BILL ANALYSIS C.S.H.B. 31 By: Kubiak May 5, 1995 Committee Report (Substituted) BACKGROUND In Texas, institutions of higher education have different policies for calculating the grade point average (GPA) of a student repeating a course. There are some institutions who will calculate the student's overall GPA by using the higher grade to replace the lower grade. Other institutions will delete the earlier grade and substitute the later grade in the GPA computation, even if the later grade is equal to, or less than, the earlier grade. Yet other institutions, include both grades in the GPA computation or, if the student takes the course three or more times, all grades are entered into the calculation. PURPOSE If enacted, C.S.H.B. 31 requires that institutions of higher education adopt a uniform policy for calculating the GPA of a student who has repeated a course in the same institution. RULEMAKING AUTHORITY It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution. SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS SECTION 1: Amends Chapter 61C, Education Code, by adding Section 61.0741 to read as follows: Sec. 61.0741. EFFECT OF REPEATING UNDERGRADUATE COURSE ON GRADE POINT AVERAGE. (a) Requires institutions of higher education to adopt a uniform policy appropriate to all students for calculating their GPA when they have repeated a course in the same institution. This section outlines the different methods of calculating the student's GPA. (b) This does not apply to a student who repeats one or more courses that could result in the exclusion of a total of more that 15 credit hours from the calculation of the student's GPA. (c) The content of the course may not have varied significantly from the first time it was undertaken. (d) A student may be given the course only one time in order to be afforded the benefits of this legislation. (e) This benefit does not apply to a graduate-level course or for students enrolled for credit in a post-graduate program. (f) In addition, the transcript must retain references to all coursework undertaken. (g) The tuition rate to be paid by any student electing to repeat an undergraduate course pursuant to this subsection shall be the amount determined by the Coordinating Board. SECTION 2: Effective date: Fall, 1996. SECTION 3: Emergency clause. COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE In Sec. 61.0741 (a), the original bill excludes from the calculation of the grade point average a grade that is the equivalent of a "C," "D," or "F" received by the student the first time the student completed a course if the grade is superior to the grade received the first time. The committee substitute instead requires each institution to adopt a uniform policy applicable to all student for calculating their grade point average and provides two methods to choose from. In Sec. 61.0741 (f), the original bill states that a grade excluded under this section must be included in the transcript. The committee substitute contains the same idea and adds the institution is not authorized to change the student's permanent record. In SECTION 2, Sec. 54.051 (o), the original bill focuses on the tuition for a course that a student repeats. The committee substitute addresses tuition in Section 61.074 by adding Subsection (g) which states that the Coordinating Board shall determine the tuition rate to be paid by any student electing to repeat an undergraduate course. The increased tuition rate shall apply to the repeated course, and not any other courses in which the student may be enrolled. The substitute deletes the addition of Section 54.051 (o) of the original bill. SUMMARY OF COMMITTEE ACTION H.B. 31 was considered by the committee in a public hearing on April 4, 1995. The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill. The following persons testified in favor of the bill: Mr. Gilberto Garcia, Jr.; Ms. Meredith Linn Frazier; Mr. Gregory Watson; and Mr. Brandon Bickler. The following person testified against the bill: Mr. Mike Allen. The following persons testified neutrally on the bill: Mr. Dale Hardgrove; and Mr. Budge Mabry. The bill was left pending. H.B. 31 was considered by the committee in a formal meeting on April 20, 1995. The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill. The substitute was adopted without objection by a non-record vote. The bill was reported favorably as substituted, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed and failed by a record vote of 4 ayes, 2 nays, 0 pnv, 3 absent. The bill was left pending. H.B. 31 was considered by the committee in a formal meeting on May 5, 1995. The committee reconsidered the committee substitute to H.B. 31, which was adopted at a formal meeting on April 20, 1995. The substitute was withdrawn without objection by a non-record vote. The committee considered a complete substitute for the bill. An amendment was offered to the substitute. The amendment was adopted without objection by a non-record vote. The substitute as amended was adopted without objection by a non-record vote. The chair directed the staff to incorporate the amendment into the substitute. The bill was reported favorably as substituted, with the recommendation that it do pass and be printed and be sent to the Committee on Local and Consent Calendars, by a record vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays, 0 pnv, 2 absent.