Virginia Virtual School Board; established, report. (SB1240)

Introduced By

Sen. Siobhan Dunnavant (R-Henrico) with support from co-patron Sen. Amanda Chase (R-Midlothian)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Virginia Virtual School established. Establishes the Board of the Virginia Virtual School (the Board) as a policy agency in the executive branch of state government for the purpose of governing the full-time virtual school programs offered to students enrolled in the Virginia Virtual School (the School). The Secretary of Education is responsible for such agency. The 14-member Board is given operational control of the School and assigned powers and duties. Beginning with the 2019-2020 school year, the bill requires the School to be open to any school-age person in the Commonwealth and to provide an educational program meeting the Standards of Quality for grades kindergarten through 12, with a maximum enrollment of 5,000 students statewide. The bill requires the average state share of Standards of Quality per pupil funding for each enrolled student to be transferred to the School. Amends § 2.2-208, § 2.2-2101, § 22.1-212.23, § 22.1-253.13:2, § 58.1-638, of the Code of Virginia. Read the Bill »

Outcome

Bill Has Failed

History

DateAction
01/10/2017Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/11/17 17102925D
01/10/2017Referred to Committee on Education and Health
01/30/2017Impact statement from DPB (SB1240)
02/02/2017Committee substitute printed 17105164D-S1
02/02/2017Substitute bill reprinted 17105164D-S1
02/02/2017Incorporates SB1380 (Petersen)
02/02/2017Incorporates SB1570 (Peake)
02/02/2017Reported from Education and Health with substitute (8-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
02/02/2017Rereferred to Finance
02/02/2017Reported from Finance (11-Y 5-N) (see vote tally)
02/03/2017Constitutional reading dispensed (38-Y 0-N 1-A) (see vote tally)
02/06/2017Read second time
02/06/2017Reading of substitute waived
02/06/2017Committee substitute agreed to 17105164D-S1
02/06/2017Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute SB1240S1
02/07/2017Read third time and passed Senate (23-Y 17-N) (see vote tally)
02/09/2017Placed on Calendar
02/09/2017Read first time
02/09/2017Referred to Committee on Education
02/10/2017Impact statement from DPB (SB1240S1)
02/13/2017Reported from Education (14-Y 8-N) (see vote tally)
02/13/2017Referred to Committee on Appropriations
02/13/2017Assigned App. sub: Elementary & Secondary Education
02/14/2017Subcommittee recommends reporting (5-Y 2-N)
02/15/2017Reported from Appropriations (15-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
02/17/2017Read second time
02/20/2017Read third time
02/20/2017Passed House (59-Y 37-N)
02/20/2017VOTE: PASSAGE (59-Y 37-N) (see vote tally)
02/22/2017Enrolled
02/22/2017Bill text as passed Senate and House (SB1240ER)
02/22/2017Impact statement from DPB (SB1240ER)
02/22/2017Signed by President
02/22/2017Signed by Speaker
02/23/2017Enrolled Bill Communicated to Governor on 2/23/17
02/23/2017G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, March 27, 2017
03/13/2017G Vetoed by Governor
04/05/2017Senate sustained Governor's veto (20-Y 20-N) (see vote tally)
04/05/2017Requires 27 affirmative votes to override veto
04/05/2017Reconsideration of Governor's veto agreed to (40-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
04/05/2017Senate sustained Governor's veto (21-Y 19-N) (see vote tally)

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 2 clips in all, totaling 4 minutes.

Transcript

This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.



Sen. Bill Stanley (R-Moneta): SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS, MR. PRESIDENT. THAT IS AN INCREASE FROM PREVIOUS YEARS, OVER 3,000 LONG-TERM SUSPENSIONS GIVEN DURING THAT YEAR AND OF THOSE LERP SUSPENSIONS, OVER 200 WERE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL STUDENTS. WHAT WE KNOW IS WHEN A STUDENT IS SUSPENDED FOR LONG TERM, MISS AND YEAR OF SCHOOL, IS NOT EXPELLED, THEY END UP WITH ACADEMIC FAILURE. GRADE RETENTION. THAT IS, THEY DON'T MOVE ON TO THE NEXT GRADE AND THEY END UP DROPPING OUT OF SCHOOL. THERE MAY BE UNDIAGNOSED MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES WHICH ARE NOT ADDRESSED BY JUST SENDING THEM HOME WITHOUT TRYING TO ADDRESS THE UNDERLYING PROBLEMS WHICH MAY HAVE CREATED THE DISRUPTION. SUBSTANCE ABUSE, THOSE STUDENTS THAT ARE GIVEN LONG-TERM SUSPENSIONS ARE MORE LIKELY TO INVOLVE THEMSELVES IN SUBSTANCE ABUSE LATER IN LIFE AND HAVE INVOLVEMENT WITH THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, MR. PRESIDENT. I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT, MR. PRESIDENT, AS A TRIAL I ALWAYS TRY TO FIND OUT THE ATTORNEY. SOURCE OF MY CLIENT'S PROBLEMS. AND THOSE THAT COME BEFORE THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM OVER AND OVER HAVE TOLD ME AT LEAST IN PART OF THEIR HISTORY, THEY HAD A LONG-TERM SUSPENSION. THOSE SCHOOLS WITH THE HIGHEST SUSPENSION RATES GENERALLY REPORT THE LOWEST TEST SCORES AND THE LOWEST GRADUATION RATES. WHAT THIS BILL DOES BASICALLY IS DO TWO THINGS. IT ADDRESS S A PROBLEM AND A NEED. IT ALLOWS THE LONG-TERM SUSPENSION TO BE REDUCED TO 60 DAYS, BUT WITHIN THAT, THE LONG-TERM SUSPENSION PART OF 60 DAYS, 45 OF THE DAYS, THE SCHOOL WILL COME AND REVIEW TO SEE IF THE CHILD HA HAS BEEN SUSPENDED CAN BE REINTEGRATED INTO THEIR IN ADDITION TO THAT, PARENTS FAMILIAR. WILL BE GIVEN NOTICE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF WHY THEIR CHILD WAS SUSPENDED AND THAT IS CRITICAL AND IMPORTANT. WE HAVE WORKED WITH THE STAKEHOLDERS. I CAN'T SAY THAT WE'VE GOT 100% AGREEMENT, BUT WE'VE ALSO ALLOWED THIS TO CARRY OVER INTO THE NEXT GRADING PERIOD AND OVER THE SUMMER, WHICH THE BILL IN ITS ORIGINAL FORM DID NOT. THIS IS THE BEST WAY WE CAN ADDRESS THESE PROBLEMS. AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE KEEP OUR STUDENTS SAFE, WE NEED TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE'RE JUST THROWING THEM AWAY, AND THAT THESE CHILDREN DESERVE THE EDUCATION THAT WE PROMISED THEM. MR. PRESIDENT, LOOKING AT A REPORT -- THIS IS WHAT GOT ME STARTED ON THIS -- FROM JUST CHILDREN PROGRAM, THE LEGAL AID JUSTICE CENTERED PUBLISHED IN MAY OF 2016, VIRGINIA SCHOOLS OUT OF SCHOOL SUSPENSIONS, OVER ONE-FIT OF FIFTH IN ST. NICHOLAS TOOS KINDERGARTEN THROUGH THE FIFTH GRADE. AFRICAN AMERICAN WERE 23% BUT WERE SUBJECT TO 58% OF SHORT-TERM SUSPENSIONS, 60% OF LONG-TERM SUSPENSIONS, AND 55% OF THE EXPULSIONS, MR. PRESIDENT. THEY WERE 3.6 TIMES MORE LIKELY THAN WHITE STUDENTS TO BE SUSPENDED. AND MORE -- AND JUST AS IMPORTANT, MR. PRESIDENT, STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES WERE 12.3% OF THE VIRGINIA STUDENT


[Unknown]: TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHEN WE'VE HAD SUCH STRONG BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. I THOUGHT THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ALWAYS STRUGGLED FOR HERE. SO I'M HAVING TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING WHY THESE BILLS HAVE BECOME SO UNPOPULAR AMONG SOME FOLKS. FOR THE LIFE OF ME, I COULDN'T GET MY HEAD AROUND OUR SIDE OF THE AISLE LEANING ON THE EDUCATION ASSOCIATIONS TO SUPPORT OUR ARGUMENT WHEN WE DISAGREE WITH THEM MOST OF THE

Duplicate Bills

The following bills are identical to this one: HB1400.

Comments

Gabriel A. Reich writes:

Hello,

I am a former high school history teacher and I have been an education professor preparing history teachers for over 9 years.

After careful consideration, I must conclude that this bill is a terrible idea. The research evidence on virtual schools is dismal, particularly in the earlier grades. There are some limited cases where virtual schools might be of some use, particularly for home-bound students in rural areas. This bill would provide for a system that goes way beyond that. Schools are where young people learn a variety of social, emotional, and cognitive skills. On all these counts, particularly the first two, virtual schools are woefully inadequate. "On-line kindergarten" sounds like something from a SNL skit, not something that our state legislators should take seriously. State agencies should not give a seal of approval to such entities.

The argument for such schools has been that they will provide cost savings, but in this bill, the full amount of state funding will go to each student enrolled. That is absurd. There is no physical plant to maintain, there are fewer services such as counseling, physical education, meals, and fewer teachers in virtual schools, so why are there no cost savings here?

People pay taxes to support their communities and the institutions that sustain them. This bill would authorize parasitic non- and for-profit entities to siphon tax dollars away from those institutions with no benefit to anyone but themselves. This is kleptocracy and the people of Virginia will not stand for it.

kirsten gray writes:

Another layer of bureaucracy and a way to drain state funds from our brick and mortar public schools. I agree with Gabriel A. Reich's full comment above. "This bill would authorize parasitic non- and for-profit entities to siphon tax dollars away from those institutions with no benefit to anyone but themselves. This is kleptocracy and the people of Virginia will not stand for it." It is wrong to use children for profit and to knowingly and deliberately give them a subpar education. Shame.

Sidney Newton writes:

This seems like a way to transfer local education funds from public education to for profit educational companies. The transfer of funds is suspect in that one 'virtue' of a virtual school is, one might assume, significantly lower costs. Yet there would be no cost savings transferred to the state in this case - just increased profits for predatory education companies.

Please oppose it!

Elizabeth writes:

Not only is there the issue of funding (the MAJOR concern, well addressed by previous commenters), but this would also take control of any virtual school programs already in existence away from locally elected school boards.