HB 1767 would create the “Missouri Educators and Parental Empowerment and Rights Act” by adding four new sections to Chapter 160, RSMo. The bill establishes a “Parents’ Bill of Rights” and an “Educators’ Bill of Rights,” applying to school districts, charter schools, and virtual schools. It declares legislative findings about the importance of parent-teacher collaboration and then sets out a detailed list of parental rights, including access to curriculum information, teacher and presenter identities, school records, data-collection information, school visitation procedures, safety notifications, and authorization for field trips. It also protects parents from being coerced into withholding information from their children, except in abuse or neglect situations where reporting obligations apply.
The bill also creates a parallel set of rights for teachers, including protection from physical abuse or threats, the right to professional treatment, preparation time, immunity and insurance protections under existing law, the ability to implement classroom discipline plans, and the right to work in a safe and orderly environment. Beginning teachers would be entitled to support through assistance programs. In addition, each local educational agency would be required to adopt policies and procedures to help parents and teachers exercise these rights, provide annual notice of the rights to parents, teachers, and students, and post them publicly.
A major operational component of the bill is its requirement that each local educational agency adopt and enforce a code of student conduct for the 2027-28 school year and beyond. That code must emphasize respect for school staff, personal responsibility, prompt responses to disruptive behavior, graduated consequences, parental notification for serious discipline, and a prohibition on policies that differentiate student treatment primarily on the basis of race alone. The bill also directs LEAs to train staff in classroom management and civility, encourage parental engagement, and provide procedures for parent visits and emergency situations such as lockdowns or lockouts.
The bill’s impact on state law would be significant because it imposes new duties on school districts, charter schools, and virtual schools, while also limiting how those entities can structure policies that interfere with the listed parental and teacher rights. It does not override other state or federal law, and it expressly preserves existing discipline policies and regulatory authority, but it would still require substantial policy revisions, notice obligations, and conduct-code updates across Missouri public education systems. The Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education may provide guidance, but the bill says it should not impose undue burdens or mandates.
Overall, the bill appears to have a generally favorable posture in the legislative process, as reflected by its “Reported Do Pass (H)” status. Even without recorded debate or votes, the structure and findings suggest strong support for parental involvement, teacher authority, and school transparency. The main points of contention likely center on the bill’s reach into local school governance, its restrictions on race-based disciplinary differentiation and related training, and the administrative burden of implementing new notice, access, and conduct-policy requirements. Supporters would likely view it as strengthening family engagement and classroom order, while critics may see it as constraining local discretion and potentially affecting equity-focused discipline practices.
HB 1767 would amend Chapter 160, RSMo, by adding four new sections that impose statewide requirements on school districts, charter schools, and virtual schools regarding parental access, teacher protections, student discipline, and school transparency. It would require local educational agencies to adopt policies, publish rights notices, provide records and information on request, notify parents of safety and disciplinary incidents, and implement a code of student conduct meeting specified standards. The bill would also restrict LEAs from adopting policies that prevent parents or teachers from exercising the rights listed in the act, while preserving other state and federal laws and existing discipline authority.
The available legislative context suggests the bill was received positively enough to be reported do pass in the House, and the bill text itself frames the measure as a collaboration-focused effort to empower parents and protect educators. The overall tone is supportive of parental rights, teacher professionalism, school safety, and orderly classrooms. No committee transcript or recorded vote data is available, so there is no direct evidence of floor debate, but the bill’s structure indicates it was advanced as a policy response to concerns about transparency, discipline, and school-parent communication.
The most likely areas of contention are the bill’s limits on local control, its detailed mandates for school policies and notices, and its provisions barring race-based differentiation in discipline and related training or curriculum. Supporters would likely emphasize parental access to information, teacher safety, and stronger discipline standards, while opponents may argue that the bill could interfere with district autonomy, complicate equity-oriented discipline reforms, or create administrative burdens for LEAs. The requirement that schools provide extensive information on request and adopt specific conduct policies by the 2027-28 school year may also be a point of concern for school administrators.