Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves amendments to let homeschool students access career-technical programs when seats are available
Summary
Representative Dubose’s House Bill 183 was amended to give in-district public-school students priority for career-technical seats and to define homeschool students; senators raised concerns about fiscal flow and disciplinary oversight before reporting the bill favorably 14–1.
Get email alerts on the Education Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Representative Dubose introduced House Bill 183 to allow homeschool students access to career-technical (career-tech) programs when there is space; districts would set the policies and public-school students would have priority for available seats.
The committee adopted two amendments. The superintendent association amendment gives first priority to students who reside in the district where the public school provides the career-tech program. A second amendment clarified that a homeschool student is a K–12 pupil who receives home-based instruction under the cited code section. "The amendment requires that students that reside within the district ... would have first priority," the chair read aloud when the amendment was offered and seconded.
Several senators raised concerns that homeschool students could 'cherry-pick' specific courses without being fully enrolled in the public school and questioned how funds and discipline responsibilities would follow or be allocated; one senator said the local board retains discretion and another noted the home-school student would pay any course fees, per the amendment. The sponsor and committee noted that districts retain flexibility to set cost and admission policies.
After debate and the adopted amendments, the committee recorded the passage of HB183, with the roll indicating 14 yes and 1 no.
The committee did not resolve detailed funding mechanics; members asked clarifying questions about whether 'dollar-follow-the-child' arrangements would compensate public schools for services and how discipline and oversight would be managed by districts.

