School Standards Reform Bill (Failed)

[Purple State]

All public high school students must complete, between 9th and 12th grade, at least four courses in mathematics, four courses in English, three courses in a single foreign language, three courses in the social sciences, one course in Atlasian/American history, four courses of science with at least three of said courses lab intensive, in addition to four elective courses.

I'd say this is a bit too regulatory.  Students should have more leeway in what they study, especially in junior and senior years.

Either way, is there an estimate as to how much all of this would cost?

This would act more as a guideline for schools to follow and would be taken care of in the usual curriculum report provided to the district by each school before the year begins. It likely wouldn't cost much more than current services, assuming schools are not grossly underserving students.

[Purple State]

PurpleState, do you accept this as friendly or should I start a vote?

Amendment to Sections 2/3/4:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I will accept Franzl's amendment as friendly and I thank him for keeping it broad, to allow some choice for the schools as to how to run their programs.

[Purple State]

i object to the friendly amendment. PE should not be mandatory 10-12th and would just be an utter waste of time for all students involved.

Who said 10-12? Read the amendment. The school needs a program, which is not explicitly described by the clause. That is the only reason I accepted it as friendly in the first place. The school needs some sort of PE program, but what that is should not be for the Senate to decide.

[Purple State]

Aye

I'm not really all that opposed to high school students taking part in PE. And I think the amendment allows schools to waive PE for those on sports team (part of the PE program flexibility), so I really have nothing wrong with this.

AYE, a student should be taught through 12th grade to live in a healthy way....which includes physical activity.

If that is our objective here, why don't we ban soft drink vending machines at schools?  Require better nutritional standards in school lunch programs?

Good idea. Why should the state pay money to provide unhealthy products to our children.

I would like to amend my legislation to include the following:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Purple State]

     At Hashemite's request, I move that Section 4.3 be stricken from the text.

I will accept the amendment as friendly. Schools may use advanced courses such as AP and IB to strengthen their acceptance rates. For one to not offer them would indicate a pressing need.

[Purple State]

What happened to my amendment to my own legislation from above? I object to the final vote call.

[Purple State]

What happened to my amendment to my own legislation from above? I object to the final vote call.

That was completely my fault, I'm sorry. Though we can't really stop the final vote maybe you could write a new bill with that amendment in it and it'll come up right away. Again, I'm sorry.

There is no PPT discretion for these kinds of things? Eh.

[Purple State]

It's only proper in this situation that the PPT bend the rules and cancel the vote, considering he had no right to call for it in the first place. It's what Happy Warrior did the time he messed up, so there's precedent too.

A good point. Thanks BK.

[Purple State]

Aye

[Purple State]

Aye

[Purple State]

How does this, as Marokai said, pretend that if all kids work hard they will be successful. What is does is exactly what Marokai wants: it provides a basic standard of education that ensures that all children receive a well-rounded learning experience.