To Repeal The Requirement That The State Board Of Education Establish Rules Regarding The Implementation Of Four-day School Weeks.
Summary
HB1924 would amend Arkansas law governing school districts that operate on a four-day school week. The bill removes the statutory requirement that the State Board of Education establish rules, standards, and guidelines specifically for calculating average daily membership and distributing state aid to districts using a four-day schedule. It keeps in place the underlying principle that a district operating on a four-day week may not receive more state financial aid than it would have received under a five-day week.
In practical terms, the bill would reduce the amount of state-level rulemaking directed at four-day school week operations, while preserving the funding cap already in law. School districts that choose a four-day schedule would still be subject to the general state aid framework, but the Board would no longer be expressly required to create separate rules to equate four-day and five-day instructional models. The measure affects Arkansas public school districts, the State Board of Education, and the state aid formula administered for local school funding.
Impact
The bill would amend Arkansas Code § 6-10-117(d) by repealing the mandate that the State Board of Education adopt specific standards, guidelines, and rules for four-day school weeks. It leaves intact the prohibition on a district receiving more state financial aid for a four-day week than it would receive for a five-day week, so the bill changes administrative oversight rather than the basic funding limitation. The main legal effect is to narrow the Board’s express rulemaking obligation and potentially simplify state regulation of districts that adopt alternative weekly schedules.
Sentiment
There is no recorded committee transcript or vote history in the provided materials, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from debate or roll call data. Based on the text alone, the measure appears administrative and limited in scope, suggesting a neutral or technical policy approach rather than a highly partisan one. The bill’s focus on reducing regulatory requirements while preserving the funding cap may appeal to supporters of local control and streamlined state oversight.
Contention
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. The most likely policy tension is between local flexibility for school districts that want to use four-day weeks and the desire for statewide standards to ensure comparable educational opportunity and fair funding treatment. Supporters may view the bill as removing unnecessary bureaucracy, while opponents could argue that eliminating explicit Board rules may reduce consistency or clarity for districts, parents, and administrators.