Overview
Senate Bill No. 88 represents a comprehensive reform of Indiana's education system, addressing multiple facets of educational policy including assessment standards, teacher licensing, curriculum requirements, and college admissions criteria. The legislation establishes Indiana-specific college and career readiness standards while explicitly prohibiting the adoption of Common Core or federally-produced assessments. The bill mandates civics education for middle school students and creates alternative pathways for teacher certification. Additionally, it requires state educational institutions to accept the Classic Learning Test as an alternative to traditional standardized college entrance examinations. The legislation reflects a policy direction emphasizing state autonomy in educational standards, expanded access to the teaching profession, and enhanced civic education for Indiana students.
Core Provisions
The bill fundamentally restructures Indiana's educational standards framework by requiring the State Board of Education to adopt Indiana-specific college and career readiness educational standards that meet national and international benchmarks while aligning with postsecondary educational expectations. The legislation explicitly prohibits the state board from adopting Common Core standards or any assessment produced solely by the United States government or a consortium of states, as specified in §20-19-2-14.5(c). The statewide assessment program authority remains with the state board, which determines subjects, grades, and format for assessments administered to all full-time students in school corporations, charter schools, and state-accredited nonpublic schools. A significant curriculum addition requires all schools to provide civics education courses in grades six through eight, with instruction covering the roles and responsibilities of federal, state, and local governments as outlined in §20-30-5-26. The bill creates alternative teacher licensing pathways through §20-28-5-12.5, allowing individuals seeking initial practitioner licenses to request waivers from certain licensing requirements, with the department granting Praxis Subject Assessment pass rates for teachers who obtained licensure through alternative pathways. State educational institutions must accept the Classic Learning Test examination on equal footing with ACT or SAT examinations for admission criteria under §21-40-4-8. Implementation timelines reference the 2023-2024 and 2026-2027 school years, with certain provisions taking effect July 1, 2026.
Key Points
- Adoption of Indiana college and career readiness educational standards meeting national and international benchmarks
- Explicit prohibition on Common Core adoption and federally-produced assessments
- Mandatory civics education course requirement for grades 6, 7, or 8
- Alternative teacher licensing pathways with waiver provisions
- Equal acceptance of Classic Learning Test alongside ACT and SAT for college admissions
- Statewide assessment program administered to all full-time students in public and accredited nonpublic schools
Legal References
- IC 20-19-2-14.5 (Statewide assessment program and educational standards)
- IC 20-28-5-12.5 (Alternative teacher certification)
- IC 20-30-5-26 (Civics education course)
- IC 21-40-4-8 (College admission testing)
- IC 20-32-5.1-7
- IC 4-22-2 (Administrative rulemaking)
- IC 5-14-6 (Electronic reporting requirements)
Implementation
The Indiana Department of Education serves as the primary implementing agency, responsible for granting Praxis Subject Assessment pass rates for alternatively licensed teachers and processing waiver requests for initial practitioner licenses. The State Board of Education holds rulemaking authority under IC 4-22-2 to implement provisions related to civics education and other programmatic elements established by §20-30-16-6.5(d). School corporations, charter schools, and state-accredited nonpublic schools bear direct implementation responsibilities for administering the mandatory civics education curriculum and ensuring compliance with statewide assessment requirements. The department must prepare and submit reports to the General Assembly in electronic format as specified under IC 5-14-6, providing accountability mechanisms for alternative teacher licensing programs. State educational institutions must modify their admission policies to accommodate the Classic Learning Test on equal terms with existing standardized tests. The legislation does not specify dedicated funding mechanisms, suggesting implementation will occur through existing departmental budgets and school funding streams. Compliance measures rely on existing state board oversight authority and departmental monitoring of school corporations and charter schools.
Key Points
- Indiana Department of Education: processes teacher licensing waivers and grants Praxis pass rates
- State Board of Education: adopts implementing rules and oversees assessment program
- School corporations, charter schools, and state-accredited nonpublic schools: deliver civics education and administer assessments
- State educational institutions: modify admission policies for Classic Learning Test acceptance
- Department submits electronic reports to General Assembly on alternative licensing programs
Legal References
- IC 4-22-2 (Administrative rulemaking authority)
- IC 5-14-6 (Electronic reporting to General Assembly)
- IC 20-30-16-6.5(d) (Rulemaking for civics education)
Impact
The legislation directly benefits prospective teachers by creating alternative pathways to licensure, potentially expanding the teacher workforce and addressing educator shortages through reduced barriers to entry. Students in grades six through eight receive enhanced civics education, promoting civic literacy and understanding of governmental structures. College-bound students gain additional flexibility in standardized testing options through Classic Learning Test acceptance, potentially benefiting students who perform better on alternative assessment formats. School corporations and charter schools face increased administrative responsibilities in implementing mandatory civics curricula and accommodating alternative teacher licensing pathways. The bill does not include specific cost estimates or appropriations, suggesting implementation costs will be absorbed by existing educational budgets, though schools may incur expenses for curriculum development, teacher training on civics standards, and administrative processing of alternative licensing applications. State educational institutions may experience minimal administrative burden in updating admission policies to recognize the Classic Learning Test. The expected outcome includes greater state control over educational standards independent of federal frameworks, increased civic knowledge among middle school students, and a more diverse teacher workforce entering through alternative certification routes. No sunset provisions are specified, indicating these changes are intended as permanent modifications to Indiana's educational framework.
Key Points
- Prospective teachers: expanded access to profession through alternative licensing
- Middle school students: mandatory civics education enhancing civic literacy
- College applicants: additional standardized testing options for admissions
- School corporations: administrative burden for curriculum implementation and compliance
- State educational institutions: policy modifications for test acceptance
Legal Framework
The legislation operates within Indiana's constitutional authority over public education, exercising the state's plenary power to establish educational standards and regulate teacher licensing. The statutory framework builds upon existing Indiana Code Title 20 provisions governing education, amending specific sections including IC 20-19-2-14.5 for assessment standards, IC 20-28-5-12.5 for teacher licensing, IC 20-30-5-26 for curriculum requirements, and IC 21-40-4-8 for higher education admissions. The bill explicitly references compliance with the Family Education Rights and Privacy Act (20 U.S.C. 1232g et seq.), ensuring student privacy protections remain intact throughout assessment and reporting processes. The State Board of Education's rulemaking authority under IC 4-22-2 provides the regulatory mechanism for detailed implementation standards, particularly for civics education requirements under IC 20-30-16-6.5(d). The prohibition on Common Core adoption represents an assertion of state sovereignty over educational standards, potentially creating tension with federal education policy frameworks while remaining within constitutional bounds of state authority. The legislation does not explicitly preempt local school board authority but establishes mandatory minimum requirements that supersede conflicting local policies regarding civics education and assessment participation. Judicial review provisions follow standard Indiana administrative law procedures, with state board decisions subject to review under IC 4-21.5 and potential constitutional challenges addressable through Indiana courts.
Legal References
- Indiana Constitution (state authority over education)
- IC 20-19-2-14.5 (Assessment program authority)
- IC 20-28-5-12.5 (Teacher licensing)
- IC 20-30-5-26 (Civics education)
- IC 20-30-16-6.5(d) (Rulemaking authority)
- IC 21-40-4-8 (Higher education admissions)
- IC 4-22-2 (Administrative rulemaking procedures)
- IC 4-21.5 (Administrative review)
- IC 5-14-6 (Electronic reporting)
- 20 U.S.C. 1232g et seq. (Family Education Rights and Privacy Act)
Critical Issues
The explicit prohibition on Common Core standards and federally-produced assessments may generate controversy regarding Indiana's alignment with national educational frameworks and potential impacts on student mobility and college readiness comparisons across states. The alternative teacher licensing provisions, while addressing workforce shortages, raise concerns about maintaining teaching quality standards and ensuring alternatively licensed teachers possess adequate pedagogical training and subject matter expertise. Implementation challenges include developing comprehensive civics curricula that meet the bill's requirements while avoiding political bias concerns, particularly regarding instruction on governmental roles and responsibilities. The mandate for state educational institutions to accept the Classic Learning Test creates potential administrative complexity in establishing equivalency standards and may face resistance from admissions offices accustomed to traditional testing metrics. Cost implications remain unclear as the legislation provides no dedicated funding, potentially straining school district budgets for civics curriculum development, teacher professional development, and administrative overhead associated with alternative licensing processing. The absence of specific assessment standards for civics education creates ambiguity regarding student proficiency expectations and accountability measures. Constitutional concerns may arise regarding the balance between state-mandated curriculum requirements and local control of education, though such mandates generally fall within state authority. Unintended consequences could include reduced comparability of Indiana students' academic achievement with national benchmarks, potential teacher quality variations under alternative licensing pathways, and inconsistent civics education implementation across districts lacking detailed guidance. Opposition arguments likely focus on the rejection of nationally recognized standards, concerns about teacher preparation quality under expedited licensing, and unfunded mandates imposing costs on local school districts without corresponding state financial support.
Key Points
- Potential loss of national educational alignment through Common Core prohibition
- Teacher quality concerns under alternative licensing pathways
- Political bias risks in mandatory civics education implementation
- Administrative complexity in Classic Learning Test equivalency determinations
- Unfunded mandate implications for local school districts
- Absence of specific civics assessment standards and accountability measures
- Reduced interstate comparability of student achievement data
- Implementation inconsistency across districts without detailed guidance