Citizen Portal
Sign In

DOE outlines application process for 'innovation schools' created by 2025 law

5964744 · October 20, 2025

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Draft NAC language would create an application and approval pathway for innovation schools authorized by SB 460 (2025), require multi-stakeholder school-level planning teams, evidence-based proposals and progress monitoring.

The Nevada Department of Education presented draft regulations on Oct. 20, 2025, to implement a 2025 statutory provision authorizing pilot “innovation schools.” The draft would create an application-to-operate process, require a school-based stakeholder team to develop the plan, and require evidence-based proposals with implementation plans and monitoring metrics.

Director Emilie Tebow said the draft aligns with SB 460 (2025) and requires applications to include at minimum three educators assigned to the site (one with a special education endorsement if applicable), an administrator, a regional professional development representative, specialized instructional support personnel, a parent, a community member, at least one student if grades 7–12 are included, and a postsecondary representative for college and career supports. The plan must describe the innovative practices, evidence supporting them, measures for progress monitoring, supports for staff, instructional time use, family engagement plans, and student supports for special education, English learners, students at risk and gifted students.

Why this matters: The innovation school pathway is intended to allow districts (with statutory limits on number of innovation schools per district) to pilot flexible practices designed to close opportunity gaps and improve achievement while requiring oversight and evidence for implementation.

Public comment: Trustee Susan Janssen asked whether “equity” language in the draft implicated DEI; the Department said the wording derives from statute and is intended to focus on closing opportunity gaps consistent with federal Title I definitions. Department staff said they would review statutes to clarify what relief (waivers) regulations can allow if districts request rule or statutory relief to implement innovations.

Next steps: The Department will move the text through LCB drafting; staff said potential statutory waivers would be considered case-by-case during application review and they would further consult statutes and SB 460 to determine the scope of regulatory flexibility.