Tennessee education committee advances bill to require closure of chronically low-performing virtual schools after heated testimony

The Senate Education Committee advanced legislation on Monday that would require the closure of public virtual schools that meet long-standing statutory closure criteria: three consecutive years of low growth on the Tennessee Value-Added System (TVAS/TVOS) or placement on the federal "priority school" list starting with the 2025 list.

The sponsor, Sen. [sponsor name as recorded], framed the measure as enforcement of criteria already in state law since 2013 and said the shift from a discretionary standard (“may close”) to a required standard (“shall close”) is necessary to protect students who have repeatedly been educated in programs that show little or no academic growth.

Why it matters: virtual schools have grown since 2011 and especially after the pandemic; the bill’s supporters say enforcement will ensure poor performers no longer remain open by choice while families and state dollars are diverted. Opponents say automatic closure would harm vulnerable children who rely on virtual programs because they have been bullied, have medical needs, or otherwise cannot thrive in brick-and-mortar schools.

Parents, providers and advocates described sharply different experiences. Mary Hale, a grandmother and learning coach, told the committee Tennessee Virtual Academy (TNVA) "saved" her grandchildren: her grandson with autism and her granddaughter who was bullied both improved academically and emotionally after moving to virtual instruction. "TNVA is now at the top of his class," Hale said, adding her family would be harmed if the school were closed.

Cheryl Tatum, senior director of academic policy and research at Stride (a management organization that partners with some Tennessee virtual programs), said the bill is "targeted and inconsistent" and warned that automatic closure without stakeholder engagement could force thousands of students back into school settings they left for safety or health reasons. Tatum added that some virtual programs serve high-needs students and that capacity in alternative statewide virtual programs is not identical for all students.

The Department of Education told the committee that the existing statutory framework already allows the commissioner to close virtual schools in certain circumstances but that legal history and litigation have affected how that authority has been exercised. A TDOE official said districts are notified through the same priority-school and accountability processes that apply to traditional schools and that intervention options exist; the department has proposed a related administration bill (Senate Bill 22 28) with somewhat different timing and triggers.

Committee choice and circulation: supporters of the sponsor’s bill argued enforcement should be prompt — noting that some virtual programs have long histories of low TVOS results — while others urged more time to refine closure criteria and to ensure that displaced students have seats in higher-performing statewide programs. The sponsor argued that the administration’s alternative would delay meaningful closures until much later (testimony compared possible closure dates as far out as 2032 under the administration approach), while SCORE and some lawmakers suggested blending the bills and technical fixes.

Outcome: after extended questioning and public testimony, the committee adopted the amendment and voted to move SB 2441 to the calendar on a 5–4 vote. Sponsors and advocates said they will attempt to reconcile the committee’s language with administration proposals in the next week; several members urged additional work to ensure clear notification processes and transition plans for affected students.

What's next: the bill will appear on the Senate calendar; committee members signaled they expect further negotiation between the sponsor and the administration before final floor action.