Texas Senate Bill SB183

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 11/9/10
• Refer: 1/31/11

Caption

Relating to placement of a student in a disciplinary alternative education program for certain harassing behavior directed at an educator.

Impact

The bill is expected to have significant implications for both school policies and student behavior management. By formalizing the process for placing students into disciplinary alternative education programs for certain harassing acts toward educators, SB183 will likely lead to an increase in the number of students removed from the traditional classroom setting. This move aims to enhance the professional reputation of educators and allow them to perform their duties without the fear of threats or harassment. Consequently, schools may need to develop training and support systems for staff to handle these situations while ensuring compliance with the new law.

Summary

SB183 aims to strengthen the disciplinary measures against students who engage in harassing behavior directed at educators. Specifically, the bill mandates a minimum 60-day removal of a student from class if they threaten an educator, associate them with criminal or hate groups, or publish obscene material. This amendment to the Education Code emphasizes a proactive approach in safeguarding educators and preserving the integrity of the learning environment. By establishing clear consequences for such behaviors, the legislature intends to discourage harassment and promote a safer educational atmosphere.

Sentiment

Sentiment around SB183 appears to be largely supportive, particularly among educators and school administrators who see the necessity for measures that protect them from threats and disruptive behaviors. Proponents argue that such protection is critical for allowing educators to work effectively and maintain a positive learning environment. However, there may be dissent from some advocacy groups who are concerned about the implications of such disciplinary policies on student rights and the potential for disproportionate penalties, particularly among vulnerable student populations.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for misuse of the newly established provisions and whether the 60-day mandatory removal might be a disproportionate response for certain behaviors. Critics argue that strict penalties may not consider the context of individual incidents and could lead to students being placed in educational settings that are less conducive to rehabilitation. The bill brings to the forefront the balancing act between protecting educators and ensuring fair treatment of students, particularly in cases where motivations behind the behaviors may vary significantly.