Senate Standing Committee on Education

Good afternoon. I'm calling to order the Senate Education Committee. Today is Monday, March 30. We are in Room 229, and this meeting is being streamed live. And if there's any technical difficulties and we cannot continue this meeting, we will reconvene on Wednesday, April 1 at 1:00PM in Room 229.

You testifiers have a one minute limit, and we are we can call you back for questions to extend your time. We do have a number. We have, what, eight eight members today that we are going to be confirming, and so time could be of the essence. Just for your information, the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board is comprised of 17 board members, eight of which is being considered for confirmation today.

The board does play a critical role in education licensure maintaining standards and addressing the state's ongoing teachers workforce challenges.

And as chair, I've sent each nominee questions several weeks ago, and all of their responses along with their resumes as as they submitted to me have been emailed to members of the committee on education. I know my very conscientious members have met with some of you today already before this meeting. Given the urgency of teacher shortages, reliance of emergency hires, and recent investments in teacher pipeline programs, this committee will focus on how nominees plan to ensure accountability, responsiveness, and innovation, and licensure and workforce development.

We have urged the members, up for confirmation to be here in person. We did make, arrangements for Zoom for a couple members who are not on island.

We have one in Texas, one on Molokai, and then we did have our first GM 658 saying they were not able to attend. So with that, we will go ahead and get started, beginning with GM 658 general nominee--I'm sorry--Gubernatorial Nominee Kristi Miyamae for a term to expire 06/30/2028. We did receive 18 testimonies. We have--let's see--15 in support.

Actually, 19 testimonies, 15 in support and three in opposition. So starting out with first item-- person testifying, Osa Tui from the Hawaii State Teachers Association.

Aloha, Chair Kidani. Not Kidani.

It's okay. I understand.

My apologies. Aloha, Chair Kim and--

Might happen.

--members of the committee. Osa Tui, president of the Hawaii State Teachers Association, testifying with strong comments on this nominee. We've been very disappointed in what the board has not been accomplishing, basically, over the past few years, and it is through the chair who has the authority, right, to make things happen, and we haven't been seeing things happening.

We know a lot of teachers have been trying to get-- trying very hard to get their licensure and have been denied those opportunities, teachers who are absolutely willing to do what they have to do. We've been trying to work on a registered teacher apprenticeship program, and we've been stymied as we've brought up a whole bunch of issues there as well. Three to five years, we've been going over that this session.

Just the fact that we'd rather get rid of the three-year people and start all over fresh and new, that's not effective, and so it is leadership at the top, and so that's why we have comments on this nominee. Mahalo.

Thank you very much. Next person testifying, Hope McKeen, in opposition. Aloha.

[Hawaiian] and I am in opposition to this appointee because of many of the issues that we're facing right now. I'm a Kaiapuni educator, have been for 20 years--20 years--have been for 20 years, and I'm actually one of the first teachers to get a teaching certificate, a teaching license, from the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board. And some historical context really quick.

When Kaiapuni first started, we all as kumu had to go through an English prep program because there was no others. And recently, some barriers have been put in place that have made Kaiapuni teachers have to switch mid-cycle doing their student teaching and change programs or move out of the classroom that they're emergency hire in, and it really-- this board has created these obstacles by misinterpreting rules that-- or creating rules to be put in place. Mahalo.

Thank you very much. Next is Shawna Nishimoto. Shawna?

Aloha. Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, members of the committee. My name is Shawna Nishimoto. I am a 7th grade science teacher at 'Ilima Intermediate, and I stand in full opposition to the confirmation of Kristi Miyamae to the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board. For four years, I've been teaching in Hawaii's public schools, specifically at 'Ilima Intermediate.

I've been evaluated by school administrators every year under the Educator Evaluation System. I've been rated proficient or higher every year, distinguished, which is the highest possible rating for the past two years. I have completed all requirements for my license. During Covid, the Hawaii Teacher Standards Board put out a proclamation allowing students to complete their student teaching before passing their content area practice. There was no deadline stated.

I followed that guidance. It took me a while, but I passed my practice in October of 2025 and should have been issued-- licensed in November. Instead, I was denied and told my work was out of order. The Hawaii Department of Education has also written a letter stating that I should be given full licensure. Thank you.

Thank you, Shawna. Wendy Akioka. Aloha.

[Hawaiian] I'm a Kaiapuni at Pu'ohala Elementary on the windward side, and I'm here in opposition of this appointment, and it's mainly because we've had so many people reach out to our committee, and they're usually Hawaiian educators--because I'm the chair of the Hawaiian Education Committee--and talk about the barriers that are in place for changes in licensure policies and rules, and especially with a certain pathway with a particular college that's giving a lot of help and scholarship and free classes; that pathway is really being choked out.

So when we're talking about innovation and supporting new teachers to come into the field, I really question the position of the board if they're choking the pathways that are helping students who don't have money actually become teachers. And I understand that the board is looking for a high-quality licensure procedure, but there has to be other ways, because if somebody's innovative and giving people money to go to school and be a teacher, why would we kill that? Thank you.

Thank you very much. Okay. We have Amanda Lacar, in support. Amanda? They didn't sign up, so all of these people I'm gonna read next is in support, but none of them signed up, but I will ask if anybody wants to testify. So Kimberly O, Kiku Catania, Lynn Yoshioka, Angie Smith, Leila Kambonga, Elwin Watkins, Stephanie Pacheco, Christopher Justo, Cara Dote, Sherilyn Pang, Lia Baltero, Sandra Yap, Stephanie Kirk, and Carlton Ho, all in support. Anyone here wishing to testify that hasn't signed up? Please go for it.

Aloha, Chair. Sarah Milianta-Laffin, on behalf of myself, coming to speak in opposition. So you've heard from the testifiers today. I have the privilege of teaching with Shawna Nishimoto, and she's one of the best aina-based science leaders I've ever seen, and she deserves to have a license. And seeing-- the other thing I wanted to bring-- and they've said everything, but I think it's important to mention there is a fear about what will happen if you speak truth to power that there'll be retaliation against you.

And as the HSTA's teacher lobbyist, I will say, I understand that, because when I come to this committee and I tell you our stories, there are a lot of teachers who are afraid to speak up, and if there's a culture put in where there's fear of speaking up to say what they're going through, what they've experienced, that's a bigger picture of what the board looks like at this time.

So I just think it's really, really important, especially this HTSB controls the future of our profession, and so we need to make sure we're being mindful and that people are comfortable really telling it like it is and what's going on. Thank you.

Anyone else wishing to testify on this item? Members, we don't normally question those that come in, but because there are many in opposition, I am going to ask a couple questions of those, and if any of you feel comfortable in answering it, if you can come forward?

Any of these issues that you pose, have that been communicated with the Hawaii Teacher Standard Board? So anybody feel comfortable wanna come up and respond? Yeah, I just wanna make sure that, you know, what you folks are telling us, these are things that might have been also told to the board or not, and they're unaware of it.

Correct. Again, Hope McKeen from Waiakamilo, Hawaii. Yes. So we did write testimony at the Board of Education with concerns to Hawaii Teachers Standards Board on the kaiapuni track and the barriers that were getting put in place. We also submitted testimony to their March meeting or January meeting.

I think one of them got canceled, but we did submit testimony. So they're aware that these conversations were happening, and our HSTA rep that's on the HTSB Hawaiian Ed Work Group, we've communicated with her and she did attend the meeting that was finally called, I think, in December or January. Yes.

And has there been any kind of formal responses to these?

No, no formal response. I know they were supposed to have-- they had a meeting, the work group-- Hawaiian Ed Work Group was supposed to have a meeting to submit their own language, but because of the weather, that meeting had gotten canceled. But I will say--I did forget to say earlier--that many of the Hawaiian Ed people did not--of the Hawaiian Ed community--didn't wanna submit testimony in opposition in fear of retaliation. So I said, well, I'll do it and be here to speak for them.

Okay. I hate to put you on a spot, but I will, or anyone else. Now it is a board. So is it the whole board that is or-- I know you're speaking in opposition to one individual. So why? I mean, I just wanna be fair to--

I-- so for me, the reason why I always go for the leader is because I come from the va'a mindset, and va'a mindset is if things are not going right on your committee, the chair is-- that that person, the captain, the chair is responsible for that. And so if they can't manage it, then something is not being managed well, and that's why I step forward for this one.

Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. There are no further testimonies. We're going to ask the nominee, Kristi Miyamae, and she is on Zoom with us. And, Kristi, would you like to begin with opening remarks, and then we'll open it to questions by the members?

Sure. I've been a chair for the past year and a half. We've been working really hard. When I-- when you look at the revised statutes of what we need to do when we're talking about licensing, we have licensed, you know, all of the-- all of the applicants that have applied. We're supposed to do review of a 120 applicants.

We actually review all of them, any applicant that comes through, so we have 20,000 licenses in Hawaii. We look at what we're supposed to do. Part of our mission also is to do reviews with the EPPs, the educator prep programs, so we've been working as well with the educator prep programs.

So when we're talking about-- I would like to address some of the issues that people are bringing up. When they talk about the Hawaiian-- what's going on with the Hawaiian Work Group, we've actually had multiple meetings with the Hawaii work groups to get input from them in terms of their recommendation for the standards. So that was supposed to be on the March meeting that got postponed. So we have the recommendations from them. We go to them as content experts.

We-- you know, obviously, our board is not knowledgeable about Hawaiian studies, so we do go to them. We have, I believe, over 20 participants on that, as HSTA is also a part of. We do have a HSTA member on there, so I'm a little confused when people are questioning why we're not doing well. We've had multiple meetings.

We've also had other work study groups with the CTE, the Career and Tech Ed, so we've really refined a lot of that in terms of the standards that they need to do. So we've put a lot of the-- we've put a lot of things in place to make sure that we're doing what we need to when we talk about standards.

For the teacher apprenticeship, we just-- I was just at a conference where, you know, they were talking about Texas, and I know that was one of the states where they're using a lot of emergency hires, and they lowered the bar. Five years ago, they decided to lower the bar and just say, okay, non-certified teachers; we'll open it up to teachers.

At that point, they had a little over 12,000 emergency hires. Now they have over 42,000 emergency hires. So what they're trying to do, they just passed legislation now to try to put it back because they have students that--as we're doing these emergency hires--they now have students that have gone through their whole elementary-- their elementary years with a non-certified teacher. So those are the things that we get concerned about.

So, you know, looking forward, we're not looking and saying, hey, you know, we don't want to extend-- and we're not trying to lower standards in order-- and we're not trying to set the standards so high that we're not allowing people to come in. We're just saying, hey, we need to do things to make sure that if there are going to be emergency hires, let's get things in place for them. Similar to, like, how teachers-- we have standards for students, we don't say, hey, okay, they can't meet it.

Let's just lower the bar. We put in interventions to make sure that they can be successful. So that's what we are looking at doing as well. So things like, again, when you're talking about interventions, we're looking at things to help them be successful. I know we talked to Passages, which is a program, and this is something that, again, where it would help them with test prep.

We're looking at things in terms of making sure that we get information to make sure that they're continuing on the path to get licensed. So there's certain things that we can put in place to help them to be more successful, and that, I think, is what we need to do, not just lower standards.

Okay. Thank you. I'm gonna open up to questions, but before I do that, I just wanna follow it up on the one thing that you did say, that you did meet and talk with Hawaiian work groups. Can you specify when those meetings were or recently?

We just had them meet again, I believe, in February to go over because there-- we had some questions about-- they had provided us with the standards that they had wanted. So we said we just had some questions and <inaudible> clarify. So we asked them to go back and meet as a group. So we allowed them to go back and then to clarify those. So those were on the-- we have a new business item from them for the recommendations that was set up for our March meeting, which--

So when you say we--

--got canceled.

We-- you physically met with them? You physically-- who physically met with them?

I wasn't able to be a part of that work group.

So who did? Who was part of the work group from the Teacher Standards Board?

So we had our staff-- we had two of our licensing specialists meet with the work group so that we could get clarification. So the board had asked for-- the board had asked for clarification on the standards, so we had a--

And how-- and how many meetings did you have on that?

For the work group?

Yes.

I believe maybe three or four meetings that they had.

Recently or--

But I'm not positive. So it was within the past year.

Within this year?

The past year.

Last year?

So part of last year--

--into-- yes. 2025-2026, yes.

2025?

Okay. Thank you. Members, questions? Senator Hashimoto.

Let me just follow up on that. So, didn't you have a board meeting in January, though, when a lot of these people came out? And what was that recommendation that the HTSB was reviewing, though, that-- a lot of this testimony that I'm looking at from the January meeting, they were very upset about that. Why were they upset?

The Hawaiian Work Group?

No, about-- the topic of the Hawaiian program was on your January meeting, was it not?

So we had-- well, no. The-- what they were talking about was when they had come out with the standards, it was a new business item that had come out. So we had some questions about it. Correct. So then we asked and we said, okay. Let's clarify--

But how did you get to that point? How did you get to that new business item, though? Did you ask the community before you brought it up?

To create a work study group to get input?

When you brought up the new business item, right, which it was 25-22 to the board, right--that's the concerns that everyone's bringing up--how was that created to bring up to the board?

No.

I'm sorry.

As far as issues that have been coming up with the work study, we didn't--that was just something that was on our list of tasks to do in terms of the study for the Hawaiian Work Group.

No, we're talking about Hawaii-- the Hawaiian education.

So we had-- well, we had OHE come out. So they did their presentation for-- we had OHE come out and they did their presentation for our board. They also-- I believe they presented to the Board of Ed, but since last year, we were trying to spearhead to make sure that they had their recommendations for their permit since it is a possible 10-year emergency permit.

So that's why we had set it up to make sure, because that was one of the tasks that we were set up to do. So in terms of-- we had heard that there was a-- HSTA also had a Hawaiian work group, so we had asked-- we-- I asked-- I had asked what theirs was about to see if we could mesh ours, but then they had said that we-- that they had representation on our work group.

So that was fine. So, I was like, okay. So then they could relay what was going on with our work group. So I'm not sure where the pushback is coming from because HSTA, they do have a member on our work group, and--

Well, I was told that whatever you came up with at that January meeting was just-- you know, they felt that it was just, you weren't listening to the stakeholders. So I'm just trying to understand, how did you come up with anything that you discussed at that January meeting?

So there were a lot of questions because there were different stakeholders on the Hawaiian group where they were having a hard time coming to consensus. So what we said was, okay, you know what? We thought-- we had put in some language in terms of, like, the NC-SARA as well, which is a federal guidelines that we need to follow, and we just wanted to make sure that everything was in place.

So at the time when all these conversations were going on and groups couldn't-- they couldn't come to consensus, we pulled the NBI and said, okay, let's have them go back so that they can talk about it because we want it to be robust--

So then, why didn't you do that--

--meeting coming from their board.

--before bringing that up to the board?

I'm sorry?

Why didn't you do that before bringing it up to the board?

Have conversations? We did. We thought that the language was exactly how they wanted, but when we found out it wasn't, that's when we said, okay, we'll defer it and have them go back.

Yeah, but how-- if you were talking to them and then they came to the board and they said that, you know, they don't like it, that means you're not talking with them. Isn't that correct?

The turnaround time from when the conversations were going, because the NBI was there, if it was just minor changes, we could have done that just at the meeting, but because there was a lot of conversation about it, then we said, okay, not a problem. We'll bring them and we'll reconvene them. So that's what we did. So we we wanted to give them their voice, so that's why we deferred that NBI. So we listen to them.

My bottom line-- my bottom line question--

We did listen to them.

--is why did you have to let it get to that? Shouldn't you have done your homework before you bring it up before the board?

We had talked to them and they had that language.

I understand, but why did they come to the board and they were upset about it? It doesn't make any sense that you say you talked to them, and then at at the end, then they were still upset about it. It just doesn't make any sense.

So there are certain things in there that-- I guess, that they didn't-- when we had talked about it, it was an agreement, so we had put it in, and they didn't like the way that it was written, so that's why we went back and said, okay, you come up with the language and provide it to us.

Okay. And I guess that's my whole concern is, if you talk about collaboration, as I said, why didn't you get that sign-off before bringing it to the board? It just sounds like, to me, there's a pattern of, you know, no collaboration between all the stakeholders, and because they came out in force in January, that is why you probably had to go back, right?

I'm look-- I read the testimony at that January meeting, and I was deeply concerned about the things that they were saying. And if you don't recognize that you didn't do the collaboration that you needed, I am deeply concerned about that.

I'm a little confused because, again, we've given them-- again, we've had multiple meetings to go about it. So at the point where-- you know, when we have-- and we have the discussions and then we put down what we feel-- you know, again, what we felt was what they were stating, and if it wasn't exactly how they had wanted it, so we said, okay, we'll correct this.

So has it been corrected?

That's why we had sent the work bit back.

Has it been corrected?

Yes. They gave us the language. Yes.

And you folks voted on it and passed?

The work group-- it's gonna come up on the April.

Senator DeCorte?

Okay. I hate to belabor this topic, but it's very important to my community that I keep the Kaiapuni discussion alive, and so, the board has made significant policy changes impacting Kaiapuni teachers, and without meaningful discussion, and without taking the information from the stakeholders and applying it, because right now, Hawaiian immersion is very much growing, at least in my community, it is, and so what we're finding is that the board is creating barriers instead of building workforces.

So you had said in your opening remarks that you're about to bring the discussion--well, I guess it was for March, but it got deferred until April--but instead of halting any decisions, you guys are already making policy changes on it. So how can you say that you're collaborating collectively with stakeholders when you're already making the decisions? And, again, I hate to belabor it, but I need you to be direct in answering these questions. Why did you make significant policy changes without including the collective voices of the stakeholders?

So when we have the NBIs, we come together and we take what we hear from the stakeholders, and we had put it and we listed it into the NBI. If they you know, when we found out that they weren't they wanted to revise the way that the language was written, that's when we said, okay. Wait. We'll stop because, again, we wanted to give them that input. We do see the importance of it.

And there's also when we're hearing from other so I talked to other teachers as well, and there were certain concerns when it came to the language versus knowing pedagogy as well. So we wanted to make sure that it was really clear and that they had the standards in place too. So that's why I asked to go back as well to make sure, okay. What is it that you want when we're talking about about the knowledge of language, about being able to speak?

Because it's hard enough to be able to teach.

But when you want the add the layer of teaching in a different language, and we wanted to make sure that we were clear from the Kaiapuri programs. What do you want from that when you're looking at educator prep programs? You know, and, again, shortage put aside. Do you want to make sure that, the language is in place, that they have certain things in place, prior to moving on?

And, you know, when we're looking at even reviewing, educator prep programs, for the Hawaiian, How important is it for the Hawaiian to be a piece in there to make sure that how many, you know, how much experience do they have with the teaching, with the language, with the pedagogy so that it is a nice robust program.

So that's why also we we had to ask those questions. We wanted your guidance.

Including, the recommendations from this working group, but you're making significant policy changes. And we're trying to bring stakeholders, the experts, to the table to impose and implement these, standards. But it seems like the board is doing everything but what the working group is asking them to do.

And so I I I again, I don't wanna belabor this, but you have to know that this is very top of mind for me and my community, and we don't need more barriers in a Hawaiian immersion program that is thriving in my community. Chair, at the appropriate time, I would like to pivot to maybe the praxis.

Okay. Senator Fukunaga, no. Okay. Let me let me ask. I wanna pivot to any more questions on this one?

Okay. I Christy, are you familiar with the apprenticeship grant that the board

Yes.

Got? Okay. And it was $4,900,000. Correct? Is that do I have that correct?

Yes.

And under that apprenticeship that was from 2024 and it ends in 2027. Is that correct?

That is correct.

So okay. So and but it hasn't been it hasn't been acted upon. Would you kinda share with us why why this is not been acted upon?

Sure. So we've been trying to when we heard what other states are doing in terms of the apprenticeship program, there's just a movement going on where I think we're, like, one of maybe, like, two other states that don't have an apprenticeship going on. So we've tried to reach out. We were we brought everybody to the table to see if anybody would take this on. And it was it seemed like nobody wanted to take it on.

We asked all the different stakeholders. So we said, okay. Let's write this grant. Let's be the ones to sponsor it. So we had sponsored it.

We put in for the application. We were able to get the money. Then we had gone to the table and we said, okay. We need to approve the standards first so that we can get the committee going. From there, it was with HGEA at the time because apprentices are educational assistants.

They would be under they would fall under a certain bargaining unit class. So we had brought HGEA to the table. And then HSTA said, you know, they wanted to be a part of this, so we invited them onto the we added them on to the to the list of people who would also be involved. And then from there, it turned into a we met a few times, and then it turned into a there were some bargaining collective bargaining things that had come up.

So at that point, bargaining is, you know, obviously, the DOE.

So then it became the DOE and the union that had to talk about some of these issues regarding bargaining. So, again, we kind of came to the table, but as a sponsor, we couldn't we're not the ones who can call the meeting. So it would be the DOE that would need to bring people to the table.

So at that point, we met again, and we thought we had come up with a solution in terms of, making sure that, the apprentices would be instead of having 450 hours and being a teacher of record, we said, okay, as an apprentice, they need to have stricter guidelines. So they would have 2,000.

We said, okay. For their, whole term, they would be a, not the teacher of record, but they would have a mentor with them for the whole 2,000 hours. And then at that point, we thought we were okay, and we thought that the contract would go through and that we were all on the same page. But then the union came back and and they said no. They wanted to negotiate.

They still felt that it was apprentices should fall under HSTA. And then there was the question about the mentoring. We were offering $4,000, but they wanted to negotiate that. So at that point, we there was no place else we could go. Yes.

Who wrote who wrote the grant?

The grant was it was the teacher standards board.

Anybody in particular that did the grant writing?

That would have been licensing specialist Mitsihika.

Okay. Does the grant identify mandatory partners?

So at that time, yes. We had listed who would be a partner in it. Yes. And then So like I said, HSTA wanted to be added on. So we said not a problem since it's the teaching union.

So we added them on. And then

So the grant the grant specifies a requirement that the HSTA be a partner on this?

Initially, they weren't because it was HGEA, but then we added them on. DOE had asked to add them on, so we did.

So as a mandatory partner on this, why weren't they why weren't they conferred with in the beginning? And one of the concerns that I'm aware of was the fact that they these apprentices would be under HGA, not HSTA. So apparently, was that not initially told to you folks? I mean,

That's how that's how when we had help from the national grow your own, so apprentices fall under, and we and we said this is the easiest because there's actually a pay scale for EAs. There's a EA, EA. I'm not sure what numbers they go up to. And then there's a TA, teacher assistant position, and that's what we were gonna be using, to have the apprentices actually get paid on the job. So they're not the teacher.

They're they're not a a teacher of record. They're actually an apprentice, but they would be paid under HGEA, the their contract.

Right. But Right. My question is that as a mandatory partner that they would be consulted and in the beginning, and as we see, this grant was from 2024. It's now 2026, and so all this time has gone by and $4,600,000 is no something to sneeze at. I mean, to me, that's great that we got this grant, but apparently, it's sitting there because you've not been able to get any kind of approval or agreement from not just HSTA, but also from the labor department.

So, I mean, it's great to get the grant, but go ahead.

The grant is it had to go through the Department of Labor. They're they're on board, so I'm not sure. At the point when we have

Have they signed the fund approval?

Well, they're waiting for the unions to sign off now because until they sign off, the department of labor is stuck as well. So we're stuck because now that HSTA has become a part of the community, they won't sign off. And we're just looking at standards right now. We can't even move forward with that. So at the time, when it was just HGEA, when it was just that, they were the apprentices to HGEA, everybody was on board.

Okay. So when were they when was HSTA put on as a mandatory partner?

This was, well, after we had gotten the grant. So

So in 2024?

2024 202- 2024-2025. Yeah.

Okay. So they were put on initially, and yet we you haven't been able to come to any kind of I mean, the way you said it was that, you know, you folks had come to an agreement, and then they came up with with another issue. But my understanding in that that's always been the first and foremost issue. No?

No. It was it was originally moving forward when it was HGEA.

No. When But then when

DOE invited so when DOE, when they asked when DOE asked and they brought in HSTA, that's when we started they had concerns and questions about it. So that's when we had then that's when we got stuck because then h HSTA said these apprentices need to be bargaining five. And then when we were going back and forth with these questions, we had met a few times with the with the department of of ed as well as with the lawyers. We brought, the department of labor was there.

So we had the we had the players there, but but then when H when it switched over and HSTA came on board, that's when this still needed and couldn't move forward because of their concerns.

And that was through

I understand. I understand. My my my question for so that the fact that they came in in either late 2024-2025 you've had all this time to be able to, try to get this resolved, and obviously not. And it's not that it came up at a last minute. It's been a point of contention for over a year or or longer, that concerns me that we that this grant is sitting there and that you folks might have not been able to get this resolved.

The fact that they're a mandatory partner, as you folks agreed to, that it would have to be be resolved. Right? Otherwise, this this thing ends in 2027 already, so we're gonna not be able to to institute this program or this grant.

So in terms of we sponsored it, but in terms of, again, the consulting confer process, that's not something that was in our hands. That was something that was in the department of Ed's hands. So we could only and we were actually asking weekly, what's going on? What's going on? What's going on?

We were trying to get meetings going. Okay. I had tried to reach

I'll bring up HSTA after we get done to get their their point of view on this. Senator Hashimoto, do you have further questions? I have others, but go ahead.

So so

I'm a I'm a little bit confused because, you know, just for context for the audience, you know, we I I I had a private meeting with with the chair and some of the other leadership of HTSB. You know, I think it was a pretty heated meeting because I think, you know, at the end of the day, my my district has the highest number of emergency hires, and we we have about, you know, a good chunk of J1 program members. You did follow-up with a letter.

Right? A lot of the letter, I will say you you you complained about my delivery and my tone.

But I will first, I would like to acknowledge that, you know, my district, it's we're facing regulatory cliff. And, you know, I think you explicitly also wrote in that letter putting us on the spot because I asked you, what are what are solutions to to really help with some of the teacher shortages that you have? And you wrote in your letter, putting us on the spot to produce a counter proposal for filling teacher shortages was inappropriate.

And then you stated this responsibility belongs to the Department of Education and not to the HTSB.

So it's number one, it's really confusing that you then did this, you know, apprenticeship program because you're you're saying that it's not HTSB. It's the DOE. Right? And so I don't know why you're getting into the middle of this if that's gonna be your take. And and number two, you know, how can we trust your role at HTSB when it sounds like there's a pattern of collaboration issues, not only on the apprenticeship program, but we're hearing about the Kai Pune program.

Right? We talked about the J1 visa program. So I'm I'm just really concerned about what is your solution. If you're saying, okay. You're gonna try something, but then it's not your responsibility.

What what what is your take on what is your responsibility and what is not?

So when we talk about, what our mission and goal is, when we're talking about quality educators, definitely that's important to us as well. And that's why when we, do the here, things that we can put in place to to build up our profession and to bring people on board, that's when we try to bring it up to all the different stakeholders. And we said, look. These are things that, are going around nationwide. Why aren't we doing these things?

Nobody wants to take it on, though. So at that point, that's when we said, let's try this because nobody else is coming up with any solutions, and nobody else wants to try this. Even if we bring in the

you know, like so for example, with the J1s, that's fine. But if DOE has other suggestions in terms of what else can we do, nobody's bringing anything to the table. And we're saying we have to turn to the people in our community. So that's when we looked at different ways on how we can bring bring in people from our community and how can we do this. Well, we know that cost is the issue.

So we said, wow. This is a great opportunity. And everybody you know, like I said, most of the states are on board, and they are filling their teaching positions. They're having, teacher apprenticeship is not something new. It's been around for at least five years, and they're starting to get the teachers that are qualified that are ready to go.

So that's why I think that's why we took it on. Nobody else wants

So it sounds like it it it sounds like HTSB does take responsibility, though, for for programming to fill those teacher roles then.

That's not one of our when you look at what our tasks are to do

Either you are or you're not. So either you are gonna be a part of it or you're not. And so I I'm confused by the the the statement that you gave to me that it is not your role. And so if if it's not your role, then that's not your role. Fine. Own it.

But if you're gonna be half in, half out, then we we it's it's hard for us to really understand where you're gonna go with this.

So as a leader, I would think it would be important for us to when you say half in, half out, we've been trying to do things. We've been bringing like I said, we've been bringing these ideas up. But if nobody's gonna take it on, that's when we said, okay. Let's just let's see if we can spearhead it.

Okay. So so let me ask you.

That's us being proactive? If that's you know, again, if that's not being proactive

Then why did you write

you then. Why did you write in your letter that it is inappropriate for you to for a counterproposal for filling the teacher's short at the that you said it was inappropriate, and you put that responsibility back on the DOE. So why did you put that in your letter if that's how you truly feel? If if you wanna be a part of the solution, I think that's great. But you said it's not a part of, of what you should be doing.

So when you came across to us and you were, pointing you know and, again, it's like you came off strong. Like, this is the intent of what the standards board is supposed to do. But when you look at all the things that we're doing as a standards board, you know, we're doing all we're bringing up up into compliance. We're making sure that everything is there so that, you know, again, we're trying to prevent lawsuits.

We're trying to make sure that everybody everything is in place so that we're protecting students.

That's what it comes down to as well. But when you talk about quality for students, is that part of our Kuleana? Of course, it is. Yes. By all means, because we want quality.

So when our board makes decisions to do certain things, you know, again, we're bringing it up because we want qualified teachers in the class. So is that important to us? Yes. That part is. But we can only do so much as you know, for standards, we're the we're the ones that are, you know, when you talk about where the last line of defense in terms of, protecting students and protecting our profession, then we're the last line of defense for them.

So when you talk about lowering standards, we're saying no. There's there's other things that can be done.

I I don't think anybody's talking about lowering standards

I just wanna be clear. Nobody's talking about lowering standards. I just wanna be clear about that because you also accuse me of that, just wanting warm bodies in the classroom. And I want you to be I wanna be absolutely clear that we're not talking about that. We're talking about trying to find collaborative solutions so that we can fill our classrooms.

bringing that to you.

Right? When we talk about collaborative solutions, it is it's talking about not only programs, it's talking about policies. Right? And and when we brought up the policies that are stymieing teacher prep education, you have a moratorium in place right now that you cannot allow new teacher prep programs, and you would not commit to getting rid of that moratorium because, you know, you feel that you have to go through review.

But I I told you, if you feel like you need to speed up that review process, you have to come to the legislature and ask for resources, but you would not commit to that.

So that's very concerning to me that from also from a very much policy perspective, you guys are unwilling to look at policies. We're not even talking about programs. We're talking about policies that the board can look at to figure out how can we, potentially for a short term, look at ways to get pathways to get teachers licensed. And that is what is frustrating.

And I would I wanna ask you, have you thought about what are those policies that you can really try and implement over the next couple of, you know, years while your time on the board?

So I'm glad you brought that up. Because with that moratorium, again, to try to be proactive, that moratorium is gonna be up at the end of the year. But right now, we have two programs. So I I had talked to our specialists. We only have a staff of we only have six specialists, and only one person does the ed prep programs to help to guide the reviews.

So with that, we already have two initial programs, and it's not something that we can just, turn around and just stamp approval. There's 15 standards that they have to go through to make sure that the program has everything in place. There's also Hawaii. There's certain things that are in our, requirements that the prep programs need to make sure that are in place. So with that, we have two.

We know that we have the the early ed that needs a lot of positions. So people have been bringing programs up for that. We also have seven that are different stages. So what we did in the meantime because you were asking about certain colleges that might wanna come in, we told them, okay.

We already met with some, and we explained the process of what they need to have in place so that when they come in, that we would be able to just go ahead and add them to that to that review.

But right now, we have we have nine going on right now, so we wouldn't be able to get to them until probably next

So my question is is then why do you have to have the moratorium then? Why don't you rescind that moratorium at your next board meeting?

We wouldn't be able to I mean, they can get the the process going.

Yeah. But why would you have a moratorium then if you can get the process going? Why don't you just get rid of it?

I can bring it up to the board.

Okay. Well, I think we would like to see some type of action on that because we at the last meeting, you Coulda you Coulda easily said that you would bring it up to the board, but you guys, you know, you you decided not to, you know, commit to that. And we were asking you, why do we still have that in place? And you say, okay. Continue.

It's gonna end at the end of the year, and you would you there was no process of of, you know, initial review. So it doesn't make sense if you're gonna initially review them but then have the moratorium in place, it it there's some disconnect there. Because I think what the problem is is it's a perception problem. The perception is that we don't want to help the teacher pipeline.

That's the perception that the HTSB is giving off right now, and I'm trying to help you with that perception problem.

I I appreciate that, but I just if I can too, if I can just explain why the reason why we had to have that moratorium up is because in the past, there were, EPPs that educator prep programs that, were not following the guidelines. It became it it was a legal issue, so the board had to address that. We were having candidates that were being placed in certain areas that, again, they needed to follow federal law, and that wasn't being done.

So we had to make sure we cleaned up that. There was a lot of issues that had come up where we needed to get the current EPPs so that everything was in compliance and in alignment so that we could prevent again some of the legal matters that that would have come up.

That had we had we had we kept going.

Well, can I understand that you you know, I I think my problem is that you should be able to do that while being able to review any potential new teacher pipeline programs that wanna come into the state? Right? That's what I told you, and I I will stand firm on that because I think you have to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. We are in a teacher crisis.

If you're going to be wanting to put up stonewalls, then that's the perception that you're gonna have that you're you're the stonewall group.

You're the gatekeeper for all these new teachers and that you're not trying to be collaborative. As I said before, it is not about lowering the standard. It is about being able to do a couple of things at once instead of being doing things linearly. We're we're in a crisis. But I think my concern is that the teacher standard board does not believe we're in a crisis and is not acting accordingly.

Well, it's difficult because when you have teachers when you have us in the meetings, when you have us, on a standards board, and I'm hearing my constituent when I hear, my teachers coming to me saying, oh, how come we're having issues with with these people? Why aren't they passing their practice? Why are we having to, you know, having to help these people out? And I said, wow. This is definitely a problem.

We're having people who right now, the support comes not just from, the mentors, which I know that that's one of the things they're trying to do, but it's the teams that have to. I work in a seventh grade setting. I'm having to go and I'm having to have, people coming to me saying, wow. I really need to support this person more because they don't have the training that they need.

They don't have there's things that they don't know how to do, and I'm having to help them.

When you put that onto a teacher's workload, that becomes a problem. So that's why where do we fix it? Well, we make sure we go back and we make sure that, again, that we're talking and we're discussing it with the EPPs to make sure that everything is in place and that that they have that that they know that what these concerns are that are coming up because it's us. It's us in the trenches that are starting to feel it.

So I hear my teachers. I hear the ones. I go out and I talk to people, and they're telling me about the the quality of the people that are coming into the classrooms. So when you say quality, yes, it does make a difference when you go through a very robust program.

And that's why when we don't have enough candidates within the the EPPs that we have right now, we're trying to help them as well to fill their programs up. So more doesn't necessarily mean that we're gonna get more candidates. We have right now part of our policy too is to do reciprocity. So when you talk about people who go through different programs in different states, they can come over.

We look at what they have, and if there's certain we look at their guidelines, and if it's we pretty much have reciprocity with with almost all the states, if I'm not mistaken.

Let me just follow-up on that, Kristi. So, you know, one of the things for me is that I understand and I certainly appreciate, the board and all they're doing to make sure that we have qualified teachers in the classrooms. But sometimes passing a test and just because you you're able to get your license doesn't necessarily mean that you're a a good teacher in the classroom. And, there is a lot of evidence of that.

And I've heard, just as you've heard from your people, I've heard a lot from the people that are saying that.

And so when you have someone, and I'm just gonna put on the spot, you know, Shauna here, who has gone through, has been student teach have been teaching and so forth, and yet come across where he he he she she has to go ahead and and redo student teaching.

You also brought up the fact that cost is an issue and you acknowledge that, and yet the cost to do this, the cost to take, again, to do student teaching because it was not taken in the right order or wasn't taken in the right subject matter and so forth, when they're already getting letters saying that they are qualified, they are doing they are doing the job in the classroom, yet you folks are still barriers for them to get their license. I mean, why is that?

I can understand the standards, but also you have to take into consideration these many of them are qualified and can do a really good job, and yet they're they're being, they have obstacles in their way, and they're not making they're losing money because they cannot go ahead and and and get hired because of this. So how do you respond to that?

So for you know, again, I don't know how much information I can state, but we were working with the EPP. That was an error. So we wanted to make sure that these things don't occur again. So we actually were working in conjunction with DOE To make sure and to see and to see if we could make sure that the process was we are moving forward in terms of to help to help out. Miss Nishimoto.

We were talking to, we have been in talks with DOE and EPP. Some of the things that were were the issue.

And I brought this issue up, and I have I did write to the board and asked to find out, get the information on what happened, what was the ruling, and why, Shauna did not get license on this.

And, I did get her approval to ask for this information, And yet the Then you guys came back and sent me a letter saying that you couldn't give me this information because it contains confidential information discussed in executive session, and that, you would need something in writing, from from Shauna to be able to release in information. I didn't ask for the entire file.

We just asked about the rulings by the board, and then the the response that you sent to Shauna Nishimoto, was very threatening in the sense that please realize by consenting to the release of information, you are consenting, all information can be shared with Senator Mercado Kim. And once the information is shared with Senator, the conf the confidential information will be considered public information which can be disseminated on YouTube and other social media platforms.

All information can also be shared openly during all legislative hearings and future board meetings. And I mean, it was very threatening in the sense that we didn't ask for all information, and you could've you could've checked to see, well, how much information will you want us to share? You know, you could've it could've been addressed that way, but it wasn't.

It was very, like, threatening, and so obviously I did not get that information, and I didn't really want that information, but I wanted to assist in making sure that we get teachers into the classroom and that the board is not throwing obstacles for the sake of throwing obstacles to insist that if you didn't take your your do your student teaching in a certain order, then you're not qualified to be in the classroom when that person is already teaching, is already in the classroom.

I'm not sure how

So we had reached out.

I'm not sure how When

we had reached out, I I

Would would assist in that. The cost and the time that it would take to redo student teaching, would would would make I just couldn't understand that, and I wanted to make sure that the board is acting in accordance to support support these teachers that we we desperately need in the classrooms.

The board is acting in accordance to support these teachers that we desperately need in the classrooms.

So when we when we spoke to and, again, we do have somebody who was part of the AG's office. So, I'm not you know, how the letter was written. I I think the intent was, to, again, to make sure that, you know, information that's shared in the executive session. There's you know, we wanted to give you the facts of what happened because there's always two sides to the story.

So if we were able to, you know, convey the conversations that we had, I think you would have understood a little bit more the direction that and why the board made the decision that they did.

But, you know, unfortunately, you know, if that letter sounded if it sounds threatening, that wasn't the intent. We had asked if we could share the information because, again, there there is sensitive information in there on her side. So we we honor that. We don't discuss it. But Right.

This was something that was definitely we we did give it a lot of conversation to it. There was a lot of information that you know, and a lot of different ideas that the board had talked about in in that session. So I think maybe that would have helped as well.

It could have been limited. It could have been you could have discussed it in that manner. And also the fact that as a legislator, you know, I get confidential things all the time, and I could be told this information would be confidential, and I would not spread it around or or release it to anybody. I mean, but those are not the options that appears in in the correspondence, to Shauna.

And it was it was it's it was troubling for me when I also read what you folks wrote to me about it.

It's like, you know, not allowing us, the legislative board, to be able to understand what was the actions of the board and if it's in keeping with what we want. The other the other area is on the moratorium. You talk about cost as an issue. And so in this in the case of counseling, we didn't have a program in Hawaii. And so teachers had or or people who wanted to be counselors had no other option to be able to get that program and get that training.

And so finally, Chaminade put the program together, but Chaminade is a private university and it's very expensive. And so that option was Spalding University, which I visited when I happened to be up on The Mainland, and, they're nationally accredited, they're affordable, and they're flexible.

I mean, they have all those options, and I'm not sure why in in those cases where Hawaii lacks having a program and lacks having an affordable program that's flexible that you folks would not consider this program, this EPP, to be to allow them. And so you're telling us the moratorium is going to the end of the year, and they have to wait even longer?

So currently well, like I said, we have one person who's putting together who does the the that helps to lead the program reviews. So when she has to put the panels together, we do have one right now through Manoa that they're putting through for their counseling program. So we're in the process of also reviewing theirs. And by that time, when we can, yes, then we'll definitely we can look at opening it up to any outside

Yeah. I'm sure if

you have any programs.

But we're talking about now and and in the last year, why that because I went to visit Spalding, what, a year ago? Maybe longer than a year ago that I went to visit Spald over a year. So I'm not sure how long it takes to look at individual ones that specifically show that we have a shortage in in Hawaii.

To give to give our teachers or our Those that want to go into counseling an opportunity to get that program and get it at an affordable rate and a flexible time that they can do it because we don't wanna take them out of the classroom because we need them in the classrooms as well. So I think those are areas of my concern.

How many teachers would you say that you have spoken to personally that are opposed to the out of state program?

When you say opposed to the out of state program, it's not that you're opposed to any programs. It's just that there's a lot of things that and it's not even the out of state ones as well. It's just issues that are coming through where we're talking about the quality of people coming through the programs. Because we know that, you know, again, when we look at sorry.

Let me just stop you right there. Okay. Okay. Because to be to put a moratorium over it, which is the point that I'm making, is so dramatic.

And, really, it closes off any option of any further discussion. You're putting a hold on everything for it to be a moratorium during, as my colleague had said, we are in a teacher shortage crisis. A crisis. This is as worse as our state has been with the lack of teachers in the classroom. And so right now, what you're doing is you're telling the teachers that are within this process that are coming up on their third year wanting to go into their fifth year, that, okay.

All of the work that you have done, we're just gonna negate it. We're gonna throw it out the door. Doesn't even matter. Maybe you can start all over again. And so right now, we have classrooms that have zero teachers in them.

They don't have a sub. They don't have a EA. They have absolutely nothing. So do you think it's better to have a teacher that's going through the process or no teacher at all?

So for the ones that are going through the process, if they need to if they come to us and they ask us there's things that we have in place so that we have issued fourth emergency hire permits. We do look at it case by case. So there is a process for doing that. When you ask us

My question is, do you prefer to have a teacher that is going through the process or no teacher at all?

Well, definitely somebody who's going through the process.

Okay. Well, when you put a moratorium on this program and you're not supporting to extend it for five years, what you're saying is that their third year, they're done. That's what you're saying.

And so now we're gonna be left again holding the bag with students having zero teacher, not having a sub now, nothing, as opposed to a teacher that's willing to spend the money, go through the programs, check off all the boxes that they're being told to check off, having to invest it and committed all this time, all these resources, all of these of their own money now of their own money. And so now we're telling them the three years that that's it.

That's all you get, where there are systematic issues that are that are out of their control. We're doing everything they're telling them we're telling them to do. And then at the end of that three years, we're saying, oh, we're just gonna pull the plug. Where I'm not necessarily sure if you understand the crisis that we're in. And it's very unfair to these teachers that are going through the process to tell them, okay.

Yeah. Thanks for everything, but, nah. No need. We're pulling the plug. And so, these teachers that are going through this program, at least in my community, which is very cultural, which is very close knit, that if the students grab on to you and they like you, we wanna keep you forever.

And so I would hate to see any of my teachers that are currently going through the process in my district have to leave because your guys' expectations and your guys' standards and your guys' rules and your guys' wish list is not being checked off the box. Because the fact of the matter is is that we are in a time right now where we have to make adjustments, and you guys are the only ones that are not adjusting. The legislature is adjusting. The teachers are adjusting. The parents are adjusting.

The students are adjusting. You guys are the only one that is not adjusting. And so I don't know where exactly and and I'm afraid to have you answer this question because I feel that you have been very indirect with my colleagues and on this committee. The fact that you're not here in person shows that you're really not taking this serious. I have people here in the room that are also here in person that have been nominated.

You are the chair, and you're not even here in person, which shows me that it's just not that important to you. Because what's when it's important, you show up, and you let everybody in the room know that you are taking this serious. So you not being here in person is not signaling to me that this is important for you. I'll just say that chair.

Okay. Members, I'm gonna say let's move on to the next nominee. We have a number of them waiting, but I did say I was gonna bring up HST to just comment on this grant. I think this grant is very important. I think it's important to be able to compensate our EAs or our teachers subbing or student teaching. So can you quickly?

You're asking specifically I'm sorry. Good afternoon, senators. I'm Andrea Eshelman. I'm the executive director at HSTA.

Yeah. Specifically on this ground, it makes it seem like HSTA is just being the being the stop gap in that.

So we have not been able to move forward because the plan sponsor is unwilling to recognize that once they become student teachers that they should be moved into our bargaining unit because they'd be doing teaching work. So they'd be preparing for delivering instruction assessment. They want to keep them in bargaining unit three, which is educational assistant, different type of work. And so we've been unable to move forward

in that And how long have you guys been arguing this point?

Months. I'd be more than happy to provide the consultation letters that have gone back and forth if the senators would find that useful.

Okay. Appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you, senators.

Okay. With that, we're going to move on. Thank you, Christie. And decision making will be at the end of the agenda. We are moving on to GM 657 submitting for consideration confirmation the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board gubernatorial nominee, Katina Soares for a term to expire sixthirtytwenty 28.

And, we have, Kitayashi from Department of DOE, testimony. Said in person, no one here. Okay. Anyone else wishing to testify on GM 657? Hearing none, Katina, welcome. If you wanna open with some remarks, you'd welcome new.

Sure. If you can hear me okay. I've had the honor and privilege of serving for about a term and a half. And it's really important to me to continue because I'm one of the few representatives from a neighbor island. I'm also from a Kaiapuni school remote area.

And I I think that it's really important that we are remembered in all of the strategies that we are using, including, teacher recruitment. And I think that, my knowledge and skills, from being from a remote community are really helpful to the board in considering, alternative ways that we fill our, teacher shortage and other areas that the board is responsible for. For me, growing our own because not everyone is going to move to Molokai.

And even the people that do come in from the outside tend to not stay. It takes a very special person, who loves Molokai to be there.

So, vetting our teachers and making sure that we have quality people in the classroom to serve our children is really important. And, as much as I want to fill the teacher shortage, at the same time, I want to make sure that we're balancing the, I like to say, not opening the floodgates, but also be a gatekeeper, keeping a balance there. I've seen on the opposite side, through investigations and things, how we've allowed some people to do harm to our students when they're not properly vetted.

So I think that it's really important that we find a balance in filling the shortage while also having high quality for our students that they deserve. Thank you.

Thank you. Why don't I go get started by saying that you have been hearing our questions and the concerns that has been raised, especially about the Kaiapuni program. You've heard from testifiers, their concerns. You have been serving on the board. And so what is your take on this based on what you've been not just today, but before your committee, before the board earlier in the year?

So I'll I'll just speak frankly because that is my committee. Two things. One is that if you ever work within the Kaiapuni community, you're not gonna get it's very rare that you get 100% agreement on anything. There's different dialects. There's different perspectives, if you will, on what Kaiapuni education should look like.

So it's really difficult to have everyone 100% on board. So I will I will just say that. The second part of it is that there were different people available at different times. My understanding of the previous conversations, there were collaborative conversations. And, the group that was present that agreed on it, thought it thought the statements were fine going forward.

And then when people who weren't present were, went back and read it, then they weren't comfortable with it. So that's when the opposition, was there. But recognizing the opposition, we asked that it was deferred and go back to to the work group. And I feel had we had the meeting, that was canceled due to the storm, we would have come to an agreement.

I think the the work groups work collaboratively, and I was actually able to meet with them, two representatives from the work group that were chosen around the language.

And I I feel like it would have moved forward and been fully supported by the Kaiapuni community.

Are you folks prohibited for calling emergency meetings? Something is so important. Is that you can call an emergency meeting. Right? I mean, you just gotta give notice.

I believe yeah. I'm not sure on the specific rules. I think we have to have, like, the, what is it called, like, a pig group? But I think the the work group is separate from our HTSD. So I was actually not part of the work group. I just spoke with them.

I'm talking about the teacher standard board because the meeting was, you said the meeting was canceled because of the weather, but you could have called an emergency meeting to take up some of those important issues that got deferred instead of waiting until the next meeting. Right?

Possibly. I wouldn't have been able to. I don't know if you saw with what's happened on Molokai lately, but we, you know, went without power and flooding. I would have not been able to participate in the meeting.

I understand. But there is that option to have that. And I'm just bringing that up because we are in a crisis, and we are in emergency. So we really want to do that. You know, it's one thing we're talking about Hawaiian standards and the working group, but I think what I've heard from from those that have testified and others is that it's the process of the licensing.

The process that the board is requiring some of these hoops that have to be jumped through that probably does not affect whether or not they're going to be, qualified in the classroom. So how do how do you respond to that?

I again, I think it's a balance. I know I spoke with a couple of you individually. It it depends on your, you know, your as an administrator, I take personal responsibility for my employees and my teachers. So I definitely take the extra time in making sure. Because I have I actually have a Kaiapuni teacher in this situation, has the permit and everything.

And so I do consult with with them myself, and it's me guiding them through go this way, do this. You know, these are your two options and making sure that they're following the process properly. Not everybody, has that support. So, or, you know, doesn't do their due diligence to read through all of the steps that are required.

So, I think that it's gonna require, again, more collaboration with with the schools and HTSB and the DOE to make sure that and the EPPs for sure that these teachers are being supported.

Not every principal has the time or the opportunity to meet with every potential candidate and make sure that they're on the right path. I have a small school. And like I said, you know, only so many people live on Molokai. So we wanna keep them and and train them and grow our own. So, I think it's my responsibility to make sure that they're successful and get through the qualification process.

Our colleague, Senator DeCoite, certainly advocates for to grow her own, especially for Molokai. So she's one of the advocates there. But in the sense of these individuals, having to go through some of these processes. You don't see any flaws in any of the processes that the board has been been following and and and been kind of kind of strict on that there's not any any need for you folks to review some of that at this point?

I think you'll see through the next meeting that whatever, flaws or course correction that needs to happen has happened and we'll do better moving forward. Again, I think part of the, there is sort of a change in philosophy around Kaiapuni education. I think, when it started and the permit was first introduced, it was all about going through Kaiapuni programs and, you know, learning the language and the pedagogy and all of that in, without lack of a better word, just, an immersive culture.

And now that the the need for more teachers is there, we have to expand those opportunities to include some English programs and allowing those who are able to speak to go through an English program and then add the license later. So I think there's been sort of, the the same thing, finding a shift in what's needed.

And then, you know, the ideal would be that all of the teachers will go through this this perspective and program that's deeply embedded in Kaiapuni education, but that's just not the reality. So we kind of had to broaden our what's what's allowed. And so I think that that shift has happened, and, it should be fine going forward.

Well, I'm glad I'm glad a shift is happening. I didn't necessarily mean it only for Kaiapuni. I meant it across the board that if there are obstacles that you've been hearing from the from your your potential licensees and so forth, potential teachers out there, and current ones, that you folks would be reviewing some of the processes in and the hoops that you're requiring them to to jump through. So I would hope that that is also part of that.

And if you could, provide us with some of these, shifts that it will be taking place, I'm sure the committee would appreciate that.

Thank you. Members? Senator DeCorte?

Thank you so much for being with us. You know, I thank you very much for your transparency. And I'll say this for you and for the other nominees that are about to come up on our agenda is please be as transparent as possible. We're really not looking for rubber stampers. We're looking for people that are going to not just challenge the system, but take a realistic approach and actually bring solutions and not criticize other programs or other methods or other ways.

This word crisis should be blaring in every educator classroom, faculty admin everywhere. And so I just wanted to say thank you very much for your transparency, and, I think we definitely need a shift, not just in membership, but also in leadership as well. So, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Thank you. Yes. Senator Hashimoto.

I guess one quick question for you. You know, I think you've heard a lot about our policy discussions in with the with the chair. What what is some of your thoughts on on tackling some of the policy shifts that need to happen? I know it sounds like at least in the Kaiapuni side that policy shift is happening. What about some of the other things?

I know we discussed some of the policy things that I'm concerned about. Do you do you think that the board is is gonna be expeditiously taking on some of these things knowing that the the urgency that we have here?

Yes. I I believe so. And I think that, there's been enough attention to it lately that, it has risen, you know, to the level of needs to be addressed, sooner than later. One of the the moratorium for one might be something that needs to be discussed sooner than later.

I do know that one of the concerns that people had was like felt like was a roadblock from the board was requiring like the and we adopted the, language from the NC Sarah, which is basically, like, the consumer protection.

And people felt like it was sort of putting up a roadblock or asking for more accountability, but, really, it was to make sure the things that I was saying that all of the people enrolling in these programs are are doing the due diligence, and the EPPs are doing their due diligence to notify them of exactly what programs will be accepted in our state and which ones aren't.

And so I think a lot of the shifts that, we're hoping to happen are actually happening in the background, and, you should be seeing some some changes over the next few months.

Okay. Thank you, chair.

Senator Fukunaga, any questions? Nope. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much.

We will move on to the next GM, GM 652, submitting for consideration and confirmation to the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board, gubernatorial nominee, Jonathan Guillatine, for a term to expire 6/30/2027, and I don't have anybody signed up to testify. Is there anyone here wanting to testify on this measure? If not, we're going to ask Jonathan to come forward, and we appreciate you being here in person. Thank you.

And I know...could not be here. So, thank you. So, you're welcome to make any remarks that you want.

Thank you. Aloha, Chair Mercado Kim and Vice Chair Hashimoto, members of the committee. It's important to have this opportunity for me to serve my community by representing them as a member of Hawaii Teachers Standards Board. I was impressed in both of my interviews about the call for collaboration. And I, as a teacher, I'm retired now, but as a teacher, I did gain a lot of experience in collaboration in terms of various things.

Facilitating professional development, joining with other teacher leaders and forging new initiatives, conducting and publishing research, advocating for teacher leadership and early childhood education in public media, and even shifting from a perspective of confrontation with a recalcitrant three-year-old in the classroom and figuring out a win-win. It was very satisfying to do that. And no, there's no one—I'm not calling anyone a three-year-old in this work that I do now. It's just occupational hazard from my days in the preschool classroom.

Collaboration serves us well as we seek to fulfill the work of teacher licensure. And I kind of did some research. UH College of Ed seeks to be a place of learning that sustains a collaborative community. Leeward Community College has a core value relating to collaboration. HSTA strives to collaborate with community to ensure quality public education for Hawaii's youth.

The Hawaii Department of Education mentions collaboration in its strategic plan. And, of course, Hawaii Teacher Standards Board, their mission is to collaboratively set high teacher licensing and credentialing standards. And so, it's my desire to bring my ability to collaborate to the context of the work of Hawaii Teachers Standards Board. Thank you.

Thank you. And we certainly appreciate your willingness to serve again, having served on this board many years ago. And, certainly, times have changed and things have changed. So, certainly, your background and your experiences can lend to this.

You've been, you've been serving during the interim, correct?

Yes.

For how long now? How many months have you been?

I think when I was excluded, the question you had about my attendance, April, the Director of Boards and Commissions said that I could be interim from that point until now.

Okay. So, that was what month again?

That was April.

April till now you've been attending the meetings. Okay.

Well, I skipped the April 1 and continued.

Okay. Understand. So, based on that, have you folks, have the board discussed openly the moratorium on the apprenticeship?

Yes. And I asked some questions.

I'm sorry, not the apprenticeship, but the moratorium on the EPPs.

Yes. I asked some questions about that. And what I learned was, just to be clear, this still allows initial state approved programs, or out of fields, to continue to submit. If they want to add something, they can do that. But what the board staff that has had the challenge of—I'm going to give five quick examples of things that they've kind of had to clean up.

One, Mainland Educator Preparation Program, I'll call them EPPs, declared bankruptcy. And so, we kinda had to scurry and scoop up all these teacher candidates who had nothing. They were, they were stuck helping them find an alternative program or another place so that they could, indeed, complete a program and get to the classroom. Secondly, there was an in-state program recommending numerous teacher candidates for licensure fields for which they did not have approval. So, in terms of an audit, internal audit, this became noted.

And it took a lot of time to sort out because they weren't really happy about the situation. Us saying, well, you're not approved for that. You know, when you submitted your documents originally, you said we're going to do these fields. And now, you're trying to put them through in these other licensure fields. Third, a mainland EPP was providing incorrect information to its candidates which meant they spent more time and money to complete the program that was unnecessary.

So, our staff had to sort that out, go through the data, interview the teacher candidates, and get some straight answers from the EPP. Fortunately, it did come out to a workable solution, but it took a lot of time. Fourth, in state EPP that had submitted a program for approvals, when we said we need course syllabus, we need some assessment information about the classes that you're offering in this program, they said, we respectfully decline, with no explanation.

To me, that's a prime example of someone not willing to collaborate when this is clearly, you know, we ask for things, similar to what they have to submit when they're being accredited.

And quite often, license across the mainland, licensing authorities in different contexts work with accrediting agencies to say, okay, yeah, we have to do this first to get them approved. And then as the years go by, they get reaccredited based on that same data. And finally, sometimes data from accreditation strategies don't match what is on file with us and so, that takes time to sort through and get cleared up.

And what I'm saying is here, all the time it took to fix these things, yes, could have been given to those out of state programs that are interested to come in, like you mentioned, Spalding, but because people are not being careful, I'll be polite, they're not being careful and so, we have to say, you know, this is what the expectation was that you agreed to.

And, but you're not fulfilling your part of the bargain. And so, let's fix this so we can move forward and not have these problems.

I certainly understand that, and I certainly understand that it takes a lot of time, and, and we do have bad actors, not just in this area, but throughout, throughout the state, in, in many different professions and stuff. But to then penalize everybody for some of the bad actors, like in the case of Spalding, did they not turn in the syllabus? Did they refuse to turn in information?

I, to my knowledge, Spalding hasn't made inquiry yet.

Because they were told there was a moratorium.

I, I don't know.

Yeah, that's my understanding.

So, that's, that's like the chicken and the egg. Right? Oh, well, they didn't apply. Or the teachers that got the degree, got their certification from Spalding, but were told, they said, oh, Felicia said, oh, that they, they didn't even apply.

Yes. That makes sense.

Well, they didn't apply because they were told they put in. Right? So, that, to me, that's disingenuous when you say, oh, they we didn't get any applications. Or how, how can they even put in when you're saying that you it's a...right?

So, they didn't even have the opportunity. But it concerns me that we're putting a...across the board and not even looking at those areas that we have shortages in, that we really maybe should consider a, a couple of them because, you know, excuse me, they're, they're, they're not all bad actors, and you are gonna have bad actors, no matter if you have more...or not. So, any next questions?

Yes.

Thank you. Thank you for being here in person. We always appreciate that. Thank you for making the time carving it out to be with us. I noticed on your resume that you have served on both HSTA and HTSB.

Yes. And so you come with, a wealth of knowledge and experience, which could be good, and it could not be good. But let me ask you this. What specific changes would you support to either expand the pipeline or remove barriers that conflict with traditional standards? Because I think it's fair to say that you are a part of those original standards.

I would say, as as we sift through some of these, as Senator mentioned, bad actors, Being able to open it back up again, I'm not sure when that can happen, but the end of the moratorium is this year. So, when that comes available, we'll be able to say, Yeah, door's open. Bring your inquiries, and we can start the process of give us your letter of intent, your plans, documents relating to, say, the counseling program from Spaulding.

Do you think it's fair to potentially, push up the moratorium discussion on a closer date agenda to see if that might be something maybe you

I think Doctor. Sorens mentioned that. I think it's worth a conversation with the board. Yes.

Yeah. Yeah. I definitely think, you know, any kind of barriers we can remove Would do one of two things. It would give, the people that are within the system or want to be in the system hope that there is, a pathway into solution driven programs. And and then also, it will, I guess, the ones that are currently here will also give them encouragement to kind of stick with the program, basically.

So I think that, you know, that would see being an important move is lifting the moratorium. I think if enough of the Board Members make that request, that it might be possible. Very good. Thank you. Go ahead.

So I guess at this point, you know, what is what is your feeling of the legislature getting involved in what has traditionally been something that the standards board has, you know, been tasked with doing. For example, you know, I think the legislature is being asked to revisit the emergency hire situation, right, from three to five years. That's traditionally been in the realm of the standards board.

And I think you you you put in your your your questionnaire that, you know, you've been through some of the executive sessions, right, for a fourth year permit. I think when I take a look at your agendas, you know, there's there's a number of executive session things that are happening.

And I don't know what signal that really sends to people of you gotta come before the the standards board and go behind closed doors to really make your case to get a fourth year versus making a, you know, more administrative pathway with with clear parameters. I think because of that frustration, the legislature has been asked to opine and and create a law.

I don't know what what is your thought because my thought is that I would think that that's in the standards board, you know, job description. But when there's a failure to act, then the only place to adjudicate that is coming back to the legislature. Now we were kind of starting to take your job.

And how does that make you feel? And what do you think? Where does that put the standards board?

I think it's a partnership, because you hear from the public when we don't necessarily do. So, coming together to say this is an issue. But also, the EPPs play a role in that if they're not able to get their people through the program in the five the three years, then that becomes a problem. For the most part, I would say that executive session doesn't really have to do with folks who are asking for, an extension.

And we have had upon occasion someone saying, I'm requesting a suspension of the rules because I'm coming to the end of my three years and I'm not gonna finish.

I need one more semester or I need additional time because of health concerns. Maybe it's family health issues. But typically, executive session items are where people have violated and, you know, been inappropriate with kids, let's say. Or they were terminated but they're not recognizing the termination. So, it's more that kind of a situation where we do have to protect our privacy and keep things confidential.

So, the Board is open to looking at those cases where the individuals are saying, Yeah, I'm one of those people that needs more time. Three years is not enough for for whatever the reason is. And so we

But doesn't that take a suspension of your rules to allow that to happen?

Yes. Yes. And

And why so so do you feel that that's the best way to approach it is just having to suspend the rules? Is that give them the fourth year?

I think that because most people can complete their program in three years that looking at it in those instances on a case by case rather than saying, let's let them have five years to complete the program. The more quickly they get through, of course we don't want them to do it in one year because it does take time to learn content, pedagogy and those other kinds of things.

By setting a three year target, we're getting them better prepared rather than to say, oh, take your time. Five years. You get a better quality.

So what if they don't decide they wanna go through the process until you're two or three?

I don't follow

You're an emergency hire. Right? And then you're like, okay. Well, I'm just gonna do emergency hire for a year. And you're like, okay.

Then, you know, maybe at that point, I wanna start the the teacher prep program maybe at year two or three.

My understanding is that they have to show progress all the way through. It's not like they get to wait until you year two or three. They have to show that they're they've started.

Is that in your is that in your admin rules or in your policies?

I can't quote chapter and verse on that.

Okay. I'm gonna get back to us with that.

I understand what you're saying. Yeah.

Because that's what if you look at what's moving at the legislature Year four and five, you have to show progress. Okay.

Thank you, Chair.

So just to follow-up on that, I've been hearing that and and even for me, I mean, three years is not that long of a time. And especially and I don't mean to, you know, discriminate against sex, but for women, there's a lot of issues. You know? There's there's pregnancy. Yes.

There's children. There's a lot of things that that we go through that we may have to take some time off.

And so three years, and it's not just the number of time, but it's the it's the stress knowing that you have a three year deadline, and you're coming up to the deadline, and it it works on your mind and your stress, added stress that I gotta get through this and then yeah, then they gotta go before the board and ask for an extension, not knowing if they're gonna get it or not.

So all of that, you have to, hope the board will understand that plays on on on the the whole, the teachers' stress level, you know, on being in the classroom and and not having to concentrate on some of these other areas. You know, so how do we give that, even if we give an extra year, then they don't have to come before the board, because a lot of them don't know if they wanna embark on this whole program.

They'll come in as a sub or they'll come in as a temporary hire and then make the decision a year later or two or get convinced. Some principals have to convince them that they should do it. But at that time, the clock is already running.

You see? So I hope that that's something that you guys will will look at.

I don't know the answer in that particular case, but it makes sense to me that there would be provision for a leave or or a break to say, yeah. So what are we gonna do?

You know, there's deaths in the family.

There's all kinds of other situations. So again, I mean, what's so hard in in letting somebody get their credentials in four years? I mean, yes, we want them as soon as possible. We want them in the classroom. But at the same time, if we don't give them the extra year, they might not be in the classroom.

Yes.

Right? So, I mean, again, that's that balance.

Yes.

You know? And is it four years or five years? I mean, you know, but I think that that's the flexibility we're looking at from the board.

Yeah. Picking the right number, I think, is the issue.

Yeah. But, you know, trying out and saying, no, we're gonna extend it to four years and let's see how this works out. Right? But at least giving some some alternative solutions to help the situation.

Sure. Yeah.

Okay. Anybody else? Any other questions? If not, thank you very much. Thank you.

Appreciate you. You. Okay. We are now on and I'm sorry this is taking so long, but, you know, this is important. This board is important.

Yes. It's important to our students, important to our schools. So, we, we really want to, to be able to talk with you folks. So, on GM 05:09, submitting for consideration and confirmation, the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board gubernatorial nominee, Kumari Moss, for a term to expire 06/30/2029. And we have Keith Hayashi testifying in support.

Hold on, Komari, I'm getting testimony first. Hold on. Okay, so, anybody from DOE?

No? Okay. Wendy Akioka speaking. No?

Okay. Anyone else wishing to testify? Okay. Now come on. You can come on.

Excuse me.

I have another.

Yes.

Sure.

Are you gonna need me anymore?

No. No.

Thank you so much.

You're welcome to go.

Good afternoon, chair and vice chair and honorable members of the committee. My name is Komari Moss. I have eleven years of administrative experience in high school, middle school, and elementary. I've also worked in private, charter, and public school, and I like to think that I'm a, a good judge of selecting talent as the principal of my school. I am honored to actually be considered as a nominee for this position.

I think that we are definitely in crisis. There's evidence, right, that we are in crisis with the, looking at J1ss outside of our country to come fill vacancies that our, our schools have. With that being said, we have to treat the selection of our teachers a little bit differently. In my experience, we are left with having to fill no matter what because otherwise we don't have students in our classroom, and that's—at a school, that's pretty highly sought out.

And in the last three years that I've been at my school, I've definitely seen a change in the candidates that are coming in.

You know, it used to be at the beginning where there's a lot that wanted to come teach, and I'm not sure what the reasons are, but we have, as principals, we have to figure it out. And, you know, in my former position as Red Hills Principal, figuring out was kind of my, my thing, you know, with, you know, trying to figure out how to educate students in a distance learning fashion, water crisis, and all that kind of stuff.

I, I do, I do feel like puzzles can be solved with communication, respect, and dignity towards, other institutions and organizations and stakeholders. I do think that it takes everybody involved. I'm not opposed to tackling hard situations at all.

I think thinking creatively is something that I do very well, and I hope to bring that to—as a member of the board.

Thank you. Members, open to questions. Senator Hashimoto? Senator DeCoite? Okay.

Why don't you just share, I mean, I know we, we, we've talked and stuff, and so, and you've listened to a lot of questions that have gone on prior to you. Do you have any comments as to, you know, some of these issues that you feel that perhaps the board needs to revisit?

I think that everyone is unique, right, in the different locations on our, on our islands, and there's not a one size fits all. I think if we're working in an ideal situation where we weren't pressed for candidates that are qualified to come teach at our schools, we can definitely apply these rules, like, and that's ideal, but we're not in an ideal situation.

And we do have to look outside the box when we're trying to get people to come in in hard to fill areas or geographic regions when, you know, even incentivizing those positions aren't enough. Like, they come for a couple years and then they leave. Right?

And it's hard to keep them, but we need caring adults in in areas that are hard to fill. That's if you even have people wanting to come to teach. But making it difficult makes it even harder for us, as principals, to have good, caring adults in our schools. I have an example of a J1 hire that she gets high blood pressure every time she has to come talk to me because she can't pass the Praxis, which is not in her native language.

But it makes it difficult because we're trying to play by the the rules and requirements that allow us to hire folks like this.

And she's awesome. Like, really, really good with our students, knows her content, but just has, like, these few points she has to get over to pass the Praxis. And my heart just bleeds for her because there's nothing I could do because those are the rules I cannot change. You know, there's times where we've hired from other organizations that don't have the same type of stringent rules, and they, they give me blood, sweat, and tears every single day.

And so, I appreciate people like that, you know, and I, I do think that I'm, like I said earlier, like, I, I, I really pride myself on finding good talent.

And like Dr. Spores had said, I take full responsibility for the ones I hire. It's sometimes the ones that come in and aren't doing such a great job that we have to utilize our own systems to, to, you know, figure out what is the best thing for them. But we have access to those things. We have the ability to do those things. Not all principals may have the same, I guess, selection process.

I don't know how else to say it, but it's one of the most—it's actually the most important thing that you can do within a school is, is hiring the right people. Sometimes we don't have the people with the full credentials to actually hire because we're not in an ideal situation. But it makes it really difficult when we have to say goodbye to just start all over if their term is up.

How, how many times can one take the practice?

A lot of times, as long as they'll pay for it.

What does it cost to take that?

Oh, I think, like, about $90 each time you take it. Yeah.

No. Somebody's taking their—you have an answer to that?

It's, it ranges between $90 and a $180.

Depending on the test.

Depending on what?

The test. The type of test.

Type of—or they can choose, oh, depending on their area of, of expertise that they're going into. I see. And then, they have to do it within the three-year period?

Yes.

To, to take that test as well?

Okay. That's another stress.

It's fast.

It's another stressful thing. Taking tests is not always easy. Okay.

It doesn't necessarily measure, you know, how good you'll be in the classroom.

Okay. Question? No other questions? Okay. Well, thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Thank you.

Next gubernatorial nominee is GM 654 for consideration to the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board, Daphne Okunaga, for a term to expire 06/30/2028. Aloha, Daphne. I am going to call and see if there is anyone that—wishing to testify. Keith Hayashi seems to not be present, although in person. We've had—we have 14 in support.

All of these names, I'll read off. If you're here, you can come up. Linda Furuto, Brandy Yagi, Don Taba, Tammy Yoon, Rina Rabago, Dana Tanigawa, Lianne Lane, Lane Sata Satakara, Malama Malama Ada, Blake Oshiro, Joseph Hoffman, Sean Kaanoye, Christina Rossman, and Patricia Ishihara, all in support. Anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? If not, Daphne, welcome.

I know you're on the Mainland. I don't know what time it is there. Five hours difference, I think. Is Texas five hours difference?

Yep. So, if you hear my stomach rum rumbling, I apologize, but I haven't eaten dinner yet. It's 7:50. Sorry. But I, I'm so sorry that I couldn't be there in person, but we are here with the state math team at a math conference, seeing how we can move math forward in our own state.

And she did tell me in advance that she was not gonna be able—we weren't able to move the meeting. So, appreciate you.

And, and our state isn't paying for it. The Dana Center paid for us to be here. I only got the ethics approval.

That's good to know. Thank you for volunteering. Yeah. You understand what's going on with our travel. We're sorry. I was—thank you. So, opening remarks.

Thank you. So, after starting as an emergency hire at Pearl City, I was there for nineteen years teaching math and business. And in reflection of this moment, I don't think I fully understood the, the teacher shortage, because I was kind of shielded from it at Pearl City. We, we don't have a huge amount of turnovers in most of the years that I was there.

But now that I'm at P20 and I am, you know, visiting non-Oahu schools and I'm talking to other schools across our state and our pathways work, I—it was just mind boggling to me, the shortage.

And while that is not great news, I also see huge potential for our state, when things—when people are collaborative. You know, the dive into education event, by the way, you're all invited next year. The dive into education event, you know, is, is, Tula started by Tamiu Napraw City High School, but has evolved. And now, Hawaii P20 is involved. You know, all our EPPs, they, they do the college fair.

They provide speakers. The Department of Education is very supportive in providing speakers. HSTA, you know, helped us to get our keynote speaker this year and provided supplies and support. The—so sorry. HTSB also was supportive and HEA.

So, you know, when you have all these organizations that are coming together to both support monetary and time wise, you know, you can see what an amazing event the dive into education could be where there were about 240 students, you know, that are at our public schools now either in a teaching as a profession field or program, sorry, excuse me, program or in a rising club and they're excited and, you know, they want to be teachers. Just to see that synergy that can happen if we all rally around, you know, this one issue together gives me hope for, you know, what's in years to come.

But the current reality is that we are in a teacher crisis. So, while I would love, you know, that all our teachers are highly qualified, I know that I started out as not one of those, and I know the level of support that it took me to get through that program because my first priority was, I'll be honest, was not in obtaining my licensure. I was super stoked about getting to work with the kids. I wanted to help coach soccer at Pearl City.

I, not for—I'm not sure why they let me, but I ran graduation my first year. So, I was really busy in those first couple years. And I, and, again, honestly, I wasn't so worried about the licensure. I was worried about the kids that I was facing every day. And so, when I decided—I did decide within that first year to go for it.

I was lucky that I had parents, right, and—that are former educators to support me through it. Pearl City High School had a tremendous amount of mentors that were willing to work with me, but a big part of it, honestly, would have been money. I don't know for a lot of folks, you know, it—to pony up your own money while not earning a great amount as an emergency hire, I think can be a struggle.

And so, I know what it took for me to get there and get it done. And so, I worry about other teachers who are going through the same.

So, I don't have a whole lot of solutions. You know, I'm very, very new to the board. I know I have a lot to learn, but I'm looking forward to committing to do that work with our stakeholders and the board.

Thank you. I I think that's what we that's what, as legislators, we hope that you will, you know, look at some of the issues that you've heard and be willing to roll up your sleeves and try and see what areas we can improve. And were you able to finish in three years?

I was.

To get—your three years. Did you find it difficult?

Yes. But I also was able to finish within three years because University of Phoenix allowed me to start, I think, like, the month after I applied. And University of Phoenix is no longer one of the ones that provides licensures anymore or provides, I mean, sorry, does the program, sorry, an EPP anymore.

Well, I think your perspective is gonna be welcome on the board because we wanna be able to hear from from all walks of life, right, as what are the issues.

And again, as it was brought up, is that one size does not fit all, and I know it's hard to to craft a program that will take into everybody's situation, because that's not possible either, but there still needs to try to aim towards some kind of system that can address the majority of the concerns and issues that's out there. Okay. With that, any questions? Questions?

Thank you. Thank you for joining us online, you know, and just thank you for your time in meeting with me in my office. That was very generous of you to give of your time.

And there was a few things that you had mentioned in our meeting that, to me, was very refreshing. One of the statements you had made was education has to modernize. And that was something that is very much a reality of where we are at. And, also, you had said, now is the time to change what education looks like. So, you have a very forward thinking vision, and I think that that's gonna be a, a huge value to the board, if you move forward in this process.

But let me ask you, as far as teacher readiness is concerned, from your experiencing—your experience—mentoring and working training teachers, what does classroom-ready mean to you? And where do you see, like, the biggest gaps today?

Classroom ready, right, you talk about teaching is as both a science and an art. So, I see the science part of it as, you know, get going through the EPPs and getting your licensure. Right?

Which is what we all want. But if I had to pick between the two, for me, teaching is more of an art because I can have all of this knowledge in my head, but if I can't reach students, if I can't build relationships where they trust me to want to learn from me, it doesn't matter what I have to say.

I can just stand up there and talk for the entire hour and nineteen minutes and by the end when they leave, if someone were to ask them, so what did you learn today? There's something like, I don't know.

Right? And I—and I don't think that that's particularly effective. So, both of them need each other. But if I had to pick one, I would say that it's art because I fully believe in teachers building relationships.

And I think you and I both talked about, right, especially in schools like Wai'anae and Nanakuli, if they don't like you, if they don't trust you, if they don't feel like you believe in them and, you know, you're there for them, then they don't care what you want to teach them.

They're just gonna, they're, they're just they're not gonna be ready for it.

Yeah. And thank you for mentioning that. Particularly, yes, in my area, we have a sub right now that's filling in for one of the teachers, and she's a longtime community member. Her family has lived there for generations. And I tell you, those kids, they fall in line.

When she walks in and she says, listen, they listen. So, to me, that creates not just culture, but it creates a relationship that's already grounded in community with culture and with understanding. And I will just preface my, my closing remarks with—I will brag a little bit that she has great work ethic because her dad was principal at Waianae High School. Her mom was teacher at Lehioku Elementary. So, she is—she got her grit from Waianae.

I'll say that. Thank you, chair.

I just wanna add, Daphne, you hit the nail on the head because I don't care how qualified you are and how many times you pass the test, if you cannot reach the students, if you can't identify with them and they, they don't feel that you care about them, they can't learn. They're not gonna learn. Yeah. They're gonna turn off. So, that's—and that's something that I think the board has to keep in mind.

You have any question? No question. Daphne, we're gonna let you go eat so your stomach is not growling anymore. But thank you for taking the time, and I know the time difference.

So, appreciate you.

Nope. I appreciate you folks taking the time. Thank you. Good night or good afternoon. Either or.

It's almost night. No. Okay. Moving on. Gm 655 is, consideration and confirmation of the Hawaii Teachers Standard Board gubernatorial nominee, Natasha Nihipoli, for term to expire 06/3028.

And, she is not here. So members, I'm going to recommend we defer action until such time we can, because I've not been able to Anyway, too bad. Yeah. So we're going to defer that, and so we're going to move on to the next GM, which is GM 656 submitting for confirmation to Hawaii Teachers Standard Board nominee, Dale Arcaki to for a term to expire sixthirty 2028. And we have Keith Hayashi who has not been present in support.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Hearing none, Arakaki, please, Dale. You've been waiting patiently, so thank you. And please, you're welcome to make opening remarks.

Good afternoon, chair and vice chair and Board Members here. So I'm humbled and blessed to have this opportunity to serve as on the Hawaii Teachers Standards Board. My background a little bit before I move forward, I grew up on the island of Maui. So I I am a neighbor islander that understand, neighbor island things. I started my career out in Waianae, fourteen years at Kamaile Elementary.

So I understand, I was a teacher there, the population there and how hard it is, to fill the positions. I was there as a vice principal, served, for about four years or so, Moved on to Waipahu Elementary, and for seven years as a vice principal. And then given the opportunity to serve at Elementary for ten years.

And then unfortunate circumstances allowed me to serve now middle school at Kona Nikoa. All of these has prepared me. I have a wide range of experiences, understanding the teacher shortage, understanding the process, understanding the collaboration that you folks are looking for. Everywhere I went, there are three things, trust, transparency, and grit has followed me in everything that I've done, from my father and my mom to the trainees that I provided out at Waianae, Waipahu, and and now at Kona Nacoa.

So that that building that relationship is is the key.

Taking over Kona Nacoa from the sudden passing of our principal Victor, that showed how much relationships really, really is important. And it is one of my priorities wherever I go and whatever I serve in is building that relationship. Teaching here in Hawaii takes a special person to understand the culture, to understand the ethnicities. And so just the avenue and the journey that it took me to become a principal was one that it wasn't very easy. It took many tries to become a principal.

And it is sometimes the right fit for the job for the for the for the area. So not all the time, you know, you can have all the credentials you want, but if you're not the right fit, things cannot work. You know, so as a principal, you you you look for that talent, you look for that fit.

And as being a board member here, that's something that I would like to make sure that it is there, that teaching is a profession, teaching is something that we don't wanna just take for granted, and we wanna make sure that we have the best person inside the classroom that can serve, but also one that understands Hawaii and understands our area. So thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for that. I think you, said it correctly, that it's so important that there's a right fit and even for principals that can understand the community that they serve and the culture, in that. Because some of our our areas like Waianae, like Kalihi, there's some uniqueness, you know, the the clientele, the students come from, public housing and immigrant families, and and they have different needs than other schools in other parts of the island. So we really appreciate that.

Member's question.

Thank you. Since you thank you for being here. Thank you for being in person.

That's it. Why are you not? Why are you not?

The tough ones out there. Since you have worked so closely in your experience with teachers, I just wanted to pick your brain a little bit about retention and how maybe HTSB can be a part of the solution. What do you think that we can do in that case, sir?

No one solution to it. Sometimes incentives, you know, you try to recruit. For me, I try to recruit local first and and the the grassroots and ground up. And I think I shared this with Senator Hashimoto that it depends on where you're at. If I'm at if I'm at currently at Kwananakoa, keeping retention teachers is not the most easiest thing to do.

You try to make sure, one, you build that relationship with your teachers there and you build a culture. And so try to retain them is understanding the situation, understanding where you are. And so each area is different, you know, and the incentive, although it has to go across the board, like previous people have said, it's not a one size fit all. And what works at Konanakoa may not work at Kamaile or may not work at Wainai Inter.

You know, it may not work at Dole or Kalakaua.

Well well, let me ask you in a different way then, because we have, more teachers that are retiring that are coming in. So and I don't think all of those retirees are necessarily aging out, so to speak. Is there anything that has shifted within the system that's causing them to take advantage of their retirement earlier, sooner rather than later?