Schools; directing the State Department of Education to establish the Oklahoma Principal Leadership Development Program. Effective date. Emergency.
SB1718 creates the Oklahoma Principal Leadership Development Program within the State Department of Education, working with the Office of Educational Quality and Accountability and the Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. The program is intended to improve principal effectiveness by establishing a statewide leadership framework, consistent access to professional development, and mentoring support for school principals.
The bill phases in several requirements over multiple school years. Starting in 2026-2027, the Department must publish a professional development plan for principals that includes learning goals, at least five days of high-quality leadership-focused training, and early literacy and numeracy training for elementary principals. Beginning in 2027-2028, new principals must be paired with a mentor for two consecutive years, with mentors required to have at least five years of principal experience and complete Department-approved training. Beginning in 2028-2029, the Department is to develop a year-long principal leadership academy based on the earlier phases, with the goal of eventually making it available to all certified principals.
The bill also creates stipend incentives, subject to available funding. Starting in 2029-2030, new principals who complete the required professional development and two-year mentorship and who are employed by a public school district may receive a $5,000 stipend. Once the leadership academy is implemented, certified principals who complete it and work in a public school district may also receive a $5,000 stipend. The State Board of Education may adopt rules to carry out the program, and the act includes an emergency clause and a July 1, 2026 effective date.
The bill’s impact is to add a new statutory section in Title 70 governing principal training, mentoring, and incentive payments, while giving the Department of Education broad implementation authority. It would affect public school principals, mentor principals, school districts, and state education agencies, and it creates a new state-funded professional development structure tied to principal certification and employment in public schools.
The available vote history suggests generally favorable sentiment: the Senate Education Committee passed the bill unanimously, 9-0, and the bill was later coauthored in the House by Representative Johns. No committee transcript is available, so the record does not show detailed debate, but the unanimous committee vote indicates broad support for strengthening principal preparation and retention. The main point of contention implied by the text is fiscal, because the stipend provisions are expressly subject to available funding, meaning implementation and payments depend on appropriations and budget capacity.
SB1718 would create a new section of law in Title 70 directing the State Department of Education to establish and administer the Oklahoma Principal Leadership Development Program. It would require phased professional development, mentorship, and a leadership academy for principals, and it would authorize $5,000 stipends for qualifying principals and new principals, contingent on available funding. The bill would affect state education agencies, public school principals, mentor principals, and public school districts, while also allowing the State Board of Education to promulgate rules for implementation.
The bill appears to have strong support in committee, as the Senate Education Committee advanced it unanimously by a 9-0 vote. The coauthoring of the bill in the House also suggests bipartisan or at least cross-chamber interest in principal development and school leadership support. Overall, the sentiment reflected in the available record is positive and focused on improving school leadership capacity rather than opposition to the program itself.
No committee transcript is available, so specific arguments for or against the bill are not documented in the provided materials. The most likely area of concern is funding, because both stipend provisions are conditioned on the availability of funds, and the bill creates ongoing state obligations for professional development, mentoring, and academy development. Any debate would likely center on cost, implementation logistics, and whether the Department can scale the program statewide while maintaining quality.