1.1 .................... moves to amend H. F. No. 988 as follows:
1.2Delete everything after the enacting clause and insert:
1.3 "Section 1.
ADVISORY TASK FORCE ON SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY
1.4STANDARDS.
1.5 Subdivision 1. Advisory task force established. An advisory task force on school
1.6technology standards is established to develop and recommend to the commissioner of
1.7education and the education policy and finance committees of the legislature school
1.8technology standards and systems. At a minimum, the advisory task force must propose:
1.9 (1) minimum standards for technology infrastructure and capacity;
1.10 (2) standards for local and state online student assessments;
1.11 (3) standards for electronic student records;
1.12 (4) school interoperability frameworks;
1.13 (5) policies and procedures that ensure instructional resource availability to help
1.14students successfully achieve education excellence and state standards;
1.15 (6) databases that are accessible to and within each district and on the Internet;
1.16 (7) policies, procedures, and systems that stimulate and promote teacher and student
1.17curriculum and learning collaboration;
1.18 (8) uniform technology standards;
1.19 (9) adequate Internet and bandwith capacity; and
1.20 (10) the Department of Education data collection procedures under each of the
1.21department's major data reporting systems, and recommendations for streamlining the
1.22reporting of school district data and eliminating duplication.
1.23 Subd. 2. Advisory task force members. (a) The commissioner of education shall
1.24appoint as members to the advisory task force a representative from each of the following:
1.25 (1) one member from the Department of Education who shall serve as chair;
1.26 (2) one member from the Office of Enterprise Technology;
2.1 (3) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.2commissioner by Education Minnesota;
2.3 (4) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.4commissioner by the Minnesota School Boards Association;
2.5 (5) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.6commissioner by the Association of Metropolitan School Districts;
2.7 (6) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.8commissioner by the Minnesota Rural Education Association;
2.9 (7) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.10commissioner by the Schools for Equity in Education;
2.11 (8) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.12commissioner by the service cooperatives;
2.13 (9) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.14commissioner by the Minnesota Association of School Administrators;
2.15 (10) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.16commissioner by Minnesota Educational Media Organization;
2.17 (11) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.18commission by the Minnesota State Colleges and Universities; and
2.19 (12) one member from a list of school technology experts submitted to the
2.20commissioner by the president of the University of Minnesota.
2.21 (b) The commissioner of education shall provide needed materials and assistance to
2.22the task force upon request.
2.23 (c) Advisory task force members' terms and other task force matters are subject to
2.24Minnesota Statutes, section 15.059. The advisory task force must submit by February 15,
2.252008, to the commissioner of education and the education policy and finance committees
2.26of the legislature a written report that includes the recommendations under subdivision 1.
2.27 (d) The advisory task force expires on February 16, 2008.
2.28EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective the day following final enactment.
2.29 Sec. 2.
SCHOOL TECHNOLOGY GRANTS.
2.30 Subdivision 1. Establishment; eligibility. A school technology grant program is
2.31established to assist school districts, consortiums of school districts, and charter schools
2.32to achieve the school technology standards adopted in rule under section 4. Interested
2.33districts and charter schools must submit to the education commissioner a locally approved
2.34technology plan that describes how the district or charter school will meet the school
2.35technology standards. The commissioner shall develop a competitive process to award
3.1grants under this section. Districts and charter schools must indicate to the commissioner
3.2how they will use the grant funds to support the school technology standards to achieve
3.3the following outcomes in the following order:
3.4 (1) realize minimum statewide standards of technology infrastructure and capacity;
3.5 (2) incorporate school technology standards within the district curriculum and
3.6provide for the professional development needed for the effective instruction of those
3.7standards;
3.8 (3) develop data-driven decision-making models in the classroom, school, and
3.9district; and
3.10 (4) foster innovation in student learning and teacher professional development.
3.11 Subd. 2. Application and review process; funding priority. Interested districts
3.12and charter schools may apply to the commissioner, in the form and manner the
3.13commissioner determines, for competitive funding to achieve the school technology
3.14standards. The application must identify, through a commonly used technology audit
3.15process that indicates the applicant's current technology capabilities, the disparity between
3.16the applicant's current technology infrastructure and capacity and the minimum statewide
3.17of technology infrastructure and capacity. The application must detail the specific efforts
3.18the applicant intends to undertake to achieve the outcomes under subdivision 1 and
3.19the applicant's ability to realize and prioritize those outcomes, and a proposed budget
3.20detailing the applicant's current and proposed technology expenditures. Administrative
3.21expenditures must not exceed five percent of the proposed budget. The commissioner may
3.22require an applicant to provide additional information. When reviewing applications,
3.23the commissioner must determine whether the applicant satisfied the requirements in
3.24this subdivision and subdivision 1. The commissioner may give funding priority to an
3.25otherwise qualified applicant that demonstrates:
3.26 (1) previous attempts through district referenda or other funding mechanisms to
3.27increase its technology infrastructure and capacity;
3.28 (2) an effective plan to close the disparity between the applicant's current technology
3.29infrastructure and capabilities and the minimum statewide standards of technology
3.30infrastructure and capacity adopted by the commissioner under section 4;
3.31 (3) previous efforts to participate in online field testing of statewide assessments; or
3.32 (4) an ability to effectively involve local business and community organizations in
3.33improving collaboration, curriculum, and learning for teachers and students.
3.34 Subd. 3. Application review; grant awards. The commissioner shall award
3.35grants to qualified applicants that meet the requirements of subdivisions 1 and 2. The
3.36commissioner may award grants as funding allows and must distribute the grant awards
4.1on an equitable geographical basis, to the extent feasible. The commissioner must base
4.2the amount of the grant award on the number of students in the participating district or
4.3charter school. Grantees' expenditures of the grant funds must be consistent with the
4.4budget information the grantee periodically submits to the commissioner, the components
4.5in subdivision 1, and the content of its grant application. The commissioner may spend up
4.6to one percent of the appropriation to administer the program.
4.7 Subd. 4. Annual reports. Each grantee must demonstrate, measure, and report
4.8to the commissioner at the end of the grant period on the extent to which it achieved
4.9the goals stated in its grant application and consistent with school technology standards
4.10adopted in rule. The commissioner must make summary program data about the program
4.11available to the education policy and finance committees of the legislature by February 15,
4.122010. Each grantee annually must report to the commissioner its actual expenditures for
4.13school technology funding consistent with the uniform financial accounting and reporting
4.14standards. The report must demonstrate that the grantee maintained its effort from other
4.15funding sources for technology and capacity compared with the previous fiscal year, and
4.16the grantee has expended all grant funds, consistent with its approved budget.
4.17EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective for fiscal year 2009.
4.18 Sec. 3.
ONLINE LEARNING EXPANSION GRANTS.
4.19 Subdivision 1. Outcomes. General framework outcomes for expanding online
4.20learning in education, consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 124D.095, include:
4.21 (1) providing grant funding to encourage expansion of and access to online learning
4.22opportunities for Minnesota students;
4.23 (2) expanding academic opportunities, increasing graduation rates, increasing college
4.24eligibility and preparedness, and providing online resources for student remediation;
4.25 (3) increasing the number of students successfully completing online courses; and
4.26 (4) developing innovative online courses and programs.
4.27 Subd. 2. Establishment; eligibility. To promote the outcomes of subdivision 1, a
4.28program is established for school districts, charter schools, consortiums of school districts,
4.29intermediate school districts, service cooperatives, and higher education institutions to
4.30develop and expand online learning courses and programs. The commissioner shall
4.31develop a competitive process for awarding grants. Interested entities must apply to
4.32the education commissioner to develop or expand online courses or programs in one
4.33or more of the following areas:
4.34 (1) dual high school and postsecondary education credit;
4.35 (2) science, technology, engineering, and math fields;
5.1 (3) preadvanced placement, advanced placement, or international baccalaureate; or
5.2 (4) student remediation efforts.
5.3 Subd. 3. Application and review process; funding priority. Eligible entities
5.4may apply to the commissioner, in the form and manner the commissioner determines,
5.5for competitive funding to achieve the grant program goals. The application must detail
5.6the specific efforts the applicant intends to undertake to achieve the outcomes of this
5.7section and include a budget detailing the applicant's current and proposed expenditures.
5.8The proposed budget must demonstrate the applicant's ability to realize the components
5.9of subdivisions 1 and 2. Administrative expenditures must not exceed five percent of
5.10the proposed budget. The commissioner may require an applicant to provide additional
5.11information. When reviewing applications, the commissioner must determine whether the
5.12applicant satisfied the requirements in this subdivision and subdivisions 1 and 2.
5.13 Subd. 4. Application review; grant awards. The commissioner shall award
5.14grants to qualified applicants that meet the requirements of subdivisions 1 and 2. The
5.15commissioner may award grants as funding allows and must distribute the grant awards
5.16on an equitable geographical basis, to the extent feasible. The commissioner must
5.17base the amount of the grant award on the number of participating students. Grantees'
5.18expenditures of the grant funds must be consistent with budget information the grantee
5.19periodically submits to the commissioner, the outcomes in subdivision 1, and the content
5.20of the application. The commissioner may spend up to one percent of the appropriation to
5.21administer the program.
5.22 Subd. 5. Annual reports. Each grantee must demonstrate, measure, and report to
5.23the commissioner at the end of the grant period on the extent to which it achieved the
5.24goals stated in its application and consistent with school technology standards adopted in
5.25rule. The commissioner must make summary program data about the program available
5.26to the education policy and finance committees of the legislature by February 15, 2010.
5.27Each grantee annually must report to the commissioner its actual expenditures for school
5.28technology funding consistent with the uniform financial accounting and reporting
5.29standards. The report must demonstrate that the grantee maintained its effort from other
5.30funding sources for technology and capacity compared with the previous fiscal year, and
5.31the grantee has expended all grant funds, consistent with its approved budget
5.32EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective for revenue for fiscal years 2008
5.33and 2009.
5.34 Sec. 4.
RULE MAKING AUTHORITY; COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION.
6.1 Consistent with Minnesota Statutes, section 127A.05, subdivision 4, and
6.2Minnesota Statutes, chapter 125B, and after carefully and thoroughly considering the
6.3recommendations for school technology standards and systems made by the advisory task
6.4force on school technology standards under section 1, the commissioner of education
6.5must adopt expedited rules under Minnesota Statutes, section 14.389, subdivision 5,
6.6to establish education and systems standards for using technology in education to help
6.7students achieve education excellence and state standards and support and promote
6.8student and teacher learning.
6.9EFFECTIVE DATE.This section is effective immediately but the education
6.10commissioner must not finally adopt the expedited rules before April 15, 2008.
6.11 Sec. 5.
APPROPRIATIONS.
6.12 Subdivision 1. Department of Education. The sums indicated in this section are
6.13appropriated from the general fund to the Department of Education for the fiscal years
6.14designated.
6.15 Subd. 2. School technology grants. For school technology grants under section 2:
6.16
|
|
$
|
60,000,000
|
.....
|
2009
|
6.17 This is a onetime appropriation.
6.18 Subd. 3. Online learning grants. For online learning grants under section 3:
6.19 Any funds unexpended in fiscal year 2008 do not cancel and are available in fiscal
6.20year 2009.
6.21
|
|
$
|
2,500,000
|
.....
|
2008
|
6.22
|
|
$
|
2,500,000
|
.....
|
2009
|
6.23 This is a onetime appropriation.
6.24 Subd. 4. Per pupil technology. (a) For per pupil technology funding consistent
6.25with commissioner of education approved district technology plans:
6.26
|
|
$
|
40,000,000
|
.....
|
2009
|
6.27 (b) The commissioner must calculate a per pupil technology allowance by dividing
6.28the appropriation in paragraph (a) by the total number of adjusted marginal cost pupil units
6.29for fiscal year 2009 and award each district an amount equal to that allowance times each
6.30district's adjusted marginal cost pupil units for that year.
6.31 (c) This is a onetime appropriation.
6.32 Subd. 5. Advisory task force expenses. For expenses of the advisory task force
6.33under section 1:
7.2 This is a onetime appropriation.
7.3 Subd. 6. Rule making. For adopting rules establishing school technology standards
7.4and systems under section 4:
7.6 This is a onetime appropriation."
7.7Delete the title and insert:
7.9relating to education finance; creating a unified technology funding stream;
7.10developing a school district technology plan; establishing an advisory task force;
7.11authorizing technology grants; authorizing expedited rule making; appropriating
7.12money."