SSB 5327
In CommitteeSenate
Learning standards
Concerning learning standards and graduation requirements.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
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 requires state education agencies to review and update computer science learning standards and graduation requirements to ensure students can demonstrate competency in the subject. It also strengthens existing processes for developing and revising state learning standards, with a focus on equity, depth, and alignment with graduation criteria.
- The State Board of Education must review and recommend changes to graduation requirements to ensure students can demonstrate competency in the high school computer science learning standards.
- The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) must review and update K–12 computer science learning standards, consulting other states and experts, and identify which standards are foundational for graduation.
- The State Board of Education must survey school districts about current computer science course offerings, assessments, and resource needs, and report findings—including recommendations for legislative action—to the legislature by December 31, 2025.
- The bill amends RCW 28A.655.070 to reinforce OSPI’s authority and responsibilities to develop, revise, and prioritize state learning standards, integrate diversity/equity/inclusion, and align assessments to grade-level content expectations with greater focus on depth over breadth.
- Both new sections expire on August 1, 2027, requiring legislative action to make any changes permanent.
Who is affected
- High school students — High school students will gain more flexibility in demonstrating computer science competency for graduation, and may benefit from expanded access to computer science courses and educators trained in the subject.
- School districts — School districts must report on current computer science course offerings and assessment methods, and may receive guidance or support (e.g., teacher training) to meet new standards and graduation requirements.
- Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Board of Education — The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) and State Board of Education must lead the review and update of computer science standards and graduation requirements, and report findings to the legislature.
- Educators — Educators—especially those teaching computer science—may need new endorsements or training to meet updated standards, and will use revised standards and assessments in instruction.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
The bill strengthens equity by requiring consultation with students, parents, educators, and community members—and explicitly ties computer science competency to graduation, expanding access to high-demand skills for historically underrepresented students.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1), Sec. 2(1)Mandating a statewide survey of district-level CS course offerings and needs provides critical data to target resources and teacher training where gaps exist—especially in rural or under-resourced districts.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)Requiring OSPI to prioritize standards with “depth over breadth” and clearly define grade-level content expectations improves instructional focus and reduces curriculum overload—benefiting teachers and students alike.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(c)Mandating stakeholder consultation—including students and community members—ensures broader input in curriculum design, increasing relevance and cultural responsiveness of CS standards.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(a)Explicitly requiring integration of diversity, equity, and inclusion into learning standards helps ensure all students—especially those from marginalized backgrounds—see themselves reflected in CS content and pathways.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)
Potential Concerns (5)
School districts must report on computer science course offerings, assessments, and resource needs—adding administrative burden without guaranteed state funding to offset compliance costs.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(2)The bill’s 2027 sunset clause creates uncertainty for districts, requiring repeated legislative reauthorization and potentially disrupting long-term curriculum planning.
Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1(4) & Sec. 2(3)The bill may require additional funding for teacher training, curriculum development, and assessment alignment—but no funding source is identified, risking underfunded implementation or diversion of existing education dollars.
EducationLean peopleRef: Fiscal Impact (unspecified)By requiring OSPI to identify *foundational* computer science standards for graduation, the bill may narrow curriculum breadth in ways that reduce flexibility for students with diverse learning pathways or interests outside CS.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(1)Mandating bias screening and DEI integration in standards development is aspirational but lacks measurable accountability or definition of “biased content,” potentially leading to inconsistent or symbolic implementation across districts.
EducationRef: Sec. 3(2)(b)
Who Is Most Affected
High school students—especially those from low-income, rural, or underrepresented racial/ethnic groups—may gain greater access to high-quality CS education and graduation flexibility, but only if districts receive adequate support to implement it.
School districts—particularly smaller or under-resourced ones—will face added reporting and potential curriculum redesign costs, but may benefit from state data collection and future legislative funding if recommendations lead to targeted support.
OSPI and State Board gain expanded authority over CS standards and assessment alignment, but must navigate tight deadlines and uncertain funding, limiting their ability to enforce uniform quality without additional resources.
Educators may benefit from clearer standards and potential training support, but face increased workload and possible credentialing changes—especially in districts lacking CS specialists.
Tech employers and higher education institutions may benefit from a more skilled workforce pipeline, but the bill does not require employer input beyond consultation and lacks measurable workforce outcomes.