A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 22.1-1, as it shall become effective, 22.1-238, as it is currently effective, and 22.1-241, as it is currently effective and as it shall become effective, of the Code of Virginia, relating to public elementary and secondary student textbooks; print as primary curriculum basis.
HB362 establishes a Printed Textbook Pilot Program within the Virginia Department of Education to identify up to 10 school divisions where printed textbooks and other high-quality instructional materials would serve as the primary curriculum basis for students, unless a student’s individualized education program provides otherwise. The program is intended to promote positive educational outcomes by testing whether a print-centered instructional model improves student learning and related outcomes in selected divisions.
The bill directs the Department to run a competitive selection process, taking into account factors such as school and division performance, enrollment, student demographics, the share of economically disadvantaged students, and geographic diversity. The Department would also set program rules and provide technical assistance to participating divisions on selecting high-quality printed materials. If funded through the general appropriation act, the Department would award grants to cover textbook and instructional material purchases, with no local match required and with the grants required to supplement, not replace, existing state textbook funding. The bill also requires annual reporting to legislative committees on implementation, satisfaction, and student outcomes, with the possibility that the pilot could later be modified or expanded based on the results.
HB362 would add a new section to Title 22.1 of the Code of Virginia and create a state-run pilot program affecting public elementary and secondary school textbook and curriculum procurement. It would not mandate a statewide shift away from digital materials, but it would authorize selected school divisions to use printed textbooks as the primary instructional basis and provide state grant support for doing so. The bill would also create new reporting obligations for the Department of Education and participating divisions, and it could influence future policy decisions about textbook funding, instructional materials, and curriculum delivery if the pilot is expanded.
The available legislative history suggests the bill was treated cautiously rather than decisively endorsed, as reflected by its continuation to the next session in Appropriations by voice vote. The absence of recorded committee debate or roll-call votes limits the ability to identify strong support or opposition, but the bill’s advancement into Appropriations indicates it received enough interest to remain under consideration. Overall, the sentiment appears mixed-to-neutral, with the proposal framed as an evidence-gathering pilot rather than a sweeping policy change.
The main points of potential contention are likely the bill’s preference for printed textbooks over other instructional formats, the use of state funds for a targeted pilot, and whether the program should be limited to a small number of divisions. Supporters would likely emphasize student outcomes, instructional quality, and the value of testing a print-based model, while skeptics may question cost, flexibility, and whether the pilot is necessary given existing local and state textbook policies. Another possible issue is the bill’s interaction with individualized education programs and whether a print-first approach could fit the needs of all students.