Senate Education Committee hears NAEP review, declines to hire both consultants and sends APA recommendation back to policy

Representative Beck presented an analysis of National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) test results to the Senate Education Committee, saying he compared state test-cycle averages before and after several states adopted recommendations from a consultant referred to in the hearing as APA.

Beck told the committee the data cover 1998 through February 2019 and that his charts subtract the national average so the bars show deviation from the national trend. "This is the results of the National Assessment of Education Progress results," he said while describing the fourth- and eighth-grade reading and math comparisons. He told members the raw data are available for review.

Why it matters: the committee is deciding whether to authorize BLR (the bureau handling the contract) to hire a consultant to produce an adequacy study that could shape funding recommendations for K–12 schools. Lawmakers pressed whether the consultant’s recommendations reliably translate into improved student outcomes and whether the differences Beck showed were substantively meaningful once implementation and other variables are accounted for.

Committee debate focused on two linked points: whether the observed before-and-after differences meaningfully indicate consultant performance and whether states that contracted with APA actually implemented the recommendations fully. Multiple members said implementation fidelity — what a state or district actually did after receiving recommendations — is essential to interpreting any result. Representative Beck acknowledged that he did not audit fidelity for each district and said two of the states he examined reported only partial adoption. "I did not cherry pick any data," Beck told the committee, urging members to inspect the raw points themselves.

Several senators and representatives pressed statistical concerns. Senator Johnson and others called the chart’s typical swings — often one to two percentage points per test cycle — small enough that they might fall within sampling or margin‑of‑error considerations; Beck responded that his analysis pools thousands of data points across cycles and that subtracting the national average mitigates shifts in NAEP frameworks over time.

On procurement, Chair instructions framed three procedural options: ask ALC to reconsider the APA contract; expunge BLR’s authorization and move to contract with an alternative (Schulz); or authorize BLR to contract with both firms. Senator Hammer suggested an additional option used elsewhere: a lower‑cost ‘‘second opinion’’ review. He said a Maryland private entity paid an estimated "$10,000 to $15,000 to have a second look" at APA recommendations and noted Nevada uses complementary contracts (WestEd) to secure multiple perspectives.

Motions and vote: a motion to authorize BLR to contract with both APA and Schulz was moved and seconded but failed after a roll call. The committee then took a second motion moved by Representative Dela Rosa asking that the panel’s original recommendation (to contract with APA) be sent back to ALC/policy and that the committee ask policy to respect the earlier decision; that motion passed on a roll call and a policy meeting was scheduled.

What the hearing did not resolve: committee members asked but did not receive a systematic accounting of how fully each examined state implemented consultant recommendations, nor a definitive estimate of contract cost within the RFP (members said the RFP prohibited including price numbers). Next steps: the committee sent its recommendation to ALC/policy for further consideration and set a policy meeting to continue deliberations.

Quotes: "This is the results of the National Assessment of Education Progress results," Representative Beck said when introducing his charts. "I did not cherry pick any data," he added when defending his selection of state examples. Senator Hammer urged a pragmatic approach to verification: an outside review in one state cost "$10,000 to $15,000," which he offered as a reference point for a possible second‑opinion review.

Ending: After the roll call and scheduling of a policy meeting, the chair adjourned the Education Committee. The policy committee will receive the recommendation to ALC and continue deliberations on consultant selection and contract terms.