Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Online Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves updates to statewide online education, sponsor says changes protect special‑education funding
Summary
First substitute SB 80 clarifies registration and credit recognition for online courses, and confirms that special‑education services remain the responsibility of students' home LEAs; the Senate passed the bill 21–4–4 after floor questions and debate.
Get email alerts on the Online Education topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Senate passed first substitute SB 80 to revise and clarify the Statewide Online Education program. Sponsor Senator Jay Stevenson said the measure updates registration, clarifies credit acknowledgement for private or homeschool students and allows institutions of higher education to provide approved secondary‑level online courses. He described technical amendments to registration and a directory to help students find available online classes.
Senator Osman asked whether the bill exempted online providers from special‑education obligations. Stevenson and others answered that special‑education services for students remain the responsibility of the student’s LEA (local education agency) and that funding for students with disabilities would be handled through the students’ school district. Stevenson said this clarification was intended to ensure access to online courses for students with disabilities while preserving LEA responsibilities. Senator Jones rose in opposition citing fairness concerns for traditional schools, noting that 92% of students attend traditional public schools and expressing concern about shifting burdens onto those districts.
The Senate waived the three‑reading requirement and passed the bill on a roll call (21 yay, 4 nay, 4 absent). The bill will proceed to the House for consideration.
Why it matters: SB 80 affects how online courses are provided and credited across LEAs, charters and private/homeschool students. The floor debate focused on special‑education responsibilities and fiscal impacts for traditional districts that remain the primary providers for most students.
