House repels amendment to end most K-12 data collection

The House cleared a policy hurdle by adopting Wednesday an educational record privacy bill to control disclosure of data on students in Kansas public schools.

The bill — approved 119-4 by the House — survived an attempt by Rep. Allan Rothlisberg, R-Grandview Plaza, to eliminate the Kansas State Department of Education's capacity to continue operating a statewide longitudinal student data system.

The computer system provides information that saved state government an estimated $2.8 million in the past two fiscal years by identifying students enrolled in more than one public school district, said Rep. Amanda Grosserode, R-Lenexa.

"It catches that dual enrollment," she said. "It, therefore, doesn't fund those students twice."

Rep. Melissa Rooker, R-Fairway, said the system tracked education expenditures influential in decisions related to student test scores, graduation rates, at-risk spending and achievement gaps.

However, Rothlisberg said his amendment to Senate Bill 367 would have stripped funding of the state's longitudinal information system. It would reduce overhead costs and allow teachers to focus on instruction rather than filling out paperwork, he said.

"A lot of 'Chicken Little' — the sky's going to fall — if we don't do this," Rothlisberg said. "My gosh, how on earth did our school systems function before we got all this data collection?"

"We have a massive amount of information being gathered on students. For what reason?" he said. "The minute you start putting dossiers on students — you've got a problem. History is replete with what happens when governments start putting dossiers on people."

Rep. Ed Trimmer, D-Winfield, asked Rothlisberg during House floor debate on the amendment what would be used in the alternative to evaluate student progress.

"How will we determine whether our schools are achieving any improvement?" Trimmer said. "Without the longitudinal data how could we do any testing and how could we compile any results of assessments?"

"How was it done before?" Rothlisberg said.

"With assessment and longitudinal data," Trimmer replied. "We've always used longitudinal data."

Rothlisberg said the "dog and pony show" discussion about benefits of data collection made hair stand up on the back of his neck.

"To much data," he said. "Too much information. It's not needed. I do not want to have any data put on any children more than is absolutely necessary. There's no reason to create dossiers on children."

"Isn't it de-aggregated data?" Trimmer asked. "You don't think we should have any of that information?"

"Just base data," Rothlisberg said. "Only their grades. No names. Nothing else."

The Senate approved a different bill on collection of student records, which means a conference committee of House and Senate members will be called upon to reconcile the versions.