Welcome to Senate Education start of the week this Tuesday, February 13th. And we are starting with Ms. Delnaio. You don't mind joining us. Trying to get in, start a little early each week. So we get out a little early, also given that it's, chairs meet on Monday. So, appreciate you coming over again and following up on your request, we are talking about S303. And you mentioned last week, when you were in one of the side chairs, that you'd like to comment and talk a little bit about different parts of the disk. So, with that, please. I'd like to start with your thoughts. Sure. My name is Catherine Delnaio, I'm a State Librarian and I'm a Commissioner of the Department of Auditories. And I really appreciate this opportunity to speak with you about S303 and act relating to supporting the wants young readers. And I wanted to share with you that the Department of Supportive of S303 as it relates to extending the Advisory Council on Literacy through June 30th, 2027. I did prepare some remarks very late. I think that your liaison put them into your cabinet. So I'll just keep to the remarks. The council is charged with advising the Secretary of Education and right now others on improvements to proficiency outcomes and literacy for students in pre-kindergarten through grade 12 and how to sustain those incomes. I'm sorry, those outcomes. Yes, I'm sorry. I'm a student in this grant. Embarrassing per-state library intimacy read. It's not. Given the role that public libraries play in supporting pre-literacy, the department respectfully requests that the State Librarian or their designee be added to the council's exocitio membership. Our hope is that adding the State Librarian or their designee to the Advisory Council on Literacy will enable the department to be part of the conversation about a holistic approach to literacy that starts as soon as a child is born when they are issued their public library cards when their parent brings them to the library. Great. So let's just pause there for a moment. So we might, we have the council here with us. So you want, you want you or the designee to be on as an ex-officio member, why ex-officio? Because it matches. So I was looking at page five, line 12 of the bill. And if you go to the last page of my prepared testimony, you'll see what we were suggesting. In the past, there had been a last year, the former secretary of education had reached out to me about serving on to the committee in one of the other roles. And there wasn't really a spot for the State Library. I see. And because I don't have a child, I couldn't serve. So it seems like there is a role all the time for the State Librarian or the youth services consultant. I'm sorry, I'm gonna have to ask you, can we meet, you don't have a child so you're not allowed to serve? The only open positions were the parents. I see. So that wasn't really, the idea of being an ex-officio is really looking at the role of the department, how the department supports public libraries specifically because public libraries support parents and caregivers and guardians in beginning kids on the road to reading success. So when we, when I was here last Friday and we were looking at the learning platform, we watched a small video, they talked to the expert in the video on literacy, talked about pre-literacy and how you need the fundamental building blocks at the beginning. If you jump in at kindergarten and you haven't had any pre-literacy activities, you are already behind. So the public library is for so many Vermonters bridging that gap at the beginning that may exist. Parents often haven't been to a public library, haven't been to a library, haven't bought about a picture book, a board book, a nursery rhyme or a song for children since they were kids themselves. And they have to be reminded that that is actually, it's not just a tradition, it's actually fundamental to language acquisition. And that repetition of syllables, the learning and the hearing that goes on will actually help the child later on when they get to the point of learning to decode language. And the science at this point for many years has supported early childhood literacy as the foundation. And I have had a long career in children's services. I was a youth services librarian. I have a school media specialist, McMaster's degree for library science. And I served as a children's librarian and then a middle and high school public services, public library staff member. And then I was a branch manager slash children's librarian. So I've got probably, gosh, 15 or 16 years in children's services and delivering those programs to myself and have had great experience of having training such as every child's ready to retrain where the librarians are taught the principles, the science of early childhood literacy and how playing and singing and talking and simple things that parents can do every day at the brochure store, just talking as they go about their day, how that's going to support a child in learning. And so when I look at the council, I see that we've got a gap. We have the birth through pre-K and in many Vermont communities, there's not a great case. So we have the birth through kindergarten years. So the kids who don't have parents who are, it gets more unfortunate than the parents who are really reading up on that don't have such a great entry point to literacy and they may have a lesser outcome when they begin their elementary school careers because they can't identify numbers. They can't identify letters. They haven't been hearing the repeated, the repeated rhythmic language through children's literature. Their parents might have some books in their home library but they don't have a practice coming to the public library every week and their parents don't know how to read the books with them. We don't just read the book at the library we model and engage reading practice. So the librarian reads and pauses and there's some interaction with the kids and that's really what a parent should be doing at home if they're trying to really have being comprehension which is a building walk of literacy. So when we look at the role of a public library, my point is really that somebody from the state library where we have trained professionals, we have a youth services consultant, we also have me currently as the state librarian but not every state librarian has my background and that's why I thought the state librarian or their desiccate would be a good way to do it. We have people who have experience in this realm and who leave continuing education programs or public librarians. And we have over the years had a relationship with VLIVE, the Vermont Burnley Literacy Initiative which is a part of Vermont Humanities, training a cohort of learners and we give a grant to humanities to support VLIVE. But I feel that we need more than that. So this year we're launching a series of trainings for every librarian in Vermont who wishes to take them on the science of reading, how to build story time and really serve as a model for the parents but also an educator using plain language that people can understand. When we talk to a parent and we talk about phonological awareness, they start policing her. And so really trying to meet the parents where they are, meet the caregivers where they are. Even I'd like to get to the point where librarians in our state have the training that they need to go and serve as a resource at a local preschool to teach a preschool teacher how to read with kids. I know that this is something that hasn't been done as much in Vermont but in the framework that I came from previously both in New Jersey and summer psychology library system and then in San Francisco, we did a lot of professional development around the science of reading. And that's the type of thing that I think could be helpful on the literacy council just having that framework and starting kids at that birth point with a public library card, with access to hundreds, thousands of books with access to library professionals who are helping them to select books and utilize those books and every book, one book's not perfect for every it. So going into the library and doing that matching and being exposed to all of the books in a story time is so important. And I think that for us kind of leveling up the skill set of the practitioners in the field giving them what they asked the department for through the working group report, they really asked for more training for the services librarians. Many of them don't have a degree in library science and master's degree but they want to learn. They're doing great work now just naturally and through their community's practice but we'd like to support them in growing that further at the department and we'll begin that this year. But really thinking about it as a constant and that's really why my recommendation would not be to add somebody again in kind of rotating role but to have some continuity from the department so that this doesn't fall off but fall out of bond again because I think it probably should have been there from the beginning. Any objection to this request? Great. And I did check with agency of education and the insurance secretary and our team were supportive of this addition. Great, great. Please do your next one. Well, I think I just said it all. But we did some great work. Great. Yeah, I'm happy to talk with you more about it or answer questions you might have about what public libraries can do and what we'd like to see them do. But I think I've covered the high point. So if you have any questions for me, happy to answer them. But I know you've got a lot of your notes in it. It's great. If you don't mind sticking around. I'm happy to stick around. Yeah, please. Thank you. I just have one quick question with a little practice, which is that you just made me get a little misty eye and as I was getting nostalgic from over the early years of reading to my kids which I just, it just hit me that those were like best times, right? Like I just really relished those moments and shout out to Eric Carl because I think I read Brown Bear Brown and they're like 150 times. But thank you so much for this test time. It was really, really important and powerful. I'm trying to bring this conversation a little bit full circle with Senator Williams' bill thinking about screens and devices. Do you know if there's any, I think I know the answer to this, but do you know if there's any evidence that would point to voices on a screen being similarly effective as actual people in terms of developing language and literacy skills? I would have to go back and look into the exact research. My recollection, what I've read over the years and I may answer in a slightly different way. The role of the parent, the parent's voice, the relationship in person with the parent is absolutely essential. I think if there were a parent working with a child, for example, I was at the Mnuski Public Library last week and I have a lot of parents who they served in that community who are not fluent in any language. So for them to read would be difficult, not just in English, but in their native tongues. There is research, definitely that, and I don't have great recall for who said it, why, and I could look that up if you'd like, but there is research that shows that what's most important is that parents read literally, that there's a fluid reading to the child. So if a parent speaks, their native language is French, that they read books in French to their child. That is more important than teaching them to read English and maybe reading an imperfect English. You're trying to teach in a fluid way so that the child understands the rhythm of the language. And if you want to know more about what we've been doing in story time, we think about a baby prime time, for example, and that's for, as soon as the parents feel comfortable taking a kid out of the house, they bring them to these programs. And as you're brining just a basic rhyme like Humpty Dumpty, having the child feeling the rhythm of the language, there's a lot of bouncing of the baby, gentle, gentle bouncing, of course, really influencing how they're hearing the words and how it's a whole body activity. Reading isn't something where you sit and push and swipe. There are products and there are tools that kids like. Sometimes that's the only way to get a book in a language for a child. But I think that that connection with a parent, the connection with their caregiver, their grandparents, that relationship, my boyfriend talks about bringing his kid to the Ulster Library every week when she was little, that that was something that really meant a lot to them. Developing that practice of reading is a very important thing. And the parents actually build a community of support in those settings. So I think that there is a value and there has also been research about books being kind of mentally stickier, I would say. So I'm sure people can learn to read if they just have a tablet. It's probably better than not having it. But for children, for the youngest children, the pre-literacy activities include flipping the pages. They include reading the board book, smelling the board book, ripping the board book. Those are things that actually lead to reading. That's some of their print motivation and print readiness. So this bill would actually be a precursor to that. Oh, okay. And if you want to talk about my bill, if we ever get a chance to see the testimony, it's addressed to you. Okay, great. I was gonna make one last comment. Sure. No, okay. I remember when I was working on a library and I every once in a while I'd get some folks in who would, they were so happy to be there and they vocalized that libraries have not been good to them when they were young for whatever reason. Either they had been disciplined for talking or being loud or they had to be fine or, and so what we really had to kind of reset how we felt about libraries. And I'm sure you are doing that, but it was, I hadn't really thought about it until people told me that that was how they were doing it. Yeah. And I think that is something that libraries are in Vermont are doing great work to overcome. That's one of the reasons so many libraries have gone fine free. I did a lot of work when I was in San Francisco to help the library to really study finds and how they impact library users in that community. And the studies that we did over a multiple years showed that the communities of color were most impacted. The poor communities were most impacted. The Tencent find doesn't mean anything for a person who has resources, but that damage that's caused to be quite extensive. And really when we look at equity and access and the working groups findings on those topics, it's really important that Vermont users who are newcomers feel welcomed in a library. Our department has a kind of a newcomer collection, which in some ways is kind of geared toward the people accepting the newcomers, but we also are looking at building out our language collections and finding ways to support people with those resources because a lot of people coming to the US don't have a tradition of a public library like we have here. So when you go to other countries, some have strong public libraries and some it's a completely foreign notion. They've just never heard of that. And so really explaining to people what we do, the department used some of our ARCO funding to just make a fact sheet about libraries and explain this is what you can do in a library and translate it into I think 16 languages and talking with folks in Wenuski and learning, well, people can't read it. They may speak a language, but they may not be able to read it. So now if I'm looking at, could we do videos and have native speakers share the message so that people can get that information? We have submitted the molecules whose language it doesn't exist in written form, right? Yeah, so really working to break down those barriers and to help make sure that people feel welcomed and that there are materials for them and that we have an ability to serve them and thinking about how will those little kids become great readers? So, if you've got a violent parent, like my niece and nephew have violent parents and so my niece is being read to in Chinese and she's being read to in English and everybody does their part and it's going to all help with her literacy in the long run. I think that that's a really important thing to remember that what's important is learning that skill, practicing with your ears, practicing that breaking down of language, that rhythm of talking and really thinking it's fun. I mean, that's part of what happens is that if you've never sat in the seat and listened and you don't enjoy the story, good luck in kindergarten, people will have a hard time. So getting kids ready to learn is one of the things that the public library can help with. So that's really where I see the importance of having the state librarian or perhaps the youth services consultant or someone else in the department if they have stronger skills in that area. I personally would love to serve myself off the council and set us off on a path really working together so that it's a nice handoff and so that the parents feel supported as they become their children's first teachers. And that's really what they are. And if they don't know how to do that, we want to help them get those skills by up-leveling what our practitioners feel of all of the librarians know and can share about literacy. One final question I have is you mentioned if you have two parents arriving in the United States they don't speak English. Did you say that it's helpful for them just to read and speak in their native tongue that in that way to support their child's understanding of English? Yeah, and if they're more, if they feel the enthusiasm. It's the, it will eventually help the child learn to be literate in whichever language. Right, right. And if they don't have access to books, then, and if a family were, you know, if there were a family that spoke the language and their local library didn't have books, we would do a true library long to get them books to try to help them. So say they didn't read stinging songs in their native tongue, conversing, describing their day, going about what they're doing and knowing that that is something that is important to do. More important than reading a, like if I were to read a French, it's broken. Yeah, the idea is that you want that fluidity. You want to learn the pattern of the language and you want to have that kind of oral, with an AU, an oral sense of the language and memory and the pattern and the repetition. And with picture books also, you know, the picture book format doesn't end once you get to kindergarten. It's, we, in libraries on picture books that go all the way up into the adult realm, the language in a well-written picture book, when you look at something like the award-winning Heldicott books. There's often interplay between the text and images. There is, so sometimes the images in the text don't match. That's a point of conversation. You want to extend the book, not just read the book, right? Ask questions about the book, thinking about the book when you're walking around later on. So thinking about things like our story walks that we blend out from the library, where people have books out on sticks out in the community, thinking about language all the time and really focusing on that and focusing on that spoken language is important, the song language and just getting the rhythm of the language is really important. But what the librarian can do, even in the absence of books in the language is to show how important that is. So when I would do a story time, it wouldn't just be here as books. You start with singing, you do some movement, you pivot if the kids aren't still interested. You're always kind of tweaking and finessing and to keep the kids interested in the program and to really get them excited and enthusiastic about learning together. And sometimes if there were, I remember I used to do a story time with a robot of nannies who were Brazilian as well, Portuguese. I didn't speak Portuguese, but they did. So they would lead some songs for the community. Really pulling on the expertise in the community and working with people. And I think that's something that will be doing more training on these topics for the library community. But that's the type of thing that we want to help Vermont's libraries to do. And really thinking about expanding story time offerings for different age groups so that they're, it's great to have any story time, but we can do story times for finding little groups of kids and developmental cohorts. And that can really be helpful too, because they have different things. Any final questions? We still don't have them. So Terebeck, tomorrow I just want to let you know we are going to mark up the public library bill. So if you can, what we're going to use, we're going to have Tucker Anderson and I've got it back with you yet, but basically take us through your recommendations and say, hey, that sounds good. So we'll start that process tomorrow if you've launched it. She should be here. I'm planning to do it at times. So thank you for letting me know. Thanks, great to see you. I'm excited for that. Thank you. We're excited to have you as the partner on all this. St. James, as I recall, we have some outstanding questions that Ms. St. James flagged for us on Friday, that's three of three, that he may have brought to the agency. We have, that is what we are looking at now. And are we looking at draft 2.1? Yes. So draft 2.1 in our files. And so the floor is yours. And we also have a first year here for any backup. So please. Thank you. Best St. James office of legislative council. We're working with draft 2.1 of your committee amendment to ask 303. Ted and I have had a chance to confer on some of the issues that I brought up, but it was after I had done all of this lovely highlighting and gotten a draft of more yet. So there might be some settled areas on here that look unsettled, but I'm going to walk you through what highlighted. It represents both the changes since draft 1.1, as well as some of the decision points that we talked about last week. And I have also marked up adding the exhibition number of the state library. Thank you so much. The next draft you see will contain that. So the first thing we're going to look at is section two. Remember, this is the requirement that I'm just going to use a general term here and then we'll delve into which term you all want to use that teachers complete the mandatory literacy models. Okay. And last time I came to you, I brought draft 1.1 of your committee amendment was bringing to you edits based on recommendations from AOE. And one of the terms they recommended using was this term professionally licensed. And that term confused me because I didn't find that specific term in title 16 and I had reached out to the agency we've since conferred. But in between Friday and talking to the agency, I located the definition for professionally licensed in the professional standards board rules for the licensing of teachers. And so whether you choose to keep it or not, I think it's a good piece for discussion for today. So what you have on page one starting on line 18, the highlighted subsection A, we got, actually I'm thinking of the other bill where we got rid of definitions, but I added the definition of this term taken from the professional standards boards rules. So lots of policy choices here, right? Professionally licensed according to that definition does not include provisional emergency teaching intern or apprenticeship licenses. Now, you don't have to go with this definition, right? I would just encourage you that regardless of who you require to complete these literacy modules, we don't have dueling terms with two different definitions to confuse folks. So if you like the definition of professionally licensed from the standards board, then I think there's nothing wrong with using that term here. If you want to modify this definition in any way, then I think we have to talk about whether or not professionally licensed is the correct term to use because it might cause some confusion with the definition that appears in standards board rules. I think part of our decision is based on how long somebody can have a provisional and emergency license. You can have provisional license for 20 years, well, you've got a problem, but if it's provisional license maps out, you've got a certain period of time you transition in, then I could capture those folks. Do you have any evidence? I don't. So, okay, Mr. Fisher. Right now. For the right-hand side, Fisher-Ramon Agency of Education and the Agencies Director of Communications and Legislative Affairs, and at two, my good friend and colleague, Andrew Prouton, who you have met virtually, will be here in person, he's the Assistant Director of Education Quality and kind of licensing for us. He's a great person to answer that question, but I do just want to agree with that, that the process of... This restricts it to educators who are fully licensed and has to add a little color to the decision point. The point of the emergency licenses is that they'll be working towards that fully licensed process. Kind of looking in the green book, but Andrew can definitely mention it when he gets here. I'm sorry, he's just scheduled for two instead of 1.30. Okay, so you just told us that Andrew's kind of should have said it, right? Yeah. Yeah, I don't think it was. Okay. My only other question could be, how many professionals are out there? Because my understanding that there are a lot right now, so that would be another question we could ask. Okay, so we'll wait when Andrew arrives to pass those questions back to me. So we move on to page two. All of the green are decision points. So this is not new. This is the language we looked at last week, but professional license is the issue we just talked about. So that term, it sounds like we're waiting on another witness to find out where to use that term. The next decision point would be Vermont school. I brought up the fact that this could be an ambiguous term, depending on what your intent here is. Is it to include educators in the way that the rent of the statute reads, it would suggest that this term, Vermont school, includes independent schools and public schools. The rest of the statute. So if you look at subsection D. Yeah. It talks about public and approved independent schools that employ professional license educators have to maintain a file on completion of the literacy module. So that's our main statute. No, this is brand new. All of this language is brand new. When you said, if you reference statute, what do you mean? This statute. The bill, the language we're looking at, is adding to your green book. And so I think I would just suggest that if you do want to require all licensed, and we'll figure out what that means, educators, and I should have, my highlighting is just, it's a good thing it's not a requirement to pass the bar. If you do want to require all licensed educators in both public and approved independent schools to complete these modules, then I think you should spell that out here. And if you don't, then you should pick which one and modify the rest of the statute accordingly. Yeah, I want to hear from the AOE on it as well. And maybe take some more testimony. I don't know if the committee, I know where Senator Kulick is on this, but I don't know where it's written else itself. He will take a little bit more testimony. And then the last decision point is just that term educator. Educator as defined in the chapter that we are working with includes teachers and administrators. Right. And then it's the term teacher would not with the administrators. Right. So that, again, decision point for you all. So correct me if I'm wrong, it's probably wrong. Are you going to ask AOE what they meant? Are we wrong? Yes, but I think you should hear from them. Okay, did they ever get back to you guys a hint that they said? I'm not actually sure that I know. I just know that you have a position. Okay. Sorry, I apologize. Which question I'm trying to see where my colleague is I apologize with. So we're wondering if Vermont educators are you looking as you were the main drafters of this bill to pull in administrators as well or just teachers? So the record Ted Fisher again, we are general feeling on this is that the metaphor I used earlier which may be imprecise, I apologize as if you're going to lead the troops then you probably should have the same standard. So we're not concerned about the idea of having principles meet that requirement in terms of alignment to the definition in chapter 51 where we get into the sticky wicked is this professionally licensed definition. And that's something I like I said my colleague Andrew can speak to. So you're opposing that principles, superintendents, others in the administration would also do this roughly was it 46, 64 hours of training? Yes. Okay, Sandra open standard. No, I think you sort of asked the question that I was going to ask, which is administrators can encompass a lot of folks. So you want that process? Not all administrative to be and understanding that it is still a pretty all encompassing group. Not all administrators require a license but the ones who do are considered to be educators. So our feeling is that broad brushstrokes again with that provisional question not the standing broad brushstrokes if you're a licensed Vermont educator you should have this understanding educators principle and this is where I'm like we're getting to the limit of my expertise so I'll mention this to Andrew and if he wants to say more then if you can permit that. But Vermont educators who are administrators also have professional learning requirements just as all other is part of and have to maintain their license just as a classroom teacher would have to. So we see that as appropriate. Sandra. Thank you. I think two questions. So sorry to go over this but online five page two when we're talking about newly licensed Vermont educators should we include the word professionally licensed? That's why that's highlighted there. Okay, yeah, sorry. So, and then the other question I think I guess more of comment. I do want to hear more as to why principles for example should go through this literacy instruction training at least from the way I see their role it's really more logistical and make sure the rights are on and it's still running. So I don't know that having the having them go through the 40 plus hour program to learn about evidence-based literacy instruction is entirely pertinent to their daily role. So, and I know they have a lot on their shoulders. I mean, everybody working school so they love their shoulders. I don't know if adding this to their plate necessarily makes sense but happy to get more about it. Yeah, I'd like to turn more as well. We'll have the VPA and those folks then to weigh in on this probably tomorrow over the day after and I can see both sides of it. Yeah, the person at the helm is setting the culture and it's sort of the active field for everything to be great. Like 46 additional hours at the top of everything else that they're doing seems like a lot unless they're teaching a class or having a story with students or something. Yeah. So I agree with you. But I would also be helpful to understand what other professional development requirements each of these educators bump into on an annual basis so we're not to your point, everyone's point adding more burden on top of burden that they may not be able to handle. Just being able to understand that development, professional development, the landscape would be very helpful. Yeah, I think that's a good idea because there might be, and I think Senator Kulick and they have raised this last week, if we hear from the Standards Board, is there something that we might take off? If the business is really important but maybe there's some give and take a little bit, yeah. Yes, Ted. Just one hypothetical which might help in thinking through this which is that the majority of educators are licensed for five years, 90% sure that that's the right number, but the license lasts for a period of years. And for example, being a principal is an endorsement that you have on top of your educator license. And so it's very possible that, let's say I have a French teacher language endorsement and I also have a principal endorsement. It's very possible that I might be employed in 2024 for this school year as a principal and I might decide to take another job as a French educator the following year. So you do run into these kinds of things when you try to parse out the endorsement areas and split administrators off from the base of their license. You do kind of run into these sort of strange hypotheticals where you might have someone who meets the requirements in year one because you say we're exempting everyone with an administrator endorsement who's working as an administrator. You're also weighing in on it and I am not an attorney and I would defer to Ledge Counsel or even maybe go and ask A and we legal, and perhaps Andrew can speak to this because he deals with licensing more often. The question of endorsements is something that is established in the standards board rule. And you might be, if you try to unpack that, you might be sort of getting into their area and I know that you of course can preempt them but it might just, if you make that decision to go that way, it may, I'm not sure what unintended consequences it could have. We don't have an administrator license that's separate from an educator license. Right now it's done through endorsements. Senator Pueh, when you were reviewed as a teacher, did the principal come down usually? I'm just thinking, would the principal need some of this in order to like review a class and say, gosh, this is really on track or the principal, so that makes sense. I mean, you typically are assessed and observed by an administrator so that is a good point. And would you mind if I start with that? No, please go. I also was gonna say that we should, one thing that we need to think about is that a lot of our teachers, and I don't have the data, but it would be interesting to get the data, a lot of our teachers become administrators so they will have to train. Yeah. And so, excuse me, do we want a population of administrators where like 50% of the training at 50 go or whatever the number is, it might be better just to man, David, since that's what, I don't know, something for us to think about. Yeah, please. I'm just curious to question, is it intended that this is a one-time training because to the area's point that this is a five-year cycle? She's, yeah, so this would be for the agency of education that they drafted.  This is a one-time training? What? For the record, Ted Fisher of Vermont Agency of Education, the idea is to have them go through the training and then newly licensed educators. So I get that. Do they have to be new every time? Currently, as we've proposed it, it's not renewed, you would do it once and then we would check at your next renewal. Also, this is my colleague, Andrew Prouton. Hello, see you on the screen. Okay, St. James, before we move to Andrew and other things, I think there's some more positive online. Yes, but I wanted, before we move on from this, I just asked Morgan to post a link to the definitions section for this chapter that we are working in in Title 16 and print out the definitions for you all so that you can have that for this discussion because, so let me just read the term administrator and I think you keep the definition and I think you'll see where I'm going with this. So this bill proposes to put a new statute in a chapter with a definition section. So the definition unless you carve out other language would automatically apply to this section, right? So the term administrator means an individual licensed under this chapter, the majority of whose employee time in a public school district or supervisory union is assigned to developing and managing school curriculum, evaluating discipline and personnel or supervising and managing a public school system or public school program. So the terms in this section are around the role the individual is playing at a point in time. So if you want to apply this requirement, not just to the role that an individual is serving at a specific time but to the endorsements that they hold or the specific licensure positions that they hold we may need to add some language to this to make it clear. So for example, to use the example that Ted just gave which I think was really helpful in highlighting this. If you for the sake of argument want this requirement to apply to both teachers the folks in the classroom during the teaching and for the sake of argument, anyone who could be considered an administrator. In Ted's example, the vice principal or the principal may also hold an endorsement that would allow them to be a French teacher, okay? But if we're just looking at a point in time that person would meet the definition of administrator. If you just carve out, if you just, let's say you don't use the term educator let's say you use the term teacher and principals because you don't want everyone who might need the definition of educator to have to take these learning modules. Then you may run into a situation where someone who is not specifically called out in this section would not have to take the learning module because they don't fit into this definition but they hold an endorsement that would allow them to fit into another definition. And so they could be in that next year, a teacher instead of an administrator but they haven't been required to take the module yet and so then that requirement may kick in at a different time depending on how folks are using their endorsements. They're going back into the classroom asking to kick something off. Depending on how we structure this, right? So if you want everyone to fit in that definition of educator, so educator means any teacher or administrator and then administrator means everyone I just talked about you could carve off just principals that you're leaving some other folks behind. The term educator includes teacher or administrator so that's gonna include pretty much everyone who's licensed most folks who are licensed by the standards board but the definitions in title 16 and chapter 51 so we're not working with the state board's rules we're working with chapter 51 are to a moment in time. If you want to tie this requirement to the enforcement that someone holds I'm just suggesting we may need to be specific about that not just using the definitions in this chapter. I think you all need to just figure out the broad category folks and then I'll craft the language for you. That's helpful. And then the only other edition here is on page three section four starting on line six. So this is a requirement that AOE submit recommendations so the standards for and how to strengthen educator preparation programs. They also have to simultaneously communicate those recommendations to the educator programs themselves and then we added a requirement that they would communicate those recommendations to you all as well. And that's it. Thanks. Yeah, thank you. So it's not a question about but just something to kind of ponder I was thinking about this bill this weekend and I was thinking that this is all about results oriented programs, et cetera, et cetera. And I'm wondering if it's appropriate somewhere in this bill to build in a review of its success. You get four or five years down the road you're one of the metrics showing it's not having the desired fact groups got to come back together and reevaluate course for the next four or five years. So I'm just, because no, not necessarily a sunset but a review, not a sunset because I don't want to just like go to the cliff and die. It's got to get to a point a milestone in time not time people who ever agrees how much is enough time. If you really want a results oriented program it's got to be based on metrics and it's got to be, it's got to have a milestone where it pivots or stays on track. Without that, it's just another, it could has potential become the first page, line 14 another outdated practice and you can't legislate outdated practices. Thank you for that. That's a really good point. Would you like to say something? I am. Beautiful. There is already some of this built into current law. Good. So the powers and duties of the standards board includes a requirement that now this isn't exactly on point for the weeks. It's not in the bill, it's in current law. So it's in title 15 and chapter 51 the professional educators title chapter. It's section 1694, which is the powers and duties of the standards board. It requires the standards board not less than every five years to review its continuing education and other continuing competency requirements for professional educators. And then it has certain things that they need to to put in writing when they do that review. So that's for continuing education or continuing competence to requirements. And then let's see, for educator preparation programs. Shouldn't we do that for everybody, right? Yeah. Especially if you're introducing a new program. I would encourage you to hear directly from the subject matter experts on the field and whether or not that's actually happening. It does appear that this is the purpose of the results oriented program approval process. And so I would encourage you to hear directly from the field on what's actually happening. Well, that's encouraging because I hope that that process would lead to this kind of review, but to raise the flag that this is the results of the legislative review, we need to address literacy because upon reasons then move forward. Senator Sheen. Yeah, thanks. I was just going to say to that point that I can kind of see two aspects of it or I guess two sides of it. And I think that looking at literacy scores, yeah, I think that's one way to see about the effectiveness, but if literacy scores are going up, that's obviously a good thing, but there could also be other factors that are causing the scores to go up. So I think, so are you getting a look to see if this particular program is effective down the road? That's, yeah. Senator Williams, Senator. So if this is already a statute and they're doing it, obviously, what about them? They're just doing the five-year review standards board is doing it five-year review standards board, yeah. Continuing competency requirements. Yeah, just, yeah. Senator. For clarity, can I get, I'm not understanding what provision of this bill are you talking about? Are you specifically? Overall. But I mean, but for example, there's a part of this bill that talks about the Literacy Council. So are you mostly pointing at the modules? Is that what you're? No, I'm pointing at getting results. How establishing metrics, getting results and reacting to those results. If you really want evidence-based and data-driven, you got to build it in. I understand that. I'm just, I think this bill has a lot of disparate provisions that it'll have even more once we add the Imagination Library. Yeah, I get that. So multi-section. So yeah, it's a combination, I think with, correct me if I'm wrong, between 204 and this, in the section of 303 where the modules become required, I would think that in five years, I speak myself, I would love to see those reading scores off. And I think we will, recognizing that there are a lot of other things that could happen that could freeze them or lower them. But that does seem like we can talk to Andrew to see, what should we be seeing in five years? Should we really start to see? Keeping the Imagination Library out of it, which I don't think is going, it's big, but we're talking about S204, and it's required to be done. Okay, it's fine. It looks like you have a lot of parts you were talking about, okay? Go ahead. I think that it's important that the administrative, principal, whatever, should at least know what takes the instruction. So I think it's important that the teachers know, I'm inclined, but yeah, we'll hear from Andrew. Principles are observing what teachers are doing, and they're going in, and it does seem to make sense, but I also recognize that principals and everybody have a lot of their plates, and we pull something off for their, I don't, Andrew, help us with this in terms of their keeping up with their certification, etc., sort of making focus on this. Take five minutes. Andrew, please come on up. While we take five minutes, get yourself comfortable. We've got a lot of questions. Welcome back to education. So Ms. Andrew, your last name is Proudton? Yep, it's Proudton. It's great to have you with us. You probably have heard some of our questions, but let me, let's go to the bill. Again, we are looking at the revised copy. This is 2.1 of 303, and we're trying to understand a couple of things. The agency, they drafted this a couple of times, and there's a little confusion. We got one draft, then they came back with changes, we got another draft, and now we're trying to sort of settle some questions that are still outstanding. And the first one, and others please feel to jump in, has to do with the first page. And if you look under mandatory completion of literacy models, we are talking about, we are trying to decide whether or not professionally licensed should be used around people that should be, receive this, and whether it should include people who are provisionally licensed, urgency licensed, teaching interns, apprentice licenses, those kinds of folks. So let's start there and tell us your thoughts. Great. So for the record, Andrew Proudton is the Director of Education Quality, and he's the Director of Primary Licensing Preparation. So yeah, a couple of different pieces within that, to start with that idea of the provisional license, there's definitely frozen comments. I mean, I'm kind of going back and forth on that. And actually this might be helpful when I apologize for the graphic. How long can a provisional license last? Yep, okay. So in a provisional license when first issued, it's two years, and if they're extenuating circumstances, we may, at the request of a superintendent, issue an additional one year. So at hand, it will be free. So you could ask the teacher teaching literacy for three years and not have to go through this and see how you can do it be concerned with that. Right. So I think on that piece, there's that appearance of what's fair, right? We're asking the professionally licensed teachers, but not this group. So where I was thinking just on that idea of that implementation, I'm working a lot, especially with special education, provisional license holders right now. We've been doing a lot of work to try to recruit people into the field to support them. So we have a whole new cohort of PEA, I believe, under that as well as some additional folks. So the requirements that they're working on right now, they have to take and pass the practice too for special education, which is not usually required, but for this cohort, we really want to make sure. They have to go through separate modules that we use through Vanderbilt University, which is quite a lot of work. That's all within their first 30 days of teaching. Provisional license. Yeah, okay, that provisional license. They then will also need to start going through an actual licensure program. We're finding the majority of this cohort are going through Vermont Higher Education Collaborative, so that's 21 credits. And that's a lot for two years, so they're starting to extend it to that third year. Who's paying for that, Jim? It depends. I think a lot of, most recently, the tuition reimbursement process, that new Forgivable Loan Program, but then districts are putting money in. There's the most, in most districts, someone on provisional license would qualify for PD funds. And then depending on sort of that local context and the contract, there may be some additional funds. I think some districts use some of the COVID, the federal COVID funding as well. So when I think about those folks on provisional licenses, right, they're doing an entire preparation program that sometimes, you know, is four years to be being acted into youth too, as well as being first year teachers. So that was sort of my thinking when posing that question of do we really want to include the provisional licenses in there? Because part of our strategy is really looking at them as retainment, looking at a pattern where folks are unable to leave all of their apartments. And so then out here two years, sometimes three, but usually just two years, they're leaving in the schools for recruiting someone totally new and starting over. And we know that that definitely has some negative impacts on students. So we're really doing a lot to try to retain them, get them in. And I think with the language of the book, once they are professionally licensed, they would still have to do the modules within those first few years. Seems to me, but please correct your mom and dad. Again, we're gonna put somebody in elementary school for any time, 46 hours seems like a logical thing to do to make sure children are learning to read and write properly. Exactly. With a provisional emergency, whatever. Right, so I mean, what I was speaking about, that's 88 people. We have almost 900 provisional emergency licenses this school year. Okay. Just issued, that's not including those on the second, second. So are you agreeing that we should move in this direction with the provisional requiring this 46 hours for teachers? Yeah, I think in that context, especially if we're thinking of elementary ed teachers and stuff, that could make sense. And this could get moving out a little bit into some of that nuance when we start thinking about that implementation and different endorsements or would and would not be appropriate as well. Super. Thank you. It's nice having you here. I feel like we should have you here earlier. So yeah, this is great. But I wanted to say that I think my personal opinion is I feel like we should move pretty slowly on this. It seems like it's important and it's gonna have a big impact on not just our kids and their reading, but on teachers. So I just wanna make sure that we get this right. I also was gonna say that, oh, what was I just saying? So we found teachers and I need provisional emergency and yeah, wow, okay, that just is gone. That's a very safe. I don't come back and then I'll try again. So just kind of a curiosity question. Do you or does that see any complications with the language in here inadvertently rolling in on anticipated educators such as drivers training, CDL schools, I don't know if you name it. There's all kinds of educational universities as an example. How do we, is there, is the language clear enough that what we're really talking about is K to 12 type institutions as opposed to the full universe of people who provide training and education in the state? Yeah, I think that's getting into that section three. Yeah, for the record again, Ted Fisher and the agency of education. There are some limits. We're not talking about university professors who really just wait that 12 or 12 years. I know you're intended, right? That's clear, but it's the language sufficient to kind of put boundaries around, okay, then you take college, 46 hours, see when you're done. I think that I could be wrong, but that's what we're gonna be talking about is professionally licensed. I think that would limit the post-secondary education folks, but I... I think we're struggling, we are struggling as the committee with the question of some of the threat that this, and you've heard me advocate for administrators being included here, but the way you have it currently drafted in, sorry, 2.1, it's because I'm very just hearing from my colleague about the cohort for special education, students understand the first special education teachers understand that's an area of high need. It's an area where they have lots of requirements that they need to learn. They still should know literacy, but we're also concerned about recruitment and retention and the burden of things we're putting on them, and that's an area of high interest for us statewide. So I think we're grappling with that same end, but I'm also very receptive to Senator Gretchen and Senator Gluck's point about wanting to move slowly, because I think why we kind of fall down on the professionally licensed definition because it allows for some remembering, yes, there is a potential, but it could take them three years to go through the full process. There's going to be a licensed educator and they're still going to be subject to this. There's no reason why they can't do it. Hours, and I'm wondering also, helping with this, it seems to me that we are running a risk of not teaching kids the right way if you have a provisional license for even two years. That's exactly the kind of argument we're struggling with, and that's why our original proposed version has educators as the definition. I remember what I was kind of saying. She's good. This is good. I was going to mention the concept of coaches because I know there are schools that have reading coaches and have all kinds of various coaches who are there for professional development. So I am thinking, again, and thinking of moving slowly if you do have a teacher who, or provisional licensed teacher in a school who might not have the time or the wherewithal or is really overwhelmed in those early years, might not be able to complete the modules. And I don't know what the coaching landscape looks like exactly, but it would be interesting to know if they had supports within the school to help them with the reading and with making sure that their reading instruction practices were to ask the three of you, Mr. Chair, to ask just a clarifying question. Do you mean potentially adding another section or another subsection that would require that individuals who are going through that process be working, you know, be working concert or in collaboration with someone who isn't, I don't know the right term coach, coach or, you know, highly skilled literacy or someone who's highly skilled in reading. What do you think about that? Well, obviously, I shouldn't answer that question, because I don't know enough yet, but it's something to think about. Yeah, and if I may, I just, sometimes I make this analogy, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but would we ever say to a nurse, I don't need to learn this bit while with your provisional, you know, you may see patients. I mean, damage to me, we have a huge literacy issue in this state. And a provisional teacher can be in the classroom for three years, teaching, reading and writing at third grade. I just, it doesn't work for me, but maybe I'm missing something, please. Yeah, I certainly agree. And that's kind of what I keep going back and forth on, especially thinking about elementary education. I think it's like 124 provisionals in that that we've issued this year for elementary ed, which is also now we're still working through some of the data that looks like it may, may not be of a shortage area for our state, as well as other states, which is this new context for our country. So in that, absolutely, I think that in that cohort, something like this would be a really valuable resource for them. And yeah, in that context, I would certainly agree. There are also situations, one thing that we've been seeing is that a lot of the people who are working on provisionals, and I don't have like a good percentage or data point, but I don't know, at least, it's a lot of individuals that I've been supporting who have gone through a preparation program and just didn't pass the testing where they didn't, they were unable to do their student teaching because, you know, illness in the family or something like that. And they've been working in schools for the past 10 years. And now, since they've never really been considered for a licensed teaching position, with the shortages that are being considered, they're getting put on provisional licenses and they're doing very good work and really showing that commitment of working in our schools and in a licensed position. So there are lots of really, really good, you know, not professionally licensed, but still qualified individuals who are working in those positions. Many, yeah, please. So again, I'm still kind of wrapped around the whole professional licensing part of the definition.  I thought a couple more just sitting here pilot training, screw buff as an example, they're professionally licensed. I'm just wondering if we need to, you know, again, put boundaries around this so that you protect. And I agree, I understand and agree with the premise of the bill. I just don't want to like start scraping on people who aren't intended to, you know, track them off on intention. So my saying James, if I may ask you, would somebody who is, as Senator Weeks points out, it's important that we're not looking to pull in people who are school instructors, people, you know, that group of people, if you will, just as an example, quick days with this language people did. No, occupational licensing span. Well, no, occupational licensing is for occupations. And then you require, there's licenses required for a myriad of things that we all participate in society. When we're looking at trying to figure out what law applies to what group, we're orienting ourselves to where the law is located. So for this example, big picture, title 16, educational land. And then we go, the next level would be the chapter. And this, I forget the title of the chapter, but chapter 51 is licensing of teachers. And then this specific definition in draft 2.1, we're talking about educator licenses specifically. So I would say there's multiple layers that would exclude everyone that you brought up automatically without having to make an amendment to this. That makes sense. Fine. He raised it as a precautionary thing, which wants to make sure. No, I'm trying to change it. Senator Acura, please. Adult ed. Do they, are they licensed educators? No, but there is, we can have a license for director of adult ed in CTE centers, but the instructors themselves should not license. Okay, interesting. Okay, I should give the module stuff. Anne, could you define the difference between emergency and provisional license? Okay. So an emergency license is, someone has a bachelor's degree and the school has not been able to hire an otherwise qualified veterinarian. Provisional license, there's a couple of different gates. If they hold an expired or valid license from Vermont or another state, they would qualify. If they have at least 18 credits in the content area, 21 for special ed. And that, or if they've passed the practice to content test, if there's one for that content area, and there's less limitations on the district, they could hire someone if there is, yeah, an otherwise strong candidate. And how long does an emergency license last? Just once, we'll hear. It's just that once. Yeah, yeah. Okay. Okay. And then teaching interns and apprenticeship licenses, again, we're trying to see who we really want to pull into this. Yeah, so we wouldn't have that. I think that language, it seems to come a little bit from our general definition that encompasses other states as well. So we don't have any licenses for teaching interns. Apprenticeship licenses is specifically talking about CTE centers. So that's like a whole another can of worms. That is an interesting thing. So what is another term for teaching intern, teaching a teacher? Student. Student together. Okay. Yeah. And I think that would be captured in some of the work on ROCA, which gets into that question earlier around our metrics and our assessment is. What I would envision is that our teacher programs would either use these modules or adapt their current, I think like, I'm sure a few, like when I went through UVM, I had a reading course, even though I was a secondary social society. So there can already be an alignment in there. And we could get to a point where they're meeting this requirement during that pre-service education. So committee, I think the question for all of us is, who else do we want to capture in this? Do we want provisional? Do we want emergency? Do we want student teachers to go through this 46 hour training, get signed off on it? I mean, my gut at the very least personally, but provisional seems to me to kind of have them go through it. And I also do worry about the emergency if you're teaching second grade for a year. That's, but I also, you know, yeah, that's kind of a shame in that center too. How long again do folks normally have an emergency license? It just one school year, so let's go again. Yes. Sorry, FedFest, do you want to share? No, no, what's the case? All right, second grade teachers in their endorsement, learning how to teach reading and face in science. I mean, isn't that part of their training as, I mean, I- Through the preparation programs? Yeah. Yeah, there's, I can't remember exactly. There was, we've done a couple of different reviews and there's a couple of different organizations that do. And generally, the way they'll be like rank on those, I'm not super thrilled on when they get letter dates, but through our standards, there are a lot of the, you know, phonetics and all those components that are in our standards and are at least addressed. I believe in all of our preparation programs. Some of them will have it addressed and they kind of move on. Other ones do a really, really good job. So it depends on the individual program. And just to be clear, are these modules going to be mandatory for everyone regardless of how much literacy training they have? Yeah, okay. To clarify, we asked in our last round, there would be the possibility that, so sort of the language in section two now says, I'm quoting from memory, so it's something along the lines of the modules adopted by the agency or selected by the agency were approved, other ones. So we could, in reference to someone who's a highly trained literacy specialist with years of experience, they would have some professional learning in their past that would meet our standard. If you would permit me, Mr. Chair, I think we're leaning into, to your point a moment ago, we're leaning into some concern. And Andrew can please kick me out of the tail if I'm saying anything wrong. But the, it's important to note that provisional and emergency licensure are things that get undertaken when we, you know, fill a can, or in certain other cases where you maybe have someone who's uneducated and the state needs to go through the licensing process. Well, we are hoping that everyone is meeting as soon as possible that high standard. And I just wanted to sort of acknowledge that fact, as you all know, we are in an employment crisis, unfortunately. So we do struggle with that. I think we're all, we also struggle with that same concern. You had Mr. Chair about that. We're trying to figure out how to navigate the moment that we're in in the hopes that we get to a point where we're ever getting missed as soon as possible. And I think this committee doesn't want to look at five years and say, why are you in an employment crisis? Otherwise, are tests worth it in fact? That's a good point. Absolutely. So, okay. So committee, what would you like to do? I think the choices are, you know, what do we want to do around provisional? Now, to your point, I think it's a good one. If somebody does come in a second grade and they have some kind of credential that they can get signed off on, okay, Mike has this, he's good, but if he doesn't have it, then it seems to me that probably we're this 46 hour. I mean, do we have to decide right now? Did I have to decide to figure it out? Oh, we're just going to turn the clock. What is it? The hour clock? Yes. Well, you can absolutely have time to think about it. I'd just love to start to close though. I'm not trying to put this soft pressure. This is soft pressure. Right, right, right. Please, soft pressure. I do think, you know, a provisional license should probably go through this program, but, you know, with the emergency license, you know, if the option is no teacher at all versus an emergency licensed teacher who may not have a model training, I'd rather go with the emergency licensed teacher who doesn't have the module rather than nobody at all that I've classed. Yeah, yeah. My assumption, correctly, if I'm wrong, but if you're provisional, if you're provisionally licensed, the intent is there's a runway to it that ends, and then you're licensed and you either fail or you pass. So I think that doesn't kind of scoop in that requirement. We think it kind of recognizes that provisional is a temporary state and leads to fully licensed healthcare. Yeah, I think that's what we're really working towards right now, but Vermont hasn't historically had the same shortage issues as other states. So provisional licenses, we used to do like 300 a year, right, so we're almost triple that. Okay, that's a number though, but it's like year to year, that 300 then becomes 50, that becomes 10, that you know what I mean? It's like that same cohort as it moves through time, eventually lead, like we assume leads to your boiless. Right. Then it falls to the other category that they're in training, right? Yeah. They're new. Right, I think the issue that we're experiencing right now is that there are so many people on that. You don't have the infrastructure at this time to really get them licensed within that time, right? They're only served in a load of seats. So that's what a lot of the work that we've been doing to really support utilizing our peer review program, really working with our ed prep programs to develop a lot of flexibility. They've really stepped up over the past few years with the pandemic, programs that used to not work with people on provisional licenses have been over the past several years. So we're still really trying to figure out how to really track the data, but we want to see a higher percentage of people on the provisional license get that professional license at the end. That's a good last point, because Andrew mentioned earlier, they either become a professionally fully licensed educator, or there's a triton, and they drop out in the school of facts trying to hire another provisional emergency license. So because a provisional license has a window, or it ends at a certain point. It can be, it can also just be naturally, it's not a good fit, and so the person decides not to, or it could just be their company for a family leave for a few months, right?  But we are concerned, correct me if I'm wrong, about there are lots of requirements on them in terms of moving towards the license. So we're talking about adding another thing to a pile that could lead to attrition in terms of yanking it through the program. Mr. Phan, what do you think? Provisional licensing for teachers. So do we have, and this is the 46 hour question. Right, I have 46 hours and we say 10. Okay, okay, okay, okay, so I'll answer. For the record, Jeff Phan and Vermont and EA, I think that one of the things we have to make know those in the weeks sort of was getting at, I was thinking, is that there's two types of folks on provisional license. Those people who don't have a license in any other way. And I've got a board member, for example, right now who's been teaching for more than 20 years, who by virtue of her new assignment in seventh grade, only had a K6 endorsement, had to go through peer review to get, because she's now on a provisional license, she had to go through peer review when Andrew understands the SOF. She's been at this for 20 plus years. She's a seasoned professional. She wants to scoop up people such as her, who have been, by virtue of the shortage, has been asked to teach in an area now that she's not endorsed it. And so that's a question for you that you probably need to grapple with this. Correct me if I'm wrong. We want all teachers to go through this. So she or she may be scooped up no matter what. Correct, I think the way it's written now is correct. The other pieces, the Ropa, the programs who are preparing teachers, the B teachers, my understanding is, and correct me if I'm wrong, Andrew, that there used to be, as you noted, a requirement that everybody get some literacy instruction whether you were teaching, aiming for a high school assignment or elementary school. I believe that's been eliminated or not eliminated, but it's not a requirement in many school professional programs now. And I think that's something that you think you're grappling with here as well. I think that's an important distinction. That's been going on for some years and we're maybe seeing the results of that. Just to remind you, the reason we started this two years ago is because we had teachers come before us saying they did not know how to teach reading, right? So that's why we're making new instructions. Licensing administrators, Andrew, what do you think? Yeah, I think the point was made earlier, somebody's evaluating a teacher. So I personally do think it would be important for at least the children administrators to participate in this. So would we write it that way if you were evaluating a teacher who is teaching literacy or do you think all children would be administrators? Actually, okay. Yeah, I mean, I'm not sure in specific language. I think this might get in the, but I don't like the sense of apologetic in advance. Like some of this might be part of that, like interpretation and implementation. Once we start engaging in stakeholders, I'd really like to be able to have some flexibility on those determinations, right? What it looks like in one district may look different in another, right? So, and I think, again, and that's kind of getting into that section three piece, but having that ability to really engage with stakeholders, look at each individual endorsement to kind of wanted to time make those decisions with lots of input in the process. Shephan, what do you think of that? Would it help your teachers if principals go through this as sort of not only in terms of the evaluation process going into a classroom, but kind of the all-hands-on deck a little bit? Or do you think principals need them? Well, I don't want to speak for Jay. No, I know. Yeah, I see. I think what you're asking is, do I think it's important that- Does it enhance- To your teachers perspective, that a principal knows something about which they're valuing me on as a teacher? And I think the answer is yes. Any other thoughts on this? Yeah, please center of view. My only other thought is that we be very mindful of the timing. The word overburdened just came up and it's just true, they are overburdened. So if we can somehow roll it out, I know the clock is ticking and so on, but first do no harm, right? Let's try not to harm folks. Take away kids. Well, then let's put in here, you can't teach the three queuing method or we could explicitly call out some ways of teaching reading that just simply don't work and actually could cause harm. So if we want to get explicit, you could, but I'm just saying I want to be mindful of retaining the teachers we have and possibly even welcoming new ones without scaring them away or turning them away. I did just want to sign posts that we were mindful of this when we were doing the drafting. So we have some deadlines. I was actually scrolling to the bottom to look for effective dates, but they are in actually in the provisions on ROVA and in the provisional license. So we have, ROVA is, we have a July one deadline to submit recommendations to the SBPE and then the SBPE has a July one deadline, excuse me, we have a July one deadline of 25 to submit recommendations to the SBPE. Julys? July one. So we're talking about, because the way we think now and we learned a lot of good lessons in some of the language we recorded, the bills we worked on last year, y'all will pass this sometime in between, sometime April, May it'll go to the governor. By the time it gets through the whole process we get a July one. So that gives us a year from time of, from effective date of passage approximately to get those recommendations. So standards board, the standards board then has a year as part of their rulemaking process, which happens every two years, but regularly. So it's part of their upcoming rulemaking process that when Andrew and I were working on the section we coordinated on that. So it'd be July one of 26 they would consider. So that's for ROPA in section four. Section two, we have an honor before January one of 26. So that would give, let's say again, from time of passage that would give 18 months for Vermont educators to do the modules to complete these modules. And then, but then we would have, we have an honor before January one of 2025, all newly licensed for Vermont educators employed. So those are for people who are coming into the profession post passage of the bill, right? So that would be a requirement for us, for licensure starting in January 20, January 1st of 2025. So we're really talking about the licensing year that ends January 30th, right? Like that application, correct? Yeah, I've heard for some folks. So it would be January 30th, 2025. So everyone would have 18 months to do the sports. Can we make it through years? And is that? We could consider, there's the ROPA, be aligned to the ROPA for the standard sports planned session of rulemaking that is upcoming. And yeah, I think I'm getting there wrong. No, I think that what we have for ROPA makes sense. You're speaking specifically two years for the individual teachers completing the modules. Yeah. Two years for 46 hours. Yeah, just to- Right, I know, I'm just thinking if I'm a parent, I've got a kid, again, I know no dual, we don't want to lose teachers, but unless I'm seeing them, just don't want the kids to have to go through a couple of years where they don't, I don't know what's funny about this interview. So this is not a binary, right? This is not, if we don't pass these modules today, kids are going to suffer. They're, that's not, I don't see that. They're suffering now. I don't see that as reality. There are readings, reading scores are not what they should be. That is not a way to suffering. I would disagree. I mean, if you are getting reading third grade and you cannot read and write at the grade level, that's a huge problem.  And again, if I'm a parent, I think that is a huge problem. And it does pretty great to suffer. It's also a problem of schools that don't have teachers in them. Like I said, this is not a binary, it's a landscape. And we have to be really thoughtful about how we roll this out. I agree. And I just say, I think we've got to put kids first all the way through this. And the risk of kids going through two or three years of being, as we're saying, not taught properly. That is, I think that's huge. But maybe I'm, perhaps I'm wrong. Yes, please. So I'll come with you. I think 18 months theoretically is sufficient. But I think that you do need to hear some testimony about what is the other professional development load on the teachers. Just to understand, I mean, look, they could say in that 18 months, well, I've got a requirement to do X number of hours per year. I don't have anything else I have to do. Obviously now I'll do this training or the different scenario, pull the cow. I've already got 60 hours of professional training requirement for the next 18 months. And how do I accomplish this? I just don't, I don't understand the landscape of the teachers themselves and what their professional development is to be able to gauge whether 18 months or 24 months or more is appropriate. I think we need to hear at least one testimony. Now we're good. Ted, keep your hand. I would just say, like, we, the agency, agree with both, both all three perspectives that we've heard here, which is that we were very concerned of implementation timelines and enough time for both us and for the field, but we also are feeling the urgency. And so the timelines, we did a much better job than pre-session when we were coming up with some deadlines and also a more thoughtful job than we did last year when we asked for some effective dates. So these, there is some thought put into these effective dates. I will actually just take the opportunity and although Beth and I had talked about this, so we did need to come back to it. In section three, where we have currently developed and distributed a list of professional learning requirements specific to each licensing endorsement, we as the agency had determined, we don't actually need that. Andrew's team has empowered to offer guidance about what under section two of this bill has currently contemplated about what would be appropriate modules for each licensing endorsement that would be an alternative to the AOE's module. So we are on track to do that as of September 1st of this year. We could do that right now. I mean, it would be linked to the bill, but we don't need, we don't need legislative authority to do that. We could do it as a result of passage on under section two. So we're able to implement that. I checked that timeline, maybe if he's comfortable with it. It's on the on my to-do list. It's on the to-do list. And what I should just say is unusual to some of our legislative conversations and this is because we have to remember we did pass a literacy bill a couple of years ago. We have a set of modules that already exist. Educators could go in now, pre-passage. We're encouraging them to do so. We're doing work to try to encourage folks to do it. So we do have these resources available. So we do just to come back full circle. We are cognizant of the need to be careful and provide enough time, but also cognizant of the urgency. Sir, wait. Well, I would just say get the language. I'll get that finalized. Who's going to be affected by it? And then put the experts aside the time. But the point is that... Other questions before we shift. You guys are staying quick. We're just shifting to S204. So as I see it, we needed to decide timing whether or not we're incorporating administrators, whether or not we're talking about provisional licensing, requiring people who are on provisional licenses or not. And I think those are the big... Oh, the other thing while we have you on this topic has to do with whether or not you look on page to letter line one, on or before January 1, 2026, should that be all professionally licensed Vermont educators? I guess what we're looking... Maybe Beth can help you there. There's something I have lagged. Behind five actually newly licensed professionals. St. James. Beth St. James of the legislative panel. So you've already talked to... You've already flagged for yourselves the professional and licensed and the educator decision points. Right. That is not settled. You've just talked about that. Right. On line five, newly licensed is highlighted because the recommendations that came from the agency used the term professionally in subsection B but not in subsection C. And so I didn't know if that was a intentional difference or not. Yes, if you ask that, would you say that again? So if you look at line one. Yeah. All professionally licensed Vermont educators. Right. That was the suggestion from AOE. Right. And five, there was no suggestion to insert that word professionally. Yeah. I'm guessing that that is just an oversight. Yeah. But it also could have been a policy decision. It looks like it's an oversight. Yeah, I always have confirmed that. The intent was educators coming into the profession from the traditional pathways to licensure but yes, it could apply to both. So newly professionally licensed. Just lots of words ending up here. The only other decision point that you haven't brought up here which may not be appropriate for this folks but if you're gonna move on and just wanna flag it it's just we've got subsection D which seems to imply that this whole section should apply to licensed educators and public and approved independent schools. And if that is your intent, I would just add some language to make that clear. And if it's not your intent, well, you'll wanna flush that out. You're talking about whether or not it's their intent. You're right. Right. But you guys draft it. So where are you on this? It's just the term. Just wanna make sure. The term school head. Yeah. And then right here is the Vermont public approved independent schools. That employed the professional license. So, okay. So I think that's the differences. Anyone who is required to have a license. So in some schools, special educators are required to be licensed. So in that context, yes. Right. Okay. And so it's through license. Right. It leaves the way. I think, and I'm sorry, I just lost track there for a second. If we did discuss this briefly previously which is the idea that it is not a requirement in some approved independent schools for educators to be licensed. However, you haven't, there are licensed educators who work in approved independent schools. And so if you employ a licensed educator the requirement to keep this follows you. That makes sense. They follow the licensed educator. So just for clarity, if you're not a licensed educator you don't have to do the modules, period. That is the intent of the sector. There was a problem with you. Whoa. Right. If we have an emergency, we need some licensed professionals. I'm talking about the ones in approved independent schools who may have been there for 25 years. We're not going to require them to do the modules. I think we still have to determine that ourselves. I would leave it at your position. You can, that's exactly, you're absolutely right, Mr. Chair and Senator. That is a policy decision. You want to, if you want to require all teachers in Vermont. Right. The thing is, from the agency's perspective we regulate the licensed educators, regardless of where they serve. But the law requires that public schools employ licensed educators and those same requirements don't apply to all independent schools. So we, our abilities to crack in and force are different depending on the venue. Right. But if we're talking about hard to children I think we, this is a really important policy decision that we have to make because we don't want to harm some kids and not harm other kids. That doesn't seem to make sense. And that sounds like that's your, this is your dinner with school meals, right? Right. You know what? Yeah, yeah. That's it. No, that's it. That is a good, that is a decision point for you. Our position is we're sticking to what we know which is the licensed educators. Great. Ms. St. James, this is, you asked us, I should read to print out a version of the Vermont Staff Futes online. These are just the definitions for the conversation you just had. So to the extent of when you mull over the terms to use when we're talking about educator, administrator. These are the definitions that automatically apply to anything going in this chapter. You can make up your own definitions for each individual section, but if you were to use the term educator and not modify it in any way, these are the definitions that would apply. 204 Andrew, you're back up.  And I think we have you in just to comment, express confidence where things have landed, whatever you would like on S204. And we have Ted Fisher in as well. Where the apologies, Mr. Chair. The lead witness for this bill is myself. Yup. Because we're moving away from licensing into general literacy. So that we don't have concerns with the, we have one potential caution with one of the provisions of section one on page four. We're seeing, we like the changes we've seen in terms of some of the concerns we had about clarifying the end of school's question I testified. I'm also available to speak as well to some of the questions that I implementation. And then you asked us to come back on. Right. So we're going to have to decide the public and independent school piece. But do you have any other concerns as it relates to this bill at this time? The only thing to flag is, and it's highlighted in green on page four is sub G. So that's the only place where the term local literacy plan. And I'm phoning a friend and my colleague Emily Lesh who I know spoke to Friday. So I was going to pull up her, what she's told me. The literacy plans, we've actually provided the local literacy plan template. We get clarifying questions from the field as to whether this is a requirement or not. I just did a quick search of the bill and local literacy plan is only listed here. We're not sure if that means you're requiring it, usually when you require things you're a little bit more explicit about doing so and Beth. So that was a question for ours. We don't necessarily recommend requiring a local literacy plan at this time. Well, this is for G and it's highlighted in green. It looks like your printed version of the green is very hard to apologies. Yeah, and I think the committee also was a little confused. This is your original language. You know that, right? Well, no, it's not. Is it recommended from Mr. Carolus or is it? Okay, so this is AOE's language that you're not supporting. I am sorry, I was not aware I had been provided by a colleague. So it says each local school district and approved independent school shall engage local stakeholders through the needs assessment and asset mapping process when developing a local literacy plan to improve reading proficiency. And frankly, I think we just need to understand what that would be. Do we know Ms. St. James? Please go ahead. That's St. James Office of Legislative Counsel. So this is highlighted in green because of the decision point. No change had been made since draft 1.1 because we kind of skipped over the topic. We just flagged it as a decision point on whether or not you want to require any local engagement. But I believe I pointed out that the local literacy plan in addition to not be something that is required in statute right now is a public school concept. And so from my advice to you is that page four, line 14, the entire subsection G that highlighted in green is just a policy decision for you all on whether or not you want to put in any language that talks about stakeholder engagement. And if you do, let's develop that concept. But that's why this is highlighted in green is that we kind of flagged that this was something that may not work and needed further discussion. And I guess I'm still slightly confused by what this mapping stakeholder stuff looks like exactly. Now I'm looking to the agency. I'm not sure exactly in this context, but generally speaking within the agency what we'll do is kind of like devise the routines, right? We'll identify folks from the field, either licensed teachers, administrators, people within, you know, experts in the field and come in and for the most part, what we like to do, especially like speaking for myself primarily is really try to give them a lot of autonomy to gather the conversation and really get a good understanding of what the best practice in the field would be and then generate policy from that. So applying that because we're talking about a local level, we aren't opposed to the idea of a requirement for stakeholder engagement. As a matter of fact, well, we've currently noted that the situation is slightly different, but we've seen the language above. If you remember, we'd asked for some changes to the parental notification to make sure it's consistent with political law, state law and federal legislative intent that we appreciate that change. I don't think we have a concern with low stakeholder engagement. That's necessarily the question was just whether you were wanting to acquire the local literacy plan. It seems like Beth is flagged that as a suggestion point about stakeholder engagement, is something we're concerned about. And if you're going to have a requirement, this will go to take that as part of literacy efforts. You could potentially do more general language. Okay, so part of this kind of tricky position is you guys have been here, and over here, and you're here. Yeah. It's not helpful just to be better people known as, I speak absolutely YouTube, but we've had bills that have been drafted and redrafted your recommendations. So it's clear and concise page. So you guys now, yeah, we're coming over here. We actually appreciate your feedback on that. And it's certainly a major, we read about going too much into detail. I learned two important things. One is we revamped our policy development process this year. There's been a lot of improvements, but some things have been rough. I also realized how important the month of July is for the legislative process, because almost everyone who does policy work in the agency was doing flood relief work at statewide level, unfortunately. So we should miss down on some of that important time. So I appreciate your committees forbearance on that. The only other thing to just note, and I, Senator, if you look, I'm sensitive to her thoughts earlier about the need to review deliberately while still moving quickly. One of the things you had asked us to just come back with some, we had flags and concerns of implementation. I still do think a lot of this has to do with bears on schools. So it'd be worth maybe hearing from some of our school colleagues about what this would, how this would play out in the local level. But one of the couple of things that we were thinking about that could be helpful would be, for example, a later effective date for universal screeners under section two, so you could move the effective date back. One of the things is that the requirement in app on page four, just so at that highlighted section, the highlighted sentence where it says, the agency shall develop a plan for parental notification or part of the subsection system with a clip will state and federal law, which is intent. You're not explicitly giving us a deadline, but that effective date is if I checked the moment of our research, it's on passage. We won't be able to implement it on that on passage or on that slide. One timeframe, we could potentially do it for the fall. So you could give us, I think I defer to that, but I think you would give us a session law, section two with a date, say of like a member first or something like that to come up with a parental notification plan. Some of those things that would give us a little bit of time and also give the field some time to react would be helpful. So you could potentially delay effectiveness of the session by a year or something like that, if you're thinking about kind of some of those things. But other than that and a concern about just generally hearing from the field on this, that's basically what we have to offer in terms of the information. We are noting the big lift, but it's worth doing to our conversation earlier. And you mean hearing from the field specifically, we've heard from the Vs, who else are you talking about? If you've heard from the Vs and they haven't flagged concerns about this language, they don't like it. I mean, I don't think the NEA correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Bennett, but they had some concerns. Okay. You've heard from them and you've heard their concerns that we were coming. That's what you're talking about. Yeah. Okay. From our part, it's really just a question of, we're big fans of effective dates now and how we are deliberate about work. So. Great. Anything else for Ted? Great. Thanks. Thank you. Really appreciate it. I mean, we're gonna shift to Holocaust education and we're gonna take though about 10 minutes until you have this St. James back as well as Linda Garsett's and Ferry Hamilton. Welcome to Senate Education and welcome back to everybody that's been engaged in Senate education. So we're looking at Holocaust education, S87, and you likely reached out to us wanting to give some testimony on the bill. Yes. Area both personally and professionally I feel very passionate about. And since you're completely new, I think you asked committee, why don't we just go around and introduce ourselves? So you know where we're all our districts in percent. So Senator Hushing from Lester. I'm honored to show for Linda County. That's me. Martin LaRocque with Chitton Center. Brighton and from Bennington County. Dave Weeks, Rollin County. Terry White, Rollin County. Great. So the floor is yours. We're all yours. Thank you so much. I had a meeting with that my department this morning with the local studies department of inferior high school. And this was like someone else brought this up on the agenda. We, so these, these points both come for myself, but also it's consultation, the history department at the chest. Good afternoon senators. Thank you for the opportunity to write testimony on the proposed Holocaust education bill, S87. My name is Perry Bell, and I come to you wearing several hats. I'm a social science teacher at Montpelier High School where I teach 10th grade world history, a senior elective on social change theory and practice and serve as an advisor to the racial, to the student lab racial justice alliance. I have worked as a high school educator for over 16 years and have many years of experience in professional development training in Vermont and California on ethnic studies education from one form practice of Jewish history.  I myself am a strong supporter of Holocaust education. I teach a six week unit every year in my 10th grade class that examines the events leading up to the Holocaust, its implementation, legacy and continued relevance today. Anti-Semitic homophobic and racist ideas continue to proliferate in our society. And in the recent decade have become more visible as white supremacist ideologies have resurfaced in mainstream politics. In the Montpelier Rockbury public school district, we've had numerous instances of anti-Semitic bullying and vandalism in recent years. Holocaust education is one essential component of preventing the spread of this ideology. That said, I have freezing concerns about this bill as currently written. First, I would like to address the potentially negative consequences of mandating six hours of Holocaust education every year up the middle of high school grades. For most, this is not a common formed approach to teaching this very sensitive material. The Holocaust is a triggering subject for many young people who belong to targeted groups. It can also be the avenue in which supremacist, often white supremacist, ideas students have learned outside of school surface in the school community, as has been the case in Montpelier. The Holocaust, like all other supremacist movements, must be taught deliberately by a content expert in a strong container with a trauma-informed approach in a traveling historical context. As a mother, I do not want my children, more Jewish, to sit through six hours of superficial treatment of this material over the course of seven consecutive years. Nor would I wish for Black students to be forced to sit through lessons about racial slavery every year, nor for Indigenous students to study the history of European colonization annually either. Furthermore, from a learner perspective, it is also not helpful for this material to be repeated every year. As history teachers, we know that any time we cover the same topic on an annual basis, it begins to feel repetitive to students and loses its impact. Students begin to just add on, believe that they know everything there is to know about this topic and not be interested in learning more, even when that's very much not the case. A more appropriate pedagogical approach would be to touch on the Holocaust experience through humanity's lens at some point in middle school and through a social science lens inside a global studies curriculum in high school. Secondly, I'd like to address the topics that are required to be covered up through this bill. There are many key facets of Holocaust education that are missing, in my opinion. Topics that I and many other Holocaust educators believe are essential to understanding this history of food. There were busts, militant, and creative resistance led by members of targeted groups. The personal risks taken by countless Europeans who acted in solidarity with targeted groups. The inclusion of socialists amongst the targeted groups and the emergence of fascist ideologies as a response to socialist revolutions. The strategy is used by the Nazi Party to gain a foothold in German society and the combined impact of indoctrination and economic promises. The use of antisemitism as a strategy for maintaining ruling class power throughout over a millennia of European history. The taxes employed during European colonization that were copied by the Nazis and implemented during the Holocaust. The connection to the social construction of race and the eugenics movement in the United States, and I would really highlight eugenics as something that is really essential to any standards covering the Holocaust. The refusal of the United States to provide a silo for Holocaust refugees after World War II. The 10 stages of genocide framework which we can understand the commonalities between the Holocaust and other incidences of genocide in the world. When I introduced a unit on the Holocaust, my students have often heard of it but have a simplistic understanding of what the Holocaust was, that the Holocaust was a result of Hitler's hatred of the Jewish people. As you all know, it is much more complicated than that. My students consistently share that what is most impactful for them in this unit can be summarized in four essential understandings. This is what I get when I review the student reflections at the end of the unit. That the groups targeted by the Nazis fought back in whatever ways were available to them, which is this idea that people resist genocide as such an important understanding. That through systemic indoctrinations and problems to ideologies can quickly take hold in otherwise progressive societies. That the Holocaust is not a fluke of history but rather deeply interconnected with the other events we study in modern world history, including histories of colonization, racial slavery, the emergence of industrial capitalism and political revolutions of this time period. And finally, and so importantly, that the Holocaust was not an isolated instance but rather one that we can use as a tool to help identify past and current examples of genocide around the world. I would urge these understandings to be at the heart of any Holocaust education curriculum. So my final concern with the bill as currently written is that by mandating Holocaust education and not genocide education more broadly, the bill perpetuates an anti-Semitic probe of Jewish exceptionalism, obscures students' ability to identify and intervene as a threat of genocide arises today, and minimizes the experience of young people or young verminers whose families or ancestors experienced one of the many other genocides in recent history. Anti-Semitism stems from the same cause as all supremacist ideologies. That is, is a strategy of a dominant group to maintain power through the dehumanization, subjugation, and scapegoating of tarpy groups. Understanding anti-Semitism in the context of other genocides that have been perpetuated in recent centuries and that are happening today is a critical tool for young people on learning the myth that there is something inherently quote unquote different about us as Jewish people. I am concerned that in making the Holocaust the only specific historical event that Vermont educators are mandated to teach we will further the idea of Jewish exceptionalism. Further, in decontextualizing the Holocaust from other instances of genocide this bill also fails to fulfill the most important ethical lesson of the Holocaust which is the importance of identifying and acting to prevent future genocides. The 10 stages of genocide's framework as created by the NGO Genocide Watch is used by scholars and human rights organizations around the world. It outlines common themes found across instances of genocide and attempted genocide. From the systemic dissemination of the indigenous people and the system of racial slavery in the Americas through the genocides committed in Darfur, Rwanda and Bosnia in recent decades to the current crusades waged this past year against civilians in Arkansas, the Congo, Sudan and Gaza to name a few. Most gravely, by de-emphasizing other communities that have been impacted by genocide we risk sending the message to many of our most vulnerable students that their group suffering is less important. My strong recommendation to the Senate Education Committee is not to move forward with the current language in ASS 87 but rather to develop a more inclusive genocide education bill that takes a global approach to understanding these histories and the current supremacist ideologies and violence in the world today. I would also ask that a committee be convened to write an updated bill that includes middle and high school teachers, historians, human rights experts and Vermonters who are from communities that have been targeted by genocide. Also, there are two points I didn't include in here that I just want to emphasize. One is that as a teacher when I have students come to my classroom, yes, they're understanding, they've heard of the Holocaust but the range of understanding of what that means varies widely. And but the same can also be said for many other hurricane circumstances in our history particularly racial slavery and colonization. It's really astounding to me and often astounding to my students how little they know about these histories before they take my class. And so I would just say, in general, I read the Vermont NEA's testimony and they raised some concerns around mandating any specific content. And as a history teacher, I share those concerns. I were seeing this play out across the country what the pitfalls can be governments mandating what is included in social studies education. That being said, we have some pretty significant holes that I see our students missing in this state. However, I think it would really be a mistake to single out Holocaust education amongst those and not more broadly address the histories, the painful histories that targeted so many marginalized historically oppressed communities in this state that don't get taught in their full complexity and that often aren't taught in a way that fully humanize the people that were targeted. And so again, like when I urge for a genocide education bill it is within that context that there is much that needs to be covered. And I think the Act 1 framework really does move us forward in many ways on that behalf where I think a genocide education bill could be a powerful accompaniment to that too. So thank you for your time. We really appreciate being here today. Thank you. Questions for Ms. fellow gentlemen. Senator Pueblo. Thank you. Could you give us a really simple brief example of what teaching of the Holocaust experience through a humanities lens might look like and also through a social study, the global studies curriculum just tease out one little... Yeah, actually, yeah. So I don't teach in the middle school and I apologize in blanking on the name of the book The Student Trade but last year my students wrote a book on refugee experiences that looked at refugee experiences in the face of genocide and mass violence around the world and criteria that maybe doesn't meet the criteria of genocide but it's a long framework of the 10 stages of genocide and it was all done through stories. So they looked both and this was down I believe in the eighth grade class where they read story of a young man who was a refugee from the Holocaust alongside a refugee from Syria and alongside several other stories. So that's what I'm referring to, right? Project. Project. It's right with another guy. I should have looked it up before I came here. Yeah, that's right. Or other material, right? That is Asian-appropriate in our middle schools, right? And some schools engage with their friends. So looking more through the personal experiences of survivors and victims of these tragedies, I think that's what I think by that. Whereas by 10th grade students are really able and have a higher intellectual cognitive ability to contextualize what is happening in broader historical patterns. And I think that's a really essential component that we added. Did hear early on some testimony. I think it was a quote from the economist that roughly 50% of young people aren't even aware of the Holocaust. So it's just incredibly disconcerting that you can imagine. I mean, those statistics are also like astounding for many other parts of our history as well. So it's helpful to like take it in that context. I can't pull the statistics right now, but it's not the only thing. Sure, fair, fair. While we're hearing about... Which doesn't always reflect that they haven't been taught about it, right? Unless one of the things we struggle with is teachers, right? You know, like I have kids come into my class and they've never learned about this and that. Oh, right. That's what I remember. Right, right. But yeah, I completely agree. We have a need for Holocaust education. And I see that need here as well, of Vermont. It would be great to have the statistics for Vermont, too. And ask, how do you combat the anti-Semitism in your school? I talked to a parent this weekend. I heard that Burlington High School has had a number of different issues related to this. Kids. Yeah, I guess I'll leave it there. How do you address this issue? We're deeply in that conversation right now. I want to know the rest. You are? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, one thing that I have experienced since I've been in the state for five years and I came from the Bay Area in California and there's just a very different culture about responses to instances of hate. And often that looks like, in what I've experienced, not just in Montpelier, but in many different districts, what I've seen in different districts, is it an effort to avoid explaining an issue or to protect student privacy that we avoid talking about things that aren't? I think that these need to be issues that our school districts take up, that when there is a swastika in a lot to install, that there is a robust response just like when there is each speech against students of color or we're trans students, disabled students, which we have happening on a regular basis in many of our districts. So I do think there's just a level of, a, just clear responses from the administration, administration, districts, having more courageous statements and clarity around these issues and that we need to take them on in our schools as well. And a key piece to how we address anti-Semitism to me though is that we really contextualize it as a supremacist ideology that we do teach in my class. Like I teach very specifically what the root is, what is specific to anti-Semitism, just like what we look at at what is specific to anti-Black racism, what the like historical reasons were that these were used as really class strategies and how that we kind of see those trends still present today, the remnants of those ideologies embedded in some of the ways and mainstream thought. So to me, a very robust education is needed, which is the kind of thing that we need to outline in much greater detail within a general science education bill or that I know like that, what working group has taken on as well. No, no, no, it's okay. Senator Sheik, I'm kind of drawing a parallel to what we were talking about earlier regarding literacy and training around it and how we teach kids, whether it's about the Holocaust or just global citizenship in general, which is a part of the education quality standards. And when we hear anecdotes that there are some teachers who just are skipping over the Holocaust and it's just anecdotes, but what's missing in the supervision there or the review process or what's being taught in the classroom? And I don't have an answer, but yeah, so that's just one of the things that I'm thinking about here. And yeah. And to take it even another step is just creating how to have those conversations. So it's teaching, but you're an administrator and there's a swastika on the bathroom wall. How do we equip our administrators and others to deal with that in an effective way? Go ahead. Yeah, well actually the question for you is if there was another history teacher in your school and they got to the World War II section of their curriculum, and they just completely skip over the Holocaust, is there, what would happen to that teacher or any, can you provide any insight? I know it's speculation, I'm sorry. No, well, I mean it, at our school, we have a curriculum that myself, the console, that wrote, right? So it wouldn't, that includes Holocaust education. Like we as a department have gone through what I've identified all of the major historical moments that are going to be taught and what both kind of content standards, skill based standards, and enduring understanding students need to have. So we do have that, I think that's like a critical piece for any history or yelling department to have. I do think that is a question for the state. I do think that there are other places where there are holes in our curriculum. And it's not clear what reports, for example, I as a parent, even at the elementary school level, the elementary school that my stepdaughter attended and my daughter will attend, has very little in addressing any of the topics that have come up today. I don't know what reports I have to address that. So I think that's something I would like the state to take on. I do think that's a place where APLUN standards and a genocide education bill could be really critically important. But to your point, the standards aren't enough. We really need training. And I know that there has been training provided in association with APLUN's introduction. And I haven't attended those trainings myself. I've seen some of the curriculum. So I can't comment on those trainings. But there's many different frameworks for teaching the Holocaust through. Echoes and reflection training uses a definition of anti-Semitism that equates any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. And so that makes that a particularly challenging curriculum for some of us to work with today, particularly as we're looking at trying to parse apart in our society a conversation about anti-Semitism and a conversation about Israel's policies as acted by Netanyahu. And so there's important considerations, too, in terms of where training happens. So that's why I would also just think it's so important that there be a diverse group of educators, and historians, human rights experts that would be part of creating these standards to figure out those complexities. Any other questions or comments? Yes, Senator Wayne. No, I thank you very much, Gloria. And I totally agree with you. I think that it should be genocide in general, not specifically for grace or more genocide. I mean, I don't have a lot to talk about because what's probable right now in me is what's going on in Israel does. I don't want to offend Netanyahu, but I think that's so important to me. You know, we get the education, we continue the message of what's happened in the past, and we don't have to repeat it. Yeah, and I think this piece of both deeply understanding, just not much or so, and deeply understanding genocide and how genocide takes place oftentimes as governments are grasping on to full amount of power. You need to be able to have both of those understandings to parse out our own country's role and current events, particularly in Israel's house time right now and really subliar. One of some of the most critical issues happening in the world, and a lot of our ability to understand it has been obscured by not having this education. A familiar teacher education program prepared you for these conversations, or was it through additional training that you were able to? Both, and I did my teacher preparation at San Francisco State University, which had an ethnic studies college, and so did get some of these frameworks in my teacher education, which I don't think could not have been the norm in most teacher education programs. And then I did a second master's at the FDF in common form practice, and so those two things, it formed my lens, but that is another place to look like how are our educators getting that education? It's in weeks. I wanted to thank you, probably some of the most thoughtful testimony we've had in the committee, but you raised dozens of extremely valuable points. And it calls us to. I mean, it shows the complexity, I think in part, why generally this committee does not do curriculum. It is a standards process. And we'll hear a little bit from this carcass around this. If you're able to stick around, great. Thanks. I'd love to have you. Yeah, great. I'll take a pass. Any final questions or comments? Thank you. Yeah, thank you very much. Thank you. She had the time. Great. Scarce. Hi. Hello. Thank you. I apologize. Oh, you're welcome. You're lost in history. Yeah, I promise to send this, but my computer literally froze before I was put in. I couldn't put it all in. No, not at all. So let me just frame this a little bit for you. You heard the testimony. We're trying to understand the best way to approach this issue is there a way for us, for example, to direct the creation of standard if we would want to move in that direction. But we know that you, through the ethnic studies process, has been in the thick of this work. And so if you would just say a little bit more, you've been in here to talk a bit, but about the process, the ACWIN framework, and how it addresses this issue. Thank you. Yeah, but I wonder if you already know for the record, I'm not going to say it, Director of Policy Education outreach for the Vermont Human Rights Commission and a former chair of the ACWIN Working Group. So yeah, I will just start by sharing that we believe that, you know, the inclusion of the Holocaust education within Vermont's public school curriculum and independent schools is really important. I just want to reiterate the charge of the working group, which was to review standards for student performance, adopted by the State Board of Education and recommend to the State Board updates and additional standards to recognize fully the history, contributions, and perspectives of ethnic groups and social groups. And it has a list of how we need to, how these standards need to be designed, which will increase cultural competency to students, increase attention to the history, contribution and perspectives of ethnic groups and social groups for more critical thinking regarding history, contributions, and perspectives, provide across this curriculum content and methods that enable students to explore safely questions of identity, race, equality, and racism and ensure that the basic curriculum and extra curriculum programs are welcoming to all students. With that said, our submissions to the State Board includes both the education quality standards and our IRS standards framework, understanding of the State Board's authorities limited to adopting the standards. For student performance, we byline our work with this understanding. And so, I want to extend right to those striving with this course for, is universally acknowledged that teaching the Holocaust alongside other challenging historical events such as slavery, eugenics, and various genocides is essential. We do have at this stage the Truth and Reconciliation Commission which is looking at some of these topics as well. These events provide critical lessons in human rights, social justice, and the consequences of prejudice and discrimination. Our efforts, we believe, are already contributing to advancement's Holocaust education. So here's how the State Board includes standards. So with many the education quality is standard and that includes specifically the need for ethnic study. That means interdisciplinary, age-appropriate, great appropriate curriculum and programs dedicated to the historical and contemporary study of race, ethnicity, and indigenous peoples including the indigenous peoples of Vermont requires a critical examination of the experiences and perspectives of racial and ethnic groups and indigenous people that have tougher systemic oppression, marginalization, discrimination, persecution, and genocide within and outside the United States. Ethnic studies may involve a criminal examination of these experiences and perspectives through the lens of the characteristics of social groups. So that was the definition that was adopted or voted by the State Board in May of 2023. There might be some revisions common in the pipeline but that is our definition of ethnic studies. So with that framework we created the Irish framework and the way that we see that the Holocaust can be incorporated at the classroom teacher is in four pieces. The guiding concept of transformative solidarity at the way of members of breast social groups to find common cause and anti-discrimination work. So one is identity development which explores the historical contemporary interdependent and multi-dimensional nature of identity. So if teacher can use that they can use interconnectedness which is another one of our standards to build one's purpose anchor and anti-racist anti-discriminatory in intercultural solidarity social responsibility co-creating cultural community spaces that center the healing from the effects of history in contemporary trauma, harm and toxicity, rude and racism and intersectional forms of oppression and so like those were the four pieces that we came up with that the educator said against. So in summary, there's more and I will send this but in summary I recommend that adopting the strategies that I'm asking which you have in your report that basically address the necessity for teacher training and curriculum development in subjects such as Holocaust education, slavery, eugenics and other genocide. The success of ethnic and social equity studies in Vermont's public schools depends on the commitment and collaboration of educators to professional administrators and community members with sustained professional guidance and resources for education of agencies. The training programs show in to enhance educators under sense of historical pedagogicals and social content as well as the professional thing curriculum development and classroom instruction to ensure success it is essential to provide adequate time resources and support for educate educators foster partnerships with organizations as cultural items in the subjects and establish long term professional development initiatives. Additionally, collaboration between school districts educational agencies and organizations experiencing curriculum design is imperative. So it's not worth it that while many other states have already made Holocaust education a requirement incorporating comprehensive approach to teachings about difficult histories that's Vermont apart as a leader in inclusive and informed education. Now I give you all the other states that have Holocaust education which are include genocide. So Oregon, for example, is required to school districts to provide instruction about Holocaust and genocide and the state for education develop academic content standards. California should offer cursive and human rights issues with particular attention to the study of the humanity of genocide slavery and the Holocaust. Arizona require requirement that students be taught about the Holocaust and other genocide Colorado shall incorporate standards of Holocaust and genocide studies which means on the Holocaust genocide and other acts of mob violence. Nebraska require to adopt standards for education on the Holocaust and other acts of genocide. So Oregon is the whole 25 states that have that requirement and most of them include the other. Is it one question when you were working on things who from the standards board use your contact did you interact with? From the state board, Amy? Yeah, no, from the standards. Oh, so the standards board that there was a licensure so we haven't worked. You have any direction up there? I mean, I'm on that board. You are on that. And we are about to revise the to enter into the process revising the standards for remote educators. But that's a long process. I'm just a chair of that board. That is the amazing Amy Maynard. Who is the superintendent? And she is really great. I love that board. Yes, we have. Yeah, great. Yeah, it's great. Any other questions or comments? Discusses? Yes, please. Thank you. Early on in your testimony I think you said the board is limited in accepting your standards. What do you mean by that? Who's got it early on? I don't think that the board that the standards of the board sets the standards. Oh, okay. Yeah, they're like the ones that adopt the standards. So all the content areas it will find better. You look at the state board. The state board. That's the standards board. And then at the end, I just I made note of when you said difficult histories. I just I don't know. I kind of wanted to flag that because I think there there are some difficult histories and then there are some histories that are beyond difficult. And I don't have a term to suggest to you, but. Inhumane, inhumane. Yeah. Like we develop a lot. We spend a lot of time looking at the history of discrimination genocide. We have a whole 32 page of all our resources of thousands of dollars. And the act one, and the act one, if I look on the webpage for act one, that's where to be. Yeah. I will send you all of our of how we came out with the finitions. Yeah. All of our research is there in the documents like a 32 page document that explains where we research all of our research came from. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yeah. I don't mind sticking around for a little bit. Nope. I hope you get it. Thank you. So Miss St. James, do you mind joining us? Sure. So I think, correct me if I'm wrong, is the committee comfortable with not moving forward with S87 as written? Okay. I think that's your opinion. So one, so in your folders, one way to look at this issue, this was proposed by a Burlington parent who is committed to this issue who conducts an interview with a weekend just as a starting point for another way to have this conversation either in this language, education bill and I'm not married to this but just want to put it out there. It's really a, and I'll have Miss St. James say a few words, but this is a data collection piece to understand what is being done in our schools around Holocaust education. Pass it to Miss St. James to just give us a quick little overview. That's St. James office of legislative council. As your chair just mentioned, it requires this language would require an agency of education to request from all supervisory unions a report back with information regarding weather and where Holocaust education is taught in a supervisory union wide curriculum and then included in a communication that goes out to supervisory unions requesting this information. There's a requirement that AOE provide Holocaust education resources that need to be developed in consultation with the Vermont Holocaust Memorial. I will just say that I think the I think that the intent of what this language trying to achieve is clear but I may not have gotten all of I may not have used all the right words as far as whether and where Holocaust education is taught if there if this if you decide to go with this language I would encourage you to either have me behind the scenes or to address to direct testimony on the very specific language to include to get the right information. So just throwing it out there as a sort of a data collection I'm looking to our most recent witnesses. We know that there is real concern out there that Holocaust education is not being taught. This one this would do a couple of things it would give us a sense of the landscape out there. It also might allow people to pause and say hey wait yeah we're not doing it. And then if they're not or even if they are there would be some recommend you know some additional resources that the AOE would put out in this correspondence with the Supervisory the unions some recommendations from the Vermont Holocaust Memorial. So I'm just looking to the two of you if you have any thoughts on that approach or anything. Well I would say that the agency of education did already a lot of resources and they it is my understanding that they work with ecosystem reflection and with the Holocaust Memorial to resource and align some of the current content standards to Holocaust studies. So there's already a resource that I think they developed. I'm not sure what the data you know what you will do in the meantime. Once thought is if an email if you were to receive an email and you've been some of these resources were listed again it might just make them a little bit more available you might sort of pause and say hey this is in a sense along with teachers while also collecting some data. Yeah and personally I would be fascinated to see that data if you're it would be fantastic just as a world's history educator I'd love to see that data as it mentioned as well for his teaching on the history of racial slavery European colonization and other genocides I think you could solicit information on Holocaust other genocides racial slavery and history of European colonization as some really key areas that have impacted so many of our students. And yeah I think that would be very helpful to see my only caveat with that would be again with the like sharing of resources looking at perhaps providing a few different resources for Holocaust education there's the Parseo Institute puts out anti-Semitism and Holocaust curriculum that takes a different approach than Eccles and reflection and I wouldn't say not to use Eccles and reflection I just think it's useful for teachers to have content that's coming from different political perspectives. This strike me is a moment in time where it would be helpful to gather some of this information and it may not even be something that we need to legislate but as the agency to do I have a vague recollection of the agency being completely wrong having been asked together this kind of information several years ago and I think it wasn't in the legislative request and that they did not have made it all the way I don't think they were able to execute it but they didn't so committee Senator Kulak what do you think? What's the question? Stop the l