SHB 1079
SignedHouse
Remote testing
Supporting remote testing options for students enrolled in online school programs.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill allows Washington school districts with online school programs to let students take state assessments remotely, starting in the 2026–27 school year, to reduce travel burdens and increase participation. It requires the state to set security and administrative rules for remote testing to ensure fairness and integrity.
- Starting in the 2026–27 school year, school districts with online school programs may offer remote testing for state assessments.
- The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction must develop or update security and administration policies for remote testing by April 1, 2026, including requirements for proctor qualifications, student-to-proctor ratios, testing environments, devices, and parental consent.
- Remote testing policies must ensure security and fairness, including rules on device use, monitoring students during tests, and limiting access to unauthorized people or information.
- The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction must adopt formal rules to implement the law, and is encouraged to use a streamlined rulemaking process.
- The bill defines ‘device’ broadly to include computers, tablets, and smartphones used for testing.
Who is affected
- Students in online school programs — Students in online school programs gain the option to take state assessments from home or other approved remote locations, reducing the need for travel and associated costs or time off from work for families.
- Families and guardians of online students — Families and guardians of online students may save time and money by avoiding trips to testing sites, and may be more likely to have their children participate in required state assessments.
- School districts with online programs — School districts offering online programs must prepare to implement remote testing, including hiring qualified personnel, setting up secure testing environments, and following new state policies.
- Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction — The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction must create and maintain rules and policies for secure remote testing, including training guidelines, device standards, and monitoring protocols.
Pro/Con Analysis
Potential Benefits (5)
Allowing remote testing removes travel and time burdens for families of online students, increasing accessibility and likely improving participation rates—particularly for low-income, rural, or working families who cannot afford time off or travel to distant sites.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1 (Findings) & Sec. 2(1)By enabling remote assessments, the bill helps ensure that online students are included in state accountability data, supporting more accurate identification of achievement gaps and program effectiveness—benefiting educators and policymakers aiming to serve vulnerable student populations.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1 (Findings) & Sec. 2(1)Standardized security protocols for remote testing (e.g., monitoring, device restrictions) aim to protect assessment integrity, which supports fair and valid measurement of student learning across diverse settings.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(iii)Defining ‘device’ broadly to include smartphones and tablets increases flexibility for families with limited technology access, potentially reducing the need for districts to provide hardware—though this depends on equitable broadband access, which remains uneven across the state.
EducationRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(iv)Encouraging use of streamlined rulemaking may reduce bureaucratic delays in implementing remote testing, helping districts plan and allocate resources more efficiently ahead of the 2026–27 rollout.
Local GovernmentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(3)
Potential Concerns (5)
The requirement for proctor-to-student ratios and monitoring protocols may reduce opportunities for in-person cheating, but enforcement will depend on local implementation and may strain resources in under-resourced districts, potentially leading to inconsistent security standards across regions.
Public SafetyRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(iii)Mandating device and network requirements could increase costs for families and districts, especially in low-income areas where broadband access or device ownership is limited, potentially exacerbating the digital divide.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(iv)The bill does not specify funding to support implementation, meaning districts—especially smaller or rural ones—may face unfunded mandates to hire proctors, upgrade infrastructure, or purchase secure devices, diverting funds from core instructional needs.
Local GovernmentRef: Fiscal Impact section (not in bill text, but referenced in summary)Mandatory parental consent for remote testing may create administrative delays and could discourage participation if families are hesitant to share consent for digital assessments, potentially reducing assessment participation despite the bill’s intent to increase it.
Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(v)Setting maximum student-to-proctor ratios may require hiring additional staff or training volunteers, increasing labor costs for districts already facing staffing shortages, especially in rural or high-need areas.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(2)(a)(ii)
Who Is Most Affected
Students in online programs—especially those in rural, low-income, or nontraditional learning arrangements—gain meaningful access to assessment participation without travel barriers, potentially improving their inclusion in accountability systems and access to targeted academic support.
Families of online students benefit from reduced time, transportation, and opportunity costs associated with testing, but may face new burdens if they must provide secure testing environments or consent to data collection without clear guidance or support.
School districts with online programs will need to invest in staffing, technology, and compliance infrastructure; smaller or underfunded districts may struggle more than larger urban districts, potentially widening resource disparities.
OSPI gains authority and responsibility for setting and enforcing remote testing standards, but without dedicated funding, implementation may be uneven, and its capacity to ensure equity and security across diverse districts remains uncertain.