Tennessee House Bill HB1789

Tennessee 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/9/24
• Refer: 1/11/24
• Refer: 2/6/24
• Refer: 2/14/24
• Engrossed: 2/27/24
• Enrolled: 3/5/24
• Passed: 3/15/24
• Chaptered: 3/26/24

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Section 49-5-417, relative to educator licensure actions taken by the state board of education.

Impact

The amendments proposed by HB 1789 are likely to reinforce the standards for educator licensure and promote protection within the educational environment. By enabling the state board of education to take action against educators who have pleaded guilty or no contest to certain offenses, the bill seeks to enhance accountability and public safety in educational settings. This legislative adjustment may lead to increased scrutiny of educators and help protect students from potential harm posed by those with documented misconduct in their past.

Summary

House Bill 1789 amends Tennessee Code Annotated, specifically Section 49-5-417, to update the criteria by which the state board of education may take licensure actions against educators. The significant change introduced by the bill is the broadening of language related to conviction status; it allows for actions against educators who have pleaded guilty or no contest (nolo contendere) to various offenses, not just those who have been formally convicted. This change aims to ensure that any educators with a history of misconduct, regardless of the form of legal resolution, are appropriately reported and managed by educational authorities.

Sentiment

Sentiment surrounding HB 1789 appears largely supportive among lawmakers and constituents who prioritize student safety and educator accountability. Proponents of the bill argue that it is a necessary step to prevent individuals with a problematic history from being in positions of trust with students. However, as with such legislative reforms, there may also be some concerns about the fair treatment of educators who might plead to lesser charges under duress or as part of plea bargains, raising questions about the potential impacts on their careers.

Contention

While the bill enjoys support from many in the educational sector who advocate for heightened screening and transparency regarding educator conduct, it may face opposition from educators’ rights groups or unions. These organizations may argue that the broader criteria for reporting offenses could lead to unjust consequences for educators, particularly if individuals are penalized for minor offenses that do not necessarily reflect their ability to perform competently in the educational environment. The discussion centers around finding the right balance between public safety and fair treatment of educators.