Texas Ed Spectator

MySA.com: Politics

AUSTIN — After a bill to teach Bible classes to high school students easily gained approval from the Senate on Wednesday, lawmakers immediately disagreed on whether the measure would make the courses mandatory.

Legislative leaders were not sure whether school districts would be obligated to offer the religion studies course if 15 or more students sign up for it. Both “may” and “shall” show up in different sections of the House bill the Senate sent to the governor without changing.

So why limit it to Bible classes? Why shouldn’t schools be required to provide classes in the Chinese language if 15 students request it? What about Java programming, will the school also have to provide the computers?

Obviously, the original sponsor of the bill thought the school could just go out and hire a Sunday school teacher. Things are a little different if you have to go out and hire a teacher qualified to teach it as an academic subject.

And if a student requests a class which the school then provides, is the student obligated to take the class? What if a requesting student moves out of the district–what happens to the class? It looks like to me common sense prevailed in the Education Committee by changing the language from “shall” to “may.”

80(R) HB 1250 - Introduced version - Bill Text:

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT relating to prohibiting discrimination based on a student’s secondary school in awarding certain financial aid for higher education.
???????BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: ???????SECTION?1.??Section 56.304(a), Education Code, is amended to read as follows:
???????(a)??To be eligible initially for a TEXAS grant, a person must:
?????????????(1)??be a resident of this state as determined by coordinating board rules;
?????????????(2)??meet either of the following academic requirements:
???????????????????(A)??be a graduate of a public or [accredited] private high school in this state who graduated not earlier than the 1998-1999 school year and who completed the recommended or advanced high school curriculum established under Section [28.002 or] 28.025 or its equivalent; or

If a person meets all has met all other college admissions requirements, does it matter if she went to an unaccredited private school?

Looks like parents might be able to save recess based on local values.

80(R) HB 366 - Introduced version - Bill Text:

SECTION?1.??This Act may be cited as the “Freedom to Play and Learn Act.”
???????SECTION?2.??Section 28.004, Education Code, is amended by adding Subsection (l) to read as follows:
???????(l)??The local school health advisory council shall consider and may make policy recommendations concerning the importance of daily recess for elementary school students. The council may consider any research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development, and the health benefits of daily recess in making the recommendations. The council shall ensure that local community values are reflected in any policy recommendation made to the district under this subsection.

It does make you wonder what other areas parents would be interested in having some influence over. And will this provide “legitimization” for unschoolers? After all, they can use any “research regarding unsupervised play, academic and social development.” Sounds like supporting unschooling to me.

In Texas?

80(R) HB 379 - Introduced version - Bill Text:

(b)??A school district employee or a volunteer or independent contractor of a district may not administer corporal punishment or cause corporal punishment to be administered to a student.

But wouldn’t that make us all wimps?