Creates provisions relating to curricula and instruction in public schools
Impact
The implications of SB 172 on state laws are significant, seeking to regulate educational content at the state level. By mandating that the state board of education does not promote or allow divisive concepts, the bill effectively centralizes control over educational curriculum, enforcing a narrower scope on the topics that can be taught. This alteration has the potential to standardize educational experiences statewide, thereby influencing how teachers address sensitive subjects, particularly those related to history and social studies.
Summary
Senate Bill 172 sets forth amendments to Chapter 160 of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, instituting a policy aimed at curbing the inclusion of what the bill terms 'divisive concepts' in public school curricula and instruction. The bill defines divisive concepts largely around notions of race and sex, outlining a range of principles that cannot be presented in educational settings. This includes ideas that promote the superiority of one race over another, suggest that the U.S. is fundamentally racist or sexist, or advocate that individuals should feel discomfort or guilt due to their race or sex.
Sentiment
The sentiment surrounding SB 172 is contentious, with opinions sharply divided along political lines. Proponents argue that the bill fosters a more unified educational environment, where complex issues of race and sex are discussed without the lens of division. Conversely, opponents of the bill express concern that it constrains educators’ abilities to engage critically with important historical and social issues, fearing it sanitizes education at the expense of inclusivity and comprehensive understanding.
Contention
Notable points of contention in the discussions around SB 172 revolve around the definition of 'divisive concepts' as specified in the bill. Critics argue that the vague language might enable broad interpretations that could restrict robust discussions in classrooms, prompting fears of a chilling effect on educators who may self-censor. This tension highlights a fundamental debate over educational freedom versus state-imposed guidelines, raising questions about the responsibilities of educational institutions in addressing the complexities of race and gender in contemporary society.
Relating to the instructional materials for certain curriculum in public schools, including certain instructional prohibitions and requirements regarding those materials.
Relating to certain public school instructional requirements and prohibitions and the incorporation of certain instructional activities as part of student coursework.
Prohibits teaching of critical race theory in public schools; prohibits public school teachers from engaging in political, ideological, or religious advocacy in classroom.
Prohibits teaching of critical race theory in public schools; prohibits public school teachers from engaging in political, ideological, or religious advocacy in classroom.