Georgia Senate Bill SB50

Georgia 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/30/23
• Refer: 1/31/23
• Report Pass: 2/15/23
• Engrossed: 2/23/23
• Report Pass: 3/7/24
• Enrolled: 4/2/24
• Chaptered: 4/22/24
• Passed: 4/22/24

Caption

Education; local boards of education which operate a school with grades nine through 12 may provide instruction in lifeguarding and aquatic safety; provide

Impact

The bill mandates that by January 1, 2026, state standards must be established for lifeguarding instruction to ensure a standardized educational framework across districts. Local education authorities will have the flexibility to design their own curriculum, but all must align with the state's requirements. This could lead to more consistent training methods statewide and prepare students to enter the workforce with valuable skills, increasing overall job readiness in emergency response roles.

Summary

Senate Bill 50 aims to amend the Georgia Code to allow local boards of education that operate high schools to provide instruction in lifeguarding and aquatic safety. This initiative is designed to equip students with essential life skills, potentially enabling them to become certified lifeguards upon successful course completion. The proposed curriculum will incorporate psychomotor skills necessary for effective lifeguarding and will begin to be implemented in the 2026-2027 school year.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB50 appears to be supportive among education and community advocates who recognize the value of teaching lifeguarding as a practical skill. Proponents argue that it is crucial for student safety, particularly in areas with significant swimming facilities. However, there may be points of contention regarding the allocation of resources and funding for these new programs, especially in underfunded school districts that may struggle to offer such specialized training.

Contention

While there is enthusiasm for expanding educational offerings to include lifeguarding, concerns have been raised about whether local schools can adequately fund and implement such programs. Critics of the bill may argue that the focus should instead be on traditional academic subjects, and that adding vocational training could divert attention from core educational goals. Additionally, there is a need for qualified instructors which may pose a challenge in some regions, thus impacting the quality of the training provided.