SB 5859
In CommitteeSenate
Competency-based assessments
Expanding opportunities for competency-based assessments in graduation pathway options.
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 broadens how Washington high school students can demonstrate readiness for college or careers by adding new graduation pathway options—including competency-based assessments and performance-based learning experiences—while requiring schools to inform students and families about available choices. It updates existing law to make pathways more flexible and aligned with students’ post-high school goals.
- Expands graduation pathway options to include more flexible ways for students to show readiness in English language arts and mathematics, beyond just state standardized tests.
- Adds competency-based assessments as a formal pathway option, including courses or exams like AP, IB, Cambridge, or locally designed assessments that meet state standards.
- Creates a new performance-based learning experience pathway—such as projects, internships, or community service—that lets students demonstrate skills in real-world contexts, evaluated using state-developed rubrics.
- Requires school districts to annually inform students in grades 8–12 (and encouraged to start in grade 6) about available graduation pathways, in line with language access requirements.
- Gives school districts discretion over which pathway options to offer, but encourages them to expand options over time.
Who is affected
- High school students — High school students in grades 8–12 (and increasingly grades 6–7) who will need to choose how to demonstrate readiness for college or career after graduation; this bill adds more flexible ways they can meet graduation requirements.
- School districts and local boards of directors — School districts must decide which pathway options to offer and develop policies for performance-based assessments; they also must provide annual information to students and families about available options.
- State education agencies — State agencies—especially the state board of education and the office of the superintendent of public instruction—must develop rules, proficiency targets, rubrics, and guidance for implementing new pathway options.
- Families and parents — Families and parents of high school students will receive expanded information about graduation options and may help guide students’ choices based on their goals.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (4)
Expanding competency- and performance-based pathways—such as AP, IB, Cambridge, or real-world projects—allows students who struggle with standardized tests (e.g., students with learning differences, English learners, neurodivergent students) to demonstrate mastery in ways aligned with their strengths, increasing equitable access to graduation and postsecondary opportunity.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (2)(d), (f)Performance-based learning experiences (e.g., internships, community service, portfolios) better align with career and civic readiness, especially for students whose post-graduation goals include direct workforce entry or community engagement—groups historically underserved by traditional college-prep pathways.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (2)(f)(i)–(iii)Mandating annual, multilingual information about graduation pathways empowers families—especially those with limited English proficiency or first-generation college students—to make informed choices, reducing information asymmetry that has historically disadvantaged marginalized students.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (4)Formal recognition of high school transition courses (e.g., “bridge to college”) and career and technical education sequences expands access to no- or low-cost postsecondary readiness—particularly beneficial for students who cannot afford traditional remedial coursework or college prep programs.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (2)(c), (i)
Potential Concerns (4)
School districts must develop and adopt written policies for performance-based learning experiences, including rubric implementation and evaluation protocols, which imposes new administrative and professional development costs on already resource-constrained districts—particularly those in rural or underfunded areas—without dedicated state funding to offset these responsibilities.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (2)(f)(iv)Mandating annual, grade-level information sessions on graduation pathways for students in grades 6–12 increases staff time (e.g., counselors, administrators) and logistical demands (translation, materials, scheduling), disproportionately affecting districts with limited counseling staff or high student-to-counselor ratios.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (4)While the bill requires rubric and proficiency target development, it does not mandate funding for teacher training or quality assurance—meaning implementation quality may vary widely across districts, potentially undermining equity for students in under-resourced schools who rely on consistent, high-quality assessment support.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (2)(f)(iii)Granting districts full discretion over which pathways to offer may exacerbate existing inequities: wealthier districts may rapidly expand options (e.g., internships, IB, AP), while underfunded districts may retain only test- or course-based options, limiting access for students in high-poverty schools.
EducationLean peopleRef: Sec. 1, subsection (3)
Who Is Most Affected
Students from low-income families, English learners, and students with disabilities are most likely to benefit from flexible, non-test-based pathways that accommodate diverse learning styles and reduce high-stakes testing pressure. However, they may be harmed if their districts lack resources to implement high-quality performance assessments or counseling support.
Rural and underfunded school districts face increased administrative burdens without new funding, potentially widening resource gaps relative to wealthier districts that can more easily absorb costs or leverage private partnerships for performance-based learning.
Families with higher socioeconomic status or strong social capital may more easily access and navigate expanded options (e.g., internships, IB programs), potentially reinforcing advantage—while families with less support may feel overwhelmed by choice overload or lack guidance.
Counselors and teachers gain flexibility to support diverse learners but face added workload (rubric development, performance evaluation, documentation) without additional compensation or staffing—potentially increasing burnout in already strained roles.
Students pursuing direct workforce entry or non-college pathways gain legitimacy and recognition for applied learning, improving alignment between high school experience and post-graduation goals—especially valuable for students who see traditional college as inaccessible.