NEA-Alaska Legislative Candidate Questionnaire 

Candidate: Peggy Robinson

Office: House 19

Adequate Funding

1. Do you support a needs based process for determining the level of school funding?

Yes

Explain:  Educational costs vary widely throughout this state, so we need good data on which to base school funding.  I have worked in rural schools and have seen the differing costs.  

If you support needs based funding, how would you accomplish this?

The American Institutes for Research's Cost Studey should be seriously considered.  Disagreements with their data and analysis should be discussed, modified if necessary, adopted, and used to adjust funding levels.

2.  Do you support a return to the instructional unit approach to funding schools?

No

Explain: It was confusing to not have funding based directly on individual student enrollment.  The extra funding that some districts lost for ESL, SPED, and Vocational students have created hardships.

3.  The recent changes in funding for pupil transportation have had negative impacts in a number of school districts.  How would you address this issue?

Districts may have special circumstances that cannot be overcome by adopting efficiencies, i.e. homeless student transportation.  Going back to cost reimbursement or allowing for supplemental funding should be done.

4.  Will you commit to working with NEA-Alaska and other groups in developing a long-range plan to supplement current funding levels and achieve adequate funding for schools within a decade?

Yes

Attracting & Retaining Quality Educators

1.   Fiscal uncertainty has caused many “new to the profession” educators to leave Alaskan school districts and even leave the state. What would you do to eliminate this annual event that has cost our state so many valuable educators?

The state should develop an educational endowment or other mechanism to provide adequate and consistent sources of funding.  The funding amounts need to come early enough to avoid lay-off notices.

2.  Would you work to amend state statute to make sure that district claims of financial shortfalls are verified by independent third parties when dealing with the layoff of tenured teachers?

No

Explain: Statutes layout the steps and criteria that need to be met.  The projected decreases in attendance and/or basic need should be verifiable locally and are part of the layoff plan.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act/No Child Left Behind (ESEA/NCLB)

1.  Would you support categorical funding so educators (teachers and instructional aides) can receive professional development to meet the standards set by ESEA/NCLB?

 

Yes

2.  What amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (No Child Left Behind) do you believe need to be made to make the law workable in Alaska?

Drop required bussing.  Develop alternatives for highly qualified secondary teachers in small rural schools.  Allow alternative methods to show student improvement, especially for special education.  Lessen the attendance threshold.

3. What are you willing to do in concert with NEA-Alaska and other organizations to amend No Child Left Behind to be “Alaska friendly” and to gain full funding of the Act?

I would work with our Congressional Delegation and other states' legislative bodies to pressure the President and Congress.  I have seen many of these issues firsthand.

High Stake Testing.

1.  This past year, some students did not receive diplomas for the sole reason they did not pass the High School Graduation Qualifying Examination (HSGQE.)  Would you support amending the law to allow schools to assess student knowledge and abilities through a variety of means and not just through a single test?

 

Yes

 

2.  Would you support funding for additional programs/staff to specifically assist students having difficulty passing the HSGQE?

 

Yes

 

3.   Would you support categorical funding for district-developed remedial programs for students who do not meet standards on Alaska’s benchmark exams?

 

No

PERS/TRS

1.  Would you support a single tier for each public retirement system as a means of attracting and retaining quality educators?

 

No

2.  How would you see the state’s public retirement systems meeting their increasing financial burden?

Health care costs hsould be closely monitored and savings negotiated whenever possible.  Investments need to perform better.  School Districts cannot continue to afford large contribution increases without state assistance.

Vouchers

1.  Do you support the use of public money for private and religious schools?

 

No

 

2.  Would you support vouchers?

 

No

 

3.  Would you support tuition tax credits

No

 

Safe Schools

 

1.  Students and staff must feel safe and secure in our schools for learning to take place.  Would you support funding for programs/staff that have been demonstrated to increase student and staff safety?

 

Yes

Explain: Many effective programs have been developed that need to be more widely disseminated.  Besides staff training, tailoring them to individual schools requires additional staff time and community involvement.

 

Return to candidate list

Note: …. indicates the response has been truncated.