Ohio Senate Education Committee - 5-19-2026

Education Committee to order. Will the clerk please call the roll?

Here.

Here.

Here.

Here.

They look accurate to me because I see Chad Aldis testified three times, and it looks like he's on there three times.

Thank you, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee. Thank you for the opportunity and for allowing us to provide sponsored testimony on House Bill 25, the Fostering School Success Act. Before I begin, I would like to ask this committee a simple question. What does it do to a child when every part of their life feels temporary? When home changes, when caregivers change, when routines disappear, and even school, the one place that should provide consistent stability, becomes uncertain too. At the onset, I want to thank my amazing joint sponsor, Representative Ray, for her partnership, compassion, and unwavering commitment to Ohio's children throughout this process. This legislation is a reflection of our shared belief that young people in foster care deserve stability, opportunity, and systems that are prepared to meet them with care and consistency. House Bill 25 passed out of the Ohio House with overwhelming bipartisan support because members on both sides of the aisle understood the urgency of the issue before us. Today, more than 15,000 children are in foster care. Thousands of them are school-aged youth navigating trauma, instability, uncertainty, while being expected to learn, grow, and prepare for adulthood. For many children, school represents structure. It is where friendships are formed, trust that adults are found, routines are established, and confidence begins to take root. But for too many foster youth, school becomes another place of disruption. A placement change often triggers a school change. A school change can mean delayed enrollment, missing records, interrupted special education services, lost credits, transportation barriers, and broken relationships with teachers and with classmates. Research shows that students in foster care are far more likely to experience chronic absenteeism and repeated school transfers than their peers. National studies have found that a single school move can set a student back academically by four to six months. Many foster youth experience multiple school moves throughout a single academic year. The outcomes reflect that instability. Nationally, fewer than half of foster youth graduate high school on time. Only a small percentage would go on to earn a college degree. Many face higher rates of homelessness, unemployment, and involvement with the justice system after aging out of care. These numbers tell a story, but they do not fully capture the emotional toll carried by these young people. We heard from foster youth all across Ohio through this bill And behind every statistic is a child trying to hold themselves together while the systems around them fail to communicate with each other It's a child who loses academic progress because credits weren't transferred correctly. The teenager who stops joining sports teams, music programs, or after school activities because they're exhausted from constantly starting over. And over time, too many false youth begin to internalize something dangerous that the belief that the system does not truly expect them to succeed. House Bill 25 exists to challenge that reality. The Fostering School Success Act creates intentional structures to support students inside Ohio's education system. So they, our foster youth, are no longer left navigating instability alone. The legislation requires every school district, community school, STEM school to designate a local care education liaison. These liaisons will help ensure immediate enrollment, facilitate timely transfer of records, coordinate transportation, support school stability, and work directly with caregivers and child welfare agencies to help students remain connected to their education. The bill also establishes foster family navigators inside school buildings. These are trusted adults who will help students access academic and non-academic supports, remain engaged in school activities, and prepare for life after graduation, whether that is a college degree, a workforce pathway, or a career training opportunity. Additionally, the legislation strengthens coordination between education, higher education, and child welfare systems, so young people receive the support not only while they're in school, but as they prepare for adulthood and independent living. For a young person in foster care, stability can sometimes be rare. School should be the one place that remains constant. House Bill 25 moves us closer to making that expectation a reality. to every foster youth in Ohio who helps move this legislation forward, who have given their voice to this legislation, this is for you and because we send a clear message. Your future matters, your education matters, and your life is worthy of consistency, care, and investment. Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to provide sponsored testimony on House Bill 25. At this time, I would like to turn it over to my joint sponsor, Representative Ray, for additional remarks. Thank you.

Thank you very much, representatives, for your testimony today. Are there any questions from committee members? Ranking Member Ingram.

So through Chair Brenner, Senator Ingram, thank you for the question. first let me say that this bill was developed in partnership with the department because they too recognized that there were some gaps when it came to actually supporting these foster youth as they matriculated through the academic k-12 pipeline and so what currently is today is that there are regional and individual individuals who have the foster care liaison designation but that could be your assistant principal. That could be your secretary. That could be your local nurse in your school. And they do not have a real defined purpose besides saying that I am the foster care liaison. Why does that matter? And what's happening is many schools do not have a coordinated care system in place to help these foster youth navigate the realities of life, especially when it comes to moving from school to school to school, when we know that that has a real impact on their ability to stay grounded in their academic ability. And so this particular bill, after consulting with the Department of Education and Workforce and other stakeholders, we put real meat to what the responsibilities are of these liaisons and the navigators to make sure that we are truly reaching those young people who truly need the system to step up on their behalf. And so I do want to say that this working, this legislation was crafted in partnership with all the agencies that we listed, that Representative Ray listed, to make sure that we have a true continuum to support these foster youth who really do need our support.

Thank you for that.

So through the chair, Chair Brenner, to Senator Ingram, thank you for the question. I want to take a step back a little bit to your question to offer some context. When we talk to foster youth, the truth of the matter is some of these positions were in name only. So the foster care liaison by title, folks would naturally assume that there was somebody in the school designated to actually supporting these young people when they needed it. Let's say they came in, transferred credit, they came out of school mid-semester, coming in. And I'm thinking I have a person who's going to help guide me through the process. But that person was not necessarily, while they were name only, they did not have the skill set. nor the support to actually provide real care for that young person. And so we've heard that time and time and time again from a lot of these foster youth who have unfortunately fallen through the crack. And to be honest with you all, as senators, they had to figure it out on their own. And many of them were not able to, and they did not graduate. And so to your question, Senator, yes, we have outlined in the bill specifics on exactly what the role is of these foster care navigators and liaisons. In terms of compensation, I don't think we have that in this bill. That is not to say that we can't have those conversations in the budget next GA, because I think today what we're trying to establish is a base level understanding of what the roles are for these positions that's going to support the current foster youth navigating schools. And right now, there really isn't much meat at a statute level on what those roles are.

Good afternoon, Chairman Brunner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram. Thank you for the opportunity to provide a sponsored testimony on House Bill 125, legislation to require excuse absence from school for 4-H FFA-related activities. 4-H is an invaluable resource and opportunity for growth for countless students, not only in Butler County, but all across Ohio, as I see my dear friend Senator Kaler, who knows all too well about this. It is an organization that focuses on the development of our state's young minds through hands-on learning that can lead to lifelong skills. It is the constant learning of 4-H, whether through events, clubs, or conferences, that these skills are able to be passed on to the next generation of 4-H students. As 4-H is important, so is FFA. of which we have decided to add FFA to this bill to go alongside the 4-H programs for excusal consideration. Currently in Ohio, official 4-H FFA events are not considered sufficient for an excused absence, and the decision whether to allow the excused absence is at the discretion of the school. The goal of our education system is to give our students lifelong skills that allow them to achieve success in the future. We argue that 4-H FFA strives to achieve that same exact goal. Under our bill, a 4-H or FFA educator shall submit written documentation to a school principal or attendance officer as proof of student participation in such an activity or program. The district shall give the student the opportunity to make up any schoolwork missed during the absence and class grades shall not be adversely affected for such absence. We did put these guardrails in. A school principal or a designate of the school principal shall not grant a student an excused absence under the section if the absence occurs during either the following, a scheduled administration of state assessments, or any period of time for which a student has been disciplined, suspended, or expelled. If the terms of such punishment would preclude the student from otherwise participating in an educational field trip or extracurricular activity. Under House Bill 125, we would be able to provide all students with the opportunity to expand their horizons and receive the full benefit that 4-H FFA has to offer without the possibility of conflict with their education. I might add, Mr. Chairman, during consideration in the House, we did place an amendment working with Chair Fowler-Arthur and Ranking Member Brennan that would prohibit a student's class grades or the chronic absenteeism calculation for the district or school from being adversely affected as well. by the student participating in the approved activity. This bill before you today passed out of the House 95 to nothing and out of committee 13 to nothing. Happy to turn it over to my joint sponsor before taking questions from members of the committee.

Thank you very much, Representative. Is there any questions from committee members? Ranking Member Ingram.

Through the chair to Ranking Member Ingram, certainly this is not a new idea as when you were in the House. I think you probably heard this bill as well as Senator Smith. The way it is written in the bill, the way it's written on line 18 talks about it being an excused absence in the bill. Now, we only made this 26 lines for a reason, so if you think that there needs to be some more specification on that. The biggest thing we heard in the House was the absence counting towards the chronic absenteeism and trying to address that. We didn't specifically get into the excused absence or the present part of it. So there's more consideration. I'd be happy to take that into consideration.

Through the chair to Senator Ingram, very good point. Presently, in the bill before you, there is no wording that talks about any kind of cap. We kind of left it broad on purpose in the House version because my county fair, full disclosure, is in the end of July. Senator Huffman, Senator Brenner, Senator Blessings County Fairs are all in different months. Some of them extend into September when the school year begins in August. So we did not put a cap because everybody was kind of different. Another question we got asked was, was this bill actually going to be used, and is it needed in Ohio? In our district specifically, there's kids that are competing on a statewide scale during September, October, November, and it is most definitely needed for those kids trying to make sure that they're able to make up their classwork, because, crazy enough, some schools are not allowing, not approving the 4-HFFA activities during the school hours for the student.

Thank you very much. Can you explain the chronic absenteeism a little bit more? I mean, does this not count? I mean, if the number is 15 and you become chronically, You're going to get five more and not count against you, or how does that work? I didn't understand that.

So if I can follow up to understand that better. So if the child has 18 absences and he's going to take four to go to the fair and that would put him over the top, is that accounted against him? Or now is he chronic absences? Or does it say, hey, look, you're allowed to, you had the first 18, we'd give you four or five more. Because to me, those are the children we need to have their butts in the seat. and maybe they'd come to class and not have chronic absenteeism if they knew that they wouldn't be able to go to the fair.

Through the chair to Senator Huffman,

All right. Well, thank you.

Thank you, Chairman.

in opposition. Okay.

Good afternoon, Chair Brenner and Vice Chair for Lessing, Ranking Members Ingram, and members of the committee. My name is Tim Hampton, and I'm the on-site coordinator of the after-school program at the Middles and High School in Newark, Ohio. Today I stand as opponent of Bill 400 in its current form. As I've read and re-read, and even re-read the bill, I found that I agree with many of its objectives in the after-school program, and Newark has always followed and abided by them. As I read the bill, I kept in mind, what is good for the students of Ohio? Having a safe and secure location, that's a good thing. Having qualified staff, that's a good thing, and for the children as well. A focus on healthy living, academic success, and future readiness, all great things and are things the after-school program in Newark currently do. However, when I got to line 47 and 49 of the bill, I visualized the hundreds if not thousands of kids in Ohio who would be negatively affected by these three lines of the bill. The bill requires that the program be deemed high quality if it serves children across multiple counties. We're in Newark District. We serve our elementary, middle, and high school students in our district. Not Zanesville, not Mount Vernon, not Pickerington, the North City schools. What benefit is the current of the Ohio school children? Bill 400 seems to have gone from what is good for the children of Ohio to what is good for certain programs. Line 47 through 49 just potentially eliminated, potentially funding for all public school after school programs. because according to the bill, they would not be deemed as quality programs. Quality programs is what we always strive for in our after-school program. We are continuously evacuated by the state on our programming and fiscal responsibility. Our staff are highly trained and highly qualified. All of our staff have been having extensive background in BCI checks. The safety and security of our after-school students are our top priority, and we follow strict protocols to ensure their safety. Our school treasure tracks our spending. We focus heavily on healthy living and provide a healthy after-school snack each day to our kids. Our students, in fact, this fall will be participating in the Team Trestle Fitness Challenge at all of our elementaries and middle schools. And we focus on career exploration as well throughout the whole year. For the last several years, we have at Newark High School to address chronic absenteeism and absenteeism and tardiness. Three years ago, we opened up the Wildcat Cafe. Our after-school program opened up the Wildcat Cafe. What is that? if you know teenagers, besides their cell phone, what's next important is to get a shot of caffeine in the morning. So they often stop by coffee shops for that latte or any other drink that has a shot of that caffeine for them. So what we did three years ago is we opened at the Wildcat Cafe. Our students, our after school kids, will arrive at school 45 minutes early, 6.45 in the morning. They don't have to be there until 7.20. And we serve lattes there at the school. What would cost someone, cost any of us $5 or $6 at any local coffee shop? We sell our lattes for $1 because we want our students to come in on time and to come in and not be absent. So it's our approach to keep that absenteeism and tardiness in check. And it has been a wonderful success. We coordinate with other business owners because our focus also is entrepreneurship. Not far down the street here you have Ms. Sein's at Roosevelt Coffee House. They invited the crew over to his store. Kenny Sipes is his name, the owner and founder of Roosevelt Coffee House. He said, come in, let me explain to your kids what we do and what I have established as business. Denison University invited us, our after school kids over there, to teach them how they produce coffee, how they do point of sales. And what our kids learn by running this cafe is to do reliability, punctuality, money handling, as well as all these other workforce readiness skills. So at the end of this year, each of our kids will receive the Ohio Means Jobs readiness seal. You know, they need two to graduate, so they will receive that seal. And it has been a huge success. They also serve to teachers and staff after they turn to students. They go to the classroom. And if you're like me, it's even beyond that. It's just the connections with a mentor that is so important, has such an influence. Before I wrap it up here, I do want to say that, you know, two years ago, two summers ago, my phone rang, and it was one of the unknown number, and I thought perhaps I'm not going to answer it. It's just another telemarketer. But I took the chance and answered my phone, and what I heard is this, Mr. Hampton, Mr. Hampton. I'm like, yes. He goes, this is Ryan. I'm at basic training. I'm in the Army because he wanted to become a combat engineer. He goes, my sergeant has given us five minutes to call anybody we want. I want to call you and say, I'm doing well. Ryan was in our after school program, took the ASFAB, but didn't score high enough on the math section. So in the after school program, we got him together and got him tutored through math, another math teacher. He retook the ASFAB and scored high enough to be a combat engineer. which to this day he stationed in Germany and he loves it I think wow what a wonderful testimony of the after program and the lives that we affect continuously And I appreciate you listening to my time Thank you.

Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Hampton, for being here. So you're listed as, oh, you're a proponent.

I'm just going to ask why you were opposed to it. So do you feel like your program, essentially I'm going to ask you the same question. Okay. Do you feel like your program would be considered a high quality, like that you all will be evaluated as a high quality after school program?

Follow-up? So I guess your suggestions of the bill would be that it not have a 12-month requirement and then not have a multi-county

Follow-up? Okay. Seeing no other questions,

Lindsay?

Thank you, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, and Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee for the opportunity to provide testimony on Senate Bill 400. My name is Michelle Dunnington, and I have spent my career in youth development and out-of-school time programming across Ohio. I have worked with programs that serve young people and families in urban, suburban, and rural communities. I want to begin by expressing my support for the intent of Senate Bill 400. Establishing clear, consistent standards for high-quality youth development programs is important. Our field benefits from strong expectations around safety, accountability, youth outcomes, and responsible stewardship of public resources. Ohio's young people deserve programs that are effective, safe, and impactful. It is also important to note that Ohio is not starting from zero in defining quality in the out-of-school time space. The Ohio Afterschool Network, with providers from around the state and state partners, has already developed the quality guidelines for Ohio's afterschool programs. These resources are grounded in research and organized around key domains like programming and curriculum, relationships, professionalism, environment, health and safety, and administrative practices. They were designed to apply a wide variety of afterschool and summer program, school community faith and others regardless of size or geography In other words Ohio already has a quality framework that is intentionally inclusive of programs large and small At the same time I want to raise a concern as a current board member of the after-school programs of Lancaster, which has provided after-school programming since 1998. As currently structured, some of the designated criteria in Senate Bill 400 may unintentionally disadvantage smaller, local, non-profit organizations organizations, not because they lack quality, but because they lack scale. In particular, lines 48 and 49, as my predecessor said, in particular, those requirements such as operating year-round programming for K-12 students across multiple counties risk turning scale into a proxy for quality. Many of the most effective programs in our state are intentionally local. They serve one neighborhood, one town, or one school district. Their strength lies in deep relationships with families, cultural relevance, and responsiveness to local needs, not in having multi-county footprint. Then we define high quality in ways that prioritize multi-county reach and year-round operation. We risk, when we define high quality in those ways, we risk sending the message that smaller, community-rooted programs are somehow less valuable, even when their youth outcomes are excellent. This has implications not only for community-based providers, but also for educational service centers and school districts. ESCs are the backbone of Ohio's regional service system and key partners in implementing statewide priorities, including professional development, family and community partnerships, and support for summer and after-school initiatives. School districts and ESCs often rely on partnerships with community-based organizations to deliver after-school and summer programming. From 21st century learning communities to other grant-funded collaborations, and only a narrow set of large, multi-county organizations can realistically meet the designation criteria, ESCs and districts may see their pool of eligible partners shrink over time. That could limit their flexibility to choose local providers that best fit their students' needs and context and make it harder to braid state, federal, and local funds in ways that work on the ground. Finally, there is concern about how the designation might be used in the future. While Senate Bill 400 does not currently tie the designation to funding, experience in other systems suggests that once a state label exists, like a similar one would be like step up to quality, it can quickly become an informal requirement for grants, contracts, and partnerships. If that happens, organizations that cannot meet scale-based criteria may be effectively shut out of future opportunities, regardless of the quality of their work. I want to be very clear that this is not an argument against standards. It is an argument for standards that truly measure quality, safety outcomes, family engagement, staff competence, and sound stewardship, rather than organizational size or geographic reach. It is an argument for building on the inclusive, field-informed quality work Ohio has already done throughout Ohio via the Ohio School After School Network. With that in mind, I respectfully offer a few suggestions to strengthen Senate Bill 400. First, clearly distinguish between quality criteria and scale criteria. Quality should focus on youth experience, safety, outcomes, and accountability. Multi-county reach and year-round operations should not be the defining thresholds. Second, explicitly align the designation framework with existing tools like the OAN Quality Guidelines, which were created by the field in Ohio and designed to support programs of all sizes. Third, create multiple pathways to designation so that high-quality single-site and community-based programs can qualify with requirements that are proportional to their size and capacity. Fourth include guardrails so that this designation does not become the sole gatekeeper for future public funding or partnerships Ohio youth development ecosystem is strongest when it includes both large multi organizations and small community providers We need both at the table if we want to reach all young people and all communities with programs at work. Thank you again for the opportunity to testify and for your leadership on this issue. I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Hello, and thank you for the opportunity to speak before you. My name is Marie Edwards. I'm the executive director of the Community Building Institute in Middletown, where we serve families in Butler and parts of Warren County. I'm writing to respectively, or I'm speaking to respectively, express concern regarding Ohio's Senate Bill 400 as it is currently written, and to ask for thoughtful reconsideration of language that may unintentionally exclude smaller community-based organizations that are providing impactful out-of-school programming for Ohio's youth and families every day. I support the intent behind Senate Bill 400 and appreciate the effort to recognize and strengthen high-quality youth development programming across Ohio. However, as currently written, the bill risks favoring larger organizations with broader geographic reach while unintentionally overlooking deeply rooted local organizations that are transforming lives within their own communities. At CBI Middletown, we operate year-round programming through the Robert Sunnyhill Community Center in Partnership, which is owned by the city of Middletown. The center serves as a community hub connecting schools, nonprofits, churches, businesses, volunteers, and social service organizations together to support youth and families. We work closely with partners, including Middletown City Schools, who actually reached out to us and asked us, because of the quality of our program, to move from one program to scale into each school in Middletown City School District. We also work with the local Chamber of Commerce, behavioral health organizations, literacy providers, workforce partners, and local employers because schools and community organizations cannot do this work alone. So partnerships to CBI are essential. Like many Ohio communities, we face challenges connected to poverty, absenteeism, workforce readiness, mental health, and economic mobility. Out-of-school programs help bridge these gaps. Through our Rise Out-of-School program and community center initiatives, we provide mentoring, literacy support, academic enrichment, leadership development, recreation, workforce readiness, family resource connections, and safe spaces for youth through the entire year. CBI currently serves over 150 students, ranging from kindergarten through 12th grade, through our RISE programming across Middletown City School districts and other community schools. We have sites in every school, and then at our community center, we have 400 youth, adults, and families working weekly through our programs at our community center. Our mid-year data shows that 88% of our elementary students regularly attend our program 30 days or more, and more than 60% of our participating students were on track to improve academically through targeted support and enrichment opportunities. Through our RISE Connect High School internship program, students have completed more than 600 hours of workforce experience in career fields, including health care, local government, advanced manufacturing, education, veterinary science, and hospitality. These opportunities were made possible through support from the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce with our 21st Century Learning Center, and through local strong partnerships within Middletown and our entire region. For many students, these experiences represent opportunities they may never otherwise receive. Students who once struggled academically are finding confidence and stability through consistent support and caring adult relationships. Some of Ohio's most effective youth-serving organizations are intentionally local because their strength comes from deep relationships, community trust, and understanding the specific needs of the families they serve. Education does not stop when the school bill rings. Students across Ohio are navigating both visible and invisible barriers that impact learning, attendance, behavior, mental health, and long-term success. Out-of-school programs provide caring adults, mentorship, structure, exposure, and you know all of these things. I respectfully ask that Senate Bill 400 be revised to ensure high-quality grassroots and community organizations that they are not unintentionally excluded from recognition or future funding opportunities simply because they are smaller, locally focused, or operating within a smaller capacity. Ohio's children deserve investment in all forms of quality youth development programming, whether statewide, regional, rural, suburban, or neighborhood-based. Thank you for your consideration and for your continued commitment to Ohio's youth. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your testimony. So are you only there in Butler County at Middletown?

Thank you. So in looking at your outcomes and knowing that after school programs are actually evaluated in order to receive dollars, do you think that a designation should include that evaluation? since there is already an after-school programming network that exists?

Follow-up? No, I'm good.

Thank you, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony against Senate Bill 113. My name is Melissa Cropper and I serve as the President of the Ohio Federation of Teachers. O of T represents active and retired teachers in traditional and charter schools, support staff, higher education faculty and staff, library employees, and social workers. On many occasions, this legislature has pledged to eliminate unneeded regulations. Local control of public schools is a bedrock value shared by Ohioans across the political spectrum. Proposed laws like Senate Bill 113 trample on local control with statewide policies that were encountered to the needs of Ohio communities. It is especially concerning when local control of schools is impeded for political reasons. Diversity, equity, and inclusion has become a vilified concept that has been blamed without any evidence for everything from plane crashes to wildfires. These political attacks have obscured what diversity, equity, and inclusion programs actually are and why organizations, schools, and governments put those policies in place to begin with. This bill is frustratingly vague about what does and doesn't qualify as prohibited diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives. With due respect, this vagueness appears to be by design. When schools fear that diversity, equity, and inclusion is whatever politicians say it is, those schools will be overly compliant in self-censoring protected speech and activities. Ironically, the same political leaders attacking DEI and public education routinely celebrate Ohio's efforts to attract large corporations and major employers, many if not most of which openly maintain diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives of their own. Fortune 500 companies invest in these programs because they believe diverse recruitment, fair treatment, and inclusive workplace environments strengthen organizational performance and employee retention. It is difficult to argue that these practices are acceptable in the boardrooms of major corporations, but somehow unacceptable in public schools serving diverse communities of students. Senate Bill 113 would seemingly outlaw efforts to recruit and retain more black teachers, even though the data shows it is objectively a good thing for students when school districts make an effort to hire diverse teaching staff. For example, research shows that black students perform better when they have at least one black teacher, 13% more likely to graduate from high school and 19% more likely to attend college. Another research shows that all students benefit from having a black teacher or teacher of color in general. As one of the largest organizations representing educators across the state, we hear from teachers every day about what Ohio needs to strengthen our public schools. These include fully funding Ohio's fair school funding plan, which would reduce over-reliance on local property taxes, eliminating redundant testing and administrative burdens, which would free teachers up for more student planning and engagement and expanding access to student mental health and digital safety resources None of these needs include big government policies that ban diversity or inclusion efforts School districts deserve the ability to explore implementing research-supported efforts that improve educational outcomes while also ensuring schools remain safe and welcoming for every student. We urge you to abandon this big government bill, focus on priorities that actually put students, educators, and parents first, and instead allow school districts to decide locally how or if they want to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion to benefit their students and their communities. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to testify, and I will welcome any questions.

To the chair, I would have a problem with mandating that, because again, we think there is such a thing as local control that we have pushed in this state.

Would you repeat? I misunderstood what you said.

To the chair, it's likely we would have a problem because, again, that is a political statement. Recruiting diverse teachers is not a political statement. That's something that we're doing to promote equity and to put teachers in front of students who represent or look like those students. It's all about recruiting quality teachers that our students can relate to.

To the chair, that's a great question and I think it deserves some discussion. I think equity means making sure that students have opportunities to achieve and that sometimes it requires more resources for some students than it requires for other students. So making opportunity equally accessible. It doesn't mean equal resources. It doesn't mean everything is equal. It means making the circle, providing resources so that students have an equitable opportunity. It's hard to say equitable. Have the same opportunity to achieve, the same resources to achieve, the same opportunity, and meeting the needs of individuals to allow them to be able to achieve what they need to achieve.

Through the chair, we always welcome any conversation that includes stakeholders at the table to help define a term. When it's defined by one political party or one person, that's where we run into difficulty. But if we had a broad discussion and consensus around what that definition is then we could be open to something like that but the problem is right now that there not a definition and that it appears that one political party is putting a spin on a word that is not necessarily what those of us in the education community feel that word means.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And ask me that question about the flag at the school, and I'll give you my answer some other time. Thank you, Ms. Cromper, for your testimony. I think it's when you look at equity, I think that your notion is that we start where that child is and therefore move them forward. Would you say that there are societal barriers for many of our students that keep them from starting at the same place as others and therefore needing additional attention in order for those opportunities that they are afforded to work?

Simple enough. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think also when we look at the notion of DEI, would you say that we've forgotten what diversity brings this country? and forgotten what equity really means, starting at different places, and then the fact of inclusion. When we get to inclusion, help me with why we have students who with certain abilities mainstreamed into other classrooms for the sake of their learning.

The second part was in regard to those students' inclusion.

Inclusion is beyond black and white and women and boys and girls.

Thanks very much Mr. Chairman. Thank you Ms. Cropper for being here. I wanted to asked about the benefits of creating a diverse faculty in your public school buildings, but your testimony sort of touched on this. I mean, I still want to come back to it. But as a former school board member, one of the kind of things that I always, one of the policy goals that I always had in my head was that we essentially were trying to help students achieve their highest potential. And the challenge as a school board member was to create kind of a macro operation that would have those micro outcomes, you know, because we were trying to do that for all kids. We couldn't design necessarily a school system for each child. So we were trying to design a school system that would elevate all kids if possible. and so again looking at your testimony you actually kind of speak to that point where you say quoting from the bottom of page one research shows that black students perform better when they have at least one black teacher and other research shows that all students benefit from having a black teacher or a teacher in color in general having a diverse faculty so part of my concern is that if we ban diversity in our Ohio public schools, will we then lose out on, you know, potential faculty members that are just going to kind of cross Ohio off their potential landing points, you know, and will we then not have a diverse faculty when the research indicates that, again, as you point out, all students benefit from having a diverse faculty as a part of their instructional staff. So can you kind of further elaborate on that point that, again, you've made in your testimony and talking about kind of the macro operations of public

Senator Kaler.

Through the chair to Senator Kaler, I appreciate that question, and I think that's the difficulty that we run into with bills like this because when there's vague definition or lack of definition around something, it allows both sides to use that terminology in the way that they wish to use that terminology. So I want to disagree with you that there are times when people who might tend to believe, like I believe, might use that as a bully club, just as on the right side of the spectrum there are people who think if you hire a person of color it is only because of diversity, equity, inclusion policies. So with lack of clarity around what those definitions are, what it does is it stifles what happens at the classroom setting or at the district level, because there's a fear of what happens if you break the law. I mean, there's always this question of what comes next. We see what's happening with Senate Bill 1, and now we're tying funding to Senate Bill 1. Is that going to be the next step of something like this, that we haven't clearly defined what DEI is, but if someone decides that you're using DEI practices and it hasn't really been defined, is the next step going to be to say, okay, we're going to withhold school funding from you now? We don't know. But, again, that's the problem. This is vague, undefined, and it leads to, it puts everything into the political spectrum and takes it out of the educational spectrum. And that's what the problem is here, that we don't have clear definition. And so we have, on one hand, some people over-complying and being fearful to teach what they think needs to be taught or fearful to use hiring practices that they think benefit their local because they're fearful of breaking the law. Or, as you say, you might have people who are using it as a bullet club on the other side to say, if you don't agree with me.

Thank you very much for your testimony today. Thank you. Up next is Heather Affairs, Ohio School Counselors Association. Welcome to committee and you may proceed when ready Thank you Chair Brenner Vice Chair Blessing Ranking Member Ingram and the members of the Senate Education Committee thanks for allowing me the opportunity to share our opposition to Senate Bill 113

Thank you for your testimony today. Are there any questions from committee members?

through chair Brenner to the ranking member Ingram thank you for your question students do not show up to school on equal footing they have a lot of different things that are going on at home they have baggage in their backpack that we will kind of talk about and having diversity equity and inclusion actually allows us to provide students the supports that they need so they can learn at that equal playing field.

If I may, since they're not the same. Through Chair Brenner to the ranking member Ingram. I think what you're kind of getting at, there's a visual of this that I kind of see, right? It's a person is a little shorter, another person is taller. They are at a baseball field, right? So the person trying to look over at the fence, they need something to stand on. So the one who was shorter is able to see the fence. So they are now on equal playing field. So equity, diversity, and inclusion gives us an opportunity to give them that step ladder. Very similar to you are wearing glasses. Not everyone needs glasses, right?

If I may follow up with a question.

And if you have that student who can't get on the box to see over the fence or climb the ladder to see over the fence because they're even shorter than the other kid, is it necessary, say, if they were in a wheelchair, that we cut a hole in the fence?

I would say we'd have to do everything that we can to allow them to have access to that field.

Thank you.

Well, I guess it's directly to the chair, Brenner, this time.

One that I've worked with in the past is called Second Step, that teaches a lot of social skills and looking more at acceptance of differences versus, I think, kind of earlier to that question, versus tolerance of differences, but there are some evidence-based programs out there.

Chair Brenner, thank you for your question. I would say that being accepting of differences is one where you don't have to agree with the other person, right? So it's not like the club that I need you to think like I do or to understand. It's more of we are different and we are going to embrace that we are different and that is okay that we are different. Tolerance is going to be more like I tolerate you sitting next to me in class versus you're going to be different and I'm going to engage with you and I'm going to have conversations and I can be friends with you.

Please.

Well, Chair Brenner, if I may, the Ohio School Counseling Association would be open to having conversations around definitions and kind of what we see in the schools. and I don't think anyone feels that someone should tell someone else what to think. I don't think that's what acceptance actually is. I think it's allowing them to say you might be different and that's okay that you are different. So having some more conversation maybe around that, we might be able to find some common ground.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Part of what we attempt to do in the committee process, not just with this bill, but with any bill, is kind of have a thorough examination of it and look for what the unintended consequences might be. And so I appreciate you being here and raising some issues. I have a question for you about perhaps with your professional knowledge what a potential unintended consequence might be regarding the English as second language learners that are currently in Ohio's public schools. reading from an Ohio Department of Education workforce webpage that says English Learners, quoting from the website, Ohio schools currently serve over 80,000 students who are English learners. Spanish is the home or primary language of about a third of the state's English learners, and then they list off a series of them. Since these are not alphabetical, I'm going to kind of assumed that this might be one, two, three, four, five, but, you know, the next ones are Somali, Arabic, Swahili, and Chinese. So I guess my question for you is, do you see, could you educate the committee as to if this policy were enacted and became law, what would this potentially do to the 80,000 students, according to the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce, where English is where there are students in a public school system in Ohio but English is not their first language Thank you very much Mr Chair Through Chair Brenner to Senator Smith thank you for your question

Actually, I'd like to follow up on that. Lau v. Nichols' 1974 U.S. Supreme Court case basically said that English as a second language is protected and you can do those type of things you just suggested to help get the kids to be able to learn English. So that's not going to change. So I guess, again, my follow-up to his question is, how would this be stopped given the fact that there are federal laws, you know, EEOC that are in place right now that would still allow those things to happen? Chair Brenner, for example, that I've personally, like, had,

Well, I will just say, before I go back to Senator Smith, that is not the intent of what my side of the aisle is doing. So I'll be happy to sit down with the Counselors Association and work with you some more on that. Going back to Senator Smith.

Through Chair Brenner to Senator Smith, thank you for your question. money is the water part of the testimony was it makes it really unclear about what training is going to be allowed and what training would not be am I allowed to go to a 504 training to learn about that for students who have the disability and that might not be the intention of the bill and I can completely appreciate that but that's the quandary that schools are going to be having if this does pass. And therefore, they're going to be more shy of doing these kinds of things because they don want to be not following the law So that our fear and our concern All right Well thank you very much for your testimony today Up next is Maxine Irvine

Good afternoon, Chairman Brenner and members of the Education Committee. My name is Maxine Irvine. I am a lifelong resident of Ohio and have a BBA degree from Kent State University and MBA degree from Ashland University. Thank you for the opportunity to speak today as an opponent of Senate Bill 113. DEI is vital to ensure that all students have a safe learning environment, an environment where students can feel accepted and included so that they will be able to concentrate on their education. We are all different from each other. Every one of us has different strengths and weaknesses. We cannot look at someone and assume what their strengths are. That is called stereotyping, and we all do that to a certain extent. Most likely, stereotypes will be wrong. Diversity among people is the key to creating and building a successful society. DEI is a technique to look beyond the stereotypes we have created to reach out to people who are different than us and to include them in their society. I can use myself as an example from the days before there were DEI. When I was in school, it was assumed that girls were good in language and boys were good in math. Therefore, boys were encouraged to pursue math and science and girls to pursue language classes. I didn't fit in. Though I excelled in math, I had an unrecognized and never addressed disability in reading, and my math teacher would not let me pursue the advanced math classes I longed to take when I was in eighth grade. What classes did they assign to me? Well, several years later, I decided to transfer to a private high school because I wasn't satisfied with my education. So what classes there did they assign to me? They assigned me to three English classes at the same time. And they assigned me to one math class, and that math class was at least six months, a half a school year behind where I should have been and where I was before going to that private school. I asked if I could attend the associated math class at the associated boys' school. They said no. But they did allow me to take an English class at the boys' school. I asked if I could do independent study. The teacher said yes, but she didn't have time to work with me. And why did I experience this? Because of the stereotype of females doing poorly in math combined with my reading disability. Even expressing an interest in math at that time labeled me as weird and that something was wrong with me. They completely ignored my national test scores where I excelled, and I was never allowed to pursue my love of mathematics. How many more people like me were denied the ability to pursue their strengths because they did not fit some unjustifiable preconceived idea of what is acceptable to society? Elimination of DEI programs will once again ostracize us who don't fit the norms and will silence our voices. Worse than that, it is denying that the difference between people even exists. Think of all that will be lost to the advancements of our society by not encouraging those with different ideas to speak up. It is those very ideas that contribute the most to society, and it is a shame if we silence them. Do not turn the clock back to a time of hopelessness for those who want to be an active participant of society. Vote no against Senate Bill 113, and do not allow some of our brightest and most creative students to experience the loss of their dreams and encouragement of teachers and others in their lives as I did. Thank you. And if you have any questions.

Thank you very much, Chairman.

I understand what you went through when you were in school. It looks like we probably went to school at the same time. You testify elimination of DEI programs will once again ostracize us who don't fit the norms. It will silence our voices. Think of all this loss. it says do not turn the clock back on the hopelessness. We did some work on Senate Bill 1, I think it was, or DEI bill. Has that happened at the colleges? Has things suddenly shifted and issues happening? Are we turning back the clock? In other words, I understand your fear, but if we get rid of DEI programs in schools, do you think they're going to force young girls to only take English classes and not take math classes? We've come so far with STEM classes and a lot of the educational programs. I myself personally am not involved in education. I am not a teacher. But I don't know what kind of results it will be, but I really do think it will prevent people from speaking up and feeling free to pursue what they really are interested in. Again, since you aren't in education, you clearly say that we're going to turn back the clock to a time of hopelessness for those who want to be active participants of society. I'm just asking you, if we get rid of DEI programs in high schools, do you really think that all of a sudden society is going to start telling girls they can't take math classes?

Ranking Member Ingram.

Senator Smith.

Through the chair, it's kind of interesting, the story that you're telling me, because my undergraduate major was actually industrial management, and for a while I was an interior design major, and I took architecture courses. And now, thinking about what would have been best for me would have been probably to get an architecture degree, because that's what my abilities are in. My visualization is phenomenal, but because of the ideas back at that time and what people could and could not do, I wound up getting a business degree. Thank you.

Thank you for your time today Senate Bill 113 seeks to prohibit diversity equity and inclusion in public schools As a former public school educator and a lifelong advocate for education, this bill is extremely upsetting. The language in this bill specifies that school districts would have to prohibit any orientation or training course regarding diversity, equity, and inclusion. Based on previous legislation I've seen hit this committee, I'm clear the authors of this bill wrote it, likely with the purpose of removing safeguards for LGBTQ plus students. And while it would achieve that problematic goal, it would also impact the education of students with disabilities. I have submitted testimony to this committee many times regarding the rights of LGBTQ Ohioans, so I believe my position on this issue is clear. Today, my testimony will focus on the impact of this bill on Ohio students with disabilities. As an educator, I dedicated the majority of my time teaching to working specifically with children receiving special educational services and saw firsthand the challenges these students faced daily. This bill is extremely discriminatory and would make it quite difficult to adhere to federal law. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, asserts the rights of children with disabilities to receive a free and appropriate public education. How can educators who do not have degrees or licensure in special education be expected to provide an appropriate education to students with exceptionalities with no specialized training on how to best serve these students? These students have a right not only to be educated, but to have a schooling experience that is as inclusive as possible. This means being educated in a general education classroom with their typical peers. And while special education professionals are able to offer support, they are not able to spend the entirety of a school day with a single student or in one classroom. This means that general education teachers must receive training on how to support all students in their classrooms. The students I served during my time teaching were brilliant. They deserve a supportive learning environment and the ability to form friendships with and learn alongside their typical peers. This bill would be devastating to children and families who already have to advocate much harder for their children's rights. I urge you to stand up for the rights of Ohio's most vulnerable students and oppose Senate Bill 113. Thank you for your time. I'll take any questions.

May I offer a response to that now? Sure. So I think it's not really up for debate that federally we're looking at an administration that would like to dismantle the Department of Education. should that occur on a federal level and it bounces back to the states legislation like this would set us up for those students to not have those rights So while I appreciate that it is currently federal law I cannot guarantee that that going to continue to be so and I can't stand for legislation that would set us up for those students to lose those rights if they lose them federally.

Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee. My name is Josh Meek. I am the statewide advocacy manager for Equality Ohio, a leading statewide nonprofit organization dedicated to advancing lived-in legal equality for LGBTQ plus Ohioans. Today I'm here testifying in opposition to Senate Bill 113. Despite the overwhelming public backlash and attacks on our public colleges and universities, as seen through Senate Bill 1, this legislation has decided to mirror its effect on our public schools by banning all diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives, programs, or offices. DEI efforts are not about lowering standards. They are about removing barriers so standards can be met fairly. According to the 2021 National School Climate Survey by GLSEN, schools with comprehensive DEI programs report significantly better outcomes for LGBTQ plus students. Schools with DEI initiatives have 30% fewer instances of homophobic remarks. Students in these schools are 20% more likely to feel safe.

so I can distribute it to the members of the committee? Absolutely, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you very much. I just have one question. And so when we start to talk about a lot of this, it's about not teaching our students what to think, but how to think. Do you think that all LGBTQ students think the same?

Any other questions from committee members? Seeing none, thank you for your testimony today.

Up next is Agnes Martin. Welcome to committee, and you may proceed when ready.

Thank you for your testimony today. Are there any questions from committee members? Seeing none, thank you for your testimony today. Up next is Gary Daniels. Welcome to committee, and you may proceed when ready.

Thank you, Gary, for your testimony. Any questions from committee members?

Through the chair to Ranking Member Ingram, who knows? It's undefined in the bill. It can mean anything that anybody wants it to mean. So all of the examples I used, all of the examples you could come up with, and all the examples previous witnesses and future witnesses can come up with is all subject to being on the chopping block because the bill, we contend, on purpose does not contain a definition.

Welcome to committee and you may proceed when ready Good afternoon My name is Elizabeth Kirby Thank you for accommodating me Just came in from Cleveland Heights University High School District Let me get the salutations correct first. Good afternoon, Senator Brenner, Vice Chair of Blessing, and members of the Senate Education Committee. My name is Elizabeth Kirby. I am the proud superintendent of the Cleveland Heights University High School District. I've been an educator for 30 years, eight years in my role. I was here last year to talk about Senate Bill 113 with some students. I've already submitted a second round of testimony, so I'm just going to talk just very practically about this bill and its potential implications on school districts. I've heard some of the speakers talk about its implications in terms of meaning less support for our students with disabilities, especially when you think about the term inclusion and equity that directly connects to the accommodations and modifications that we must provide for students and the training that we must provide for staff in order to provide those. I want you to know that there is already fear out on this bill. This past year, I was a participant in the Jewish Federation of Cleveland's Education Leaders Summit. During that summit, we specifically engaged in training about understanding anti-Semitism, strengthening leadership skills and promoting an inclusive environment, discussing how to best manage differences within school communities, cultivating a sense of belonging for every student, and learning about the diversity of the Jewish people. So this was the goals of that summit. As we invited both public and private schools, we noticed that public school leaders were a bit hesitant to even attend because of the language, and this bill hasn't even been passed yet. So there's already a chilling effect that is happening. I think it's an unintended effect, but I do think it's important for the committee to understand how it actually lives on the ground. And this work is really about making sure our kids feel supported in school. The other pieces around the report card and the scores are starting to roll out, and I talked about this the last time, specifically when you look at the gap-closing component of the report card, it calls out specific subgroups of students for which districts often structure professional development to meet the needs that we see in the data. So because the language is vague, people tend to fill in the blanks, and they tend to err on the side of caution, which means that students can get negatively affected. So, for example, within the gap-closing component on the report card, there's a specific metric for English learners, English learner proficiency. Well, what kind of training can be held in order to support our students who are English learners? You could see diversity training. You could see equity training. Even inclusion training being something that you do in order to bolster student achievement. so again I think that one thing that I don't think folks realize is that when you're on the ground in the schools we really do listen and look at the legislation when it comes out we try to interpret it the legislative commission will give some interpretations we get nervous so when you have legislation that doesn't have clear definitions or real understanding it tends to hurt kids but also use and waste resources of the school district and the state as they try to interpret and figure things out too as well. So this is something that I really hope that the committee really considers. I would love to sit down with any member of the committee and talk about its practical application and what I've seen already happening in schools. Um. based on this. I think the final thing that is challenging is we know that non-public schools are getting more state funding than traditional public schools are, and they won't have this, if this passes, they won't have the, I'm sorry, I'm over, this hanging over them. So it's just another challenge of trying to meet the needs of kids in a system that doesn't appear fair.

from committee members. Senator Smith. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Ms. Kirby, for being here. Thank you for your service to kids. Perhaps you, I don't I've sort of got a good visual of the room. I don't know if you were here when I asked about another person who testified about English as a second language. But according to the Ohio Department of Education and Workforce, in Ohio public schools currently there's over 80,000 students that are learning English as a second language. And again, the website's a little unclear, but it seems like the top five languages in Ohio, native languages, are Spanish, Somali, Arabic, Swahili, and Chinese. Could you speak to, I mean, obviously I know that Cleveland Heights School District

Follow-up? Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just very quickly, as a former resident of Cleveland Heights, I appreciate your work, and thank you for those comments.

Thank you.