PROVIDING CAREER INFORMATION

IN EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS

AND SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLANS

Senate Bill 684 (S-1) as reported from House committee

Sponsor:  Sen. Ken Horn

Senate Bill 685 (S-2) as reported from House committee

Sponsor:  Sen. Peter MacGregor

House Committee:  Workforce and Talent Development

Senate Committee:  Economic Development and International Investment

Complete to 6-12-18

BRIEF SUMMARY:

Senate Bill 684 would amend the Revised School Code to require that development of an educational development plan (EDP) include certain information regarding career pathways and opportunities, and that students with EDPs review and revise their EDPs as appropriate each year of high school.

Senate Bill 685 would amend the Code to require that School Improvement Plans (SIPs), which each school district and public school academy (PSA, or charter school) must submit to the Michigan Department of Education every year, include requirements that students have certain access to practical career training and experience and counseling on opportunities.

SB 685 is tie-barred to SB 684, meaning that it could not take effect unless SB 684 were also enacted. Each bill would take effect 180 days after enactment.

DETAILED SUMMARY:

Senate Bill 684

Currently, section 1278b(11) of the Code requires a school board or board of directors of a PSA to give seventh grade students the opportunity to develop an EDP, which would be reviewed during the student's eighth grade year and revised as appropriate. The EDP must fulfill all of the following requirements:

·         Be developed, reviewed, and revised under the supervision of the student's school counselor or another person designated to act in that role by the principal.

·         Be based on high school readiness scores and a career pathways program or similar career exploration program.

·         Be designed to assist pupils to identify career development goals as they relate to academic requirements.

SB 684 would add the requirement that the board or board of directors ensure that each student review and revise his or her EDP as appropriate each year of high school.

Additionally, now, during the process of developing and reviewing the EDP, the student must be advised of the curricular requirements that may be fulfilled through career and technical education.

SB 684 would add that an EDP must provide a student all of the following:

·         Information on various types of careers and current protected job openings in Michigan and those jobs’ actual and projected wages.

·         An opportunity to explore careers specific to a student’s interests and identify career pathways and goals for achieving success in those careers, including the academic degree and training necessary to achieve those goals.

·         An opportunity to develop a talent portfolio, to be developed and revised throughout the implementation of the student’s EDP as a record of the student’s experiences, proficiencies, certifications, or accomplishments that demonstrate talents or marketable skills.

MCL 380.1278b

Senate Bill 685

Now, in order to receive accreditation for a public school, the board of a school district or board of directors of a PSA[1] must yearly adopt and implement, and make available to MDE, a 3- to 5-year school improvement plan (SIP) for that school. Each SIP must include all of the following:

·         Goals centered on student academic learning.

·         Strategies to achieve the goals.

·         Evaluation of the plan.

·         Development of alternate measures of assessment to provide authentic assessment of students’ achievements, skills, and competencies.

·         Methods for effective use of technology.

·         Ways to make available opportunities for structured on-the-job learning such as apprenticeships and internships, combined with classroom instruction, in as many fields as practicable.

The bill would add to the categories required in SIPs, so that they would also need to include all of the following:

·         A requirement that each school operated by the district provide a variety of age-appropriate career informational resources in grades K-12 and an opportunity to do each of the following:

o   During grade levels that the district board considers appropriate, complete one or more experiences in a field of a student’s interests or aptitude and participate in a follow-up process that provides sufficient reflection of those experiences.

o   During grades K-12, discuss career interests, options, and preparations with a school counselor or other knowledgeable adult.

·         Programs that will provide students in grades 6-12 work-based learning activities that ensure that those students make connections with workers or experts in a variety of fields.

·         Programs or instruction ensuring that every student in grade 12 knows how to develop and use a resume, letter of reference, school record, and talent portfolio, as described in SB 684.

MCL 380.1277

FISCAL IMPACT:

House Bill 684 would increase costs for the state and would increase costs for local units of government.

MDE, in coordination with TED, would incur costs to develop and make available to school districts and PSAs model information materials for developing “talent portfolios.”

School districts and PSAs would incur costs to comply with revised Educational Development Plan requirements, which include extending the provision of yearly revisions of the plan from in grade 8 to throughout high school, as well as providing pupils with information on current and projected career trends in the state, providing opportunities to explore careers specific to the pupil’s interest, and creating a talent portfolio.

House Bill 685 could increase costs for MDE and would increase costs for local school districts and PSAs.

MDE could incur administrative costs to verify that districts and PSAs meet the additional school improvement plan requirements.

Districts and PSAs would incur additional administrative costs to meet additional school improvement plan requirements, as described above.

BRIEF DISCUSSION:

Proponents argued that the bills would increase and document students’ exposure to new and meaningful work experiences. Currently, students create EDPs in 7^th grade and review them in 8^th grade, and some feel that the plans are disregarded after that point.  They argue that Senate Bills 684 and 685 are intended to keep a student’s goals at the front of his or her mind throughout the high school career, and to foster career exploration. Opponents wondered how the bills would accommodate students with special needs, and whether the limited number of school counselors would be further taxed by additional requirements.  In response, supporters stated that EDPs are and would continue to be optional, and that the bills are intended to make sure that any usefulness they provide to students is furthered throughout high school.

POSITIONS:

A representative of the Michigan Manufacturers Association testified in support of the bills. (6-12-18)

The following organizations indicated support for the bills (6-12-18):

·         Michigan Department of Education

·         Michigan Department of Talent and Economic Development

·         Michigan Farm Bureau

·         NFIB Michigan

·         Michigan Chamber of Commerce

·         Home Builders Association of Michigan  

·         Michigan Chemistry Council

·         Grand Rapids Chamber of Commerce

The following organizations indicated opposition to the bills (6-12-18):

·         Michigan Association of School Boards

·         Oakland Schools

·         Michigan Association of Secondary School Principals

The Michigan Association of Superintendents and Administrators indicated opposition to SB 685. (6-12-18)

                                                                                        Legislative Analyst:   Jenny McInerney

                                                                                               Fiscal Analysts:   Samuel Christensen

                                                                                                                           Jacqueline Mullen

■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.

---