Public Comments for 02/02/2022 Education
HB346 - College partnership laboratory schools; application and establishment.
HB 1024... OPPOSE... Diverts public funds to private entities ... sounds like vouchers/tax shelter HB 344/356 OPPOSE... Local School Boards already have the authority to review applications for charters, etc.. once again looks like a method of diverting public funds to private entities .. Virginia underfunds it public schools as it is. We need to keep the public funds where it would do the most good and if the Va. Leg had not tied the hands of public education with all the SOQ/SOL requirements and was able to allow the educators more flexibility to implement programs tailored to the needs of their district more freely and would FUND these public programs things would be even better. I noted that all the Ed representatives opposed this at committee hearing. Who is going pay for that regional board mentioned in 356?? that will just siphon more public money for another layer of admin. HB346. I noted in the committee meeting that only the colleges who already have the capability to create lab schools now spoke FOR this bill because it would bring more of the public k-12 funds to their doorstep. Opens door for corporate/for profits to operate as well.
As a VA taxpayer for over 50 years, I write to oppose the diversion of money from our excellent public schools to new, state sponsored charter schools. Such schools reduce the autonomy of local school districts in favor of "big government" and would require another costly layer of administration, including that needed for transportation, support staff, etc. Virginia's public schools, despite funding deficits, rank high (#4 or 5, as rated by non-partisan agencies World Population Review and Wallet Hub) nationally and make our Commonwealth attractive to businesses. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." What is to be accomplished by this bill? Local school boards are best able to decide what is needed for that district's students. That is where I want my tax dollars spent. HB346 is a non-starter.
I am writing in opposition of HB344 and HB346. HB344 - local governing bodies should have the sole discretion to approve or reject charter schools within their jurisdiction. Given that our schools are still underfunded, the emphasis should be improving the educational experience for all students, not passing the buck. HB346 - Our local school boards are best equipped to make recommendations for student needs. We should not be establishing schools outside the purview of the school board and without accountability to the parents and voters. The bill would also allow institutions whose values run counter to the goal of inclusive public schooling to enter our public schools. Underserved communities are already struggling and should not have their vulnerability exploited by schools or private businesses with a political agenda. Keep our money in our schools. A strong public education system benefits every citizen and improves our communities.
The purpose of my comments are to OPPOSE HB 346.
Both I, a public school teacher in Fairfax County, and the Virginia Education Association OPPOSE HB 344 & 346. Charter schools (and variations) take essential moneys away from public education. Charters hurt students, schools, and communities.
Dear Members of the Education Committee, I respectfully wish to oppose HR356. I am a retired Virginia K12 teacher and I have seen first hand what lack of funding and support for our public schools has done to the quality of education and the morale of both students and staff. The schools I served and loved have never recovered from the decrease in funding that began in 2008 and has continued on into the present. Please do not destroy or dilute our public schools effectiveness by further taking needed funding away and giving it to duplicate and divisive systems. I support all available funding be used to renew America's public school system.
We strongly support HB346! This last election demonstrated that parents want more options for educating their children. They rejected the attempt by school boards and politicians to prevent parents from engaging in their child's public education. It is time for politicians on both sides of isle to start listening to parents.
I am opposed to HB346. This is yet another bill that seeks to stifle my voice as a voter and taxpayer by setting up a complicated governing structure at several removes from the people whose taxes are paying the bills. I urge you to vote against all these bills that dis-empower voters and elected school governance.
I do not support this bill. Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
Please oppose all bills which give taxpayer money to charter schools or university lab schools. These schools are not accountable to local parents or voters, and their support takes money away from public schools, which are essential to our democracy.
HB344 (Davis) Public charter schools; applications; review and approval and HB356 (Tata) Authorizes the Board of Education to establish regional charter school divisions Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession. HB346 (Davis) College partnership laboratory schools; application and establishment Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
Local school boards are best positioned to determine their students' needs. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. Didn't Gov Youngkin's campaign indicate that parents would be able to determine what their children are taught? How does HB346 meet this promise?
Hello esteemed committee members, I am a parent of a current Chesterfield County Public school child as well as a 2019 graduate of CCPS schools. I am a STRONG supporter of public schools. I oppose any proposed bills, including HB344, HB346, and HB356, that take away control from locally elected school boards and give it to privately operated boards that have the real potential for cronyism, grift, corruption, and fraud. Charter schools also siphon taxpayer money from Virginia's already severely underfunded public schools and fling open doors to businesses/people that profit off of public education. Virginia's current College partnership laboratory schools are public, nonsectarian, nonreligious schools established by a public or private institutions of higher education that operate a teacher education program approved by the Board of Education. The language in HB 346 would allow ANY public or private institution of higher ed OR private business to apply to the BOE to establish a college partnership laboratory school. This would open doors for for-profit schools like EPI, religious schools like Regent, or businesses like Amazon or McDonalds to establish teacher training programs. This is another attempt at education privatization. Please keep in mind that Virginia is currently ranked 4th by Wallet Hub for best schools in the US. This is WITHOUT a proliferation of charter schools and attained during the Covid-19 pandemic. Why do we need charter schools? Who REALLY wants them? https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335 Public education is the foundation of a democratic society. It is open to all students, regardless of color, disability, income level, religious belief (or lack of one), gender identity, or national origin. Please say no to HB 344, HB346, and HB356. Thank you.
I oppose HB1024, HB344, HB356, and HB346. These bills divert funds from public schools, reduce transparency with respect to public interest in the education of its citizens, remove/reduce influence of local school boards, potentially introduce religious bias into instruction, and/or disproportionally benefit the wealthy. We need to invest in our public education system and encourage parents to participate in public education. We do not need to divert funds to private schools from an already underfunded public education system or reduce the tax base for public schools. Our society requires a quality education system for all of its citizens for its continued growth and stability. The public has as much interest in the education of children as parents. Focus on funding and promoting public education not trying to fund private and particularly, private for-profit schools, which are NOT in the best interests of the public.
I oppose HB344, HB346 and HB356. Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
Please do not support house bills 1024, 344,346, or 356. These bills divert resources from public schools. There is not interest in charter schools in Virginia, creating new schools is highly inefficient especially when there is a shortage of teachers and staff.
I oppose House Bills 344 and 356 because they support charter schools. Charter schools take funding away from public schools, and there is no evidence that they produce better educational outcomes. At a time when the funding and staffing of public schools is a problem, the allocation of funds to charter schools is not an educational decision but a political sop to a vocal constituency.
HB344 - Public schools that are open to all students need to be our priority and these public schools need to remain under the control of local school divisions. Funding additional schools outside of local control removes funding from local public schools. This is especially important when more, not less, funding is needed for public schools. HB346 - This bill also removes local control and funding from public schools. Public school divisions have the capability to work with local public institutions of high learning to provide lab schools. This cooperation should be encouraged at the local level - NOT with legislation that encourages private institutions and business to establish schools.
I oppose any of the pending legislation that would divert funds and resources from our public schools. Our public schools are already shamefully underfunded.
Good morning, esteemed members of Virginia's House of Delegates, I’m a parent who lives several hours away from Richmond and DC and I believe it’s imperative that local control in education decision making should remain just that; local. I currently have easy access to the locally elected, public school leaders and school system administrators in my county and am able to see their budgets, provide input on income and expenditures, and ensure our tax dollars are being spent wisely. Please don’t remove citizens’ rights to do this by opening the flood gates to charter school operators, outsiders who aren’t invested in our communities. I’ve chronicled the problems other states have with their charter schools since 2015. Each day in the headlines I see fraud, waste, embezzlement, and mismanagement of funds by charter school operators in those states. We don’t need those problems for Virginia. Charter schools often use selective enrollment tactics, can’t accommodate children with special needs, and don’t provide transportation and meals. These would be very big issues for countless students and their families here in SW Virginia. If communities would like to open charter schools, they may do so now under Virginia’s Constitution, and that’s the way it should remain. Virginia’s public schools are ranked 4th in the nation. They’re valuable, not because they’re money-makers, but because they’re responsible citizen makers. Please don’t undermine them and further under-fund them through unwise charter school legislation. Instead, please better support our neighborhood public schools through full and fair funding. Please look at the Community Schools model as a way to provide services for children in need of supports that will help them succeed in the classroom. Sincerely, Laura Bowman
Respected Committee Members, The push to create charters in Virginia via a variety of methods in HB346, HB356, and HB344 is a deeply flawed idea. Across Virginia we have over 44 International Baccaulareate schools which are the most respected advanced acacemic program in the world. Those districts are all across the Commonwealth, including 2 in Virginia Beach, Danville, York, Hanover, and Fauquier. Most students can access Dual Enrollment classes in virtually any subject at our community colleges while still in high school, and over 640K students have accessed a range of career courses over 17 career categories that encompass many fields. CNBC ranked Virginia 1st in the nation on 85 different metrics aross 10 categories. We have school choice built into our system. To disrupt the system by siphoning money and resources to privately managed or regional schools that many students cannot reach will negatively disrupt what is already highly successful and more readily available buffet of choices. Please vote no on HB346, HB356, and HB344. Thank you.
We oppose the above listed bills
Please pass HB217. Moe can be done to encourage and educate students about opportunities in STEM-C fields and to make sure that educational opportunities in our schools are adequately supporting students pursuing these goals. Identifying the full range of employment opportunities in these areas and the education needed to succeed in them can only be a benefit. Please pass HB221. Please oppose HB344. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Members of the State Board of Education are appointed and consequently are accountable only to those who appointed them. Also, this bill provides that there is no longer the opportunity to revisit the decisions of this State or local boards in granting or continuing such charter. The public should not lose a mechanism of redress already in place. Please oppose HB346. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Extending the establishment of charter and lab schools to private institutions of higher ed and private businesses further removes the oversight of such schools to boards that have no accountability to the public that they serve. Please oppose HB356. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Please oppose HB486. Governor's School admissions should not be constricted by an arbitrary quota of students from one district. Please oppose HB563. While assisting local districts in funding construction where school buildings are in disrepair is a desirable goal, the diversion of funds allocated for instruction should not be institutionalized as a regular mechanism to accomplish this. Please pass HB585. Standardized testing has become the tail that wags the dog in education. Increasing amounts of time are dedicated to teaching towards the test and administering tests to the detriment of education tailored to the needs of students and localities. Reducing such testing the minimum required for federal accountability would free time and resources to more fully meet the needs of students. Please oppose 789. Family life education should remain an opt out program instead of an opt in program. The latter puts an onerous burden on schools for the delivery of this important curriculum. Please oppose HB988. Transgender students deserve equal protection in schools across the Commonwealth. All school districts should maintain certain expectations in this regard. Please pass HB994 Please pass HB1005. This bill stipulates that teachers under continuing contract can resign within the school year but must do so providing 2 weeks of notice. Such a provision provides more time for local school districts to make arrangements for staffing adjustments. Please pass HB1023. Human trafficking is increasingly a problem in the Commonwealth and beyond. Our students should be alert to its threats and educated as to how to protect themselves from it. Please pass HB1026. With technology and the internet playing an increasing role in every aspect of our lives, expanding our understanding of this role and improving education surrounding it can only be a good thing. Please pass HB1299. Our students need as much information as possible about their opportunities after graduating from our public school system.
Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
I am a public school teacher in Fairfax County and I am writing to urge you to vote no on HB 344, HB 346, and HB 356. These bills divert public money out of our existing public schools and into creating new charter and “laboratory” schools. It is the state’s responsibility to ensure that our public schools are fully-funded. Up until this point, the General Assembly has not even funded the Virginia Board of Education’s Standards of Quality for minimum staffing standards in our public schools (relatedly, I ask that you please vote in favor of HB1135/SB490 so that we can finally fund these minimum recommended staffing standards). The argument in past years has been that fully funding our public schools would be too costly, and yet there are over a dozen bills this session seeking to further deplete state public school funding to divert into private and charter schools. Please protect public school funding by voting no on these bills.
My name is Dr. Rachel Levy and I live in Ashland, Virginia (23005), in the 55th House of Delegates District and the 9th State Senate District. I am a mother of three--I have one child in Hanover County Public Schools as well as two who are just graduated in 2021. I am also a teacher who has a PhD in Educational Leadership & Policy from VCU. I was a candidate for the 55th District seat in 2021. I oppose HB344, HB346, and HB356 because I support our public schools, because they are impractical and unnecessary, and because this legislation would disenfranchise local communities. We already have good laws that allow establishing charter and lab schools, in ways that preserve local democratic control and don’t rob funding from our public school students. All of these bills would strip power away from our locally elected school boards and hand it over to un-elected regional boards stocked with gubernatorial appointees. These regional charter school boards could override our locally elected school boards and their constituents (us!), duplicating services and forcing taxpayers to fund schools run by national and global for-profit companies that are focused on profits, not education. Allowing these companies to force their schools on us would be harmful across our Commonwealth, especially in rural areas such as where I live. Our public schools are beloved shared public and community institutions. Even if we don’t agree on what should be taught or on masking policies, we can all agree that the parents and citizens who fund our public schools should get to determine how they’re run and by whom. We want fully funded public schools, fairly compensated teachers and staff, and modernized school buildings. Corporate charter schools would drain the resources needed to achieve these goals. Many public school teachers and staff are of their communities, especially in rural areas, with deep knowledge and relationships. Outside charter school operators will bring in non-professional teaching staff and a “we know better” attitude. They pay reduced wages, salaries, and benefits. I hope you will join me in opposing this legislation that will bypass local communities and defund our education-centered public schools.
I am against these three bills and against any tax payer funds going to anything other than our public schools that are already underfunded in some areas of the Commonwealth. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession. If parents want to send their children to private, religious, or charter schools, fine, but at their own expense. Our public schools offer extremely good educations in Virginia and we should be supporting our educators and facilities with our tax dollars. We do not need another level of administration at a regional level to run a parallel set of schools, many that would have a small number of students.
I oppose HB346 for the following reasons - please vote NO! Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am writing in opposition to HB344, HB346, HB356. HB344 - It shows the complete dishonesty of the argument, that you want local governing bodies to have expanded rights, except where it serves your purpose. HB346 - Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools. HB356 - Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries, and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am writing to oppose any bill that would divert tax dollars from our public schools. Charter schools compete with our existing schools and reduce their ability to meet the needs of the students in their community. Our public schools are underfunded. We need to use our tax dollars to support our existing schools, to pay teachers a living wage, and to provide safe and up to date educational facilities. My sister has taught in Virginia's public schools for 35 years, and her salary is an insult to her professionalism and commitment to her students. Regional charter school divisions and laboratory schools would take control away from local school boards. Private institutions and businesses should not receive tax dollars for education. Thank you.
Please move to report HB344, HB346, HB356, HB789, HB1188, HB221, HB340, HB1125, HB1215, HB988, HB1023, HB1093. Please gently PBI HB486 so that academic merits ONLY decide who gets in.
I oppose this legislation and any other legislation that opens the door for private charter schools to move into Virginia. HBCU's Lab Schools should be fully funded via the existing Lab School laws and policy.
Both I, an public school teacher in Fairfax County, and the Virginia Education Association oppose HB 344, 346, and 356. Programs that drain public school budgets, such as vouchers, are a very bad idea. These programs hurt kids, schools, and communities.
Radford University has a proud history of preparing teachers for schools in the Commonwealth of Virginia since 1910. Our existing educator preparation programs, which are fully accredited by CAEP and approved by the Virginia Department of Education, prepares educators for early childhood, special education, elementary education, middle education, and secondary education. The University is committed to growing the teaching workforce and welcomes the opportunity to partner with school divisions to explore an array of innovative education opportunities, including college partnership laboratory schools. We support the provisions in HB 346 that expands eligibility for all public and private institutions of higher education; and investment by the Commonwealth to support the establishment of college partnership laboratory schools.
Dear Education Committee Members: My name is Frank Morgan. I am a retired educator who spent 43 years working in public school districts in Virginia and South Carolina, including 16 years as a superintendent I have a fair amount of experience with charter schools. I was very involved in Albemarle County in the development of one of the first local charter school policies in Virginia around 2000 and in the establishment of one of the first charter schools in the state shortly thereafter. I also worked with a charter school in the district in South Carolina where I served as superintendent. That said, there is no research out there that indicates that charter schools are overall any more or less successful than regular public schools. There are good ones and not-so-good ones, just like with regular public schools. The front-page publicity on January 28 in The Richmond Times-Dispatch about Governor Youngkin’s charter school proposal requires, I believe, some cautionary caveats. Governor Youngkin asserts that his advocacy for charter schools is connected to increased ‘choice”. Consequently, any expansion of charter schools in Virginia must reflect legitimate and realistic “choice” for families. This means that charter schools must be subject to fully open or lottery-based enrollment and be required to serve economically disadvantaged, special needs, and non-English-speaking students. Publicly funded charter schools must also be required to provide no-cost transportation given that transportation is often a barrier to economically disadvantaged students attending “schools of choice”. In the absence of these requirements, charter schools will simply be “choice” for charter schools to cherry-pick the students they want and exclude the ones they don’t. I would hope this is not the vision involved. Further, charter schools must be subject to the same academic accountability and state testing requirements as regular public schools. Otherwise, how will measurable and valid comparisons be drawn? Parent satisfaction and teacher grades should not be the sole accountability barometers for charter schools unless regular public schools can also be judged solely by these measures. Finally, charter schools must be subject to the same due process requirements as regular public schools. Especially given that they would be publicly funded, charter schools must not be permitted to exclude a student because of low achievement or minor behavioral issues. Regular public schools can’t exclude students for these reasons. In addition, charter schools must be subject to the same stringent financial (auditing) oversight as regular public school divisions in Virginia. I googled “charter schools/financial mismanagement/scandal” and got almost 5 million hits, which clearly indicates the nationwide seriousness of this issue. Such oversight is particularly important if corporate interests become involved in managing charter schools. The private sector has some history of financial missteps when involved with charter schools. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this feedback. Dr, Frank E. Morgan 2002 Deep Ridge Court Henrico, VA 23233 (803) 572-2591
Both I (a public school teacher in Fairfax County) and the Virginia Education Association OPPOSE HB346 and HB356. VEA is against the creation of any type of charter schools. Charter schools are bad for students and community, because they are so unregulated, and they take needed dollars away from our public schools.
Virginia Faith and Freedom Coalition supports this bill.
HB356 - Public schools; Board of Education may establish regional charter school divisions.
I oppose HB356 because it would divert resources from our existing public schools, including teachers and funds that would be needed for additional administration, building maintenance, transportation and educational supplies. Funding quality public schools is necessary for the future of our students and for the economy of the state of Virginia.
HB 1024... OPPOSE... Diverts public funds to private entities ... sounds like vouchers/tax shelter HB 344/356 OPPOSE... Local School Boards already have the authority to review applications for charters, etc.. once again looks like a method of diverting public funds to private entities .. Virginia underfunds it public schools as it is. We need to keep the public funds where it would do the most good and if the Va. Leg had not tied the hands of public education with all the SOQ/SOL requirements and was able to allow the educators more flexibility to implement programs tailored to the needs of their district more freely and would FUND these public programs things would be even better. I noted that all the Ed representatives opposed this at committee hearing. Who is going pay for that regional board mentioned in 356?? that will just siphon more public money for another layer of admin. HB346. I noted in the committee meeting that only the colleges who already have the capability to create lab schools now spoke FOR this bill because it would bring more of the public k-12 funds to their doorstep. Opens door for corporate/for profits to operate as well.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
I OPPOSE HB346 because I think local school boards are best positioned to determine what students need. This legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and outside of accountability to local voters. Further, this bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
Please oppose HB344 and HB356. Our public schools need attention and are the best places for our tax dollars. Charter schools will not lessen the financial burden of education and would compete with funding for existing public schools. Another level of administration, teachers, libraries, and food services, for example, would have a significant impact on funding our public schools. The public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession. Public schools first and foremost.
Dear Members of the Education Committee, I respectfully wish to oppose HR356. I am a retired Virginia K12 teacher and I have seen first hand what lack of funding and support for our public schools has done to the quality of education and the morale of both students and staff. The schools I served and loved have never recovered from the decrease in funding that began in 2008 and has continued on into the present. Please do not destroy or dilute our public schools effectiveness by further taking needed funding away and giving it to duplicate and divisive systems. I support all available funding be used to renew America's public school system.
Dear Members of the Education Committee, I respectfully wish to oppose HR356. I am a retired Virginia K12 teacher and I have seen first hand what lack of funding and support for our public schools has done to the quality of education and the morale of both students and staff. The schools I served and loved have never recovered from the decrease in funding that began in 2008 and has continued on into the present. Please do not destroy or dilute our public schools effectiveness by further taking needed funding away and giving it to a duplicate and divisive system. I support all available funding be used to renew America's public school system.
HB 356 "Public schools; regional charter school divisions" creates a complicated, additional, expensive layer of bureaucracy, apparently just to thwart oversight by local elected school boards and the voters that elected them. Instead of wasting my tax dollars on this scheme, put the money into our public schools. Funding cuts over a decade ago have not been fully restored. That's where our tax dollars should be going, not diverted to schools where taxpayers have no voice. My taxes educate other people's children and I'm fine with that as long as I have a vote on electing the governing school board and the opportunity to speak at that board's public meetings. HB356 takes away my voice as a voter and taxpayer. Please do not pass HB356.
Please oppose all bills which give taxpayer money to charter schools or university lab schools. These schools are not accountable to local parents or voters, and their support takes money away from public schools, which are essential to our democracy.
HB344 (Davis) Public charter schools; applications; review and approval and HB356 (Tata) Authorizes the Board of Education to establish regional charter school divisions Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession. HB346 (Davis) College partnership laboratory schools; application and establishment Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools.
We need to prioritize energies and money for our current schools and their students. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 levels when funds were diverted due to the recession. Charter schools will compete for these limited funds: additional teachers, administrators, educational supplies, maintenance and health, safety and food services. Charter schools do not equitably serve the needs of all students. I oppose any legislation supporting charter schools.
Hello esteemed committee members, I am a parent of a current Chesterfield County Public school child as well as a 2019 graduate of CCPS schools. I am a STRONG supporter of public schools. I oppose any proposed bills, including HB344, HB346, and HB356, that take away control from locally elected school boards and give it to privately operated boards that have the real potential for cronyism, grift, corruption, and fraud. Charter schools also siphon taxpayer money from Virginia's already severely underfunded public schools and fling open doors to businesses/people that profit off of public education. Virginia's current College partnership laboratory schools are public, nonsectarian, nonreligious schools established by a public or private institutions of higher education that operate a teacher education program approved by the Board of Education. The language in HB 346 would allow ANY public or private institution of higher ed OR private business to apply to the BOE to establish a college partnership laboratory school. This would open doors for for-profit schools like EPI, religious schools like Regent, or businesses like Amazon or McDonalds to establish teacher training programs. This is another attempt at education privatization. Please keep in mind that Virginia is currently ranked 4th by Wallet Hub for best schools in the US. This is WITHOUT a proliferation of charter schools and attained during the Covid-19 pandemic. Why do we need charter schools? Who REALLY wants them? https://wallethub.com/edu/e/states-with-the-best-schools/5335 Public education is the foundation of a democratic society. It is open to all students, regardless of color, disability, income level, religious belief (or lack of one), gender identity, or national origin. Please say no to HB 344, HB346, and HB356. Thank you.
I oppose HB1024, HB344, HB356, and HB346. These bills divert funds from public schools, reduce transparency with respect to public interest in the education of its citizens, remove/reduce influence of local school boards, potentially introduce religious bias into instruction, and/or disproportionally benefit the wealthy. We need to invest in our public education system and encourage parents to participate in public education. We do not need to divert funds to private schools from an already underfunded public education system or reduce the tax base for public schools. Our society requires a quality education system for all of its citizens for its continued growth and stability. The public has as much interest in the education of children as parents. Focus on funding and promoting public education not trying to fund private and particularly, private for-profit schools, which are NOT in the best interests of the public.
OPPOSE HB356 Charter schools would compete with our public schools for limited resources and personnel at a time when public schools are struggling. The General Assembly does not fund the SOQ, and our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am opposed to the bill and other bills that establish or support public charter schools. They decrease funds available for existing public schools.
I oppose HB344, HB346 and HB356. Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
Please do not support house bills 1024, 344,346, or 356. These bills divert resources from public schools. There is not interest in charter schools in Virginia, creating new schools is highly inefficient especially when there is a shortage of teachers and staff.
Oppose HB344 and HB356 Current schools should be the priority.
HB356 - Our public schools should remain under local control as stated in the Virginia Constitution. This needs to be our priority. Establishing charter schools in a process outside of a local school board is not a solution to improve education. School divisions need more funding - not less funding. Creating charter schools outside of oversight of local school boards reduces funding for public schools and does not ensure equal access for all students.
Good morning, esteemed members of Virginia's House of Delegates, I’m a parent who lives several hours away from Richmond and DC and I believe it’s imperative that local control in education decision making should remain just that; local. I currently have easy access to the locally elected, public school leaders and school system administrators in my county and am able to see their budgets, provide input on income and expenditures, and ensure our tax dollars are being spent wisely. Please don’t remove citizens’ rights to do this by opening the flood gates to charter school operators, outsiders who aren’t invested in our communities. I’ve chronicled the problems other states have with their charter schools since 2015. Each day in the headlines I see fraud, waste, embezzlement, and mismanagement of funds by charter school operators in those states. We don’t need those problems for Virginia. Charter schools often use selective enrollment tactics, can’t accommodate children with special needs, and don’t provide transportation and meals. These would be very big issues for countless students and their families here in SW Virginia. If communities would like to open charter schools, they may do so now under Virginia’s Constitution, and that’s the way it should remain. Virginia’s public schools are ranked 4th in the nation. They’re valuable, not because they’re money-makers, but because they’re responsible citizen makers. Please don’t undermine them and further under-fund them through unwise charter school legislation. Instead, please better support our neighborhood public schools through full and fair funding. Please look at the Community Schools model as a way to provide services for children in need of supports that will help them succeed in the classroom. Sincerely, Laura Bowman
Respected Committee Members, The push to create charters in Virginia via a variety of methods in HB346, HB356, and HB344 is a deeply flawed idea. Across Virginia we have over 44 International Baccaulareate schools which are the most respected advanced acacemic program in the world. Those districts are all across the Commonwealth, including 2 in Virginia Beach, Danville, York, Hanover, and Fauquier. Most students can access Dual Enrollment classes in virtually any subject at our community colleges while still in high school, and over 640K students have accessed a range of career courses over 17 career categories that encompass many fields. CNBC ranked Virginia 1st in the nation on 85 different metrics aross 10 categories. We have school choice built into our system. To disrupt the system by siphoning money and resources to privately managed or regional schools that many students cannot reach will negatively disrupt what is already highly successful and more readily available buffet of choices. Please vote no on HB346, HB356, and HB344. Thank you.
We oppose the above listed bills
Please pass HB217. Moe can be done to encourage and educate students about opportunities in STEM-C fields and to make sure that educational opportunities in our schools are adequately supporting students pursuing these goals. Identifying the full range of employment opportunities in these areas and the education needed to succeed in them can only be a benefit. Please pass HB221. Please oppose HB344. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Members of the State Board of Education are appointed and consequently are accountable only to those who appointed them. Also, this bill provides that there is no longer the opportunity to revisit the decisions of this State or local boards in granting or continuing such charter. The public should not lose a mechanism of redress already in place. Please oppose HB346. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Extending the establishment of charter and lab schools to private institutions of higher ed and private businesses further removes the oversight of such schools to boards that have no accountability to the public that they serve. Please oppose HB356. The establishment of charter schools should remain with local school boards who are accountable to their constituents. Please oppose HB486. Governor's School admissions should not be constricted by an arbitrary quota of students from one district. Please oppose HB563. While assisting local districts in funding construction where school buildings are in disrepair is a desirable goal, the diversion of funds allocated for instruction should not be institutionalized as a regular mechanism to accomplish this. Please pass HB585. Standardized testing has become the tail that wags the dog in education. Increasing amounts of time are dedicated to teaching towards the test and administering tests to the detriment of education tailored to the needs of students and localities. Reducing such testing the minimum required for federal accountability would free time and resources to more fully meet the needs of students. Please oppose 789. Family life education should remain an opt out program instead of an opt in program. The latter puts an onerous burden on schools for the delivery of this important curriculum. Please oppose HB988. Transgender students deserve equal protection in schools across the Commonwealth. All school districts should maintain certain expectations in this regard. Please pass HB994 Please pass HB1005. This bill stipulates that teachers under continuing contract can resign within the school year but must do so providing 2 weeks of notice. Such a provision provides more time for local school districts to make arrangements for staffing adjustments. Please pass HB1023. Human trafficking is increasingly a problem in the Commonwealth and beyond. Our students should be alert to its threats and educated as to how to protect themselves from it. Please pass HB1026. With technology and the internet playing an increasing role in every aspect of our lives, expanding our understanding of this role and improving education surrounding it can only be a good thing. Please pass HB1299. Our students need as much information as possible about their opportunities after graduating from our public school system.
Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am a public school teacher in Fairfax County and I am writing to urge you to vote no on HB 344, HB 346, and HB 356. These bills divert public money out of our existing public schools and into creating new charter and “laboratory” schools. It is the state’s responsibility to ensure that our public schools are fully-funded. Up until this point, the General Assembly has not even funded the Virginia Board of Education’s Standards of Quality for minimum staffing standards in our public schools (relatedly, I ask that you please vote in favor of HB1135/SB490 so that we can finally fund these minimum recommended staffing standards). The argument in past years has been that fully funding our public schools would be too costly, and yet there are over a dozen bills this session seeking to further deplete state public school funding to divert into private and charter schools. Please protect public school funding by voting no on these bills.
My name is Dr. Rachel Levy and I live in Ashland, Virginia (23005), in the 55th House of Delegates District and the 9th State Senate District. I am a mother of three--I have one child in Hanover County Public Schools as well as two who are just graduated in 2021. I am also a teacher who has a PhD in Educational Leadership & Policy from VCU. I was a candidate for the 55th District seat in 2021. I oppose HB344, HB346, and HB356 because I support our public schools, because they are impractical and unnecessary, and because this legislation would disenfranchise local communities. We already have good laws that allow establishing charter and lab schools, in ways that preserve local democratic control and don’t rob funding from our public school students. All of these bills would strip power away from our locally elected school boards and hand it over to un-elected regional boards stocked with gubernatorial appointees. These regional charter school boards could override our locally elected school boards and their constituents (us!), duplicating services and forcing taxpayers to fund schools run by national and global for-profit companies that are focused on profits, not education. Allowing these companies to force their schools on us would be harmful across our Commonwealth, especially in rural areas such as where I live. Our public schools are beloved shared public and community institutions. Even if we don’t agree on what should be taught or on masking policies, we can all agree that the parents and citizens who fund our public schools should get to determine how they’re run and by whom. We want fully funded public schools, fairly compensated teachers and staff, and modernized school buildings. Corporate charter schools would drain the resources needed to achieve these goals. Many public school teachers and staff are of their communities, especially in rural areas, with deep knowledge and relationships. Outside charter school operators will bring in non-professional teaching staff and a “we know better” attitude. They pay reduced wages, salaries, and benefits. I hope you will join me in opposing this legislation that will bypass local communities and defund our education-centered public schools.
I am against these three bills and against any tax payer funds going to anything other than our public schools that are already underfunded in some areas of the Commonwealth. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession. If parents want to send their children to private, religious, or charter schools, fine, but at their own expense. Our public schools offer extremely good educations in Virginia and we should be supporting our educators and facilities with our tax dollars. We do not need another level of administration at a regional level to run a parallel set of schools, many that would have a small number of students.
I oppose HB344 & HB356 - please vote no for the following reasons: Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am writing in opposition to HB344, HB346, HB356. HB344 - It shows the complete dishonesty of the argument, that you want local governing bodies to have expanded rights, except where it serves your purpose. HB346 - Local school boards are best positioned to determine what their students need. The proposed legislation would set up schools that are outside of the local school board purview and therefore outside of accountability to local parents and voters. The bill would allow private institutions and businesses to establish schools. HB356 - Our current schools should be our priority. The charter schools would compete with our public schools for our current tight and limited resources. Another level of administration at a regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health, safety, and food services would be required even if it is a school with a smaller number of students. It is already difficult to staff our public schools. Funds would be needed for transportation, libraries, and books. These standard educational supplies, alone, carry high costs. Our public schools are still not funded at the 2008 level when funds were diverted due to the recession.
I am writing to oppose any bill that would divert tax dollars from our public schools. Charter schools compete with our existing schools and reduce their ability to meet the needs of the students in their community. Our public schools are underfunded. We need to use our tax dollars to support our existing schools, to pay teachers a living wage, and to provide safe and up to date educational facilities. My sister has taught in Virginia's public schools for 35 years, and her salary is an insult to her professionalism and commitment to her students. Regional charter school divisions and laboratory schools would take control away from local school boards. Private institutions and businesses should not receive tax dollars for education. Thank you.
Please move to report HB344, HB346, HB356, HB789, HB1188, HB221, HB340, HB1125, HB1215, HB988, HB1023, HB1093. Please gently PBI HB486 so that academic merits ONLY decide who gets in.
Both I, an public school teacher in Fairfax County, and the Virginia Education Association oppose HB 344, 346, and 356. Programs that drain public school budgets, such as vouchers, are a very bad idea. These programs hurt kids, schools, and communities.
I am a public school teacher in Fairfax County and I urge you to vote no on HB 356. Public funding should go to supporting public schools and not charters that will only serve a small portion of students. I ask you to please vote against all the bills this session that seek to redirect funds from public schools to build additional charter schools in the commonwealth. Please vote no on this bill.
Please vote "No" on HB356. Increasing Charter Schools whether via a current local school division or expanding to a Regional Division would negatively impact our present schools. There would be competition for our current limited resources. Another level of Administration at a Regional level would have a major fiscal impact. Significant personnel for administration, teachers, maintenance, health care, safety, and food services even if it is a school with a small number of students. Transportation? Library? Books? Computers? Just standard supplies for education have high costs. Funds for those are already scarce today. How could we ADD schools, or even find adequate personnel today? Our current schools need priority. Please vote "No" on HB356.
Dear Education Committee Members: My name is Frank Morgan. I am a retired educator who spent 43 years working in public school districts in Virginia and South Carolina, including 16 years as a superintendent I have a fair amount of experience with charter schools. I was very involved in Albemarle County in the development of one of the first local charter school policies in Virginia around 2000 and in the establishment of one of the first charter schools in the state shortly thereafter. I also worked with a charter school in the district in South Carolina where I served as superintendent. That said, there is no research out there that indicates that charter schools are overall any more or less successful than regular public schools. There are good ones and not-so-good ones, just like with regular public schools. The front-page publicity on January 28 in The Richmond Times-Dispatch about Governor Youngkin’s charter school proposal requires, I believe, some cautionary caveats. Governor Youngkin asserts that his advocacy for charter schools is connected to increased ‘choice”. Consequently, any expansion of charter schools in Virginia must reflect legitimate and realistic “choice” for families. This means that charter schools must be subject to fully open or lottery-based enrollment and be required to serve economically disadvantaged, special needs, and non-English-speaking students. Publicly funded charter schools must also be required to provide no-cost transportation given that transportation is often a barrier to economically disadvantaged students attending “schools of choice”. In the absence of these requirements, charter schools will simply be “choice” for charter schools to cherry-pick the students they want and exclude the ones they don’t. I would hope this is not the vision involved. Further, charter schools must be subject to the same academic accountability and state testing requirements as regular public schools. Otherwise, how will measurable and valid comparisons be drawn? Parent satisfaction and teacher grades should not be the sole accountability barometers for charter schools unless regular public schools can also be judged solely by these measures. Finally, charter schools must be subject to the same due process requirements as regular public schools. Especially given that they would be publicly funded, charter schools must not be permitted to exclude a student because of low achievement or minor behavioral issues. Regular public schools can’t exclude students for these reasons. In addition, charter schools must be subject to the same stringent financial (auditing) oversight as regular public school divisions in Virginia. I googled “charter schools/financial mismanagement/scandal” and got almost 5 million hits, which clearly indicates the nationwide seriousness of this issue. Such oversight is particularly important if corporate interests become involved in managing charter schools. The private sector has some history of financial missteps when involved with charter schools. Thank you for the opportunity to provide this feedback. Dr, Frank E. Morgan 2002 Deep Ridge Court Henrico, VA 23233 (803) 572-2591
Both I (a public school teacher in Fairfax County) and the Virginia Education Association OPPOSE HB346 and HB356. VEA is against the creation of any type of charter schools. Charter schools are bad for students and community, because they are so unregulated, and they take needed dollars away from our public schools.
HB319 | Coyner | Virginia Literacy Act; early student literacy, evidence-based literacy instruction, etc.--YES! YES! YES! Long overdue! Thank you from a Teacher/Reading Interventionist! HB356 | Tata | Public schools; regional charter school divisions.--YES! YES! YES! Long overdue! Thank you from a teacher with experience in a magnet school in Texas and a charter school in Maryland!
Greetings legislators, I categorically oppose HB356 and any bill that is pushing vouchers, charters, and the privatization of our public schools. We should be pushing to fund all public schools (and public schools only) in all communities to ensure equitable opportunities for all students. Students should be able to attend their neighborhood/community school and their parents/guardians/family adults should expect the same quality public education and public services across their school district/county and throughout this great commonwealth. Championing vouchers is a way to create enrollment and staffing problems already exacerbated by the pandemic. Vouchers are a way to siphon money from our public schools and to charters and private schools. Virginia is already 4th in the nation for public education. Privatization efforts will run us into the ground and hurt public education which will ultimately hurt our students and their families futures. Look no further than the District of Columbia to see how charter schools have negatively impacted the public schools. I am afraid this will create a new Massive Resistance here in Virginia. This is just another way to segregate our schools. Please oppose this bill. Thank you for taking the time to read my comment.
I oppose HB8. It appears to be another effort to introduced "armed mentors" into our public schools. This is a terrible idea. Many children are frightened of guns and don't feel safe when they are around. Virginia's schools don't need to be made into a police state.
HB406 - Higher education; students and student organizations, remedies for certain violations.
The Student Press Law Center supports the provisions of this bill relating to section 23.1-401.2, student journalists; free speech and the press. We have no position on this bill as it relates to other sections of the law. The Student Press Law Center (SPLC) is an independent, non-partisan organization that, since 1974, has helped students of all ages participate in civic life and learn essential skills, ethics and values through the vehicle of journalism. In addition to providing education and free legal services to student journalists and advisers, we have worked alongside advocates on the ground to support “New Voices” laws, similar to 23.1-401.2, which restore and protect the freedom of the student press and clarify under which circumstances administrators may restrict or censor student media. Several of those laws include injunctive relief provisions guaranteeing the publication of illegally censored material. Such provisions provide clear recourse for student journalists and advisers, ensuring that high quality student journalism is not suppressed because of confusion as to how the law is to be enforced. We support extending these protections to Virginia's college student journalists. Thank you for supporting Virginia’s student journalists. We are available to answer any questions the committee may have. Submitted by: Hillary Davis, Advocacy and Organizing Director hdavis@splc.org
The Student Press Law Center supports the provisions of this bill relating to section 23.1-401.2, student journalists; free speech and the press. We have no position on this bill as it relates to other sections of the law. The Student Press Law Center (SPLC) is an independent, non-partisan organization that, since 1974, has helped students of all ages participate in civic life and learn essential skills, ethics and values through the vehicle of journalism. In addition to providing education and free legal services to student journalists and advisers, we have worked alongside advocates on the ground to support “New Voices” laws, similar to 23.1-401.2, which restore and protect the freedom of the student press and clarify under which circumstances administrators may restrict or censor student media. Several of those laws include injunctive relief provisions guaranteeing the publication of illegally censored material. Such provisions provide clear recourse for student journalists and advisers, ensuring that high quality student journalism is not suppressed because of confusion as to how the law is to be enforced. We support extending these protections to Virginia's college student journalists. Thank you for supporting Virginia’s student journalists. We are available to answer any questions the committee may have. Submitted by: Hillary Davis, Advocacy and Organizing Director hdavis@splc.org
HB547 - Speech-language pathologists; Department of Education to develop/maintain statewide strategic plan.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as autism spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Wendy Pulliam, MS, CCC-SLP pulliamwj@gmail.com
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Best, Maria McCharen, MA CCC-SLP Speech-language pathologist in Giles Co. Public Schools
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. As an educator with 35 years of service I have seen the impact high caseloads have had on the delivery and effectiveness of Speech and Language therapy. Our SLP's do an amazing job juggling so many children- but what is the cost of that? The cost is loosing high quality staff as well as decreased effectiveness of the the much needed therapy. We must lower the caseloads in order for the children to receive an appropriate level of therapy delivery. We must also lower the caseloads in order for therapists to deliver that therapy with fidelity. These therapists are tasked with delivering therapy, paperwork(documentation), collaboration with general education staff and parents along with all of their other duties within a school building. We must support these dedicated professionals and allow them to effectively execute their jobs in order to recruit and retain. Kathryn Payne Preschool/Special Education Coordinator Greene County Public Schools
I am writing in support of HB 547. The breadth of support services that school-based speech language pathologists can offer to students to improve their communication and swallowing skills is important. Our role and responsibilities are truly unique in the school districts as we work directly with the students on our caseload as specified in their IEPs. We are often the case managers for the majority of our students . As case managers, we are the main point of contact with families regarding their student's special education services. We write and carry out the student's IEP in collaboration with the student's IEP team . SLPs oversee the screening new students (for communication and hearing), conduct evaluations of students with suspected disabilities, write thorough reports of these evaluations, complete progress reports, bill Medicaid for the services we provide to eligible students, and collect and organize data for all the students on our caseload (for each session if the student is eligible for Medicaid). Our profession covers a broad range of skills and we are also obligated to stay abreast of current research and practices in our field (which encompasses language disorders, speech sound disorders, fluency differences, swallowing, voice disorders, social language, executive function skills, augmentative and alternative communication) and apply these to our daily interactions with our students. Applying evidence based practice to our work in the schools requires a good deal of specialized professional development which is often different from what would be helpful for a classroom teacher. SLP's are also called on frequently to support classroom teachers as they work with students who have any level of communication delay or disorder to better support these students in the classroom- even if the student does not qualify for speech-language services in school. With these unique roles and services, having such high numbers of students on our caseloads leads to more work than can be reasonably completed in a week. I have worked in my school division, which currently employs 5 full time and 1 part time SLP, for the past 5 years. In that time, we have had a part time position that has gone unfilled for 4 of the 5 years. In that time frame, we have also had five SLPs leave our school district. Only 1 of those 5 still works as a school based SLP in a Virginia school district. My husband regularly entreats me to look into working at a private practice rather than in the schools because of the amount of time I spend at home in the evenings and on weekends completing my work responsibilities. I am in full support of lowering the caseload cap as a way to boost recruitment and retention of qualified Speech Language Pathologists in the schools. My insight as a school-based SLP is that most of us working in the schools would prioritize having a more manageable workload than a pay increase. Every professional development conference I have attended has included at least one session targeted to preventing burnout. These types of sessions would not be necessary if burnout was not a big problem in our profession. Thank you for your support of school based SLPs and HB 547. Sincerely, Marla Bruton Speech-Language Pathologist
I would like to provide comments and data on this bill. Our SLP currently has 50 students on her caseload. She is considered 'Part Time'. Within our school, she is ONLY SLP and has to toggle between therapy sessions, Local Screening, IEP meetings, Pre-School Transition meetings, and 6th grade transition meetings. It is absolutely impossible for ONE SLP to manage all of this workload being PART TIME. She deserves to be made full-time if she is expected to fulfill her duties without it causing extreme stress in her personal and professional life. She is having to work on weekends (as many of us are) and extended holiday breaks (as many of us are). When does she have any time left to devote to her family?? As an SLP who works in the education setting and provides fantastic and desperately needed services daily, she deserves the respect of being given FULL TIME status! SLPs and other paraprofessionals should also be included when SPED teachers are given raises as well! They work with the same students and share caseloads more often that not. You will be driving wonderful and highly qualified individuals out of the educational profession if something is not adjusted. Counties across Virginia are severely lacking educations and paraprofessionals because of the demands and lack of resources handed to them. If you would like more individuals to leave the profession and dig a further hole, then do nothing. I HIGHLY suggest taking steps to remedy, or to begin the process of adjusting policies/requirements for hours ASAP.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, My name is Donna Bryant. I live in King George County and work as a speech language pathologist for Spotsylvania County Schools. This is currently my 33rd year working as a school-based speech language pathologist in Virginia. I am writing in support of HB 547 that proposes to collect data that could lead towards caseload reduction legislation for school-based SLPs. The proposed bill evaluates data for SLP staffing, recruitment and retention, tuition, differentiated pay, mentorship, and compares caseloads and compensation to neighboring states. The caseload cap for SLPs in Virginia schools is 68 students. At this point I have 62 students on my caseload. I serve students with primary speech-language impairments as well as students with autism, intellectual disabilities, learning disabilities, and developmental delays. The students typically receive services 1-3x each week. I am responsible for: • planning and collaboration with classroom teachers for each student • developing individual education plans for each student • attending meetings to review each student’s individualized education plan with parents and teachers • online documentation for each session with each student • maintaining current reevaluation data for each student • quarterly progress reports to parents on each goal for each student Although I love my students and helping them become better communicators, the workload and paperwork associated with my current caseload is significant. I spend time at home and on weekends completing schoolwork that there is not time to complete during the school day. At times, students need to be seen in groups that are larger than is optimal, to accommodate needed meetings and student schedules. When the impact of the workload associated with each student on a caseload is considered, it becomes clear that caseload reduction legislation for speech language pathologists should be a priority in Virginia. Reducing SLP caseload sizes would benefit not only the SLPs working in schools in Virginia, but also the students receiving the services by enabling reduced group sizes and increased time to address each student’s needs. Pairing this with recruitment and retention efforts would draw SLP candidates to Virginia to fill positions. I appreciate your considering HB 547, School SLP Caseload cap. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Sincerely, Donna Bryant, MS, CCC-SLP Speech Language Pathologist Spotsylvania County Schools cdbryant@va.metrocast.net
I am writing in support of HB 547. I started SLP-ing in Virginia's public schools in 1976: the Bicentennial Year & the first year of implementation of our inclusive & welcoming Individuals with Disabilities Act which families of children with disabilities had to advocate for so their children could access public education (Brown v Bd of Ed -1954 was often cited back in the early days of getting this civil rights legislation passed in a bi-partisan 94th Congress). I am now on Year 40. I received my 30 year pin from Spotsy Co PS in May 2021. I love what I do. Amber Handon with Charlottesville PS, has already sent you a comment that has the supporting reasons for you to also support Del. Hudson's HB 547. We need help with recruiting and retaining SLPs in public schools, especially full-time ones that carry the current & overwhelming 68+ caseload. It's not working to patch together some part-timers who get an hourly rate to do a few students. There's no room left in the school buildings to have part-timers coming in/out throughout the day all looking for an empty room. We're using all the rooms now. We don't want Learning Cottages on the property just to add more space, even for the 'out of state' teletherapists who are now being contracted by school systems because we can't find 'in person' Virginians to work in public schools and spend their paycheck in our communities. Those out of state teletherapists still need a room for a para to walk students into for a screen session. And as per ASHA, teletherapy is just as effective as 'in person' with a small group. Ms. Handon mentions WV and NC w- caseload caps of 50. That's our competition. Really? We can have a more reasonable caseload w- the national average of 47. The whole point of IDEA is to provide speech/language therapy for a student to access the curriculum. We want to get to remediation. Not decades of therapy because we have in/outs of SLPs with no consistency in implementation from one year to the next and/or having to group when we could do a pair-up or 1:1. I was once told by my most favorite supervisor ever: Ron Branscome, Executive Director (now retired) of the Rappahannock Area Community Services Board (Planning District 16: City of Fred, Caroline, King George, Spotsy & Stafford) that I approached my job with Urgency. I asked him, is that a good thing? He said sure. We need Urgency to get things done. This was during my years in early intervention birth - 2 yrs old which is Part C of IDEA before these infants/toddlers transition into Part B public schools, ages 2-21 yrs old. This situation with burdensome caseloads is URGENT. Virginia is the ONLY state that provides EI at age 2 yrs old (not 3 yrs old, like the other states do) It's something to be right proud of. We have age 2 yrs as our start for public school special education because the parents of the deaf children back in the 1940s advocated to the Virginia General Assembly that we 'invest' early in intervention & we get better results & more 'dismissals' because we've remediated the speech/language impairment. But we need a reasonable caseload number like the national average of 47 to be efficient with our therapy. That early INVESTMENT in a 47 in the long run saves Virginia public schools funding because reduced caseload equals smaller groups, more individualized attention to each student. And the students are out earlier. Not decades of therapy $$$
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with a wide variety of disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Our work ranges from articulation, language, social/ pragmatic skills, fluency/stuttering, feeding and students using alternative/ augmented communication systems. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Jen Johnson Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● School-based speech-language pathologists provide direct and/or consultative services to students identified with a variety of disabilities to include: developmental delays, intellectual disabilities, multiple disabilities, autism spectrum disorders, sensory disabilities, specific learning disabilities, social-emotional disabilities, vision or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries, and speech-language impairments. (Students identified with speech-language needs that impact their educational performance and require specialized speech-language services demonstrate significant needs in the areas of speech sound disorders, receptive/expressive language, pragmatics/social communication, fluency, voice, and/or functional language.) In addition to providing services to students having identified disabilities, speech-language pathologists also provide preventative support and services to students without disabilities as part of their school systems’ tiered systems of support. ● In Virginia and across the United States, there has been a shortage of school-based speech-language pathologists. Numerous districts in Virginia were unable to fill speech-language vacancies for the current 2021-22 school year, leading to higher caseloads and workloads to already overtaxed school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Virginia has a caseload cap of 68 students, and many speech-language pathologists in Virginia have higher caseloads than their counterparts in other states. For example, the bordering states of West Virginia and North Carolina both have caseload caps of 50 students. High caseload numbers undoubtedly impact Virginia’s school districts’ ability to recruit and retain qualified speech-language pathologists. Reducing the caseload cap for speech-language pathologists in Virginia would assist school districts in attracting and retaining prospective speech-language pathologists. Virginia’s current caseload cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB 547, the Virginia Department of Education will collect data to identify the needs of school-based speech-language pathologists across Virginia. VDOE will then create specific action plans focusing on the recruitment and retention of speech-language pathologists. I appreciate your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia, and thank you for your consideration of HB 547. Michelle Dombrovskis Speech-Language Pathologist Greene County Public Schools mdombrovskis@greenecountyschools.com
Please support HB 547 by voting YES! Our SLP caseloads are incredibly high and understaffed across the Commonwealth. We need to investigate this problem in depth. Thank you! Diane
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 16 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Please continue to support this important potential legislature.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Michelle Sisk, M. S., CCC-SLP Speech-Language Pathologist providing services in Campbell County
I am writing as a school-based speech-language pathologist (SLP) in Frederick County, VA. As with other special education positions, competition to recruit and retain SLPs is high, and job vacancies are not always filled (there were 93 reported full-time SLP vacancies in the fall of 2021 across schools in the Commonwealth). When personnel shortages exist, employee workloads often increase substantially, leading to burnout and further loss of personnel. Students should receive thoughtful, planned therapy services from highly trained SLPs. The results from a recent survey conducted by the American Speech-Language Hearing Association (ASHA) highlight this concern: 63% of surveyed school-based SLPs identified "lack of time to ensure the delivery of quality services to my students" as an ethical issue they had faced during the last three years (ASHA 2020 Schools Survey: SLP Workforce and Work Conditions). The current caseload cap of 68 does not account for the workload in serving 68 individual students with various disabilities and needs. Passing HB547 would ensure that the VDOE gathers needed data to implement solutions for recruiting and retaining SLPs across the Commonwealth. Thank you for your time and service. Janet Gavin Speech-Language Pathologist working in Frederick County Public Schools
Please consider the inequitable workload and responsibilities that are placed on speech-language pathologists working in the schools. Many SLPs are over stretched and are burned out as a result of high caseloads, a significant amount of special education paperwork that is considerably higher than special education teachers, time spent in countless meetings, and a lack of support from school administration and county superintendents. We need support from the statewide government in order to ensure that quality SLPs remain in VA school districts and our students' needs are met.
I am writing in support of HB 547. This bill tasks the VDOE to develop a strategic plan to recruit and retain qualified speech-language pathologists for our public schools. Just last year my county lost 20 speech-language pathologists! This service is critical for many of our students with disabilities. It can be life changing.
Currently the SLP that is working at our school has a caseload of 50 students. She is the only SLP in our building and she works Mondays-Thursdays. Sometimes she requires one-on-one sessions with them, and she also has some kids that require 4 hours per month. Not only that, she has 29 evaluations scheduled for this year, which take a minimum of 8 hours to do. Her caseloads require her to have around 80 IEPs a year! I can't imagine how this could be a job that can be done within the hours in school by one person and how this can be feasible for anyone to do without getting burnt out. We are striving as a country to tell our teachers to take care of themselves, and yet we also expect our teachers to do what is best for our students. A teacher is not capable of doing both with this type of caseload. If we care about the future of this service - that many students highly benefit from- we really need to look into creating more manageable caseloads or maybe even paying SLPs on a different type of pay scale.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. I am a special education teacher and work at an elementary school where our speech and Language Pathologist is a part-time teacher but she has a caseload of over 50 students. She is only paid to work 4 days a week but it still working on the 5th day to write reports, IEPs, and complete other paperwork. She has MANY evaluations each year that take 8-10 hours to complete. Every minute of the school day is filled with therapy, testing, or meetings. So, she has no time during contract hours to complete report writing, IEPs, speech language updates, etc. The caseloads for SLPs is unmanageable. The school SLP workload is not consistent with PT and OT or SPED teachers who have lower caseloads and workloads. However, school SLPS are on the teacher payscale and paid the same amount as other professionals with a different workload. I ask that you consider creating a manageable caseload cap for our hard-working SLPs.
I work as a speech-language pathologist for Albemarle County Public Schools. In our district, where we benefit from having the University of Virginia at our doorstep however, we still struggle annually to attract and retain SLPs. Due to our location, we frequently have spouses of UVA graduate and doctoral students that help to temporarily fill positions, and we benefit from a slightly more competitive pay. Even with these factors that many of our surrounding counties do have, we cannot fill and retain SLP positions. We have lost SLPs in the recent years due to expanded workload (with no compensation and not enough SLPs to cover the extra load). We have also lost individuals with special skill assets, such as fluency in another language, due to a lack of stipends or different salary scale to encourage individuals with these additional qualifications to stay. I urge you to pass legislation that will promote the recruitment and retention of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia schools.
As a speech/language pathologist, I urge you to support lower caseloads for public school speech pathologists through HB547. I work primarily with students with intellectual disabilities who are learning crucial skills such as using a communication device to express their wants/needs and learning basic communication skills to enhance their employability. Communication is a key factor of whether students can control problematic behaviors, be gainfully employed and possibly support themselves. Due to so many workload demands such as attending screening meetings, eligibilities, evaluations, IEP's, documentation, consultations, Medicaid billing, and planning, it is difficult to provide the services in the individualized manner that these students need. Parents regularly advocate for more services for their child but more services requires lower caseloads. A differential salary scale and lower caseloads for SLP's could attract more professionals to the field which would alleviate these difficulties. Please pass this bill as a step toward resolving this situation.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. In my personal experience, while on maternity leave recently, my district was unable to staff a temporary position to cover my leave, therefore leaving my students without services for six weeks. ● Large caseloads and low pay in comparison to Speech Language Pathologists working in other settings (i.e. Skilled Nursing Facilities, hospitals, private practices) may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists in the school setting. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Kate Worcester Speech-Language Pathologist worcester.kate@gmail.com
I currently am the Lead Special Education teacher at an elementary school. Our Speech and Language Pathologist is a part-time teacher, who works four days per week. She currently has a caseload of over 50 students, most of which are in their reevaluation year or have become newly eligible for speech and language supports and services. She has advocated that she would like to be full time, but she has not been granted a full-time position at our school. She was told that the only way that she could hold a full-time position is if she takes on a second elementary school and a second caseload. Instead, she spends the day that she is not paid to be working writing reports, IEPs, and managing other paperwork. Needless to say, she is doing the work of a full-time employee with part-time pay. Our school's principal, our speech and language pathologist, and myself have all advocated for her to be full time, but our request has been denied. As there is no current case load cap, our hard-working Speech and Language Pathologist and her peers have been slammed with too many students and an unmanageable workload. I urge you to consider creating a manageable caseload cap for these hardworking professionals.
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Jessica Gleason Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools gleasonj1@charlottesvilleschools.org
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school-based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as autism spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Susan Heck, M.S., CCC-SLP Speech Language Pathologist working in Roanoke County Public Schools sheck@rcps.us
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 14 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 5 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. Additionally, schooling to become an SLP is a longer process than to become a classroom teacher. As such, SLPs should be considered for differential payment
To Members of the House Committee on Education: K-12 Subcommittee, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. ● Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. ● There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation. Based on a fall 2021 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time equivalent) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists. ● Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. ● The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. By passing HB547, the VDOE will gather the data needed to identify the needs for SLPs in schools across the Commonwealth and create specific action plans targeting the recruitment and retention of SLPs. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia. Carolyn Kilday Speech-Language Pathologist working in Charlottesville City Schools crkilday@gmail.com
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
As a parent of a minimally speaking child who uses alternative and augmentative communication (AAC) to be heard, I strongly urge you to support HB547. When my child was first identified for special education services at 3 years old, the staff giving a tour of the early intervention preschool program told us that none of our children would receive speech services. Due to the severity of my child's speech needs, I assumed that would not apply to us. I was wrong. In our initial IEP meeting, we could not get the staff to agree to a speech-language evaluation. despite the fact that Infant & Toddler Connection (ITC) was already providing speech services and the ITC speech therapist was with us in the IEP meeting. We were told preschool was a language-rich environment and that would address our child's speech delay. Except our child's speech disability is due to motor planning deficits. A "language-rich environment" doesn't resolve motor planning deficits. After months of back and forth, we finally got a consultation, and that consultation only recommended one hour/MONTH of speech services. 15 minutes a week. For a child with a severe speech disability. Over the course of the next year and a half, we increased that amount to 4 hours/month, which is where we are still today. While some progress has been made, that amount is still inadequate for the severity of our child's needs and yet 4 hours a month is the unspoken cap, due to the significant staffing shortages for Speech-Language Pathologists (SLPs) and their overflowing caseloads. It is absolutely imperative that Virginia address the staffing shortages and impossible caseloads for ALL related service providers (including physical therapists, occupational therapists, & assistive technology specialists), but starting with SLPs would be an encouraging step forward. I have spoken to multiple families this year alone whose children were found to require AAC devices to communicate, and yet those same children were denied speech services that would facilitate learning how to *use* those devices. The denials of service that I and these other families have experienced are nonsensical and directly relate to the SLP staffing shortages and towering SLP caseloads. Students who need speech services the most are routinely denied access to them because schools do not have the SLP resources to meet their needs. I urge you to pass this bill ASAP and start Virginia on a better path to truly meet the needs of ALL students. Thank you.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 52 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 16 years. The following quote describes how all of my colleagues feel and why many leave school jobs: “It’s hard to pinpoint what the biggest issue is as a school SLP, but it really is all of the juggling. Billing, progress reports, paper data sheets, IEPs, meetings, re-evals, screenings, filing paperwork, lawyers, uninvolved parents, small work spaces, low funding, low support from school staff, lack of understanding of our role as school SLPs. I feel like if caseloads could be capped to something like 40 instead of having 60 like I do now, I’d be able to manage all of these tasks. But right now, I barely meet deadlines, my therapy is mediocre quality, and I always wish I had time/energy to give more to my kids and focus on the IMPORTANT part of the job which is treating and diagnosing speech and language disorders efficiently and in a way that is individualized to each student. It’s what they deserve and it never feels possible when it COULD BE.” https://www.slptoolkit.com/blog/dear-asha-what-school-slps-want-you-to-know/ We need help with increased staffing. You can help by incentivizing students from JMU, UVA, and Radford to stay in Virginia and work in our public schools. Please support this bill. Thank you
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 8.5 years and total experience in the profession for 15 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. We work closely with general education teachers and special education teachers to screen students with communication concerns, consult/collaborate with teachers and parents, administer comprehensive communication assessments, determine and write communication goals, provide direct service, closely monitor progress, complete progress notes, write detailed and thorough evaluation reports, write reevaluation update reports, case mange more students than special education teachers at the elementary school level, run IEP meetings, complete Medicaid paperwork, and at additionally at the elementary level: attend Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and Local Screening meetings, and provide services to students who live in Fairfax County boundaries but do not attend their local public school. The more students we work with directly, the more paperwork that is required with no assistance as compared to special education teachers would have through their instructional aides. Having a cap of 45-50 students on an SLP’s caseload would allow for smaller group sizes, thorough planning for direct services, and better medicaid documentation of direct services. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to better serve our students’ individualized needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 7 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each student's individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 2 years. I am writing this because I strongly support HB 547. School based Speech-Language Pathologists serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, and social communication. A major issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. The current caseload cap of 68 students is not manageable. Due to high caseload size, I am required to be in more meetings (IEPs, re-evaluations, eligibilities, etc.) which results in missed therapy sessions that are difficult to make-up due to my unmanageable workload. I work many hours into the night just to get paperwork done because there is not time for me to complete it during the day. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, SLPs would be able comprehensively serve each of each of our students’ individual needs. SLPs would also be more likely to stay in their current positions without feeling burnout. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
Ever since I moved to Virginia, I have been met with extremely high caseloads. This impact my children's ability to learn and receive the time written on their IEP's. Each of my kids end up having about 10 minutes each of direct attention and instruction because most of my speech classes consist of large groups. This is unfair to me as a professional but more importantly unfair to my students.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year.The role of the SLP in a school includes prevention, correction, or alleviation of articulation, fluency, voice, language, and social communication impairments. We are tasked with reducing the functional consequences of communication disabilities by promoting the development, improvement, and use of functional communication skills, and we provide support in the general education environment to alleviate the social consequences of communication impairments by facilitating successful participation, socialization, and learning (ASHA, 1999). Our responsibilities include: 1. Prevention - Provides pre-referral consultations and involved in various initiatives including RtI 2. Identification - Conducts speech-language screenings; identifies if students failing screening should be referred to Child Study 3. Evaluation: Determining Need for Evaluation - Serves as member of team for students with suspected speech-language deficits 4. Evaluation: Assessment - Conducts a comprehensive assessment to determine the existence of a disability 5. Evaluation: Interpretation of Assessment - Identifies child’s communication strengths and weaknesses; prepares evaluation report 6. Eligibility Decision - Presents speech-language assessment results at team meeting; describes the student’s functional speech and language skills as they relate to the student’s ability to access the curriculum and progress 7. Individualized Education Program Development - Drafts parts of present level of performance, IEP goals and objectives/benchmarks related to speech-language impairment 8. Intervention - Provides intervention appropriate to the age and learning needs of the individual student 9. Caseload Management - Employs a continuum of service delivery models in the LRE; meets federal and state mandates as well as local policies in performance of job duties 10. Data Collection and Analysis - Gathers and interprets data for individual students as well as overall program evaluation 11. Supervision and Mentorship - Supervises university practicum students, clinical fellows, and paraprofessionals Mentors new SLPs 12. Documentation - Completes progress reports (for special education and Medicaid) 13. Collaboration - SLPs work with individuals and agencies in the community, universities, other school professionals, families, and students 14. Unique Contributions - Addresses the linguistic and metalinguistic foundations of the curriculum 15. Professional Development - Remains current in all aspects of the profession and supports the use of EBP Adapted from American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (2010). Taken from “Speech-Language Pathology in the Schools”; VDOE We are often overlooked, underpaid, and disrespected, yet we continue to do our job with the highest level of professionalism because what matters most to us is our students’ progress. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this extremely important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 27 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. We provide services for at least 50-80 students and are responsible to case manage, which no other disciple does; Occupational Therapists (OT), Physical Therapists (PT), and school Psychologists. We service students from preschool through graduate transition services, while other school personnel typically service only one year. We are the only school personnel who screen, evaluate, re-evaluate, diagnose and treat students. We run the IEP process from start to finish. OT’s, PT’s, Psychs don’t, they just evaluate. SPED teachers and teachers don’t either. SLPs generate millions of funds for the districts through Medicaid reimbursement, but we must hold our National certification to do this. Our National certification is NOT rewarded by school districts, even though our training is more time consuming and intensive than the National teachers certification process, which receives a stipend from school systems for teachers. To comply with Federal guidelines, SLPs have a voluminous amount if paperwork as Case Managers for 5 times the amount of students than other Special Education or Related service providers. We don’t have assistants like Special Education teachers and general education teachers. Speech Pathologists are being grossly overworked in the schools. A caseload cap of 40-50 students is essential to allow us to provide the high quality of service delivery that we’ve been trained to do. Please help us! I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. With thanks, Liz Bergstrom, M.S., CCC-SLP
I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 17 years. School-based SLPs serve students with communication needs of varying severity levels from age 2-22. We hold Masters or Doctorate degrees, and keep up our best practices with continuing education every year in order to hold our certification. A key issue that impacts SLPs is caseload size, along with additional job requirements such as Medicaid billing, diagnostic sessions, and more. Caseload size in Virginia is enormous and does not reflect the depth and breadth of the students who require specialized communication services. We no longer are “speech correctionists”, but have to have the knowledge and time to address the proliferation of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder as well as those who are nonverbal and require an Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) device. Lowering the caseload from where it stands now would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Please take the time to consider supporting this important legislative measure. The quality of children’s lives depends on it. Thanks you.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
To Members of the House Committee on Education, I am writing in support of HB 547 and school based speech-language pathologists. Speech-language pathologists provide services to students with disabilities such as Autism Spectrum disorders, developmental delays, emotional disabilities, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, sensory disabilities, visual or hearing impairments, traumatic brain injuries and speech-language impairments. Speech-language pathologists also provide support and services to students without disabilities, through prevention work and Virginia’s Tiered Systems of Support. Based in a fall 2020 survey of all school districts, there were 93 (full time) vacancies for Speech-Language Pathologists There has long been a shortage of Speech-Language Pathologists in Virginia and across the nation There continues to be a need for speech-language pathologists in the schools. While three of the bordering areas do not have caps, West Virginia and North Carolina have a cap of 50. In reducing the caseload cap in Virginia, we would become more competitive for prospective speech-language pathologists near the West Virginia and North Carolina borders, as their cap is currently 18 students lower than Virginia’s. Large caseloads may negatively impact both recruitment and retention of qualified speech-language pathologists. The need for the reduction of the speech-language pathologists’ caseload has been well established per discussion and action in 1989, 1994 and 2000 in the Virginia General Assembly. When the Virginia General Assembly reduced the caseload to 70, it included the intent of the General Assembly to reduce caseloads to a level equivalent to the national average by the year 1999. The current cap of 68 is well above the national average of 47. I am available to discuss any concerns or questions you may have. Thank you for your time and your service to the Commonwealth of Virginia Amber Handon Speech-Language Pathologist amber.handon@gmail.com
Thank you for this opportunity to submit a brief statement summarizing why this legislation should be supported. I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for almost 12 years, and I have been working in this field for almost 20 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, expressive language, receptive language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size due to the numerous requirements for supporting each individual case and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to more comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. Taking care of students with special needs and their families is at the heart of what we do and the passion upon which we SLPs thrive. Lowering caseload numbers would allow us to spend more time on the tasks that directly support students and families and maximize children's progress. Moving toward this action would also increase attraction and retention of highly skilled SLPs in the Virginia schools. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
Thank you for considering this important legislation. I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 22 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language (including use of augmentative communication devices,) voice, fluency and social communication. We are required to be highly qualified with a Master's Degree to serve our students. Communication is a basic human right and speech language pathologists in the school system support the development of this skill from preschool to early adulthood. As a speech pathologist who works with adolescents, I prepare students to enter secondary education or the work-force. Communication is KEY work place and educational skill. A vital issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. Our job responsibilities include scheduling, Individual Education Plan (IEP) drafting and completion, inter-professional collaboration, filing, documentation of work and billing to outside pay sources. All of the previously mentioned duties in addition to direct service delivery. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs and prepare the students to communicate effectively in all their interactions. I am grateful to Delegate Hudson, and I strongly support HB 547.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 8 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency (stuttering) and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature (HB 547).
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 6 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for over 11 years. During my career, my caseload size has dramatically increased from the low 40s range to the 60s and other job requirements (e.g. IEP/Eligibility meetings, Medicaid billing, trainings, screenings, etc.) I've been tasked with have increased as well. As a result, the quality of my therapy has suffered, my students are not getting the services they deserve, and my overall job satisfaction has greatly decreased. I'm required to be in more IEP/re-eval/eligibility meetings which has resulted in missed therapy sessions that are difficult to make-up due to my unmanageable workload. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow me the ability to comprehensively serve each of my students’ individual needs. It would also save school districts from lawsuits because students would be better supported with more planning time, more individualized care, and more parent communication. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) currently working in Virginia’s public schools. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. Many issues negatively impact Speech-Language Pathologists' ability to effectively service students' needs, though excessive caseload sizes and the increase of non-clinical job requirements are two issues of significant concern. A smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 2 years. I have worked in other settings as a speech langauge pathologist for over 16 years. The school position is the most challenging position I have had due to the workload (high caseload, large amount of special education paperwork and writing, high load of evaluations completed, demand to serve preschool students in addition to K-6 students, meetings, and mandated school trainings) and low compensation. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year and poor compensation. As an SLP in the public schools for many years, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature. Please consider a case load cap of 50 students for a full time employee, a pay raise to offer competitive and livable wage that matches our education and expertise and skill, and find other providers to serve preschool students so that school based SLPS (K-12) are not over-tasked with this need. If issues are not addressed, more SLPS will resign from the school setting to work in other settings that have a more manageable workload and better pay. The schools wil not be able to meet the needs of students withtout addressing the workload and compensation of school based SLPs.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for 15 years. I have worked in 2 school districts, and both have had the same difficulty retaining SLPs, due to pay differentials and caseload maximum being too high. SLPs deserve higher pay in the public schools to compete with the pay scales of the private sector, both of which require the same state and national licensure and experience/qualifications. A smaller caseload would allow more individualized instruction and support to our highly diverse caseloads. Our students range from nonverbal/AAC users and some that require 1-1 support to students who are seen in the general education environment. We are inundated with paperwork, deadlines, meetings, and reports for EVERY student on our caseloads. It would also ease some of the scheduling difficulties/stress when there are fewer schedules to consider when forming groups for instruction. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency, social communication, and Augmentative/Alternative Communication. Thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature to ensure the best progress for our students with Speech Language Impairments.
I am a Speech-Language Pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia’s public schools for about 2 years. SLPs serve students with varying communication needs to include the areas of speech, language, voice, fluency and social communication. A key issue that impacts Speech-Language Pathologists is caseload size and the increase of other job requirements we are tasked with each year. As an SLP in the public schools, a smaller caseload would allow us the ability to comprehensively serve each of our students’ individual needs. The difficulty of the work of SLPs is directly related to caseload size and over the last two years has become unmanageable. It causes the stress that people working six figure salaried jobs feel, however we are unable to afford to things that can relieve the stress as people with high paying jobs can. It causes serious burnout which affects the quality of service students on our caseload receive. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting this important potential legislature.
I am a speech-language pathologist who has worked in VA public schools for the past 7 years and I strongly support H.B. 547. In my current position, I work with students ages 2-12, with a variety of communication disorders including articulation, fluency (stuttering), language, voice, social communication, and functional communication needs. The current caseload of 68:1 is untenable for the roles and responsibilities of SLPs in public schools. A smaller caseload and workload would allow me to comprehensibly serve each student that requires my services. I want to thank you for taking the time to consider supporting H.B. 547 and I am grateful to Delegate Hudson.
I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) who has worked in Virginia's public schools for over 20 years. SLPs are respected school community members who address communication disorders that impact students educationally. Developing a strategic plan is essential to address the shortage of SLPs and the challenges the public schools face in recruiting, hiring, and retaining employees. SLPs must earn a master's degree and receive licensure through the Virginia Board of Audiology and Speech-Language Pathology in the Department of Health Professions. School-based SLPs hold the same license as SLPs working in private practice and medical settings. The public schools compete with private and medical employers to hire a limited number of available SLPs due to the national shortage. Addressing the caseload cap and associated workload is one action that will help attract SLPs to the public schools and assist with the retention of quality employees, thus improving services to students. In the public schools, the current workload/caseload (68:1) is not related to present best practices and does not reflect the roles and responsibilities of the school-based SLP. SLPs are highly skilled professionals delivering federally mandated services to students under IDEA. The roles and expectations of the SLP greatly expanded under IDEA in the late 1990s, and the caseloads were never reduced to reflect the increased workload. The stress of the current workload associated with a 68:1 caseload is unsustainable. The workload pressure leads to SLPs leaving the public schools for more money and less work, making it challenging for school systems to provide mandated services to students. Reducing the large caseloads and associated workload is a complex issue that must be addressed. I am grateful to Delegate Hudson, and I strongly support HB 547.
Thank you for your consideration of HB 547. I am a speech-language pathologist (SLP) with 5 years of experience working in schools, as well as three years of experience as a doctoral researcher. SLPs are valuable members of the community. We help support students who cannot produce certain sounds, students who have trouble with language (i.e., vocabulary and grammar), students who stutter, students who suffer from social/emotional/behavioral disorders, and more. I have seen firsthand many of the challenges encountered by Virginia's school-based SLPs; as our caseloads grew larger and as our responsibilities expanded, we have less time time to provide individualized services to each child with a communication disorder. These services, as you know, are mandated by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), and the Supreme Court's ruling of Endrew v. Douglas determined that these services must be high-quality and impactful. Overly-large caseloads can negatively impact the quality of speech-language services and students' outcomes, but these large caseloads may be preventable. Part of the problem is that many of these SLP jobs are unfilled for a variety of reasons. Possible reasons include relatively low wages compared to private positions, and even the large caseloads themselves may be a factor driving SLPs away from school settings. Even SLPs who prefer school settings may be enticed to work in neighboring states, where "caseload caps" limit the student-to-SLP ratio at 50:1, which is much more manageable than Virginia's cap of 68:1. I do not claim to know the solution to these complex problems. However, I am grateful for Delegate Hudson's H.B. 547, which seeks some of the answers to these questions through a statewide strategic plan. I strongly support this bill.
HB587 - School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program; processing of applications.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
Greetings, My name is Chlo'e Edwards with Voices for Virginia's Children where our mission is to improve the laws of Virginia's children, particularly those at the greatest disadvantage. We are supportive of the following bills: HB1184 (Guzman), HB582 (Roem), HB 629 (Roem), HB583 (Roem), HB 587 (Roem), HB649 (Carr). As of 2020, the number of children (0-17) and young adults (18-24) in Virginia is just above 2.6M, and yet, too many children struggle to meet their basic needs. Poverty rates in Virginia remain unchanged in the past decade. Additionally, barriers to access to services and resources still persist for families of diverse identities and that face unique challenges. Voices believes in creating just and fair futures for Virginia's children as we know that children are the future. In creasing access to services and supports for Virginia's children today to ensure they live, thrive, and survive, we are creating a brighter future tomorrow. We hope that it pleases the member of the committees to support these initiatives as there are
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
HB688 - School boards; production of public records, fee schedules.
My name is Deborah Wahlstrom and I am a Suffolk citizen. Thank you for allowing me to provide input to HB 688 – a bill I support and encourage you to pass. I come to you this morning with wide experiences in helping schools and school divisions improve in their operations and academic achievement. I’ve seen loads of central offices and the impact of decisions made by school boards around Virginia and other parts of the country. I believe it is important to recognize that generally speaking, most school boards are not aware of the Freedom of Information Act and what it means. Because the topic is left out of most division and school-level leadership courses, we have superintendents, central office staffs, and building-level staff who have not learned that public documents are well, public. One of the consequences of filing a FOIA request is being charged an amount of money – and this amount is usually arbitrary. In Suffolk, I was charged over $600.00 dollars to get a list of people and topics for FOIA requests. I don’t mind paying fees, but it doesn’t make common sense to be charged so much for something’ the school division should have had on hand – as FOIA requests are also FOIABLE. The cost is arbitrary as are the citizens who must pay for public information. The current law provides some guidance, but not enough such that fees are consistent from one FOIA requester to the next. Each school division is required to have a FOIA officer and it seems that part of that person’s job is to provide responses to FOIA requests. There does not need to be a fee for all requests and there certainly needs to be consistency of FOIA fees in a school division. For these reasons, I wholeheartedly support HB 688. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts with you.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
Please vote Yes on HB 988. It is not equitable to charge the public exorbitant amounts for 'public information' and is discriminatory against those with few resources.
HB694 - Commonwealth College Completion Fund and Program; established.
HB741 - Annual public elementary and secondary school safety audits; creation or review of school building.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
The VACP highly supports HB 741, which mandates that all public schools create detailed floor plans for each school building. Although the bill states detailed and accurate floor plans, this is not clearly defined. Language should be included that would more clearly determine what is acceptable. Language should also be added to include that the mapping data is made accessible to local public safety agencies., and that agencies are provided updated mapping data each year. When critical incidents occur inside school buildings, such as an active shooter incident, seconds count. Having a detailed and accurately LABELED floor plans can make a tactical response more swift and effective. This can mean the difference between lives being saved. This mapping data is necessary regardless of whether an SRO works in a school or not. Ideally these floor plans should be labeled by room {name and/or number), entrances, stairways, etc. The detail is critical for first responders in emergency situations. These maps can also be used from incident command posts to direct safe areas, points of egress, etc. Amazing technology exists that could be instituted and ensure consistent mapping data is captured across all of our VA schools. This data needs to be in the hands of public safety and loaded in their computers and phones so it is readily accessible and can be used while in a vehicle or on foot via smart phone. Trying to find a paper map in a supervisor's vehicle in an emergency is not effective when seconds count. From a mutual aid perspective, having this data sharable would also enhance response from outside agencies.
HB853 - Brown v. Board of Education Scholarship Program Fund; unused funds, etc.
HB857 - Virginia National Guard; institutions of higher education, issuance of tuition grants.
HB863 - Local law enforcement; certain reports to school principals and division superintendents.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I would like to voice my support and urge the need for bill 863. Here in Loudoun we have seen 1st hand what happens due to vaugness in the law. After a sexual assualt at a high school in May our local sheriffs office launched a investigation. A arrest was made in July and that arrest, by law, should be reported to the superintendent. However without clear responsibility of who is suppose to report it, clear info on how it is to be reported, and requirements of a paper trail there is some doubt if it was. The Sheriff said the courts reported it. The courts have stayed quiet. And the superintendent says he was never alerted. The law doesn't say how it is to be reported so we are stuck in two community leaders pointing fingers at each other. Without the sheriff reporting the arrest (which should be reported by the office who made the arrest in my opinion), the superintendent could not take action. The end result was a 2nd victim months later, and the two community leaders pointing fingers at each other and a community of parents, including myself, having to decide who is lying and who to trust to keep our kids safe. Please fix the ambiguity and require strict rules on how law enforcement should report these types of events and what paper trail should be kept to ensure accountability. Thanks Todd Kaufman
As a Loudoun County resident and the parent of students in LCPS, as well as a constituent of Del. Reid, I ask you to strongly consider HB 863 to require written documentation and communication between school principals and law enforcement regarding offenses potentially committed by students. It is frankly shocking that this is not already a requirement.
HB979 - Provisional teacher licensure; teachers licensed or certified outside of the United States.
Del. Tran's bill is a good start, but what is really needed are monetary incentives to get people to go into the teaching field. We are leaching teachers at an alarming rate; few of the best and brightest are entering the field. We need quality teaching more than ever, but the system is corrupt enough to reward only friends and buddies of the administrators. That complicates matters, too. Gov. Y's attempt to have a snitch line only exacerbates the problems teachers face.
World Education Services Statement of Support for HB979 HB979 would create a provisional teaching license for internationally licensed educators in Virginia. This legislation would create a more vibrant economy and address workforce shortages by ensuring that immigrants and refugees in the state have access to educational and career pathways—especially in high-demand fields like education. World Education Services (WES) is a non-profit social enterprise dedicated to helping international students, immigrants, and refugees achieve their educational and career goals in the United States and Canada. For more than 45 years, WES has set the standard of excellence in the field of international academic credential evaluation. Through WES Global Talent Bridge, the organization joins with institutional partners, community-based organizations, and policymakers to help immigrants and refugees who hold international credentials utilize their talents and education to achieve their academic and professional goals. WES’ philanthropic arm, the WES Mariam Assefa Fund, supports catalytic leaders and organizations working to build inclusive economies and to ensure that immigrants and refugees can achieve their aspirations and thrive. Virginia is home to 321,000 college-educated immigrants and refugees, yet 21.5 percent of these individuals are unemployed or underemployed due to systemic barriers including limited recognition of international credentials (1). At the same time, the number of unfilled teaching positions in the state has grown by 62 percent over the last three years, according to data from the Virginia Department of Education (2). Last August, 76 of Virginia’s 132 districts reported a total of nearly 5,000 educator vacancies (3). The need is clear: Virginia must ensure that immigrants and refugees who hold international teaching credentials have equitable opportunities to join the state’s workforce. In advancing HB979, Virginia has an opportunity to create teaching licensing pathways, promote more inclusive teacher workforces, and improve student attendance and outcomes (4). Thank you for the opportunity to submit this statement of support. Sources: 1. “U.S. Data Tool: Interactive Resource Featuring National and State Level Workforce Data on Immigrant Skill Underutilization,” World Education Services, October 11, 2021, https://www.wes.org/partners/global-talent-bridge/u-s-data-tool-interactive-resource-featuring-national-and-state-level-workforce-data-on-immigrant-skill-underutilization/. 2. Kate Masters, “Virginia Teacher Shortages Spiked during the Pandemic. Experts Are Worried about What's to Come.,” Virginia Mercury, December 6, 2021, https://www.virginiamercury.com/2021/12/06/virginia-teacher-shortages-spiked-during-the-pandemic-experts-are-worried-about-whats-to-come/. 3. Ibid. 4. David Figlio, “The Importance of a Diverse Teaching Force,” The Brookings Institution, August 20, 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-importance-of-a-diverse-teaching-force/.
Please see the attached document for World Education Services' Statement of Support for HB979. Please email Jacqueline Esposito at jesposito@wes.org with any questions.
Dear Education - Early Childhood/Innovation Subcommittee, my name is Tyvon Bates, and on behalf of American Federation of Teachers Virginia, I am writing to urge you to support HB 979 chief patroned by Delegate Tran. Support staff are essential in meeting the academic, social, and emotional learning needs of students in and out of the classroom, and they maintain school safety, keep school facilities functional, aid teachers, and promote healthy learning environments. Adequately staffing these positions leads to better academic and life outcomes for students and helps build a system of public education that works for all. Yet since the 2008-2009 school year, there has been a profound drop-off in state investment for support staff positions. This is because in 2009, during the Great Recession, lawmakers added language to the budget creating a “cap” on support staff funding, cutting hundreds of millions in state funding for support staff. Between 2009 and 2019, support staff in Virginia schools has declined by 2,800 positions while student enrollment increased by more than 57,000 students. HB 979 will help to provide help to put a band aid on a bigger problem facing our education system. I hope you will join me in supporting HB 979. Thank you,
HB1004 - Two-Year College Transfer Grant, etc.; eligibility, removes registry for Selective Service.
HB1034 - School boards; guidelines for the provision of counseling services in public schools.
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB 1034. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. I have worked in two different public school systems in Virginia over 13 years, and I have seen first hand how beneficial counseling services can be to a wide variety of students. If parents are allowed to prohibit their students from accessing counseling services in the school, these students may be cut off from not only critical mental health support, but but also the academic, career, and community support that school counselors and mental health team members provide. All members of a school mental health team must undergo rigorous education before obtaining their licenses, and as such they should be trusted as the professionals they are to provide only services that they deem necessary for students well-being. I strongly urge you to let the trained mental health professionals do their jobs. Don't make students get tied in the mire of adult squibbles. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
To Whom It May Concern, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on HB HB1032. As a public high school school teacher and parent of two young children (ages 5 and 2) in Virginia, I have serious concerns that this bill will wind up doing more harm than good for the children of our state. As VA Senator Peterson said on January 27 of this year, regarding a similar bill, "I don't think we should be involved in micromanaging school libraries...The problem is that you’re going to sweep up books that you don’t intend to sweep up" (Matthew Barakat, abcnews.go.com). I strongly urge you to leave the books in the libraries for the kids. They deserve to have the opportunity to decide with their own parents and personal support systems what books to read. Thank you, Sara Watkins Mother Teacher Concerned Virginia Citizen
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I strongly oppose HB 1034 and encourage the subcommittee to vote "NO." Children deserve to seek counseling and help without the possibility of being stopped by a parent or guardian. I fully support parental rights, but not every child in the Commonwealth comes from a steady home and has parents with their best interest at heart. The passing of this bill would assure that those children are not able to seek help.
Both I (a public school teacher in Fairfax County Public Schools) and the Virginia Education Association OPPOSE HB 1034. This bill limits a students ability to seek counseling and confidential help based on their parent's approval. This bill will HARM children who may no longer be able to seek outside help from a bad situation at home.
HB1352 - Private elementary and secondary schools; retaliation for good faith reports of child abuse.
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
HB89 - Disorderly conduct in public places; provisions shall not apply to student in grades kindergarten-8.
My name is Daniel Irwin and I am writing in opposition to HB89, which would effectively allow schools to charge students with disorderly conduct if the offense occurs on school property. I have been working in schools for close to 20 years and working with students with significant challenging behaviors. I cannot stress enough how ineffective and harmful this bill can be. First, there is no provision for students with disabilities or students in mental health crisis. There are a variety of reasons that students engage in disruptive behavior and the threat of criminal charges is not likely to change them. Schools exist to support students, not just academically, but socially, emotionally, and behaviorally as well. Students who act out at school need support, not further punishment. They are children. Stop criminalizing trauma. Stop criminalizing mental health needs. This bill sets the stage for further criminalization of minority students, specifically black students. Black students are already 4.5 times more likely to be suspended than white students. Black students make up 22% of the school population, but 52% of suspensions statewide. Black individuals also make up a disproportionate share of the incarcerated population. Why would we want to speed up the school to prison pipeline? Disorderly conduct is a loosely defined concept that is wide open to interpretation/ misinterpretation. It is just another opportunity for students to encounter consequences that are not likely to have a positive impact on their lives. This is a poorly crafted bill that provides schools with another punitive option that will do very little to change student behavior and will likely damage the relationship between the school and student. Schools have the capacity to issue suspensions, expulsions and other punitive procedures. These procedures are often ineffective "strategies" to change behavior. By eliminating the exemption for students in this bill, you are sending the message that a bigger or more severe punishment is what is needed. It is not. Students need supportive communities, comprehensive mental health support, family support, and instruction in social emotional learning so that they can develop skills to manage emotions and behavior. Further, teachers need more resources to support students in this way, This includes professional development, social emotional curriculum, and embedded school support that address the underlying causes of disruptive behavior. School teams should be empowered to develop plans to support students through a responsive tiered system of supports including functional behavior assessment and behavior intervention plans. The science of behavior has come a long way and it should be utilized. All behavior happens for a reason. It is our job as educators to find the reason and help students develop healthy, appropriate means for getting their needs met.
I am outraged that HB89 was resurrected as a substitute. The disorderly conduct charges to be reported under this bill to Law Enforcement and the HB4 that will report ALL incidents to law enforcement leaves every student in a behavioral health crisis being sent to the Juvenile Justice System. There is no protection for Autism students or DD or mental health crisis. You are throwing these children out along with their education. VOTE NO on HB89 and stop this ridiculous action.
I plead with the reconsideration of this bill. It is unfair, ridiculous, ludicrous and unbelievable in this days and age when is to be recognized that a person’s behavior is not always in their control. My own son is a brilliant young man fully invested in academics and the world around him. However he is also a nonspeaking autistic epileptic and there are times of extreme stress and/or fear when regardless of Alternative/Augmented means of communication he would NOT be able to easily and readily communicate this and would perhaps only have behaviors as a means of conveying his distress. He is actually part of the Marcus Alert program that is working to educate police and EMTS to medical and psychological behaviors in certain instances and to not have then escalate to needing any type of legal action be involved. And change IS HAPPENING! How can it possibly be that our state is considering going BACKWARDS in this? Shame shame shame. Please do what is needed d to be fair and just for all citizens especially those that have such a hard and challenging time having their very important and critical voices being heard! Thank you for your true and honorable consideration.
VOTE NO on HB89 This Bill WILL unintentionally place students and families into the courts when the issues can be resolved within the school environment. Students who struggle with honoring norms and expectations need support, services, and resources. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises from a crime, there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. In 2015 Virginia was publically shamed for its treatment of children when it was ranked top in the Nation for sending students into the court systems. (https://publicintegrity.org/education/virginia-tops-nation-in-sending-students-to-cops-courts-where-does-your-state-rank/). HB89 will do away with all the hard work of ensuring that schools are safe spaces for ALL children. Including those with developmental and environmental weaknesses which need resources and not punishment. HB 89 will target black and brown students for police involvement and does nothing to engage the positive community and school relationships. This Bill will set up Virginia for federal class-action discrimination law suites. Schools should engage with parent and community resources to develop and implement corrective and restorative plans rather than throwing children into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues, students with autism, or disabilities. This Bill, along with HB4, which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement, is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors. There is no research or evidence that supports criminalizing a student's behaviors keeps school safe or changes the students' behaviors. Please read the below testimony, which provides additional resources on WHY you should vote NO on HB89 https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/12-12-12TeskeTestimony.pdf Please show compassion for our most vulnerable members of society, our children, and VOTE NO on HB89. Cheryl A Poe Executive Director Advocating 4 Kids, Inc
VOTE NO on HB89 Students do not need to be sent to the Juvenile Justice system for conduct that should be handled by school staff. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises to a crime there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. A student can be given in-school suspension or out of school suspension or expulsion—Handle this conduct inside the schools. Schools should engage with parent and come up with a plan rather than throwing them into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues or students with autism or students with disabilities. This bill along with HB4 which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors.
I am outraged that this HB89 was resurrected as a substitute. The disorderly conduct charges to be reported under this bill to Law Enforcement and the HB4 that will report ALL incidents to law enforcement leaves every student in a behavioral health crisis being sent to the Juvenile Justice System. There is no protection for Autism students or DD or mental health crisis. You are throwing these children to the dogs and destroying anyone wanting to go to public schools... oh wait, I guess I connected the dots. So you will remove any funding for private special education students to go to private schools and send them back to home public schools and self contain them (SB356). Funnel all neurotypical students to private school placements by making anyone in public school subject to Law Enforcement and then what? When does this stop? VOTE NO on HB89.
VOTE NO on HB89 Students do not need to be sent to the Juvenile Justice system for conduct that should be handled by school staff. The definition of disorderly conduct is vague and can be used punitively by school resource officers or school staff against a student. If something arises to a crime there is a punishment that can be had outside of disorderly conduct. A student can be given in-school suspension or out of school suspension or expulsion—Handle this conduct inside the schools. Schools should engage with parent and come up with a plan rather than throwing them into juvenile justice services. There are NO protections for children with mental health issues or students with autism or students with disabilities. This bill along with HB4 which requires principals to report incidents to Law Enforcement is waging war on students and criminalizing student behaviors. both are trrble nnd garbage get rid of them please!!!!!!
As a mother and teacher of children with disabilities, PLEASE DO NOT allow HB89 to stand without exceptions for those with mental health problems and disabilities!!! If my son was to act out and be charged with disorderly conduct and sent to a detention center, when the behavior is a manifestation of his disability, it would cause irreparable harm and only lead to further behavioral and academic issues. I have been attacked as a teacher and I would have never wanted that child to go to jail! They need mental health services NOT to be put into the system. This bill is outrageous and should be immediately shut down!
Please vote for this bill. The training should be optional.
I am a teacher in Fairfax County and I am writing to urge you to vote no on HB 89. This bill criminalizes student behavior and exacerbates the school-to-prison pipeline. Students of color and students with disabilities would be disproportionately negatively impacted by this bill. Instead of increasing the presence of law enforcement in our public schools, please instead focus on getting students the mental health support they need by staffing counselors, psychologists and social workers at the ratios recommended in the SOQs and lifting the support staff cap. Please vote no on this bill.
As the mother of a child with Autism, I strongly urge the Education Committe to vote "NO" on HB89! This bill will harm our children and criminalize their behavior.
I strongly urge the Education Committee to vote "No" on HB 89. I am a speech-language pathologist with years of experience working in public schools, and I have also co-authored research manuscripts about communication disorders in youth offenders. Whereas only one in thirteen children have a condition called "Developmental Language Disorder" which impacts their ability to communicate and comprehend, this disorder is prevalent in over 60% of youth offenders! Children who cannot communicate as well as their same-age peers are more likely to demonstrate behavior problems, and when they encounter law enforcement officers, they are less equipped to understand and follow basic instructions, much less complex instructions like the Miranda rights. Rather than passing legislation like HB 89, which seeks to expand the school-to-prison pipeline (which disproportionately targets children with disabilities and minorities), we must aim to prevent these problems before they happen. Properly-funded education will reduce criminality, and legislation which supports school counselors, SLPs, small class sizes, school psychologists, and special education teachers will be more effective at preventing and reducing delinquency than this ill-conceived bill. Instead, I encourage you to pass bills like HB 547, which aim to support school SLPs. If you have any questions, please reach out to me at rrsenter@umd.edu. Thank you!
Vote No on HB89 - This bill will hugely harm students with disabilities, especially those with autism and other developmental disabilities. Children with disabilities have complex behaviors and needs, this bill would further stigmatize these children, punish them for their disabilities and force them out of the education setting and into the school to prison pipeline.
Dear Delegates, I work for the May Institute where we provide medically necessary services to persons with autism and related disabilities. In my profession, we provide therapy to increase more socially acceptable behavior, as well as decrease problem behavior. I have run across many scenarios where school districts lack the support that they need to provide persons with disabilities a free and accessible education. Many times they are suspended without any sort of plan on what to do next when they come back. It can become cyclical at times. I feel that this bill would create more barriers for children and adolescence to get the therapeutic support that they need. In addition, it would further stigmatize these individuals with disabilities as being "bad" kids. I am asking everyone to vote "no" on this bill. Virginia already does not have a great track record when it comes to this.
This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized.
Stop criminalizing behavior of children! Vote NO to HB89!! Children acting out often have home issues or health issues or other things as a root cause of behavior. They need assistance and age appropriate services to help them, not be treated like criminals. Vote NO to HB89!
I would like to comment that there should be a no vote from all of you for this bill My son can become overstimulated and have a meltdown at the store He should not be charged if he can’t control what happens to his brain during a meltdown He is not the only one
Vote no on HB89. Even with our recent legislative actions to support students rather than criminalize adolescent behavior, Virginia remains a national leader in referring students to law enforcement from school. It was only in 2020 that Virginia repealed disorderly conduct from school discipline options. We have been in the throes of a pandemic for the last 2 years and have not had an opportunity to reap the benefits of alternative supports to keep our children in school rather than in court. Vote no on HB89. It takes Virginia backwards instead of forwards at a time when our children need more support than ever. We must not move back to using the court system for school discipline.
Hello. Thank you for the work this committee is doing. It is so important. However, I am deeply concerned as a parent of a special needs child with HB89. I cannot imagine a worse bill to feed the school to prison pipeline and incriminate our special needs, unless you rounded them up and place them in a detention center. This bill is the equivalent of doing that to our children. Please vote no to this bill. Our children are often suspended and expelled as a result of their disability. In Loudoun our numbers are very high in disciplining special needs children but adding disorderly conduct to that is not the solution. Lowering classroom ratios, adding a social emotional program like Zones of Regulation, and more counselors with less case loads could help turn things around in elementary and middle school. It requires a significant investment but our children are worth it. Respectfully, Heidi Bunkua
Vote no on HB 89.
VOTE NO on HB89-- This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to be criminalized. Please vote NO!
This bill as introduced allows no relief nor distinction amongst those with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, such as Autism and other similar neurological disorders. Persons must not be criminalized due to disabilities, and instead supported with proper, adequate care, mental health and behavioral supports. Please do not criminalize our children with disabilities wherein some behaviors and actions are completely and legitimately out of their control. Support, not incarcerate.
Voting No on HB89
Please vote no on HB89. It would unfairly impact autistic and developmentally disabled children.
Please vote no on this bill. My son has Autism and I would hate to think if he has a meltdown one day that he could be charged with a crime. Thanks
Stop criminalizing the behavior of children! Vote NO on HB89.
Please do not vote for HB 89.
I have three kids with Pandas/Pans. PANS is considered to be inflammation of the basal ganglia and is thought to be caused by infections and other inflammatory reactions. PANS causes dramatic changes in my child and makes it so they are not in control of themselves. It requires urgent, aggressive medical treatment. These are the kids who have behavioral issues and disorderly conduct. Please consider these children and educate yourself on this disease before passing a bill like this.
I’ve been bashed so hard for my ‘behavior’ and because of that, I lost motivation, I got scarred for life and I nearly ended my own life. We cannot let this pass. We don’t need salt rubbed in our scars.
I am very opposed to HB29 as it is written. As the parent of a special needs child, I have seen what can happen when these individuals are treated as criminals. Justice is not necessarily dispensed, and they can...and are...both mentally scarred and legally branded. Unless there is modification of the bill as it is written, it must be defeated. Yes, there is a need for keeping law and order in our schools; but this bill is NOT the way to do that. Better, more thoughtful legislation must be considered.
Stop criminalizing behavior of children. Vote NO on HB89
My son has profound developmental and intellectual disabilities. Occasionally he becomes overwhelmed and can have disruptive behavior-it is wrong to criminalize his behavior . When considering HB89, please remember that children and people with profound developmental/intellectual disabilities are NOT our peers when it comes to ability to rationally think through their actions. Especially when experiencing anxiety or sensory overload, they need support not punishment. Criminalizing children’s behavior is an expensive, esteem crushing mistake by adults who are out of energy and creativity -there are many strategies currently gaining popularity in special needs community that recognize need for support not punishment and have had great success in schools and group homes in Virginia and parts of Europe and UK. Including the Ukeru approach (used at Grafton school in Winchesterand to be implemented next school year in Fairfax county) and the Low- arousal approach used throughout Scandinavia and UK. HB89 shifts responsible for mature/thoughtful behavior by capable adults to children whose brains are not fully developed-it’s short sighted and ineffective -please vote no!
As a mother of children with special needs, I beg of you NOT to pass such a horrible bill! If children of this age or any age for that manner are acting out they require mental health treatment NOT jail. In fact if my son had been able to be charged with disorderly conduct when he walked out of the classroom in a fit of rage over testing. The then abusive teacher and administrator who sat on him in the stairwell to prevent him from eloping, could have charged him with disorderly conduct and my son with Autism, ADHD, and Bi-Polar disorder would have been sent to Juvenile Detention instead of crisis mental health services. That would have cause irreparable harm to him from which he might not have recovered. DO NOT PASS HB-89! Not only for my children, but the hundreds of students I teach in this age group who need help and support not jail.
VOTE NO on HB89-- * This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. * Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) * Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized. * Students with disabilities should not be reported as engaging in criminal conduct for having a behavioral crisis. It would be a better idea to provide teacher/ administrator training and additional support in classrooms to help students with special needs. My son is on the autism spectrum and it is terrifying that anyone in our great state is attempting to criminalize the behavior of children that we should be helping.
VOTE NO on HB89: - This bill will further criminalize behavior of children. - Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) - Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children, all children but especially children with special needs, should not continue to criminalized. - Schoo staff may have tools or process to handle disorder from students.
VOTE THIS BILL DOWN PLEASE ITS TRRRBLE FOR YMY ARC LCUB PALS AND EMEBERS!
I vote NO for this bill
Voices for Virginia's Children opposes HB89
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive place. I myself suffered from Youth Incarceration and suffered detrimental effects from it. Please ensure that section D. IS NOT CROSSED OUT. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." If this bill passes the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment.
*Virginia already reports students for criminal conduct as much as three times the national average. (From a study of U.S. Department of Education data.) *Students with disabilities frequently have a behavioral crisis at school. Behavior of children should not continue to criminalized. This bill would open the door for students with disabilities being reported to law enforcement in alarming numbers. Why are we criminalizing children? ->>VOTE NO on HB89 Thank you
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive space. Ensure that section D. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." is not crossed out. If this bill passes: the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. Out of the 400 children and teens incarcerated, 20% are 2SLGBTQIA+. In addition to this being an issue of institutionalized racism and gender-based violence, this has a financial impact, too. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment. For more information regarding the statistics in the comment, visit: [https://www.nokidsinprison.org/](https://www.nokidsinprison.org/?fbclid=IwAR0co7Zt1y354C2krmn-Nur3aQGQmzX-gUAxvnbfYe3jVLOKp_UpecQrY1A)
Greetings Legislators, I strongly oppose HB89 with the amendment as it will criminalize our students and children. We should be disrupting the school-to-prison pipeline— not funneling more students through. School is supposed to be a safe and supportive space. Ensure that section D. "The provisions of this section shall not apply to any elementary or secondary school student if the disorderly conduct occurred on the property of any elementary or secondary school, on a school bus as defined in § 46.2-100, or at any activity conducted or sponsored by any elementary or secondary school." is not crossed out. If this bill passes: the rate of Black, Latin American, and 2SLGBTQIA+ students will be disproportionately targeted as they already make up the majority of students in juvenile detention centers. 54.58% of the children and teens in Virginia juvenile detention centers are Black. 12.75% are Latin American. Out of the 400 children and teens incarcerated, 20% are 2SLGBTQIA+. In addition to this being an issue of institutionalized racism and gender-based violence, this has a financial impact, too. In Virginia it can cost $215K/year to imprison a child, but only $12K/year for public education. Keep our kids in school, not in prison! Oppose HB89. Thank you for taking the time to read this comment. For more information regarding the statistics in the comment, visit: https://www.nokidsinprison.org/