Protests
Senators Polehanki, Geiss, McMorrow, Moss, Bayer, Hollier and Brinks, under their constitutional right of protest (Art. 4, Sec. 18), protested against the passage of House Bill No. 4074.
Senator Polehanki moved that the statement she made during the discussion of the bill be printed as her reason for voting “no.”
The motion prevailed.
Senator Polehanki’s statement, in which Senators Geiss, McMorrow, Moss, Bayer, Hollier and Brinks concurred, is as follows:
The sponsor of this bill seeks to include instruction in entrepreneurship into the high school social studies curriculum. This in and of itself is not bad idea, but what the bill’s sponsor fails to mention is that entrepreneurship is already included in the Michigan K-12 standards in economics under section 1.1.2 entitled, “Entrepreneurship.” In addition, there are 14 pages of content expectations on entrepreneurship already included in the business management administration career cluster of the CTE standards. So Mr. President, the bill is redundant. It’s also overly prescriptive. Michigan teachers must teach to the state standards but these standards don’t prescribe how teachers must teach the material. Nevertheless, the bill’s sponsor has written, and I quote, “a program of instruction under this section must be project-based.” Must be project-based, this isn’t how it works. This isn’t how any of this works. The Legislature should not be dictating how lessons are taught, that should be left to our local educators.
Finally, in testimony the bill’s sponsor put forth a unit that he paid to have created to be viewed as a model unit for his bill. However, the unit is for middle school students, not high school students and it does not align in any way with the essential focus of the social studies standards in middle school years which in grade 6 is world geography; grade 7, early ancient civilization; and grade 8, U.S. history. You see, we have standards that guide instruction for a reason. We don’t just create units then fit them in somewhere. So because this bill is redundant, overly prescriptive, and misguided, I’ll vote “no” today and I ask that my colleagues do the same.
The following bill was read a third time:
House Bill No. 5701, entitled
A bill to amend 1937 PA 306, entitled “An act to promote the safety, welfare, and educational interests of the people of this state by regulating the construction, reconstruction, and remodeling of, and the installation of certain security devices at, certain public or private school buildings or additions to those buildings and by regulating the construction, reconstruction, and remodeling of, and the installation of certain security devices at, buildings leased or acquired for school purposes; to define the class of buildings affected by this act; to prescribe the powers and duties of certain state agencies and officials; to prescribe penalties for the violation of this act; and to repeal acts and parts of acts,” by amending section 1d (MCL 388.851d), as added by 2020 PA 45.
The question being on the passage of the bill,
The bill was passed, a majority of the members serving voting therefor, as follows: