HB3026 amends the Illinois School Code to create a new Article 14D on dual language education. It requires the State Board of Education to adopt statewide guidance by December 15, 2026 for school districts that are starting or expanding dual language programs. That guidance must address program structure, curriculum, instruction, assessment and accountability, staff quality and professional development, family and community engagement, and support/resources.
The bill also directs the State Board, by July 1, 2029, to incorporate dual language education into its Equity Journey Continuum and broader strategic planning. In doing so, the Board must treat dual language education as part of educational equity and excellence and include provisions focused on recruiting, developing, and retaining bilingual educators. Separately, by July 1, 2027, the Board must establish biliteracy recognition pathways for students at prekindergarten/kindergarten, 5th grade, and 8th grade levels, with school districts allowed to opt into the program. The Board may adopt rules to implement these requirements.
Impact
HB3026 changes state education law by adding new statutory duties for the Illinois State Board of Education and creating a formal state framework for dual language programs and biliteracy recognition. It does not mandate that every district create a dual language program, but it does require statewide guidance and recognition pathways that districts may use, which could influence curriculum planning, staffing, student assessment, and bilingual program expansion across Illinois school districts.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable legislative support. It passed the Illinois House 77-35 and the Senate 42-12, suggesting broad bipartisan or at least cross-faction support, though not unanimous agreement. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the vote margins indicate the measure was viewed positively overall.
Contention
The main points of contention likely center on the scope of state involvement in local school programming, the administrative burden on the State Board of Education, and whether districts should be encouraged or effectively pushed toward dual language expansion. Potential concerns may also involve implementation costs, staffing shortages for bilingual educators, and whether biliteracy pathways and equity planning should be statewide priorities. The recorded no votes in both chambers suggest some lawmakers were unconvinced about the policy approach or its practical implications.