Student achievement missing from new school board ethics bill

Improving K-12 education remains a top priority for the South Carolina General Assembly. 

S.70, a school board ethics bill, is now making its way through the Statehouse. 

Current law 

As public officials, school board members are subject to the S.C. Ethics Act. 

According to a separate statute, board members must complete an orientation program focused on responsibilities, school ethics, community relations, etc. within one year of taking office. In practice, this training must be completed with the South Carolina School Boards Association, as it has historically been the only organization approved to provide it. Other states, including North Carolina, often have more than one source from which board members can receive required training. 

State law does not currently require board members to receive training on student achievement (i.e. how does their role relate to improving student outcomes), and there are no statutory penalties for not completing a new member orientation. 

What’s new 

Under S.70, the State Board of Education would create a baseline model code of ethics that all local boards must adopt, with room to expand on it if desired. The bill would also establish a new model training program.  

The most recent amended version requires that the training program be completed within six months rather than one year, and it clarifies that re-elected/re-appointed board members are now also expected to complete the program. If a local board member does not complete the required training and does not comply within a period determined by the State Board of Education, the Board would submit the name of the local board member to the Governor for removal. 

Additionally, S.70 strikes the reference to the South Carolina School Boards Association (SCSBA) in this statute as an example training provider. 

This is a very welcome change. The S.C. code must remain impartial to external entities. By listing the SCSBA directly, they are given an implicit competitive advantage. Removing their name from state law would keep training sources on even footing under the law, promote fairness, and reduce the perception of bias. 

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated that the Department of Education would be responsible for creating the model policy. In fact, this responsibility resides with the State Board of Education.

Room to improve 

While good intentioned in improving accountability statewide, and while the current amended version is certainly an improvement, there is still one notable flaw in the bill. 

As pointed out by Carolinas Academic Leadership Network Director, Bryce Fiedler, in his written testimony to a Senate Education subcommittee, there is no inclusion of “student achievement” or related terminology under the required board member training topics section of the bill. 

He argues that “A school board’s chief responsibility is to govern in a manner that improves student outcomes.” 

If S.C.’s K-12 education is to truly improve, student success needs to be part of everything a district does. It’s time for S.C. to get serious and pursue academic excellence at every level of education. 

The bill received second reading in the Senate on Thursday, Feb. 18. Following a perfunctory third reading, it will move to the House for consideration. 

Ethan Brawer is a research intern for the South Carolina Policy Council.  

This report may be republished in whole or in part, provided that proper credit is given to the author(s) and the South Carolina Policy Council.