Public School Policies

Utah may boast the most restrictive sexual education laws in the country if a new bill passed through the state legislature is signed into law. The new law would restrict schools from teaching any type of sex ed in public schools outside of abstinence and would prohibit discussion on contraception and sexually transmitted diseases. Despite the fact that this bill has passed in both the state House and Senate, there is plenty of opposition to the bill with state lawmakers, educators, and even parents.

About the Bill

Referred to as HB363 and sponsored by Bill Wright (R-Holden), this bill would define sex education in the state of Utah as abstinence-only and would ban schools from providing instruction on sexual intercourse, homosexuality, contraceptive methods, and sexually transmitted diseases. According to Deseret News, Wright sponsored the bill as a response to what he called “inappropriate material” presented in classrooms. Specifically, Wright was opposed to material produced by Planned Parenthood being distributed to students. Wright said he believes sex education is something that should take place in the home, rather than the school.

Currently, Utah schools are allowed to offer sex-education courses with some restrictions attached. Schools are allowed to provide instruction about sexual intercourse and contraception without advocating for it. The classes are offered on an elective basis, so parents can choose not to have children take the course if they don’t want them to.

“A lot of our schools are already teaching abstinence,” Wright told

A proposal to give state funding directly to high school students, rather than public schools, continues to be hashed out by Utah lawmakers. The bill would take per-pupil funding and put it into a savings account for the individual student, rather than sending it directly to the local school district. This money could then be used by the student to pay for public or charter school, online classes, or even courses at the college level. Like other bills touting school choice, this proposal has been met with strong opinions on both sides of the aisle.

About HB123

The new bill, dubbed HB123, is a proposal that would put money into the hands of students and their parents, rather than the school system. The bill was originally introduced by Republican state Representative John Dougall, according to the Huffington Post. Dougall believes that his bill would offer a number of advantages to Utah high school students, including the creation of more competition between schools, which could raise the bar on the quality of education in the state overall.

“Today what we have is top down funding and we know many of the challenges that come with top down funding,” Dougall told the Huffington Post. “HB123 is what I call grassroots funding where we fund the student rather than institutions.”

Dougall estimates that the current funding amount students would expect to receive from the state would be approximately $6,400 per student, per year, based on

A new bill aimed at the Arizona senate would punish public school teachers who violated Federal Communication Commission guidelines by using profanity and obscenities in the classroom. The bill was introduced by Arizona State Senator Lori Klein, after a parent complained about a teacher who used foul language in his daughter’s class. However, not everyone is in favor of the bill; some say it is an unnecessary measure that should be handled by districts, rather than at the state level.

Origins of the Bill

According to a report at News Day, the original complaint came from Floyd Brown, a parent of a high school student and a long-time Republican strategist. Brown was responsible for the infamous “Willie Horton” ad during the 1998 presidential campaign that some thought played a major role in Michael Dukakis losing the election. Brown told News Day that his daughter, a sophomore, came home from school upset one day because one of her teachers was using the F-word in class.

Brown took the issue to school administrators, but told CBS News that the educators did not take him seriously. When his complaints went unaddressed, he pulled his daughter out of the high school, and she is now being homeschooled.

“I’m not going to subject my daughter to that kind of environment,” Brown told CBS News.

Next, Brown took his complaint about the teacher’s language to Klein, since she represented his Arizona district. Klein called the language “totally inappropriate” and told CBS that

As No Child Left Behind (NCLB) deadlines approached in the early 2010s, many states recognized they would be unable to meet the law’s federal proficiency requirements within the original timeline. As a result, the Obama administration granted waivers to multiple states, allowing them to move away from the rigid requirements of NCLB. In exchange, these states committed to continuing academic improvement efforts, including updated accountability systems focused on student performance and school evaluation.

Why Waivers Were Necessary

No Child Left Behind (NCLB) was a bipartisan federal law signed in 2002 by President George W. Bush. The law aimed to ensure all students reached proficiency in math and reading by 2014, with a focus on historically underserved groups, including low-income students, minority populations, students with disabilities, and English language learners.

However, many have complained that the federal system of accountability did not allow states sufficient flexibility in developing systems that worked for their kids, and that it encouraged teachers to simply “teach to the test.” Many states are already showing signs that they will be unable to meet the federal guidelines in a timely fashion, which has prompted the request for waivers in many states. At the time, President Obama described NCLB as “an admirable but flawed effort,” highlighting widespread concerns about its implementation.

These waivers gave states greater flexibility to design accountability systems tailored to their student populations. They also allowed states to continue receiving federal funding while implementing revised accountability

When Roy Roberts became the emergency manager of Detroit Public Schools (now Detroit Public Schools Community District, or DPSCD), he took on the nearly impossible challenge of turning around a system that wasn’t doing justice to the nearly 70,000 students currently enrolled in the district at the time. However, instead of shying away from the challenge, Roberts took the proverbial bull by the horns and embarked on a major shake-up that was slated to occur during the following school year. While some applauded Roberts’ efforts, others were concerned about what the changes would mean to students, teachers, and the neighborhoods that many of these schools called home.

School Closures Just the Beginning

From overcrowding in Detroit Public School classrooms to facing bankruptcy, the challenges abounded for this Michigan school district. According to the Huffington Post, Roberts planned to close nine public schools and convert four more into charters in an effort to repair a broken system. This move was predicted to save Detroit Public Schools $7.5 million in annual operating costs, money that Roberts hoped to put toward educating children rather than maintaining empty classrooms.

"Rather than continue to support buildings that are far underutilized…we will consolidate,” Roberts was reported saying at Huffington Post. “We have been using an outdated educational model that we must discard,” Roberts added.

The Detroit Free Press reported that by that fall, Detroit Public Schools would be downsized to around 50,000 students, down from the nearly 70,000 then enrolled in the school district