Louisiana Senate Bill SB46

Louisiana 2018 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/21/18
• Refer: 2/21/18
• Refer: 3/12/18
• Report Pass: 3/19/18
• Engrossed: 3/22/18
• Refer: 3/26/18
• Report Pass: 4/26/18
• Enrolled: 5/14/18
• Chaptered: 5/23/18
• Passed: 5/23/18

Caption

Provides relative to the master plan for postsecondary education. (gov sig)

Impact

The bill enhances the powers of the Board of Regents by mandating the formulation of a master plan that incorporates funding formulas for equitable distribution across educational institutions. Additionally, it requires the Board to review and revise these mission statements at least once every four years. This stipulation is designed to maintain institutional balance across diverse educational needs and access while promoting excellence in the state's higher education system.

Summary

Senate Bill 46 aims to amend and reenact certain statutes within Louisiana's education framework, specifically focusing on postsecondary education. It seeks to address the formulation and timely revision of a master plan for postsecondary education. This includes establishing mission statements for public postsecondary education systems and institutions, which are to be reviewed and revised periodically to ensure equitable distribution of educational resources and institutional quality.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB 46 appears to be largely positive, especially among legislators who support systematic improvements in postsecondary education. By codifying a structured review process, proponents see this bill as a necessary tool in advancing educational standards and access. However, there may be dissent concerning the practicality and implementation of the master plan revisions, particularly regarding how effectively they can cater to the diverse needs of various institutions and the communities they serve.

Contention

One notable point of contention is the requirement for regular assessments and changes to mission statements, as stakeholders may differ in their views on what constitutes progress and adequate representation of institutional goals. Critics of stringent oversight might argue that these requirements could stifle institutional autonomy in responding to local educational needs, emphasizing the delicate balance between state-level directives and local governance.