Skip to content

LOWERING NH EDUCATION STANDARDS IS A BAD IDEA 

New Hampshire students’ futures depend on their schools meeting high expectations and having a comprehensive curriculum.   

The State of New Hampshire is currently engaged in a process to revise the state’s “Minimum Standards for Public School Approval” – also known as the “306 Rules” – that has the potential to impact every facet of education for educators and students. In addition to state laws, the 306 Rules articulate what New Hampshire public schools must do to be an approved school. These minimum standards for public education exist to ensure that no matter where a student lives, they receive consistent access to quality education. At every opportunity, NEA-New Hampshire has voiced our concerns about the 306 Rule overhaul and raised educator voices.  

Click here to urge lawmakers to protect strong standards for public schools and oppose efforts to increase class sizes! 

For three years, educators, parents, and students have raised concerns and provided input to the State Board of Education and their hired contractor on the proposed overhaul of the so-called “306 Rules” – or minimum standards for public school approval. Sadly, after all this time and effort, major concerns have been ignored or glossed over by the State Board of Education. 

We maintain that the State Board’s final proposal continues to cause significant concern for what it will mean for students, including concerns raised by Reaching Higher NH that the Final Proposal: 

  • Weakens requirements for curriculum and programs: The NHED proposal originally removed requirements for curriculum and programs and would make them optional by shifting language from “shall” to “may”. Their final proposal would instead minimize the state’s responsibility by simply making sure that the school would “ensure” programs in the required areas, rather than provides them. This is unclear an very worrisome especially in light of the sorts of programs and initiatives they have championed over the past several years which have little to no standards.
  • Replaces “courses” with “learning opportunities”: The NHED proposal removes “courses” throughout the document and replaces the term with “learning opportunities,” which is a vague term that could diminish the level rigor for students. While they did define “learning opportunities” to include courses, the removal of “courses” as a minimum standard for public schools may lead to confusion and inconsistent applications between school districts. 
  • Changes class size requirements:  The NHED proposal removes maximum class sizes, replacing it with a student-teacher ratio based on a certain number of students per teacher in the district. While it would mandate a certain number of teachers per student, it does not put a maximum number of students in each classroom. A state attorney flagged the removal of maximum class sizes as being “very broad,” contrary to the state’s obligation to offer a constitutionally adequate education, and noted that it would have fiscal implications and could not be uniformly enforced.  
  • Broadens alternative courses of study: The NHED proposal changes the definition of “alternative programs” to a broader one and would require the school district to pay for the alternative if a student chose to pursue it. There are open questions about whether the definition would now be so broad that any “learning opportunity” that a student chose would have to be funded by the local school district. 
  • Impacts instructional needs of students: The NHED proposal removes the requirement for school boards to adopt policies requiring that schools meet the instructional needs of each individual student. 

The Joint Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, which is responsible for evaluating all administrative rules, will now evaluate the State Board of Education’s Final Proposal on the first half of the minimum standards for public school approval (also known as the 306 Rules) and determine whether to approve them, issue an objection, or request changes to meet approval. Before they convene on Thursday, September 19th, join us to take action to protect strong standards for public schools in New Hampshire!

This is the final public forum on the first half of the rules. You can make your voice heard by contacting your legislators and urging them to tell JLCAR to reject these 306 Rules changes, renew the current rules, and begin the process again.

NEA-NH’s Position on the 306 Rules:

Consistent with NEA-New Hampshire’s mission, we are advocating for school standards that:

  • Clearly articulate curriculum expectations to ensure that expectations are clear about what students should know and be able to do upon graduation from a public school in our state.  
  • Maintain class size limits to ensure educators can adequately provide instruction to all Granite State students that meet their individual learning needs. 
  • Protect local competencies, local graduation requirements, and local assessments to ensure public education meets the needs of individual communities and their students.  
  • Maintain use of the term “grade level” as opposed to “learning level” when referencing the configuration of school organization. As every educator knows, these terms are not synonymous and for these rules to imply otherwise would be inappropriate and could weaken a school’s responsibility to educate children. The structure of our school buildings, state and federal assessments and accountability are done by grade level; without that, the schools will be out of compliance.   
  • Preserve language that addresses equity and fairness because public schools should educate all students and educators should work to identify and eliminate any barriers that prevent students from a quality education. 

A deeper analysis of the 306 Rule revision proposal in relation to these priorities can be found here: 306 Rules_NEA-NH Analysis. 

Background Information on the 306 Rules: 

In 2020, a contract was awarded by the NH Department of Education to the National Center for Competency Based Learning to engage stakeholders and produce a draft of recommended changes to these 306 Rules.   

NEA-New Hampshire has expressed deep concern throughout this process that there was not sufficient educator involvement. No practicing teachers were invited to participate in the taskforce established. Group members included one practicing principal, one practicing superintendent, an educational consultant, and representatives from the state’s virtual charter school, the NH School Boards Association, and the business community.   

We supported independent work conducted to solicit additional educator input outside of the taskforce, as outlined in this article from the Granite State News Collaborative. In November of 2023, NEA-New Hampshire attended two meetings with representatives of the task force to provide our feedback on a draft overhaul that was released in March 2023. 

In 2024, NEA-New Hampshire helped construct a 306 Rule revision proposal that was submitted to the State Board of Education. Unfortunately, the Board moved forward with a NH Department of Education proposal (see here). NEA-New Hampshire opposes the current NH DOE draft 306 Rule revision because it: 

  • Privatizes learning 
  • Removes class size requirements 
  • Moves to a statewide model of competency and assessment (eliminating local control) 
  • Removes educator certification requirements 

The State Board of Education public hearings and public comment period for the draft 306 Rules has closed. NEA-New Hampshire will continue to update members about the 306 Rule revision process as it progresses. If you have questions, please contact Brian.  

306 Rule Resources: