Transcript Highlights:

• . education. education.
• We have home education. We have private education.
• education, including home education. education, including home education.
• child's education. child's education.
• Education Committee. Education Committee.

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The reason I'm in education is because, well, my background—my father stressed education growing up.
• in education.
• are highly educated.
• But I've done almost everything else in education. in education.
• and higher education.

Transcript Highlights:

• Education barrier.
• Educational Adequacy Fund.
• Institutions of Higher Education as directed in law to help fund the Educational Excellence Trust Fund
• the Educational Adequacy Fund as requested by the Department of Education.
• The Department of Education also receives general revenue, Educational Excellence Trust Fund, and Educational

Summary: The House and Senate Education Committee first approved minutes from February 2 and 3, then heard an interim study proposal on Arkansas adult education and the Excel Center model, presented by Goodwill Industries of Arkansas and the University of Notre Dame’s Lab for Economic Opportunities. Witnesses argued that about 300,000 Arkansas adults lack a high school diploma or GED and described the Excel Center as a diploma-granting public charter option for adults 19 and older, with wraparound supports such as child care, transportation, tutoring, life coaching, and career services. They said the Arkansas campuses are not state-funded, highlighted growth in enrollment and graduation outcomes, and cited research showing improved employment, earnings, and reduced criminal justice involvement for graduates. Committee members discussed the role of Goodwill’s nonprofit mission, the need for multiple adult education pathways, and the relationship between adult education challenges and broader state efforts such as LEARNS and ACCESS. The committee then debated the interim study proposal procedure, including whether questions should have been taken before the vote. The motion to adopt the ISP passed, and members noted that the study would broadly examine adult education, GED testing, high school diplomas, charter schools, in-person adult education, and funding allocation. Several members asked for follow-up information on current adult education funding, the availability of Excel Centers, and the criminal justice study results. After that, staff from the Bureau of Legislative Research gave a detailed adequacy funding overview for Arkansas K-12 education. They reviewed national funding principles and then explained Arkansas’s revenue streams and distribution system, including general revenue, the Educational Excellence Trust Fund, the Educational Adequacy Fund, local property-tax revenues, and facilities partnership funding. They also walked through the state’s foundation formula, categorical aid, supplemental aid, and additional funding, including the per-student matrix amount of $7,771 for 2025 and how funds are allocated to districts and charters. Members asked about student support staff, special education high-cost occurrences, ALE funding, teacher salary equalization, and the Excel Center’s treatment in funding totals; staff said some of those questions would be addressed in a later spending presentation. The meeting ended after the committee was told the department was present mainly to answer questions and no further business remained.

Transcript Highlights:

• Spaces for educators.
• I am an outdoor educator.
• education institutions.
• He educated every leader probably in the last 50 years in the educational field.
• stuff and educators.

Transcript Highlights:

• Education Agency.
• To special education.
• a bachelor's in general education, special education, and art. multicultural urban education with a
• bachelor's in general education, special education, and art.
• This one for special education? Investment in special education.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• AB 903 the Education Technology Empowerment Act of 2025 directs the California Department of Education
• and special education.
• receive the quality education.
• Department of Education.
• This stark contrast does not reflect a lack of quality education. qualified educators in Mexico, but

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Special education, funding only for students in special education.
• There has to be an educational. The special education obligation is specifically educational.
• So if an educator gets arrested, if an educator gets indicted, if an educator gets convicted...
• But uncertified educators, there is no SBEC for uncertified educators.
• Look at the linkages between early childhood education, elementary education, secondary education, moving

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I also serve as president of California Virtual Educators United, representing over 1,100 educators across
• I also serve as president of California Virtual Educators United, representing over 1,100 educators across
• Christopher Anderson, 25-year educator and career tech education president of the Stockton Teachers Association
• As an educator for 17 years, I know that dismantling the United States Department of Education poses
• for our nation's education system.

Summary: The Assembly Education Committee met without a quorum for much of the hearing and heard several bills out of order. SB 249 by Senator Umberg would move county board of education elections from the primary to the statewide general election. Supporters, including the League of Women Voters and many educators, argued the change would increase turnout and make the electorate more representative. The Orange County Board of Education opposed the bill, saying it would increase costs, reduce local control, and bury education races on crowded general-election ballots. The chair and members discussed turnout, cost, and representation, but the bill was held pending a quorum. Senator Grove presented SB 373, which adds safeguards for California students placed in out-of-state non-public schools through IEPs. The bill would require more robust LEA and CDE oversight, including annual site visits, student interviews, quarterly contact, stronger certification standards, and restrictions on prone, supine, and mechanical restraints. Testimony from a survivor of an out-of-state placement and from advocates emphasized abuse, neglect, and the need for stronger monitoring. There was broad support and no opposition testimony, but the measure was also held pending a quorum. Senator Ashby presented SB 568, the epinephrine in schools modernization act, to clarify and expand requirements for stocked epinephrine so they clearly apply to all public schools, including preschool programs. School nurses and medical experts said the bill would close gaps created by universal preschool and ensure life-saving treatment is available for anaphylaxis. The committee discussed dosing and implementation, and the bill was supported without opposition testimony. The committee also heard SB 414, the Charter School Accountability Act, which would strengthen fiscal oversight, audit standards, and transparency for charter schools and authorizers. Supporters said it responds to fraud and audit findings while preserving charter flexibility; opponents, including school employees and teachers, said it did not go far enough on authorizer accountability and small-district oversight. After discussion, the committee voted 7-0 to pass SB 414 as amended to Appropriations. The committee also briefly heard SB 743 by Senator Cortese, which would create an equalization reserve account to provide additional funding to underfunded school districts and reduce funding inequities tied to ZIP code. The author said the bill would support student achievement and teacher retention over time. The transcript cuts off before testimony or action on SB 743 was completed.

Transcript Highlights:

• public education.
• teachers special education education teachers special education teachers<00:25:07.720> a<00:25
• special education or a general education special education or a general education setting<00:27:
• education paperwork.
• <01:53:10.280> Educators<01:53:10.719> or parents or Educators Educators or parents

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Protecting Equity in Higher Education.
• I'm an educator.
• The pillar of higher education and in education is the educator.
• The education gap is major.
• The implications of federal higher education policy are not limited to education.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Racial Equity, Civil Rights, and Inclusion held an informational hearing on “Protecting Equity in Higher Education” and emphasized that no bills were being heard. Members and witnesses focused on the effects of recent federal actions on DEI, admissions, financial aid, student loans, international students, and campus equity efforts in Massachusetts. Opening remarks from the co-chairs and the chair of Higher Education highlighted Massachusetts’ investments in free community college, expanded financial aid, and early college programs, while warning that federal policy changes could undermine those gains. Testimony from BU law professor Jonathan Feingold argued that many DEI practices remain legally defensible after Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, and that the decision did not end all race-conscious or equity-oriented efforts. He said the Trump administration’s anti-DEI actions and funding threats were legally suspect and had created confusion and a chilling effect. Bahar Akman-in-Boden of the Hildreth Institute testified that proposed federal cuts to TRIO, Gear Up, Pell Grants, SEOG, work-study, and student loan programs would disproportionately harm low-income, first-generation, Black, Latino, and other underserved students, and urged the state to prepare hold-harmless and advising supports using Fair Share revenue. Commissioner Noe Ortega described Massachusetts’ long history of equity in higher education and said the state has expanded aid, success programs, and early college, but still has work to do on attainment and completion. He said the state responded to SFFA by creating ACARE and continuing to defend equity practices, while also warning that federal disruptions and “dear colleague” letters have created uncertainty. In the second panel, state university leaders and campus officials said federal threats to Pell, DEI grants, Medicaid, and international student policies could affect access, campus operations, and the economy; they stressed that most state university graduates stay in Massachusetts and that institutions are continuing their equity practices despite federal pressure. Roxbury Community College’s president said RCC remains committed to open access and inclusion, noted enrollment growth, and said executive orders do not change existing law or the college’s obligations.

Transcript Highlights:

• <00:07:45.199> in education in education in Minnesota<00:07:47.199> and<00:07:47.720>
• finances of Education finances of Education thinking<00:13:00.160> about<00:13:00.680>
• We also know that a majority of the E-12 education general fund budget goes toward general education,
• not special education.
• Are there any talks about general education programming possibly being targeted if special education

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• they' expect those resources to educate they' expect those resources to educate and<00:11:25.920
• Department of Education to the New Hampshire Department of Education.
• <01:16:30.760> or education and Department of Education or education and Department of Education
• If a district is educating a special education student, they're going to receive special education differential
• Oh, special education.

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: The Department of Education’s Bureau of School Finance provided an adequacy-funding training for Division II, led by Mark Mello. He walked the committee through the adequacy formula using Albany, Allenstown, and Alton as examples, explaining average daily membership, base adequacy aid, and differential aid for free/reduced-price meals, special education, and English language learners. He also noted a recent change requiring home-education differential aid and emphasized that these aid streams are generally unrestricted district funding rather than money tied to specific students or programs. A major focus was the ongoing litigation over the adequacy base amount and the statewide education property tax, or SWEPT. Mello explained the historical basis of the current base amount, the 2008 legislative report that set the original methodology, and the later court ruling that the adequacy amount should be $7,356, which is now before the Supreme Court. He also described how SWEPT currently raises a fixed statewide amount of $363 million and how that revenue is used to offset the state’s adequacy obligation. For the example towns, Albany and Allenstown receive state adequacy grants because their SWEPT revenue is below their calculated adequacy cost, while Alton is an excess SWEPT community because its local SWEPT revenue exceeds the cost of adequate education. The discussion then turned to the pending “excess SWEPT” issue in the Supreme Court and what would happen if excess collections had to be remitted to the state. Mello said the Department is preparing a hypothetical walkthrough and explained that, if the court upholds the Superior Court ruling, DRA would likely be directed to collect excess SWEPT. Members raised concerns about whether SWEPT must be used for educational purposes and about the cash-flow burden on towns if money had to move from municipalities to the state and then back to districts. Mello and members discussed possible administrative workarounds, such as credits against other state aid distributions, and noted that the committee would continue reviewing the mechanics if the court decision comes down during budget work.

Transcript Highlights:

• The representative from Education.
• Vermont's career technical education Vermont's career technical education system. system. system
• with the Career Technical Education with the Career Technical Education Division<00:03:26.320>
• , secondary and adult education, secondary and adult education, and<00:03:33.440> our<00:03
• Education to students.

Keywords: 926, house, all

Summary: The House took up Senate Bill 313, relating to transforming Vermont’s career technical education system. The Committee on Commerce and Economic Development described the bill as part of a broader effort to integrate CTE more fully into Vermont’s education system, with goals including universal access, more consistent admissions and credit policies, better transportation access, updated rules and procedures, and stronger alignment with workforce needs. The committee emphasized that CTE should be treated as a core part of education, not a stand-alone track, and reported the bill favorably 11-0-0 after hearing from education, labor, workforce, fiscal, and CTE stakeholders. The Committee on Education recommended a few changes, including a typo correction and removal of a legislative working group, explaining that broader education reform work already underway would make a separate working group duplicative. It added a task for the Agency of Education to study how to serve adult diploma students in CTE programs amid federal funding changes, and it supported the bill with an amendment vote of 10-0-1. The Committee on Appropriations said the fiscal impact could not yet be estimated because it depends on future rulemaking, and it recommended the bill ought to pass in concurrence as amended by a vote of 10-0-1. The House adopted the Education Committee amendment, then adopted a further amendment offered by Representative Bartley and others that incorporated language from S. 230 while removing a solicitation provision related to Department of Corrections property. The House then agreed to propose the amended bill to the Senate, ordered third reading, suspended rules to place the bill in all remaining stages of passage, passed S. 313 in concurrence with proposal of amendment, and suspended rules again to message its action to the Senate forthwith. The House then recessed until 1:00 p.m.

Transcript Highlights:

• people who are committed to improving sex education in our schools.
• have sexual education to no longer provide that education due to the radical ideology.
• education, which... ...comprehensive health education; it is in opposition to public education, which
• For its implementation, my team of history educators at the Asian American Education Project stands ready
• Students and educators have long been calling for interdisciplinary climate education and the necessary

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on a wide range of bills, with the largest portions focused on the Healthy Youth Act (S.340/H.656), comprehensive and inclusive curriculum bills (H.655/S.371 and related measures), climate literacy education (H.560/S.391), computer science coursework (H.534/S.362), arts education funding and STEM-to-STEAM proposals (H.561 and H.4297), and a homeschooling reporting bill (H.518). Supporters of the Healthy Youth Act argued it would preserve local control while requiring medically accurate, age-appropriate, LGBTQ-inclusive sex education and regular updates to state health frameworks; opponents raised parental rights, age-appropriateness, and opt-out concerns, with some calling for fetal development content. Supporters of inclusive curriculum bills said they would improve representation, belonging, and civic understanding, while opponents argued they could undermine parental authority or promote ideological content. Climate, computer science, and arts advocates emphasized workforce readiness, student engagement, and the need for state support and funding to expand access and teacher training. Testimony on the climate literacy bill described increasing climate impacts in Massachusetts and argued that interdisciplinary instruction would prepare students for science, policy, and green careers; witnesses said the bill was not a mandate but a support and funding measure. Computer science supporters said access remains uneven, especially for girls, students of color, and students with disabilities, and urged stronger statewide requirements and AI-related standards. Arts advocates backed both the STEM-to-STEAM bill and the Lowell Mason arts funding proposal, citing research on student achievement, attendance, creativity, and the economic importance of the arts sector. The homeschool bill was supported by a homeschool advocacy group as a modernization of reporting requirements. The committee closed testimony on numerous bills where no one remained signed up or testimony had concluded, including several education, curriculum, and commission proposals. No votes were taken during the hearing itself. At the end of the session, the committee closed out the remaining testimony and adjourned after a motion and second.

Transcript Highlights:

• and the tech education programs.
• Is the Education Trust West still here?
• Currently, substitutes work 30 days in a general education classroom and 20 days in a special education
• special education, alternative education, court schools, migrant education, foster youth, homeless student
• special education, alternative education, court schools, migrant education, foster youth, homeless student

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The educators aren't doing a good job.
• As our students navigate the world of early adolescents, our work as educators is to create educational
• One key way has been through Gloucester education foundations or local education fund, but there have
• As education leaders, we must balance innovation with inclusion and embrace tools that empower educators
• We save the students' educations.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Education heard testimony on several bills centered on school accountability, receivership, graduation requirements, charter school access, community schools, school libraries, and student voting rights. Much of the discussion focused on the Thrive Act, S. 374, which would end state receivership and change the state’s accountability approach. Supporters, including educators, parents, advocacy groups, and students, argued that receivership has not improved outcomes in districts such as Lawrence, Holyoke, Southbridge, Boston, and the Dever, and that local communities should have more control, with greater emphasis on community schools, wraparound services, and broader measures of school quality. They also supported related bills on community schools and school library standards, and several witnesses backed a bill to expand student representative voting rights on school committees. Opponents of S. 374, especially charter school leaders, parents, students, and some education advocates, focused on Section 4 of the bill, which would change the charter school net school spending cap in the lowest-performing districts. They argued that the provision would reduce access to charter seats in communities where families are seeking more options, and that schools such as Roxbury Prep, Excel Academy, Brook, Veritas Prep, and Libertas Academy have produced strong results for students, including students of color, low-income students, and students with special needs. Several witnesses said the section would force schools to shrink or close and would remove opportunities for families in districts with long waitlists. Committee members questioned witnesses on both the effectiveness of receivership and the charter school cap language. Chair Lewis and Chair Gordon emphasized the need for a better accountability system and noted concerns about whether current measures, including MCAS-based designations, accurately reflect school quality. Some witnesses said they had discussed the possibility of removing Section 4 from the Thrive Act and suggested it might be addressed in separate charter reform legislation. No votes were taken during the hearing; testimony was received and the committee later closed testimony on S. 374 and several related bills before moving on to the student voting rights bill, S. 367.

Transcript Highlights:

• Elevating the importance of career education and career technical education in our changing economy.
• Of career technical education.
• Department of Education?
• Would it be the Department of Education administering the Career Technical Education Incentive Grant
• While this is not part of the career education, this council is part of the master plan for career education

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• our Educator Preparation Program.
• Education and teacher education would benefit from the same kinds of communities of practice that have
• These would be math, science, special education, and bilingual education.
• and special education folks.
• that includes everyone who works in the field of education, including early childhood education.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• technical education in our changing economy, making sure that our education programs are relevant to
• Department of Education. Good morning.
• So, rest assured, on career technical education as well as general education courses or general programming
• Would it be the Department of Education administering, you know— Would it be the Department of Education
• Those are out of county offices of education.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Education Finance heard an overview of the governor’s new Career Education Master Plan and related budget items. Labor Secretary Knox described the plan as an effort to reduce fragmentation across K-12, community colleges, workforce boards, and other systems by improving statewide and regional coordination, data sharing, skills-based hiring, career pathways, and wraparound supports such as child care, housing, food, and transportation. Members asked how success would be measured, how the plan would serve disconnected youth and adults, and whether the proposed data integration would rely on Cradle to Career; the secretary said it would. The Department of Finance said it was available to answer questions on the education side. The committee then reviewed existing CTE funding and oversight. The LAO, CDE, and Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office described the major ongoing programs, including CTIG, Perkins, K-12 Strong Workforce, and Community College Strong Workforce, and noted that many programs overlap in purpose and administration. Members repeatedly raised concerns about duplication, annual applications and reporting burdens, lack of clear outcome metrics, and whether funding incentives should be better aligned to regional collaboration. CDE and the Chancellor’s Office said they support alignment and dual enrollment, and Finance and CDE said LCFF/local match dollars are part of the funding structure. The committee also discussed child care as a barrier to participation and the need for better tracking of enrollment, completion, and job outcomes. On the consolidated application proposal, Finance proposed a study directing CDE to examine whether three long-standing CTE grant programs—Specialized Secondary Programs, CTIG, and California Partnership Academies—could be streamlined into a single application and reporting process. The LAO supported reducing administrative burden but noted that the largest programs, CTIG and K-12 Strong Workforce, were excluded from the proposal even though districts most often cite them as burdensome. CDE said it did not oppose the study but warned that statutory differences may limit consolidation. Members said the proposal should better address regional coordination, multi-year funding stability, and outcome measures rather than only simplifying paperwork. Finally, the committee heard a proposal for a $5 million ongoing California Education Interagency Council. GovOps said the council would provide a neutral venue for statewide coordination across education and workforce systems. The LAO opposed the proposal, arguing that existing bodies already provide coordination, the proposal does not change agency incentives, and the council would lack authority to implement decisions. Members expressed mixed views, with some supporting a coordinating body and others questioning whether it would differ from past efforts. No votes were taken during the portions summarized here, and the committee indicated it would hold some items open for further discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• education is made.
• same system for special education tracking.
• Additionally, the state lacks qualified candidates for educational roles such as special education teachers
• on special education staffing shortages.
• for special education.

Summary: The JLARC I-900 Subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on special education services, focused on comparing student needs, district identification practices, and funding. Auditors said Washington does not appear to under-identify any particular population for special education, though districts face ongoing challenges with identification, documentation, staffing shortages, and inconsistent referral tracking. They explained that their analysis used statistical models because the true prevalence of disabilities is unknown, and found Washington districts generally clustered near the national average, with little evidence that any demographic group was systematically under-identified. The audit also found that special education funding has historically been insufficient, with districts collectively covering about $500 million in costs not paid by state or federal sources, and that districts spent about 26% more per student than they received in funding. Auditors noted recent legislative changes that removed the special education enrollment cap and changed the safety net process, but said it was too soon to assess their effects. Their recommendations to OSPI included clarifying what counts as an official special education referral, requiring districts to report referral data even when no evaluation follows, and ensuring the new statewide data system is developed with district input, training, and possibly a mandate for uniform use. OSPI staff said they concurred with the report and appreciated the work of the auditor’s office and JLARC. During member questions, Representative Paulette raised concerns that the audit did not directly examine prevalence of specific disabilities, such as autism and dyslexia, in vulnerable populations or compare Washington’s identification practices to medical and peer-reviewed prevalence data. Auditors responded that medical prevalence is not known in a systematic way, that educational eligibility differs from medical diagnosis, and that the report’s conclusions should not be read as proving no populations are under- or over-identified. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned.