A BILL to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter 13 of Title 22.1 an article numbered 1.6, consisting of sections numbered 22.1-212.33 through 22.1-212.37, relating to establishment of Virginia African American, Asian American, Pacific Islander, Latino, and Indigenous Education Advisory Board; report.
HB814, as amended by Senate substitute, directs the Virginia Board of Education to study and report on whether the Commonwealth should create a Virginia African American, Asian American, Pacific Islander, Latino, and Indigenous Education Advisory Board. The study must examine the feasibility of such a board, the most appropriate way to establish it, and how it could advise the Governor and General Assembly on the treatment of African American, Asian American, Pacific Islander, Latino, and Indigenous history in the Standards of Learning and related curriculum frameworks.
The bill also asks the Board of Education to evaluate how this content is currently taught in classrooms and to consider strategies for developing elective courses in African American history and social studies, Asian American and Pacific Islander history and social studies, Latino history and social studies, and Indigenous history and social studies. The Board must submit recommendations on membership structure, advisory authority, duties, and implementation options by November 1, 2026.
HB814 does not itself create the advisory board or change the Standards of Learning; instead, it requires the Board of Education to conduct a feasibility assessment and deliver recommendations. Its immediate legal effect is to impose a reporting mandate on the Board of Education and to place the issue of culturally specific history instruction and advisory governance before the Governor and legislative education committees. If implemented later through follow-up legislation, the bill could lead to new advisory structures and curriculum-related policy changes affecting public schools, the Board of Education, and state education oversight.
The available context suggests the bill was treated as a policy study measure rather than a direct mandate, with no recorded floor votes or committee debate provided. The Senate substitute indicates continued legislative interest in exploring the proposal, but the bill ultimately was left in the Education and Health committee. Overall sentiment appears neutral to mildly supportive of further study, with the measure framed around gathering recommendations rather than immediately changing law.
The main point of potential contention is whether the Commonwealth should create a new advisory board focused on specific racial and ethnic histories, and whether such a board would be the best mechanism for shaping curriculum and elective course development. Supporters would likely emphasize more inclusive representation and improved instruction on underrepresented histories, while critics may question the need for a new board, the scope of its advisory role, or the implications for curriculum control and implementation. Because no committee transcript or vote record is available, the specific arguments on each side are not documented in the provided materials.