Ohio Senate Education Committee - 3-24-2026

The meeting of the Senate Education Committee to order. Will the clerk please call the roll?

All right, we have a quorum. The minutes from the prior meeting are on your iPads. Are there any corrections, additions, or changes to the minutes? Hearing none, the minutes will be approved as written. I now bring forward for its fourth hearing, House Bill 462. We don't have any testimony.

The amendment is in order. Will you please explain the amendment?

All right. Thanks for that explanation. Are there any objections to the amendment becoming part of the bill? Hearing none, the amendment becomes part of the bill, and I'm going to grant LSC the authorization to harmonize these changes to the sub-bill. We do have one person to testify in person, from Kate King from the Ohio Association of School Nurses. Welcome to committee, and you may proceed when ready.

Thank you so much for submitting that amendment.

Any questions? Any questions from committee members? Seeing none, thank you very much for your testimony.

All right. I think there's, I don't see any written testimony in the iPads.

Motion has been made. Will the clerk please call the roll?

The bill passes unanimously. That will conclude the fourth hearing on House Bill 462. Please sign the sheet that's going around for that. Up next will be Senate Bill 326 for its third hearing And we do have an amendment to recognize Vice Chair Blessing for a motion Thank you Mr Chairman Move to adopt Substitute Bill 1762 The sub-bill is in order. Would you please explain the sub-bill?

Thank you very much for that explanation. Are there any objections to the substitute bill? Hearing none, the substitute bill is adopted. We do have interest to party testimony, Paul Imhoff from the Ohio School Boards Association, or BASA actually on this one. I've got it backwards on my thing here. So welcome to committee and you may proceed. I was going to say that didn't look right. Thank you.

and of course I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. Thank you for your testimony. Are there any questions from committee members?

Through the Chair and to the Senator, yes, definitely. So I think when you look at the estimates, I think it will cut that in half.

There is flexibility in the language.

If they meet the standards, then that student would be able to count that as the requirement.

Through the chair and to the senator, I think I see as a best practice the ability to take these technological literacy standards and to implement them across multiple courses, for instance, if a district would like to do that. Years ago, when I started as an English teacher at the high school level, we taught public speaking as a standalone course. And then we discovered if we implemented public speaking into all of the other courses in an authentic way, we actually got better outcomes. Working with Senator Kaler on Senate Bill 328, also looking at the same type of thing. How do we implement our middle school career awareness content, possibly into multiple courses, again, in a more authentic way? So I think schools could have the option to do a standalone course, or they could integrate this into multiple courses, but they would be held accountable for teaching these standards.

All right. Any other questions from committee members? Ranking Member Ingram.

Through the chair and to the senator it is our opinion that we need more flexibility in the bill in the language in order to do what I just described All right Any other questions Seeing none thank you very much for your testimony today I do want to draw

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I motion to adopt substitute Bill 2051-3.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The substitute bill pushes back implementation deadlines and makes several clarifying changes that reflect potential concerns we had during interested party testimony. I'll explain the substitute bill briefly, but we'll also have proponent testimony to further explain the changes. The substitute bill adjusts the timelines by moving the implementation deadlines for schools to the 2027-2028 school year and pushes back the deadline for the Department of Education to produce the professional skills standards and career coaching framework to March of 2027. The deadline for the Return on Investment Initiative reports to December 2027. It changes the one-half unit course requirement for the middle school career exploration to at least 60 hours of instruction across grades 6 through 8. It clarifies that a career technical education course in 7th or 8th grade will count for both the CTE and the career exploration requirements. Clarifies that schools may use existing personnel for their career coaching framework and that the state is providing guidance in the statewide career coaching framework rather than the mandating a new system across the state. It strengthened the department's role in providing guidance and identifying free tools and resources for schools to deliver career exploration. And finally, it makes student planning more career-connected and clarifies the purposes is to document the student interests and aptitudes throughout the school and to build on their intentions toward their future careers.

Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. My name is Cassie Pulsgrove, the Vice President of Strategic Partnerships and Government Affairs at Ohio Excels. I'm here today to speak specifically to the substitute version of Senate Bill 328 and the changes that have been made in response to stakeholder feedback. We appreciate the thoughtful input from educators, career tech leaders, counselors, workforce partners and state agencies, especially the input from those serving on the Career Connected Learning Coalition we convene. The substitute bill reflects that input and, in our view, strengthens both implementation and clarity. I'd like to briefly highlight a few key improvements. First, the substitute bill adjusts timelines to better reflect implementation realities. The start of the required career exploration instruction and career and academic plans is moved to begin with students who enter sixth grade in the 27 28 school year deadlines the state-developed professional skills standards and the career coaching framework are also extended to March 2027. And the deadline for the Return on Investment Initiative reports is now December 2027. These changes ensure that the Department of Education and Workforce, schools, and our partners have adequate time to prepare and implement this important work. Second, the bill strengthens flexibility for districts. It now more clearly allows districts to meet the career exploration instruction requirement through at least 60 hours across grades 6 through 8 through either course or an approved plan, which is an equal option, and explicitly allows districts to partner with external organizations and use multi-year models that deploy embedded career exploration instruction and activities throughout a student's experience. This reflects what we heard from the field. Schools want to build on what they're already doing well, not necessarily start from scratch. The substitute bill also clarifies alignment with career technical education. If a student takes a career tech course in grade 7 or 8 that meets the bill's career exploration instruction requirements, that course can count for both CTE and career exploration. This reduces duplication, supports early pathway engagement, opens the door to weighted funding, and ensures that we're not unintentionally discouraging students from entering CTE early. We also heard concerns about staffing and existing programs. The substitute bill makes clear that schools may use existing personnel, including counselors, teachers, career coaches, or existing navigators. Furthermore, the statewide career coaching framework is guidance, not a mandate, for new roles or any staffing changes. It also explicitly allows the framework to enhance existing career coaching programs rather than replace them. The substitute bill strengthens the department's role in supporting schools. It requires the department to provide guidance on high-quality career exploration models, identify free tools and resources to develop the activities, including interest and aptitude assessments, align professional development to these requirements, and publicly display how districts are delivering this career exploration. This ensures that schools are supported, not left to figure this out on their own. The bill also clarifies the purpose of student planning. Plans are not about locking students into a certain career. They're about ongoing exploration and updating goals over time. They help students document their interests and aptitudes, understand their options, and map out a path through high school that aligns with their ultimate goals, whether that includes college and accelerated pathway options or career technical education pathways, military enlistment, industry-recognized credential earning, going straight into the workforce, or any combination of those things. things. Plans need to connect students to real opportunity. In the near term, the sub bill also builds on Ohio's existing career plans by making them, or I'm sorry, their existing graduation plans by making them more career connected. Helping students think about not just graduation requirements, but about what comes next and how those graduation requirements and their coursework connects to real opportunity. Then, beginning the 27-28 school year, the state transitions to the new career and academic plan approach for incoming sixth graders. So this is not about adding something new on top. It's about evolving what we've already have into something more useful, more relevant, and more connected to students' futures. The sub-bill ensures implementation is aligned by cohort, avoiding any confusion during transition. This makes planning more meaningful and developmentally appropriate and continue to be focused on growing students or growing with students over time. Members of the committee, the substitute version of Senate Bill 328 reflects meaningful collaboration over the past three weeks through our Career Connected Learning Coalition meetings with practitioners state agencies policy makers and other stakeholders It maintains the core goal improving outcomes for students while also incorporating practical feedback to ensure that this work is implementable, flexible, and aligned with existing systems. We appreciate your partnership that has shaped this version of the bill and respectfully urge your continued support. Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions.

Thank you, and good afternoon, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide proponent testimony about Senate Bill 328. My name is Melissa Cropper, and I'm a library media specialist from Georgetown, Ohio, serving as the president of the Ohio Federation of Teachers. OFT represents teachers in traditional and charter schools, support staff, higher education faculty and staff, library employees, and social workers. While I'm here today as the president of the Ohio Federation of Teachers, I'd like to start my testimony from the perspective of the most important job I've ever had, which is the mother of five children. While my children were across the board on how well they performed in school, they had one thing in common. None of them knew what career field they wanted to pursue as adults. Of course, not knowing that made it difficult to make decisions about next steps after graduation. And like many families, we spent thousands of dollars figuring out what they did not want to do. All five of my children received some kind of post-secondary degree. Only two of them are actually pursuing a career in the field that requires that degree. What my family experienced is not uncommon. Unfortunately, the problem has only become more exacerbated over the years as our education system has become more and more test focused without attaching any meaning to these tests. Students and families are struggling to see the relevance of school, and this is often reflected in our absentee rates and less than ideal testing results. When students do not see the relevance to what they are learning, when they struggle to make the connection between what is happening in the classroom and how that is going to impact their futures, they lose interest in even being in school. The higher Federation of Teachers joined the Career Connected Learning Coalition because we have seen how student engagement changes when students have exposure to different careers and opportunities to try them on for size. I have personally witnessed several examples of this, such as at Van Wert High School, where the CEO, the Career Education Opportunity Program, gives juniors and seniors the opportunity to work in local workplaces and get a feel for whether the field is right for them before they even graduate. I have also seen at New Lexington School District how early exposure to careers and a strong workforce development framework has literally changed the trajectory of students and families. I have included a link to a video about New Lexington to the testimony and I encourage you all to take a look at it because it really shows how they've embedded career-connected learning throughout the K-12 system. Senate Bill 328 provides a framework for giving the same types of opportunities to all students across the state. It honors the great work that is already happening in many districts across the state while also providing a framework for developing career awareness in middle school and putting students on a path to finding a career that works for them. It not only makes K-12 education more relevant, but also helps families make better decisions about what kind of higher education opportunities to pursue after graduation. In addition, it establishes educational workforce return on investment initiative to better coordinate and use the state's data. We appreciate the way that Senator Kaler has worked with the coalition to address concerns on the front end of this bill. As with any worthwhile initiative we anticipate that there will be some bumps in the road and that more adjustments will need to be made when implementation begins We particularly concerned about the workload this could create if not done in a thoughtful way at a local level with teachers and counselors at the table helping to shape the implementation, especially at a time when many of our districts are already struggling with funding and making reductions in force. However, we also feel strongly that this can bring back the relevance that our students are craving and can move our education system in the direction it needs to go if all stakeholders are willing to work together, learn from the implementation process, and commit to making changes and providing resources to make this a success. This concludes my testimony, and I would be glad to answer any questions.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for your testimony today. It's great to be working with you on this bill. You mentioned two schools, Van Wert and another school, and what they're doing in New Lexington and how well that's working. I think I know the answer to this question, but I want to hear it from you. Will this bill hurt what they're doing or stop them from doing what they're doing?

Any other questions? Senator Smith.

Through the chair to Senator Smith, I could literally spend all day talking about New Lexington, and I just received the video today, so I apologize that I didn't get to you sooner. It's a video that was just created or that was just sent to me. New Lexington has really figured out a way to embed career-connected learning throughout all the grade levels, including starting in grade three. They have an experiential class for all third graders to go through a three-week welding experience, and they make a welding project. They have a working farm on campus where all students, they have the opportunity to raise an animal. They plant a lot of their own crops that they then use to sell popcorn at concessions, potatoes and salads that they use in their cafeteria. And then at the high school level, lots of different opportunities, different pathways it can go into, such as phlebotomy, graphic design. They have a partnership with IBEW to allow for apprenticeship programs in the school. There are a multitude of programs there. But it's a model that not only has specific career pathways, but also allows for students to explore different areas and get different types of credentials. And so one of the things they have found is often students will earn some credentials that will allow them to make money after they graduate while they are pursuing higher education, maybe in another field, but they're able to work at the same time and help pay for their education. One of the most beautiful stories that I've heard come out of New Lexington was from their apprenticeship program with IBEW, where a mother literally cried at the award ceremony they had because she said that her son was the first person in their family not only to ever graduate from high school but to also get a career starting at a year that gave him retirement benefits health benefits and all those things that you get in a good union job, good career pathway, that literally is changing the trajectory of this family and putting them on a pathway out of poverty into figuring out life-sustaining careers that they could pursue. So having those opportunities at school for students to be able to experiment, not necessarily to be tracked into one pathway because that's not the intent of this, but for students to see all the different possibilities that are available to them, how they can use these possibilities after they graduate, and how they can, again, whether it's going into a specific career pathway, starting their own business, the skills that they learn through this career-connected learning, are just the skills that they need to be successful after they graduate.

Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram and Committee members, Thank you for the opportunity to provide proponent testimony today on Senate Bill 328. My name is Chad Aldis, and I'm with the Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Ohio has made real progress over the past several years in expanding career-connected learning. Students have more opportunities today, many more, than they did a decade ago. But despite that progress, too many students still move through school without a clear sense of what comes next or how their education connects to their future. Senate Bill 328 takes an important step toward fixing that. This testimony will focus on three parts of the bill that will likely, in our view, have the greatest impact. The middle school career exploration requirement, the new approach to academic and career planning, and the return on investment initiative. Let's start with middle school. One of the most valuable aspects of this bill is that it doesn't wait until high school to begin career-related conversations. It requires schools to provide students in grades 6 through 8 with meaningful exposure to careers, including hands-on experiences, financial literacy, and at least one structured career coaching session. That matters more than it might seem at first glance. Right now, we typically expect students to make important decisions early in high school, what courses to take, whether to pursue career and technical education, how to think about college or training programs, without ever having explored their interests in a serious way. For many students, those decisions are made with very little context. This bill helps change that by making sure students have time before high school to explore options, reflect on their strengths, and think about what they might want to pursue. Research and experience both tell us that those early exposure opportunities, job shadowing, career speakers, and even simple interest inventories can make a real difference in how students engage with school and the choices they later make. It's much easier to build a coherent pathway when students have had a chance to see what's out there. That leads directly to the second piece, academic and career planning. Senate Bill 328 asks students beginning in eighth grade to create a plan that goes beyond just earning a diploma. Instead of focusing narrowly on graduation requirements, students will be asked to think about their interests, their goals, and steps needed to get where they want to go. This shift is significant. Too often, planning in high school is treated as a compliance exercise, something to check off rather than something that meaningfully guides decisions. The approach in this bill is different. Plans must be updated each year. It must reflect real experiences like career exploration and work-based learning, and families are expected to be a part of the process. That combination, starting earlier, revisiting plans regularly and involving families makes it much more likely that these plans will actually matter. And frankly, they need to. As we've seen, many students graduate without a clear sense of direction, which makes the already difficult transition to college or career even harder. Helping students connect their coursework to real goals is one of the most practical ways to address that problem. Finally, I want to touch on the Return on Investment Initiative. Ohio has invested a great deal in education and workforce programs, but it's often hard for students, families, and policymakers to see which pathways lead to strong outcomes. This initiative is designed to change that by connecting data across agencies and making it more useful and accessible. That includes information on things like employment outcomes, wages, and how well different programs are preparing students for what comes next. That kind of transparency is long overdue. Students and families should be able to see in clear terms what different pathways lead to. Educators should have better feedback on what's working, and policymakers should be able to make decisions based on evidence, not guesswork. Taking together these three components, early career exploration, meaningful planning, and better data fit together in a way that strengthens the overall system. Students explore options earlier, they build and refine the plan over time, and the state provides clearer information about which pathways deliver results. That's a coherent approach and it builds directly on the work that Ohio has already done. Senate Bill 328 doesn't try to reinvent everything. Instead, it fills in some important gaps and makes existing efforts more connected and more effective. It's a good bill and I would urge you to pass it without too many changes. I'd be remiss if I didn't note one amendment that was added in today that we are not supportive of. It was around the middle school career exploration requirement. We think one of them does pose a significant risk of watering down the requirement to the point of making the course requirement almost irrelevant in practice. So I am concerned about that. So I do urge you to look at that as it goes forward, but I thank you for the opportunity to testify on what I believe is a very good bill, and I would be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

Chairman Brenner, Vice Chairman Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of this committee, the U.S. Department of Education does not educate a single child in Ohio, or anywhere in America for that matter. The agency recently saw its staff reduced by about half, and I strongly suspect that no classroom in this state was affected. My name is James Paul. I'm the director of state education policy at the America First Policy Institute. We're a 501 that develops research and policy to put the American people first. And when it comes to education, AFPI seeks to empower parents to find learning environments that work best for their children. Unfortunately there is little evidence that the Federal Department of Education or ED helps families find these environments In fact there is little evidence that ED has made any positive impact on students since it was founded in 1979. Fewer than one-third of eighth graders, fewer than one-third, are proficient nationally in math and reading in 2024 on the most recent NAEP assessment. This is after $268 billion in annual federal education spending. 46 years and trillions of dollars cumulatively have not helped students. And that is why I'm grateful to speak today in support of SCR 16. As you know, this resolution does two things. First, it calls on Congress to make permanent the administrative changes that are currently underway at the federal level. And secondly, it directs HIO's legislature to work with state agencies and state officials to build a comprehensive plan, creating an inventory of federal programs, identifying statutory changes, and waivers that are needed to assume greater control over education, and ultimately preparing legislation for introduction. Ed simply does not improve student outcomes. What it does instead is create rules, many of them ideological and expensive, all of which favor compliance and box checking over basic classroom instruction. A 2024 Title IX rule threatened federal funding from Ohio schools that declined to open girls' locker rooms to biological boys. A 2014 guidance threatened civil rights investigations for districts whose discipline data showed racial disparities, regardless of whether policies were applied evenly and ultimately produced more disorder in districts that followed the guidance. And then there was proposed regulations on the charter school program, the federal charter school program in 2022, that would have undermined successful charter schools, made it harder for them to access federal funding, and forced them to collaborate with competitors who ultimately want to see them closed down. Americans simply trust states more than the federal government to make educational decisions. The most common objections, having said that, that I hear to dismantling this agency are that doing so would somehow cut title funding, remove special education protections, and disrupt financial aid. But I assure you that none of these are true. All of these programs predate the Department of Education. Title I, created in 1965, Pell Grants in 1972, IDEA in 1975. ED inherited these programs when it was founded, and they can be redeployed to other agencies and, as appropriate, down to the states. Secretary McMahon is already taking these actions, establishing 10 interagency agreements as of this month that transfers Ed program administration to other federal agencies like Treasury, Labor, and Health and Human Services. However, all of these administrative changes could be reversed by a future administration in Washington. Only Congress can make these permanent which is why the message that could be sent by SCR 16 is so important that Ohio supports dismantling ed and that Ohio is developing a plan to assume devolved control to it For these reasons I urge this committee to pass the resolution

from committee members? Ranking Member Ingram. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your testimony. So why was the Department of Education created at the federal level?

I want to follow up. Thank you, Mr. Chair. And you have the data for that as to who was eligible and included prior to having some framework for all of our states to function on certain things, not everything. So do you have data that shows what outcomes were for various groups of students that would say that they were all failing or that they were what?

All right. Senator Smith.

University of Arkansas.

To, excuse me, through the chair to the senator, I'm not aware of the, I couldn't speak to the educational arrangements in other nations. However I would hesitate to draw conclusions about the relationship between the existence of such agencies to student outcomes

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Follow-up. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So you're saying that the fact that adults, in this nation over the age of 25 the notion that they have doubled some degree of higher education since 1979 when the U.S. Department of Education was founded, that the U.S. Department of Education had nothing to do with that? Through the chair, to the senator, no, I did not say, and I don't

Senator Blessing. Thank you for that. And thank you for being here to testify. I'm curious, and I'm glad that you mentioned equity in educational opportunities, because I think that's an important point that you brought up that this doesn't affect IDEA or Title I. But I guess my question is that, generally speaking, like if this were to occur, you would still be supportive of, you know, I'm glad you mentioned block grants to some sort of wealth equalizing function amongst the states from the federal government. I get that education is, you know, very much a local thing. But I do recognize that, you know, there are some states without two nickels to rub together versus some very wealthy states. and if they're going to have, broadly speaking, at least a minimum bar of educational opportunity that the federal government's economy of scale would have to step in, the same way that the state at least nominally tries to do this with our wealthy school districts versus some of our poor rural districts. I mean, is that kind of what you're pitching here, that we would, you know, this goes away, but there would still be money going to the states, but equalized in such a way where we recognize their ability to raise local dollars, their population, their median income, so on and so forth.

Senator Smith. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Again, thank you, Mr. Paul, for being here. So are you aware of and do you have an opinion on a component of the U.S. Department of Education, which is the Institute for Education Science?

I aware of I Yes I say that you know my Well I answer your question Yes I aware of it Follow up So yes I guess I will do a follow up So I mean that that is one of the components of the U Department of Education that I frankly most concerned about and would be interested in your opinion But let me give you some of the background from an Ohio perspective. So we've got a Republican governor in Ohio. I'm sure you're aware of that. And he is, during the course of his eight years, Governor DeWine has attempted to move the curriculum, especially of our elementary schools, to the science of reading. And the science of reading is something that has been extensively studied by the Institute for Education Science over the last 25 years. And probably the most well-known of those was the National Reading Panel in 2000. It was an exhaustive review of over 100,000 studies on reading instruction. And so I guess, you know, one of the fears that I have if we lose the U.S. Department of Education is, I mean, they don't tell schools what to teach and how to spend their money. They're in the they do high quality research on evidence based practices and policy to try to advance us as a nation. And so I would say, what is your, I mean, my fear is if we lose the U.S. Department of Education that we would lose the Institute for Education Science. And our Republican governor has relied extensively on that research to try to get the schools in Ohio to do a pivot to the science of reading based on the evidence that the U.S. Department of Education provided. So my polite question to you, sir, is why would we want to get rid of that?

Through the chair to the senator. Thank you for the question. I have a few comments on that. First, I would share your enthusiasm for the science of reading as an intervention that is important. It's something that in another capacity, I'll say that I serve on the State Board of Education in West Virginia, where I reside. And I'll tell you that our state of West Virginia is implementing an approach right now that is grounded in the science of reading that's very important. and I think has worked very well in Mississippi and other states and is something that should be pursued. I think one of the core legitimate functions of a federal Department of Education, one of the few but legitimate functions, is a research and a data collection function, so administration of NAEP, some education research certainly needed. My understanding of IES is that they largely fund research. They fund it. IES did not produce by itself any evaluation, to my knowledge, in-house of the science of reading in an RCT basis. I'm not aware of that. I could be wrong. These are grants giving out to researchers at Ed Policy Institutes, at Ohio State University, and other Ed Policy schools throughout the country. The research could continue and absolutely should continue on the science of reading, on other educational interventions that are being implemented in states, or that policymakers like yourself are curious to learn, are they working? The question is whether the federal government itself needs to be the body that funds that. And I would say no on the whole. There's an interest in every state in studying, in learning, in evaluating, in figuring out what is working and what isn't. And I don believe that there necessarily a role for the federal government in doing that I would say that I think there is a role for NAEP of course and a few other functions But when it comes to whether the federal government needs to be the one paying for these interventions, I would say that's not an appropriate role for the federal government.

Well, simply to say, Chairman Brenner, if indeed the federal Department of Education is dismantled and control is further devolved to the states, each state is going to need to establish a plan to identify how it's going to step up and administer funding more directly, whether that's through block grants. There's going to need to be statutes that are updated, and that's a key part of this resolution is for, for example, the state of Ohio, to take an inventory of all the federal grants that it currently receives, of all the mandates that it's currently complying with, all the statutes and rules and regulations, and make a plan to administer those funds in ways that serve Ohio students and to be prepared for that day and to send a message to Washington that we're ready to do this, we support dismantling the Department of Ed, and that we're ready to step up. And I do agree.

Chairman Brenner, yes, that's correct.

Ranking Member Ingram.

There's no direct accountability to staff members at the Federal Department of Education for someone who lives in a school district in Ohio or in my school district in West Virginia. There's no direct accountability. So the answer is who are the states accountable to, who is watching them. It's ultimately the people in each state who will elect, who will directly elect their representatives and will have more voice in how schools are organized and how schools are funded. And one thing that I found pretty strong bipartisan support for in any state that I've looked at or researched is an interest in spending more money on education. There seems to be support for that, and I wouldn't expect that dismantling ed would make states not want to spend money on education or not want to do things that are in the best interest of students. That's one of the benefits of devolving control more locally is to make sure that states are in a position to lead and so that states are able to tailor solutions that are best suited to the students that they serve because they know students better than the bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. All right.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chair Brenner, Ranking Member Ingram, Honorable Members of the Committee. My name is Brad Jensen. I'm the Director of Intergovernmental Affairs at the U.S. Department of Education. I'm very grateful for the opportunity to be here today. It's always good to get out of D.C. It's always great to come to Ohio, I'll tell you. Let me prepare some shared remarks, and then I'd be happy to take any questions that you have. As was mentioned by the previous member from AFPI, this is a very interesting moment in American public policy in this large national discussion about the future of education. We have seen a great deal of evidence over many years that the Department of Education's effectiveness in actually improving education outcomes across the country is very tenuous indeed. The test scores following the COVID-19 pandemic and the 2024 NAEP test are very, very low. And one of the challenges that we face as Americans in talking about our type of education system and how we can improve and help American children to succeed is to talk about how do we improve their ability to read, how to do math, how to succeed in life overall. Let me share some just quick comments and then we'll maybe take some questions as well. One of the key things is just from our perspective at the department is to just consider that most education in America is done at the state and local level. If you look at your own state budget, most states on average spend around 80% of their budget on K-12 education and public systems of higher education. A good example is in California, they have 10 Cal, University of California's like Berkeley or UCLA. They have 23 Cal States and then 144 community colleges. It's a very large system that requires a great deal of funding from the state. And so most of that funding in America comes at the local level. So around 90 to 92 percent in the average state is generated locally and only a small portion of around maybe 8% comes from the federal government. However, that funding is very important to very key programs like we've discussed IDEA and Title I funding, for example. And so this type of funding, and when we talk about restructuring the department, many of these programs will continue. They existed prior to the formation of the department, and in the current structure it would continue long after the department was restructured or distributed to other federal agencies. This is one of the key things that we're seeing and the things that Secretary McMahon has led the way on is we are actively partnering with other federal agencies that have a great deal of expertise in key areas. So last week you may have heard a very important change, which was shifting our student loan portfolio to the U.S. Department of Treasury. That portfolio is enormous. It's $1.7 trillion. If that was a commercial bank, it would be the fifth largest in the country. Roughly 44 million Americans have student loans of some kind. Of those 44 million, only 40% are currently repaying their loans. 25% or 11 million Americans are in default right now. And so this is a really critical asset that is owned by the federal government, and since it's owned by the federal government, it's an asset owned by the American people. How do we maintain and properly manage that type of debt, which is owned by millions of our own citizens? Education really needs the help of the U.S. Department of Treasury. Treasury has extraordinary expertise, extraordinary experience in managing this type of a portfolio that Ed simply does not. I'll give you another instance. Last fall, we have partnered with the Department of Labor on our Office of Career Technical and Adult Education. Many of you are probably familiar with Workforce Development. This is our office that does that. What we found in the past is that labor is very actively engaged in training adult Americans to upskill, to become more competitive in the marketplace. And the Department of Education has had an office that has engaged in this over the many years. What we found is we have two agencies with two offices specializing in this area with two staffs that barely speak to each other. So by actually partnering together, moving the ED office over to labor, labor has a great deal of greater sophistication in its grant making capacity. And actually there's been very, very positive synergies between the ED staff and the Department of Labor staff. And so these are one of the key things that we're seeing that is very, very successful. It has already previously been mentioned that it's very good to have states step up and anticipate changes from the federal level. Many states haven't introduced legislation, Tennessee notably, anticipating future changes that may come. Here in Ohio, I think that Ohio generally, if you look at the 2024 NAEP scores, has done relatively well compared to the rest of the states. but still roughly 32%, only 32% of 8th graders are proficient in math and reading in the state. And simply that's duplicated across America where basically one-third of American students are proficient. The other two-thirds are not. And so when we talk about changes in restructuring, what we're trying to do is changes for the better, changes that improve the outcomes for American students across the country. With that, let me conclude my testimony. I'd be happy to take any questions.

Are there any questions from committee members Ranking member Ingram Thank you Mr Chair Thank you for your testimony The difficulty I have is that if I have a student loan you're dealing with a student here, or the student's trying to get a loan, going through for their Pell Grants or whatever, then they're dealing with the Department of Treasury. If they're doing something else with workforce development or whatever, they're going to the Department of Labor. And for IDEA, I guess that goes to Health and Human Services and things of that nature. So you've got a student who can't go to one place that's going to three places now trying to get served. And that was part of the issue, too, when the department was developed. Now, do we need efficiencies? Absolutely. If there's two departments doing the same thing, you're absolutely right. but that doesn't take abandoning the department. How does that work with all of those resources coming from different places to be addressed to a student?

Follow-up. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So a scalpel rather than a hatchet might be better on some of these things. But I do have a question, too, because part of what you indicate in your presentation is school choice. You didn't talk about that and the expansion of that. And if you know Ohio, you know that that's quite widespread. We've even got students who are well beyond the income level, and their parents still receive a portion of a voucher to attend a private school. Is this a way for the states to expand into the voucher program more? And the choice, you can call it choice if you want to. We've always had choice. But to expand into the choice arena more so for more parents which then creates a new division in the outcomes for education if there are no depending on who creates the standards what they look like Right

All right. Any other questions from committee members? Seeing none, thank you very much for coming in and testifying today. With that, that concludes the in-person testimony today and the second hearing on Senate Concurrent Resolution 16. For the people who are waiting on House Bill 485 for its second hearing, we will be doing that shortly. I have to recess for a little bit because Finance Committee is reconvening, and several of us are on Finance Committee, which is starting in a few minutes over one of the bills. So we're going to go ahead and stand and recess to probably when Finance Committee is over, but I suspect that's going to be between 425 and 430, so we'll say we'll stand and recess until approximately 430. So we will be in recess for about 15 to 20 minutes. Thank you. I'm back from recess now, and we will begin with the last bill of the day, House Bill 485, for its second hearing. We do have a proponent testimony, and I'm going to call your name. If you're not there, I'll make another call if you're not here since we were in recess. Dr. William Lyle, welcome to committee.

Senator Blessing, when you get here, and also to ranking Senator Ingram.

Thank you, Doctor. Are there any questions from committee members? Ranking Member Ingram.

We don't even include that in that age. The key is that there was one cell from the mom and there was one cell from the dad that came together. It's not the role of the educational system to discuss the issue of sex.

One cell from the mom, one cell from the dad, and then there's an amazing process. How just from that one zygote, 10 weeks later there's a billion cells that have a beating heart. It's an amazing scientific fact and we just want to teach these kids and encourage them maybe to go into a STEM field, to encourage them to go into medicine and treat babies and diagnose babies that are still in the womb. My daughter performs ultrasounds over at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, an amazing career where she's not only involved in looking at babies in the womb, but also involved in transplant science because they're doing kidney transplants, liver transplants, heart transplants. Sometimes the exposure to a new career is vital to them making a career decision My exposure came the hard way My exposure to medicine was actually being hospitalized many times when I was a child That was my exposure But it was a positive exposure and it led me into a career of treating women as patients but also the babies in the womb as patients.

Yes. Well, through the chair to the senator. First, the Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine. We all know the Hippocratic vote. 30,000 members are in favor of the endorsement. And when it comes to expert witness testimony and medical expertise, I've never seen that somebody's personal religious affiliation would disclude them from providing expert witness testimony. No, that was never the intent.

Senator Smith. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Lyle. Yeah. Okay, good. So, yeah, I mean, I have similar questions to the ranking member. I mean, lines 63 and 64 of the bill talk about that, you know, essentially that we're going to show these two videos that are detailed, line 67 and then line 71. We're going to show these two videos, you know, from grades five through grades 12 once a year. I mean, once for every grade level. And I mean, in Ohio, we do we teach biology in grades nine and ten. And so I guess sort of my question is, you know, why are we not? it would make more sense to me that if we're going to have these videos be a part of the mandated curriculum, that we do it at the same time we're talking about, you know, because I mean, I guess sort of the question is, why aren't we teaching biology in grade five? And I understand that, you know, you're a medical professional, not an educational professional, but I mean, We've made some decisions about when things enter the total high school education, and some topics we just think are better for more mature minds. So if you could speak to the notion of are we introducing the baby Olivia concept and video too early is kind of my concern.

I going to kind of follow up with actually Senator Smith And I think you kind of touched on it a bit there though We have like life sciences are included I mean we got a lot of other types of sciences that are included in the fifth grade Do you think the maturity level there is for kids in fifth grade to be able to watch this video

But can they handle it? I mean, we see what they're seeing on TikTok and Facebook and everything else that's out there in the social media world.

Thank you for that. The bill says grades 5 through 12. Do we need to be showing this in every one of those grades or can be integrated in other biology class or other things as appropriate throughout grades 5 through 12?

All right. We'll see no other questions. Thank you very much for your testimony today.

Up next is Kate Mackra from Right to Life Action Coalition of Ohio. Welcome to committee, and you may proceed when ready.

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

Through the chair to the ranking member, that is an excellent question, and I believe that it's different for every person, but I believe in my experience, And again, it is anecdotal in my case, but there have been studies that have backed up the fact that many women who are not necessarily abortion certain, you know, they don't walk in there thinking, I'm going to get an abortion. But women who are genuinely on the fence about that, when they see the ultrasound, it really hits home that there is a human being in there. And to those of us in this room, we may think, well, that is that's common sense. Of course there's a life in there, but you would be surprised how many young girls and women don't know that because they weren't taught that. And I honestly believe that enacting the Baby Olivia Act starting even at fifth grade, I think, will go a long way to helping to instill that understanding in them. that if they understand that the consequences of these actions could be the creation of a human life, there's a very good chance that they will make better life choices somewhere down the road when it comes to that situation. Now, as you astutely pointed out, there are some who will never make those choices. But I believe that with the Baby Olivia Act, we can reach many of these young girls, and boys also, because if they understand that they are part of the equation, we can teach these students to make better choices down the road, and we will be facing fewer unwanted pregnancies and fewer abortions. And I think we can all agree that's a good thing for our communities.

I believe that that is a decision that is made. I think a lot of it should be discussed in the home. I really do. And unfortunately, it is not. So the kids learn it elsewhere, if you will. or they don't learn it at all until it's too late. And so I think that, for example, me, I had sex education class when I was in fifth grade. And it made quite an impact on me because I saw a lot of things that I didn't want to see when I was in the fifth grade. And it was very memorable, but it does make an impression on you. And I believe that fifth grade is appropriate. but as far as the actions it's not really discussed as far as the purview of the Baby Olivia Act but I do agree with you that it needs to be dealt with and I think the first stop would be the home but I do believe that there needs to be more education and outreach on that because these kids are learning it where they shouldn't be learning it or they're not learning it at all and that's not a good thing.

I believe that that is something that's going to be kind of a wait and see. I believe that we may have to adjust it. I mean, when we, I mean the Department of Education. the way it's currently written. I believe that repetition is always good because kids, as we know, have very short attention spans. And also, I do want to make clear that the Baby Olivia video, the Meet Baby Olivia, is not the only one. It could be there are an option of videos that will be approved by the Department of Education, and they will be up on the website. So the class, the teacher does not have to show the same one over and over again. So perhaps they could add a little variety and show a different video every year. Again, I'm not here to try to tell the teacher how to do their job or anything like that. But I believe that that was put in there because just showing it once to a kid in the fifth grade, I don't believe is going to make an impression. And I do definitely see your point that kids kind of turn off after a while if they see the same thing over and over again But if we at least gotten through to them on some level I think then we done our job

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the witness.

I don't want to relitigate Issue 1 and the many reasons why Issue 1 passed, But I know that there were many, many people who who believed things that were not true, that they they would happily support the baby Olivia act because they want to see the truth about conception and they want their kids to be taught things.

One more question. Polite follow-up. Thank you very much. Chair, thank you to the witness. Yeah, I just want to politely remind you that that was not my quote. This was from the American College of OBGYNs that said that the baby Olivia video was, and this is their quote, designed to manipulate the emotions of the viewers rather than share scientific evidence-based scientific information about embryonic and fetal development, close quote. So this was from a medical group. Some would say the preeminent group of OBGYNs.

To the chair, yes, Senator Brenner, actually the original bill was originally designed to instruct students starting in the third grade, I believe. And that was adjusted because we wanted to make it more age appropriate. And so we actually moved the age to fifth grade because we wanted to take everybody's concerns into account. and so now instead of being third grade to 12th grade, it is now fifth grade to 12th grade because we felt that that was more sensible and more age-appropriate for the subject matter even though there's nothing sensitive particularly. But yes, it is age-appropriate and it is educational and it is biology.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Chairman Brenner, Vice Chair, Reckoning Member Ingram, and members of the Ohio House Health Committee. As members of the Senate Education Committee, you all understand uniquely the critical importance of delivering sound, effective education, the very objective at the heart of House Bill 485, the Baby Olivia Act. Education and awareness are among the most powerful tools that we have to shape understanding, and that effort must begin with young people. The Baby Olivia Act advances this goal by ensuring that Ohio students scientifically accurate, developmentally appropriate information about how human life begins and develops. A strong foundation in education begins presenting students with a complete and factual understanding of human biology. Yet for too long, discussions of prenatal development have been limited or absent in the classroom, even as advancements in medical imaging, embryology, and fetal medicine have provided unprecedented insight into life before birth. Today's students are already exposed to images and information through social media and television, but too often without context or clear explanation. The Baby Olivia video and curriculum helps fill that gap by offering a medically reviewed, age-appropriate, and neutral explanation of early human development. I'm going to skip around a bit, not to be redundant. For decades, the Right to Life movement has recognized that when individuals are given accurate science-based information, it can meaningfully shape how they understand the world. Education fosters awareness, awareness builds respect for ourselves, for others, and for the dignity of every human life. These efforts have played an important role in informing public and understanding and encouraging thoughtful and compassionate conversations. By starting with young people, we lay the groundwork for a more informed and respectful society. Ohio Right to Life has worked with countless women across our state, and we know firsthand that access to clear information and adequate time for reflection makes a meaningful difference. Women consistently express appreciation when they are given the opportunity to learn more, and we appreciate this legislation. And on behalf of the Ohio Right to Life and thousands of Ohioans we represent, we respectfully urge the committee to support and advance House Bill 485. Thank you for your time and consideration. Thank you for your testimony today.

Thank you.

Chair Brenner, Vice Chair of Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide proponent testimony for House Bill 485, the Baby Olivia Act. When I first found out I was expecting, I remember staring at that positive pregnancy test. I was excited, nervous, and a little overwhelmed. It felt so abstract. I could feel my body changing, but I didn't truly understand what was happening inside of me. Then came my first ultrasound, around 10 weeks. I remember sitting in that dark room and seeing my baby on the screen for the very first time. My doctor gently pointed things out. Here your baby heartbeat which began beating just a few weeks ago And in fact by around six weeks that tiny heart is already pulsing rhythmically By nine weeks the beginning of taste buds are forming Around 12 weeks, the baby begins to move, swallowing amniotic fluid and opening and closing its mouth. By 14 to 15 weeks, those taste pores are active, meaning that the baby can respond to flavors and the amniotic fluid, depending on what I eat as a mom. Later in pregnancy, around 30 weeks, babies have been shown to respond with facial expressions, even settle smiles or frowns to those flavors and sensations. Hearing that from my doctor changed everything for me. It brought the whole experience out of the abstract and made it deeply real. Suddenly, it wasn't just about taking prenatal vitamins, drinking water, or eating as healthy as I could. It was about caring for a living, growing child who depended on me every single day. Seeing that ultrasound and learning those facts made me understand, in a way words never could, how everything I did as a mom mattered. That's why House Bill 485 is so important. Sponsored by Representative Melanie Miller, the Baby Olivia Act ensures that every public school in Ohio includes human growth and development education for students in grades 5th through 12th. This instruction will include a high-definition ultrasound video showing the early developments of a baby's brain, heart, and other vital organs. as well as the Meet a Baby Olivia video developed by Live Action, which visually walks students through each stage of human development, from fertilization to birth. The purpose of this bill is not political. It's educational. It gives young Ohioans access to scientific, factual information about the earliest stages of life, the heartbeat, the movement, the growth. Students will gain a deeper understanding of biology, of life, and of the impact their choices can have on others. If we can start that kind of education early, if children grow up not only hearing, but seeing the reality of life inside the womb, it moves lessons from the abstract to the tangible. Instead of hearing, don't drink or don't smoke during pregnancy because it's bad for the baby, students will understand why. Because they'll know what's happening inside the womb. Then they'll see when the baby's heart begins beating, when the liver starts functioning, when the brains begin to develop. It becomes specific, understandable, and deeply human. The Baby Olivia Act gives our students the opportunity to see what so many parents have witnessed on an ultrasound screen. That human life is not abstract. It's visible, it's growing, and it deserves to be understood and valued. By teaching the biological reality of human development we are hoping to raise a generation that is not only more scientifically literate but also more empathetic and responsible I urge this community to vote yes on this bill so that we can have it law in Ohio Thank you, Chair Brenner, Vice Chair Blessing, Ranking Member Ingram, and members of the Senate Education Committee for considering my testimony in support of House Bill 485. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. and thank you for that. How are you? My question is, would you have been as excited? Because when you talk about your excitement when you first got pregnant, when the doctor pointed certain things out to you and how exciting that was when week after week or whenever your appointments were that you found out different things about the baby. Would you have been that excited if you were watching a video cartoon. From the chairman to the representative.

very sweet, because, yeah, most big brothers and big sisters do want to make sure, especially if you're expecting, and then especially when they start to kick and they'll be able to hear certain things. That's fabulous. My concern is that at fifth grade with no concept, that how do you get that emotional tie-in other than watching the video and then you're forced to watch it every year? My concern is, is just as I think somebody else testified, that certain things should be taught at home by the parents. Now I get it. Some kids aren't as fortunate as others to have that loving parent there but how do we do that without doing this now in the fifth grade And especially if something goes wrong and I say wrong and I shouldn because children with disabilities, whether they're cognitive or physical, are not wrong. They're just different. What do you do in that conversation? Say if you're a fifth grader, I see you looking, if I may. Do you have a question there or anything? Yes, I do. Say if you're a fifth grader, that was a question, actually. Say if your fifth grader asks you or has a big sister that has disabilities, they're sitting there watching the video, then their question may be what went wrong. Will that be included in the curriculum as to the possibilities, or are we just going to go straight through?

All right. Any other questions from committee members? Thank you very much, former representative, for coming in and testifying today. I do appreciate it.

We had David Mahan could not stay around, so he will be put in as written testimony. We do have a lot of additional written testimony there from the Ohio Christian Alliance, Ohio Value Voters, and a bunch of additional people for proponent testimony on the bill. With that, this will conclude the second hearing on House Bill 485. With nothing else to come before the committee, the committee is adjourned.