2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

2025 · Regular session · Senate bill

SB1191

SB1191 requires the education commissioner to develop a standard method for calculating high-school grade point averages, and requires school districts to use it.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the development of a standard method of computing a student's high school grade point average.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists Senate author(s): Creighton. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

SB1191 requires the education commissioner to develop a standard method for calculating high-school grade point averages, and requires school districts to use it.
The extra weight must be equal for AP, IB, OnRamps and dual-credit courses not included in the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s Workforce Education Course Manual or its successor.
The bill sets no numerical GPA scale or bonus-point amount and no fixed calendar deadline for the formula.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

SB1191 requires the education commissioner to develop a standard method for calculating high-school grade point averages, and requires school districts to use it. The method must give extra weight to completed honors, Advanced Placement (AP), International Baccalaureate (IB), OnRamps dual-enrollment and dual-credit courses. Previously, developing a statewide method was optional; districts were required to use it only if the commissioner developed one. Final law, section 1; Prior law.

The extra weight must be equal for AP, IB, OnRamps and dual-credit courses not included in the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board’s Workforce Education Course Manual or its successor. Dual-credit courses included in that manual must receive a different amount of extra weight from the other dual-credit category. The act does not say that the different amount must be lower, and it does not require honors-course weight to equal the AP/IB group. Final law, section 28.0252(a).

The bill sets no numerical GPA scale or bonus-point amount and no fixed calendar deadline for the formula. It directs the commissioner to develop it “as soon as practicable.” Signed June 20, 2025, it took effect immediately after receiving the required votes. This briefing describes the enacted mandate, not a finding that a particular statewide formula has already been implemented. Final law, sections 2–3; Retained rulemaking authority; Official history.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill made development mandatory and proposed equal extra weight for AP, IB and all dual-credit courses. The Senate committee substitute added OnRamps to both the weighted-course list and the equal-weight group. The engrossed and House committee versions retained those terms. Introduced bill; Senate substitute; All text versions.

The sole indexed floor amendment, offered by Buckley and adopted in the House on May 28, divided dual-credit courses according to whether they appear in the Workforce Education Course Manual. It kept non-manual dual credit in the AP/IB/OnRamps equal-weight group and required different weighting for manual-listed dual credit. The Senate concurred May 30, and the amendment appears in the final law. Buckley amendment; Amendment index; Final law.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

A statewide method may make district GPA calculations more consistent and reduce differences in the treatment of the named advanced-course options. Districts may need to adjust their systems once the method is developed. A particular student’s GPA or ranking effect depends on that method and the student’s courses; the act does not promise a higher GPA, college admission or a scholarship. It also does not itself set the amount or direction of the manual-listed dual-credit difference. Final law.

All five indexed fiscal-note listings—from the March 27 introduced note through the May 29 as-passed-second-house note—anticipate no state or local fiscal implication. They do not quantify district system-adjustment work or individual student effects, and the act makes no new appropriation. Introduced fiscal note; Substitute note; Engrossed note; Amendment-printing note; Final-stage note.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.