BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1992 |
By: Zerwas |
Higher Education |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
The Advanced Placement (AP) program is a widely implemented program that allows high school students to take college-level courses and earn college credit before graduating high school. Scores on AP examinations are ranked one through five and correspond with letter grades for certain college courses. According to interested parties, studies conducted in states that have adopted statewide AP credit-by-examination policies have shown strong college performance by students who earn a score of three or higher on an AP examination. Granting undergraduate course credit for scores of three on an AP examination, these parties contend, could potentially save Texas families millions in tuition costs, given the number of students who achieve that score on AP examinations and the number of course credits that score represents. The parties conclude that an ambitious student could enter college with a full semester of college credit if the student completes the core curriculum classes through an AP examination route. C.S.H.B. 1992 seeks to provide for such opportunities, with a certain exception.
|
||||||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that rulemaking authority is expressly granted to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board in SECTION 2 of this bill.
|
||||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1992 amends the Education Code to prohibit an institution of higher education from requiring a score of more than three in establishing the minimum required score on an Advanced Placement (AP) examination for granting undergraduate course credit to entering freshman students for a particular lower-division course, beginning with freshman students entering institutions of higher education in the 2016 fall semester, unless the institution's chief academic officer determines, based on evidence, that a higher score on the examination is necessary to indicate a student is sufficiently prepared to be successful in a related, more advanced course for which the lower-division course is a prerequisite.
C.S.H.B. 1992 requires the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board, in consultation with institutions of higher education, the coordinating board's Undergraduate Education Advisory Committee, and other interested parties, to conduct a study on the performance of undergraduate students at institutions of higher education who receive undergraduate course credit for achieving required scores on one or more AP examinations. The bill requires the study to compare the academic performance, retention rates, and graduation rates at institutions of higher education of students who complete a lower-division course at an institution and students who receive credit for that course for a score of three or more on an AP examination, disaggregated by score. The bill requires each institution to submit to the coordinating board any data requested by the coordinating board as necessary for it to carry out its duties relating to the study. The bill requires the coordinating board, not later than January 1, 2017, to submit to the governor, the lieutenant governor, the speaker of the house of representatives, and the standing legislative committees with primary jurisdiction over higher education a report regarding the results of the study and any recommendations for legislative or administrative action. The bill requires the coordinating board to adopt rules as necessary to implement the study in a manner that ensures compliance with federal law regarding confidentiality of student educational information. The bill's provisions relating to the study expire September 1, 2017.
|
||||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
On passage, or, if the bill does not receive the necessary vote, September 1, 2015.
|
||||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1992 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||||
|