Arkansas committee deadlocks on bill to shift computer-science graduation requirement into CTE pathways

State Rep. Jeremy Wooldridge, sponsor of House Bill 18-25, told the House Education Committee that the bill would allow an existing computer-science graduation requirement to be met through courses embedded in Career and Technical Education pathways instead of a single standalone class.

Wooldridge said the proposal was "constituent driven" and designed to let students meet the computer-science credit through CTE courses "narrowly tailored" to particular pathways. He told the committee he had worked with the Arkansas Department of Education and the governor's office on the language.

The bill drew detailed questioning from committee members on accommodations for students with disabilities and the practical effect of changing a statewide graduation "shall" requirement into local options. Committee members pressed staff and witnesses about whether alternative pathways or IEP accommodations already exist and whether the bill would reduce access to computer-science instruction.

Courtney Salisbury of the Arkansas Department of Education said there are multiple computer-science options already used in CTE, including introductory and advanced courses, and that embedding standards into CTE could make coursework more relevant to a student's chosen pathway. Salisbury listed examples such as information technology, software development, AP computer science and computing with data as existing state course options.

Anthony Owen, senior director of state government affairs for Code.org, testified against the bill. Owen said the amendment before the committee would leave the state without a graduation requirement and warned districts would offer limited seats or minimal options if the mandate were removed. "If schools are asking for this to be removed, that's proof that they are not going to continue to do it," Owen said, adding that Arkansas would be the first state to repeal a computer-science graduation requirement if the change passed.

Owen also said the department had previously created "alternative pathway standards" for students with significant cognitive disabilities and that IDEA (the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) allows IEP teams to set alternate diploma paths when appropriate. He cited state course counts ("55 state-developed courses") and an enrollment rise from about 12,000 to 21,950 students in high-school computer-science courses after the requirement was first applied to the cohort now in the juniors'rank.

Mary Ann Spears, superintendent of Lincoln School District, testified she supports embedding computer science in CTE for small districts, saying her district would still ensure every graduate obtains the requirement either in a pathway or via a standard program and that IEP students would be served.

Committee members raised multiple practical questions: whether the change would require additional teachers, whether districts would stop offering the content if it became optional, and how the change would affect students currently on IEPs. Department witnesses and the sponsor said federal law prevents creating lower academic standards solely because a student has an IEP and that local districts would retain responsibility for accommodations.

After lengthy debate and public testimony, the committee voted by voice on a motion to give HB 18-25 a recommendation to pass as amended. The chair called for aye/no voice votes; the record in the transcript shows opposition and the chair stated "Well, your bill is still," indicating the committee did not adopt a do-pass recommendation at that time. No roll-call tally appears in the transcript.

Why it matters: The bill would change how Arkansas students can meet the computer-science graduation credit, with implications for statewide access to advanced computing skills, CTE alignment and how districts serve students with disabilities. Supporters argued embedding computer-science content into vocational tracks makes instruction more relevant; opponents warned removing a statewide mandate risks uneven local access.

The committee did not advance HB 18-25 to the full House during the session recorded in the transcript; no additional committee referral or floor action is recorded there.