NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
|
SPONSOR: |
Carraro |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
|
||
|
SHORT TITLE: |
Require Reading Proficiency for 4th
Graders |
SB |
SB 189/aSFC |
||||
|
|
ANALYST: |
L. Baca |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
|
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
|
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Narrative |
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
LFC
files
Responses
Received From
State
Department of Education (SDE)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of SFC Amendment
The amendments adopted by the Senate Finance
Committee strike the appropriation.
Synopsis
of Original Bill
Senate Bill 189 amends
the Public School Code to prohibit the promotion to fourth grade of any student
who fails to read proficiently at the end of third grade. The bill exempts developmentally developed
students who are learning to read through a plan approved by a certified school
instructor. The bill appropriates $10,000.0
from the general fund to the State Department of Education (SDE) for
expenditure in fiscal year 2004 to fund reading enhancements in grades one
through three.
Significant
Issues
This bill indirectly mandates performance for
elementary schools and teachers by holding back students who fail to meet
minimum reading standards by stressing the achievement of reading proficiency.
This emphasis on achieving literacy is consistent with the State Board of
Education performance standards for all grade levels. The bill, however, appears at odds with
22-2-8.6.F. NMSA 1978 which provides options other than retention for students
lacking reading proficiency and more specifically with 22-2-8.6.F(b) NMSA 1978
which allows the child to be promoted if the parent or guardian to refuse to
allow his child to be retained.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The appropriation of
$10,000.0 contained in this bill is a recurring expense to the general fund.
Any unexpended or unencumbered balance remaining at the end of fiscal year 2004
shall revert to the general fund.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
According to an SDE
analysis prepared for an earlier legislative session, state standardized
measurements provide scores that places a student’s reading ability to be at
one of the following levels: below basic, basic, proficient, or advanced. Students who score in the proficient range
are considered to be reading at grade level.
According to the 2002
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 55% of New
What is not as clear,
however, is the impact of retention on students. Available research shows a high correlation
between retention and school dropouts.
The record of scholastic achievement of retained students is less conclusive,
but the use of more intensive and different instructional strategies is
suggested.
It is clear that
additional resources will be needed to meet the requirements of this bill, and
the appropriation contained in this bill intends provide the financial support
for these additional demands on public school districts.
POSSIBLE QUESTIONS
1.
If the state board has performance
standards that address this matter, do we really need a law?
2.
Will implementation of this bill penalize
students who are from poor families or who come from families who are
culturally and\or linguistically different?
3.
Will the provisions of this bill
supersede the section of law that allows a parent or guardian to allow a parent
or guardian to refuse to have his child retained?
4.
What effect does retention have on the
student emotionally as well as academically?
LRB/ls