Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Professional Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debates pilot allowing districts limited flexibility for teacher professional development; bill circled
Summary
Lawmakers debated First Substitute House Bill 100, which would let districts apply for up to 27.5 flexible hours per year for job-embedded professional development; Representative Snow moved to reduce that to 16.5 hours, but the House ultimately circled the bill for later consideration.
Representative Last introduced First Substitute House Bill 100, saying the measure responds to local school districts’ request for more time for on-site professional development and greater flexibility in the 180-day / 990-hour school-year schedule. "If a district wants to apply to the state board for some flexibility up to 27 and a half hours in a year, they can apply," Last said, and he described reporting requirements to the education interim committee and a two-year sunset if the pilot does not work.
Representative Moss said she had reservations. While she supported professional development in principle, Moss cautioned that testing and other interruptions have already reduced instructional time, and urged care before cutting time available for classroom teaching. "What I hear from teachers is that they don't have enough time to teach," she said.
Representative Snow questioned how 27.5 hours translates to days and moved to amend the bill on line 40 to change 27.5 hours to 16.5 hours, which he said equates to roughly three days. Snow said his amendment was intended to balance teacher training with instructional time for students.
Representative Last opposed the amendment, arguing the larger number gives districts more flexibility to schedule short blocks of collaborative time rather than removing whole school days. "It may represent some kind of creative scheduling where the teachers come early on a Monday morning and the students come a little bit late," Last said, and defended the 27.5-hour figure as allowing more substantive, sustained professional learning.
Other members weighed in: Representative Wallace, who described herself as a trainer, urged rejection of the amendment and said training on school time benefits teachers and students because it allows practice and follow-up. Representative Dunnegan supported the Snow amendment, arguing the trade-off is fewer instructional hours for students.
Before a roll call on the amendment, Representative Curtis moved to "circle" the bill, a procedural motion to set the bill aside for further consideration. The motion to circle passed by voice vote and the bill was circled for later action.
The House did not adopt the substantive amendment during this session; the bill remains under further consideration. Next procedural steps were not announced on the floor record when the bill was circled.
