their title I funds into 

97 

early childhood and elementary programs, and while we fully support continuing the 

drive to help students succeed in these grades, the needs of struggling students in 

our lowest-performing middle schools must not be ignored. If title I funds were distributed on the basis of student populations, middle level schools (representing 23 

percent of the Nation’s student population) would receive approximately $2.92 billion of the current title I allocation. Yet, of the $12.7 billion appropriated in fiscal 

year 2005 for title I, only 10 percent is allocated to middle schools. 

Therefore, I strongly urge the committee to support the Success in the Middle Act 

(S. 2227), which was introduced last year by President-Elect Barack Obama. Under 

the bill, States are required to implement a middle school improvement plan that 

describes what students are required to know and do to successfully complete the 

middle grades and make the transition to succeed in an academically rigorous high 

school. School districts would receive grants to help them invest in proven intervention strategies, including professional development and coaching for school leaders, 

teachers, and other school personnel; and student supports such as personal academic plans, intensive reading and math interventions, and extended learning time. 

NASSP believes the comprehensive middle level policy articulated in S. 2227 is 

necessary to address the realities that only 11 percent of eighth-grade students are 

on track to succeed in first-year college English, algebra, biology and social science 

courses (ACT, 2007), fewer than one-third can read and write proficiently, and only 

30 percent perform at the proficient level in math (NAEP, 2005). Enacting the Success in the Middle Act hand-in-hand with the Graduation Promise Act would 

strengthen ESEA by providing the support necessary to turn around our Nation’s 

lowest-performing middle and high schools and give our struggling students the 

help they need from pre-school through graduation. 

GRADUATION RATES

As you know, the U.S. Department of Education released final title I regulations 

on October 28 that would require all States to report a national uniform graduation 

rate that defines the ‘‘4-year adjusted cohort graduation rate’’ as the number of students who graduate in 4 years with a regular high school diploma divided by the 

number of students who form the adjusted cohort for that graduating class. The regulations would allow States to propose an extended-year adjusted cohort graduation 

rate that includes students who graduate in 4 years or more with a regular high 

school diploma. Any States that choose to report an extended-year graduation rate 

would be required to submit to the department a description of how it will use an 

extended-year rate along with its 4-year rate to determine whether its schools and 

districts make adequate yearly progress. 

NASSP has long advocated for a uniform formula to counter the confusion and 

inconsistencies in current graduation-rate calculations that make it impossible to 

compare State performance and blur any views of a nationwide graduation rate. 

However, we do have concerns that States may not choose to report an extendedyear graduation rate or include the extended-year rate in the accountability system. 

Because not all students enter the 9th grade reading and writing at grade level, 

NASSP recommends that the graduation rate be extended to within at least 5 years 

of entering high school. We also feel very strongly that identified special-needs students who complete high school with a state-approved exit document should have 

until age 21, inclusive, to be counted as graduates as defined by the Individuals 

with Disabilities Education Act. 

Designating a 4-year timeframe within which students must exit and graduate 

from high school goes against what we know about student learning, especially for 

English language learners, and timelines designated by IDEA. In fact, we should 

be moving in the opposite direction by allowing students additional time to graduate 

if they require it without penalizing the school, or less time if they have reached 

proficiency. 

Student performance should be measured by mastery of subject competency rather 

than by seat time. States that have implemented end-of-course assessments are on 

the right track and should be encouraged to continue these efforts. And ESEA 

should reward students who graduate in fewer than 4 years—which could encourage 

excellence—rather than simply acknowledge minimum proficiency, and the recognition of high-performing students could help schools that are nearing the target of 

100 percent proficiency. 

Ultimately, individualized and personalized instruction for each student must be 

our goal. NASSP has been a leader in advocating for such positive reform strategies 

through its practitioner-focused publications Breaking Ranks II: Strategies for Leading High School Reform and Breaking Ranks in the Middle: Strategies for Leading 

Middle Level Reform. 

98 

PREPARING ALL STUDENTS FOR POSTSECONDARY SUCCESS

In 2009, the NASSP Board of Directors will consider a position statement expressing our support for challenging graduation requirements and providing recommendations for Federal, State, and local policymakers to help schools ensure that 

all students meet those high standards. 

The national conversation about graduation and dropout rates has all but ignored 

the individuals who obtain their high school diplomas but are not prepared to succeed in postsecondary education or the workforce. Those students are the near dropouts who earned enough credits to graduate, but have backgrounds similar to the 

1.2 million students whom high schools ‘‘lose’’ annually. Data from the National 

Education Longitudinal Study indicates that only 21 percent of graduates from the 

lowest-income families are adequately prepared for postsecondary education, compared to 54 percent of graduates from middle- and high-income families. 

In the absence of national standards—which NASSP supports—many States are 

already taking the initiative to improve academic content standards and raise graduation requirements for all students. The American Diploma Project, launched by 

the nonprofit education reform organization Achieve, helps States align their standards ‘‘with the real-world expectations of employers and postsecondary faculty in the 

increasingly competitive global marketplace.’’ Since 2005, 22 States have aligned 

their high school standards to meet those goals and an additional 10 States plan 

to do so by the end of the 2008–2009 school year. 

But raising academic standards alone is not enough to ensure that all students, 

especially low-income and minority students, will graduate from high school and 

succeed in postsecondary education and the workforce. Supports must be in place 

to help schools ensure that all students achieve this goal. 

NASSP recommends the Federal Government offer incentives for States and districts to develop graduation requirements that allow students to choose from multiple pathways to graduation, including career and technical education courses that 

are aligned with higher standards, Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate programs, dual-enrollment programs, and early college high schools. The 

Federal Government should also ensure that students have access to academic supports that will help them stay on track toward graduation. These supports could include counseling services that provide information and assistance about the requirements for high school graduation, college admission, and career success; targeted 

and tiered interventions for middle level and high school students who are falling 

behind; online learning opportunities; extended learning; job shadowing, internships, and community service; and in-school and community-based social supports, 

such as counselors, social workers, and mental health services. 

Madame Chairwoman, this concludes my formal remarks. As the committee and 

Congress move forward on the reauthorization of ESEA, NASSP stands ready to 

work with you to ensure that all students graduate from high school with the skills 

to help them succeed in postsecondary education and the workplace. 

Thank you again for this opportunity. 

ALASKA PACIFIC UNIVERSITY, 

ANCHORAGE, AK 99508, 

October 30, 2008. 

U.S. Senate, 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee. 

DEAR MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE: I am very pleased that the committee is holding a field hearing here in Anchorage on November 15 on the important subject of 

improving High School Graduation and Postsecondary Success for Alaska students 

as well as all our Nation’s students. 

I have prepared a list of recommendations that University of Alaska President 

Mark Hamilton may include in his presentation, and I would like them entered into 

the record of the hearing as well. 

Dr. Douglas M. North, President of Alaska Pacific University, submits the following list of recommendations for improving High School Graduation and Postsecondary Success for Alaska students as well as all our Nation’s students: 

1. Reduce class sizes allowing for more individualized attention. 

2. De-emphasize standardized testing and use tests primarily as a diagnostic exercise to determine the learning needs of the individual student. 

3. Emphasize stand-and-deliver forms of education where the students have to 

present work they have done to their peers as well as the teacher. 

99 

4. Increase project-based education and other creative teaching strategies to engage and enhance student curiosity and learning. 

5. Reverse the ethic, especially among school-age males, that it is not cool to be 

smart or achieve academically. 

6. Increase both challenge and support of students through more positively oriented individual conferences with teachers. 

7. Measure school success in part by how many students want to, and love to, go 

to their schools. 

Thank you very much for allowing me the opportunity to share these recommendations that have come from my 42 years as a postsecondary educator. 

With sincere good wishes, 

DR. DOUGLAS M. NORTH, 

President, Alaska Pacific University. 

BEST BEGINNINGS, 

ANCHORAGE, AK 99501, 

November 5, 2008. 

Hon. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, 

U.S. Senate, 

Washington, DC 20510. 

Subject: Improving High School Graduation Rates and Postsecondary Success in 

Alaska and Nationwide—What can the Federal Government Do? 

DEAR SENATOR MURKOWSKI: Best Beginnings is a public-private partnership that 

emerged from growing concern among Alaskans that we aren’t doing nearly enough 

to prepare children for school and life. Best Beginnings is mobilizing existing resources and organizations to build a statewide early learning system that Alaska 

so desperately needs. One of our most important roles is to engage, convene, and 

mobilize the myriad organizations with an interest in early learning. Best Beginnings is pursuing solutions to meet this challenge. Our efforts are in three areas. 

Because parents are a child’s first and most important teachers, Best Beginnings 

promotes early learning and literacy, family literacy, and education at home. 

Because so many young children spend time in care away from home, Best Beginnings is a catalyst for making high quality child care and early learning programs 

affordable and accessible for all families that want them. 

And because preparing children to succeed in school has such important implications for the whole State, Best Beginnings is promoting a cultural shift in Alaskans’ 

attitudes. We will know this cultural shift has taken root when Alaskans insist on 

the investments to finance and sustain early learning. 

THE PROBLEM

Alaska’s children are being left behind. Too many Alaska children—about 40 percent—enter school unprepared to succeed. When children are not prepared for 

school, they rarely catch up later. Children who start school unprepared are less 

likely to finish high school, go to college, have the skills to get good jobs, and contribute to a thriving economy. 

Lack of readiness contributes to low scores on standardized tests, poor performance on high school graduation qualifying exams, and high school dropout rates that 

are among the highest in the Nation. 

Studies have shown that when infants and young children are given appropriate, 

positive learning experiences, they develop the skills and knowledge needed to succeed in school. A child’s readiness for school is a strong indicator of how he or she 

will fare in life, generally. For this reason, economists say that investments in early 

learning yield huge returns to society as a whole. Quality early learning results in 

productive citizens, healthy families, and greater contributions to society. 

We know what success will look like: 

• Parents and extended families are fully engaged in children’s learning right 

from birth; 

• Built-in incentives for more and better programs and services; 

• Appropriate pay for early childhood professionals; 

• An early childhood infrastructure built on established standards; and 

• High quality early learning programs that are affordable and accessible to all 

Alaskans who want them. 

100 

PUBLIC INVESTMENT IN EARLY LEARNING INTEGRAL TO ECONOMIC RECOVERY

Early education should be an integral component of America’s economic recovery. 

Indeed, the current economic challenge makes public investment in early education 

even more critical. As a nation, we cannot afford to pass up the dividends that accrue from investing in high quality early education. 

Decades of research on high-quality voluntary early childhood education have 

shown that a Federal investment in the early years now—not when we’re in the 

black—would yield the following short- and long-term benefits: 

• More 3- and 4-year-old children—still in the most critical stage of brain development in their lives—can attend programs that prepare them for school and for life; 

• Family pocketbooks receive much-needed relief; 

• States see a reduction in costly expenses for special education, remediation, 

criminal justice, and social services; and 

• Our future workforce gains the foundational skills they will need to compete in 

the 21st century global economy. 

Ensuring that children enter school ready to learn and succeed is fundamentally 

sound fiscal policy. Human capital is as important as any other form of capital we 

invest in as a society. To assure a strong economy, it is imperative to increase support for proven human capital strategies as much because of our current financial 

crisis as despite it. 

SPECIFIC STEPS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CAN TAKE

• Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)/NCLB 

should include Pre-K in sections that provide Federal funding for school and teacher 

training. Congress should: 

• Create a Federal incentive grant program to support and improve State PreK programs; 

• Include high-quality Pre-K programs as an allowable instructional intervention available to States and local education agencies identified for improvement in title I; 

• Include Pre-K teachers in academic training and professional development; 

and 

• Help States include Pre-K in their longitudinal data systems designed to 

measure students’ progress from Pre-K through college. 

• Head Start and Child Care.—The 2007 reauthorization of Head Start adapted 

this landmark education program to serve the present needs of low-income children. 

As the Department of Health and Human Services prepares to implement the refurbished Head Start law, we recommend: 

• The departments of Education and Health and Human Services share in responsibility to oversee coordination between Federal and State programs that 

support Pre-K and child care; 

• Congress provide new funds for Head Start and the Child Care and Development Block Grant to compensate for years of underfunding; and 

• Provide funding for State Advisory Councils, as envisioned under the 2007 reauthorization. 

• Rural Needs.—To ensure that every child has access to high-quality early learning experiences, we recommend Congress provide funding to support the growth of 

quality programs in rural areas, including home visiting programs. 

Thank you for your attention to these vitally important issues. 

Sincerely, 

ABBE HENSLEY, 

Executive Director. 

[Whereupon, at 2:42 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

Æ