Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Online Rural Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate advances bill to prioritize online-education funding for rural schools
Summary
Senators advanced First Substitute Senate Bill 35, which would require the State Board of Education to establish a priority funding distribution for the statewide online education program to better serve rural schools lacking access to higher-level courses.
First Substitute Senate Bill 35, a measure to prioritize state funding for the statewide online education program, was advanced for third reading after a presentation on its goal of increasing access for rural students.
Senator Johnson described the bill as a remedy for rural schools that lack staff, geographic access and funding to offer higher-level courses such as Advanced Placement and concurrent enrollment. "What this bill does is dictate that the state board must establish a priority funding distribution system that evaluates and ranks schools based on ... the school's current access to college and career readiness programs, their ability or inability to provide higher level courses, their geographic isolation from qualified instructors, their limited staff capacity to teach these courses, and or their financial constraints in hiring qualified instructors," Senator Johnson said.
The bill would direct the state board to develop a funding-prioritization formula so small rural schools receive targeted support through the online education program without causing large local education agencies to lose a disproportionate share of funding. Proponents said the change is meant to bring rural students the same course opportunities available in larger districts.
There was no extended debate recorded on the floor after the presentation. The Senate proceeded to a roll-call vote to read the bill for a third time; the clerk announced that Senate Bill 35 "had received 24 yay votes, 0 nay votes, 5 being absent." The bill was placed on the third-reading calendar for final consideration.
Supporters framed the measure as a funding-priority and access change rather than a direct new appropriation; the transcript does not specify the exact implementation timetable or any new dollar amounts. No amendments or fiscal notes were discussed on the floor during the presentation.
The floor presentation and the subsequent vote occurred during the Senate’s second-reading calendar session.
