On March 8, the Minnesota Senate Committee on E-12 Policy held a hearing on S.F. 2487, the newly proposed Academic Balance Bill. Following the hearing, the bill was passed by a 5-3 vote of the Policy Committee, and was referred to the E-12 Finance Committee.

The bill was written by Senators Carla Nelson (R) and Paul Anderson (R), and was first introduced on Feb. 20. As introduced to the Policy Committee on March 8, S.F. 2487 sought to prevent teachers from promoting “specified social or political viewpoints,” required “caution from classroom teachers when expressing personal views in the classroom,” and prohibited “the introduction of controversial matters without a relationship to the subject taught.”

Following the March 8 hearing and testimonies, S.F. 2487 was amended during a call of the Senate on March 12. Two sections were added to the bill, one which would prohibit teachers and other employees from “using public resources for advocacy,” and another which would award a one-time grant to any district or charter school that adopted an “academic balance policy” during the 2019 fiscal year.

The debate over whether or not controversial topics and personal political viewpoints should be discussed in a classroom setting has been raging in Edina Public Schools over the last two years, and the question of whether or not teachers should feel free to express their own views has been at the center of the debate. Some Edina High School teachers came under fire specifically for the expression of their personal political opinions in the days following the 2016 presidential election.

Many Edina High School students, teachers, and community members attended the March 8 hearing to testify for or against the bill. In total, 15 testimonies were given, four in favor of the bill, and 11 against.

Several supporters of S.F. 2487 hope the bill would prevent teachers from alienating students with differing opinions.

“I am one of several conservative students that have been singled out by teachers for my conservative beliefs,” EHS junior Tatum Buyse said. “[The bill] will benefit Minnesota public schools because it will help students learn how to think, rather than simply being told what to think.”

Opponents of the bill argue that the bill would do more to limit student expression by discouraging teachers from introducing and leading discussions that encourage open debate on important, complicated issues.

“If I was a teacher I would be very scared of what I can say and what I can’t say,” EHS senior Destiny Washington said. “The most serious conversations that I’ve had in the classroom were about controversial history. And not with teachers saying ‘you have to believe this,’ but with them telling you the facts, and telling you historical things and things of that nature. And if you try to stop that, and try to halt that, it can be really detrimental to our education as a whole.”

S.F. 2487 is set to be heard next by the E-12 Finance Committee. The date of the next hearing is unknown.