Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Computer Science Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Committee Hears Bill to Require Computer Science K–12; Sponsor Says Amendment Lowers Funding Ask
Summary
Senate Committee on Education Chair Frederick opened a public hearing Feb. 5 on Senate Bill 541, a bill that would require Oregon public schools to offer computer science education at all grade levels beginning in the 2026–27 school year and direct the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) to provide teacher supports and staff to lead the work.
Get email alerts on the Computer Science Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Committee on Education Chair Frederick opened a public hearing Feb. 5 on Senate Bill 541, a bill that would require Oregon public schools to offer computer science education at all grade levels beginning in the 2026–27 school year and direct the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) to provide teacher supports and staff to lead the work.
The bill’s sponsor, state Senator Janine Salmon, told the committee the measure “requires the Oregon Department of Education to develop and maintain teacher supports, hire staff, and support access to computer science education.” Salmon said the measure also would require the State Board of Education to include computer science in its routine review of curriculum goals, performance indicators and diploma requirements and initially described a $20 million general-fund appropriation in the introduced language. She said an amendment being offered narrows the funding ask to $5 million and pushes the implementation date to one ODE regards as more attainable.
Why it matters: Supporters framed SB 541 as a statewide equity and workforce measure. Jill Hubbard, an associate professor of practice at Oregon State University Cascades, described computer science as “fundamental” and said that only a small fraction of Oregon students currently access foundational CS courses. Hubbard said the bill would broaden participation, in part by building teacher supports and standards that enable districts to offer computer science without relying on isolated local initiatives.
Lincoln County Schools technology director Brian Freske told the committee his district lacks time, certified staff and budget to scale computer science without state action. “If we're lacking computer science in the ORS, in the ODE guidance, it's just not going to be a priority for the district,” Freske said, adding that his district of about 5,000 students has relied on grants and local funding to pilot instruction.
University of Oregon researcher Dr. Joanna Goode, creator of the Exploring Computer Science curriculum, said limited access in Oregon is “deeply inequitable,” with participation predicted by ZIP code, race and gender. She urged a package of standards, teacher preparation, curriculum, and a dedicated specialist at ODE to democratize access.
Opposition and concerns: The Oregon School Boards Association and COSA spoke in cautious opposition, asking for clearer resources to districts. Stacy Michaelson of OSBA said the bill as drafted is “quite prescriptive” and risks adding requirements districts must meet without commensurate funding, professional development and staffing. OSBA emphasized that the bill directs funds to ODE rather than directly to school districts and urged that any final bill include funding streams for local implementation. Morgan Allen of COSA said districts repeatedly receive new requirements without full funding and asked for timelines and resources districts can rely on.
Sponsor response and next steps: Senator Salmon said she considered district concerns when drafting amendments, including flexibility for districts to partner with higher education or industry rather than create stand-alone courses. Salmon noted other states have invested significantly (she cited Washington and New York figures) and said Oregon needs to avoid falling behind. The bill’s sponsor and stakeholders indicated willingness to continue negotiations on timeline, staffing and funding details.
Ending: The committee heard a range of stakeholder testimony and did not take a vote on SB 541 on Feb. 5. The hearing record includes testimony from university researchers, district technology leaders, and statewide education associations; proponents emphasized equity and workforce development while local boards and superintendents flagged implementation, staffing and funding concerns.
