Print 🖨

The House Public Education Committee met to hear invited and public testimony regarding interim charges related to state-level strategies for teacher compensation and the charter school system in Texas. It was noted that this is the last expected committee meeting for the interim.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics the committee took up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the hearing, but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Opening Remarks

  • Expected to be the last committee meeting for the interim

 

Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, Texas Education Agency

  • Huberty – you plan on releasing new rules on A-F ratings and some things have changed. Would like you to talk about those changes
  • A-F rating will be released August 15th
  • Previously 3 out of the 4 indexes were what student achievement were based on
  • Now domains will be used for student achievement and school progress
  • Process to reconfigure took 29 months with aim to make the new structure more fair and balanced
  • Some of the new changes include school progress domain – campuses will be measures in two ways (year to year and relative performance)
    • Stakeholder input led changes to be best of either academic growth or relative performance
    • Still have some questions as to the realistic representation of the methodology
  • Huberty – compare apples to apples from the last rating to the new ratings?
    • It would be the largest lowering of needs improvement campuses year over year in the history of Texas
  • Allen – does this new change apply to 17-18 or 18-19?
    • It will apply to 17-18 school year
    • Have established this in HB 22 to maintain this system for the next 5 years for stable and consistent rules
  • Allen – so schools do not know what they are working for?
    • That is always the way the timeline has occurred
  • Huberty – we found a potential problem related to the grade of a ‘D’ where the state could get involved depending on how that falls, can you speak to that?
    • HB 22 created a distinction between D and F in the system where previously d and f were treated the same which has many laws associated with it
    • Will be working through the rules process to clarify the ‘D’ rating
  • Huberty – how many campuses are getting a waiver due to Harvey?
    • Roughly 1200 school applied for a waiver
    • You would be not rated if received ‘improvement required’
    • If 10% or more of campuses were eligible for this treatment, then the district would then become eligible
  • Huberty – recent story related to numeric scores, can you speak to no letter grade was supposed to be done in the fall?
    • School report card which has been issued for as long as accountability system has been in place
    • Contains 4 indexes for schools
    • Currently shows numeric scores within the indexes and will begin showing numeric scores for domains
    • It is easier to understand the numbers now compared to previous score cards
  • Dutton – related to student progress, should teachers know where students are when they come in the class?
    • Yes, they should
  • Dutton – they don’t necessarily give them an exam to determine that before the new year?
    • STAAR exams are used in some grade levels (4-9)
    • There are various degrees of use of those scores
  • Dutton – when students are assigned to a class, does a school assign the student to a teacher based on the scores?
    • Do not believe there is a typical response to that
    • Some certainly do, and it is less than random process across the board
  • Dutton – it is possible to get students who did not perform well all in the same class?
    • It is possible
  • Bernal – in HB 22 there is a section that says that a district that gets two Ds consecutively it becomes an F, correct?
    • The consequences look the same
  • Bernal – it is spelled out like that in statute?
    • Not as clearly as would be desired
  • Bernal – it sounds like we’ve added a fourth element
    • It does account for time
    • There is a provision that says don’t do that if one is an F
  • Bernal – looks like we’ve added another scenario that creates an F, and have we created another rule that has the same force and power as a statutory element?
    • There are many areas that are not explicitly spelled out in statute such as dual credit
    • Do not think it is wise to look at any atomized component of the rating
    • Have attempted to arrive at a holistic view of performance
    • It is a significant improvement over the past and there are changes that need to be changed moving forward
    • In regards to Bernal’s follow up question on components helping to measure holistic system, traditional high school is an example where academic growth will be limited to 10th grade English and 9th grade Algebra I
  • Huberty – there are some things that need to be fixed and changed going into the next session such as the D system
    • TEA has tried to arrive at holistic definition of performance that is accurate for students that is rigorous and fair but indicates there is room for improvement
  • VanDeaver – relating to a teacher understanding of where a student is when entering their class, what percentage of students take a norm reference test when entering a new grade?
    • Do not have that information, would be good to study that
  • VanDeaver – how reliable is the criterion referenced assessment for a teacher to get an accurate picture?
    • Criterion is good because you learn their mastery and norm reference is good to determine their relative performance
    • Will likely need several assessments to get a good picture to make the most appropriate instructional adjustment (including summative and student work)
    • Ideally want teachers to have access to range of information
  • VanDeaver – that statement is why our high dependency on high stakes testing is wrong
    • None of the tests are designed to do everything
  • VanDeaver – my point is to caution everybody on how we use the tests, and not to infer things that are not represented in the tests
    • Agree
    • Best use of the summative assessments is for the school board to determine if the campuses are getting better or not
    • Also, for parents to better understand their campus as a whole

 

Review current state mechanisms for identifying and rewarding educators through state-level strategies. Examine how providing additional funding to enhance compensation in districts facing a shortage of experienced, highly rated teachers would affect retention and teacher quality, in addition to whether it would encourage teachers to provide additional services through extracurricular activities, tutoring, and mentoring.

 

Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, Texas Education Agency

  • Handouts of presentation was provided to members
  • Teacher evaluation system – PDOS, then T Test pilot – default appraisal systems (90% of districts use this)
    • Do have data back from the pilot showing higher level of differentiation in the T Test
    • TEA is barred from looking at teacher evaluations, so it is difficult to provide summative information
  • Grow Your Own Initiative – Development program working on pathways to become educators, become better teachers, and student teaching
    • Grant application is down to 10 pages (all grant applications have been updated to new format)
  • Related to new teacher mentoring, much mentoring going on but very inconsistent – it is a “may” statute not a “must”
  • Related to incentive compensation – last appropriated in 82nd Legislative Session through Texas Equalized Grant Program (TEG) and District Alternative Education Program (DAEP)
    • Not necessarily performance targeted
    • Research draws distinction between narrowly targeted merit pay and broader strategic compensation methods
  • TEA focus is on teachers as the first factor that impacts student outcomes
    • Compensation is a very important part of the puzzle but only a part
  • Recruitment – McKensey Study: 23% of new teachers came from top 1/3rd of graduating classes
    • From wholistic perspective, system is not bringing in the ‘cream of the crop’
    • Factors that disincentivize people from becoming teachers: compensation, working conditions
    • Relative salary has gone down in recent years, but other professions with similarly educated people have gone much higher
  • Education is below social work as the worst career for compensation
  • In terms of retention, Texas has mirrored the ebb and flow of the economy
  • Texas specific data shows teachers in their first 3 years represent the majority of teachers
  • Rate of raises of doctors, lawyers and educators shows that doctors and lawyers are getting a much higher rate of raises
    • Districts are responding by changing their approach to compensation – provided 9 examples to the members in the handouts
    • Dallas no longer pays based on year and only pays on performance
  • Huberty – have heard testimony from Dallas on this, one thing they told us was that it is not sustainable, can you speak to that?
    • That is correct, it would be very wise for this committee to support districts that are doing this
    • The annual increase in compensation requires districts to make tradeoffs
    • Lubbock is another district doing things like this, briefly described other districts with alternative programs for teacher compensation
    • All districts participating in these programs are reporting additional support needed to continue the positive effects of these types of programs
  • ACE Programs – districts reconstituting high needs areas with massive incentives, high concentration on compensation for teaching at lowest performing schools
  • Bernal – understand that that also includes social workers and counselors, etc.
    • May include lengthening school day
    • There is typically a large focus on wrap around support
  • Koop – how can the state affect that change?
    • There could be a mechanism to modify the FSP support to reflect the amount of difficulty a district faces that is tied to teacher evaluation in some case, to make these initiatives sustainable
  • Koop – would you tie that to the school performance for several years?
    • The challenge is most extreme in high poverty schools and in rural schools
    • Discussed potential versions of extending/continuing the funding when the school’s performance grows
    • Considers it capacity investments that build over time
  • Dutton – have done a lot to raise the ceiling but not to raise the floor, why in education do we send or worse people to our worse problem?
    • Beyond missionary zeal, it is a lot easier to work in higher performing areas that in lower performing schools for the same pay
  • Dutton – it shows that it nothing wrong with the students, and because of our system we blame the students for underperforming, how do we get school boards to be more responsive to that idea?
    • We should be recognizing these school boards for making these types of decisions
  • VanDeaver – mentioned two situations that are most dire: high poverty and rural, how does something like that ACE program that is scaled to rural schools that may have one campus?
    • That is a challenge
    • ACE is effective because there is safety in numbers
    • Need to create ACE like incentives for one or two teachers
  • Koop – in speaking to top 10% graduated going into education, has there been any incentive conversations to bring those students into education in Texas?
    • This is a large-scale societal problem
    • Would refer to the Strategic Plan for the pipeline that touches all aspects of this
  • Allen – referring to the presentation, what should we do to retain teachers? Discussed minimum teacher pay schedule, and the need for the state to raise its contribution to base pay
    • Discussed current distribution of teacher pay, if one of the policy options is to raise the base pay, you’d have to raise it a lot.
  • Impact ACE program has had in Dallas is remarkable
    • Now teacher retention is higher that 70% and are keeping all their top performing teachers
  • Huberty – can you track where the low performing teachers are ending up?
    • TEA probably can, do not believe the ISD can
    • The idea of portability of this information tied to the teacher is worthy of study and research
    • Believe that would create a lot of energy and societal change related to the profession
  • Allen – are grant monies given to pay for additional aid stipends?
    • Not grant money, outside funds
  • Reviewed multiple compensation methods outside of Texas: D.C. Impacts, Tennessee, Etc.
  • National Board Certification – 25 states offer financial incentive for board certification
  • Other states compensation policies: several states have created a state level ACE program, as well as other methods
  • Good teachers that are paid significantly more will likely stay
  • Cautions that if teachers do not believe in or understand the evaluation process, then it will not work
  • Needs to be a long-term program
  • VanDeaver – what does a third-party system look like?
    • Feedback showed that rural schools need third party to help design and manage teacher evaluation system
    • Perhaps the state can create something like that for districts that do not have the capacity to create that to opt in
  • Allen – this is great information, what do you recommend?
    • Should consider state level policy that created a pathway to tier highest performing teachers and provides compensation through FSP to better compensate them
    • There would be a large fiscal note
  • Bohac – who gives out the National Board-Certified teacher certification?
    • Done by non-profit which used a very collaborative method to determine the criteria
    • Do not have many teachers applying in Texas
  • Bohac – would you recommend getting that certification versus getting a master’s degree
    • Yes, would be more effective for the practice of teaching
  • Meyer – how do we get a roadmap from you to go about creating policy around this?
    • Happy to work with the committee to get into more details regarding this to create a specific path forward
    • Will need to involve many stakeholders to get this right
  • Bernal – you have mentioned how important it is to make this a part of the formula, what are the perils of doing that?
    • Regression to the mean
  • Huberty – what does it cost to implement Dallas’ program across the state of Texas?
    • First biennium costs would be probably $50 million
    • Over 10 years, about $1 billion per year
    • Due to scale up of program
  • Huberty – if the average teacher base pay is affected by implementing this type of program, what would it be?
    • On average, in 10 years it would go up about $4-5,000
    • 10% of teachers would make well over 6 figures, the scale would slide right
  • Huberty – we need to have some hard numbers from TEA of LBB related to a program like this as we move forward
    • Will send the information from the special session bill as a starting point
  • King – in the finance commission, wed need an extra $21 billion to fund all the good ideas, we really need to know how much we need and where we are going to get it from

 

Katie Benningfield, Teacher, Dallas ISD

  • Began teaching 4 years ago at low performing school
  • Every teacher understood charge
  • 2014-2015 the Dallas ISD implemented TEI to identify highest rated distinguished teachers
  • ACE program recruited highly rated teachers to the campus, bringing high level of expertise
  • Began extended day, extracurricular activities and other initiatives
  • After first year 90% of teachers are still on campus
  • Saw many positive changes in teachers and students
  • In two years, the campus earned all of the state distinctions from TEA
  • Described specific student experience
  • Secret to success requires highest qualified staff and extra compensation
  • Huberty – what was the turnover during the implementation?
    • Only 5 of 40 stayed on campus
    • Have had teachers move but remain in district to help spread the learned experience
  • Dutton – what system was used to determine which teachers went to that school?
    • TEI uses specific rankings for each teacher
    • Determined by teachers report cards and test scores
  • Dutton – how were teachers being encouraged to go to the school?
    • Through interviews, etc.
  • Bernal – what role did social workers and counselors play?
    • There was a very supportive staff

 

Chris Green, Teacher, San Antonio ISD

  • Leveraged high performing teachers to improve performance
  • Master teacher program identifies high performing teachers which includes additional compensation for those teachers as well as additional training and development opportunities
  • Requires those master teachers to teach specialized classes to utilize the additional training they have had (like extended hours to tach classes designed to bring students up to grade level, etc.
  • Relayed a personal experience with student performance
  • Had opportunities to support other teachers as a master teacher as well as utilizing other opportunities to work with students outside of their scheduled class time
  • Parents are excited to have master teachers at their campus
  • Relayed personal experience with choosing to leave campus to become master teacher at SAISD
  • Bernal – how much of the district’s gains can be attributed to the program?
    • Only anecdotal evidence
    • Performance of the students was tracked
  • Bernal – does not believe there was any coincidence in the district changes and the implementation of the program

 

Milton Perez, Teacher, Round Rock ISD

  • 12-year teacher
  • Strategic compensation program (RISE) for title one campuses allowed for additional compensation for high performing teachers
  • School offered after school programs, clubs, etc. which offered productive activities for students led by teachers
  • Described personal experience with a specific student
  • The program ended causing the school to go back to the way it was
  • Without the higher compensation many teachers left the school
  • Saw need for mentoring, and for opportunities for teachers to extend their influence outside of their classroom
  • Each teacher had two experienced mentors during the program
  • Huberty – where did the original money come from?
    • Federal grant money
    • Numbers improved until the funds dried up
  • Huberty – point is made that great programs must be sustained
  • Dutton – do you know of teachers that were ineffective?
    • Teaching without support there is no way to go from ineffective to effective
    • Just like in every profession there are people who are really effective and work that much harder and there are people who show up and work as hard as they can but are less effective
    • It really requires the effective teachers to be in a leadership role
  • Deshotel – have you met teachers who knew they were ineffective?
    • Katie Benningfield – have seen teachers who were not as highly ranked and do not have as high of test scores
  • Deshotel – teachers that want to reach out and get better are good teachers, not sure how to help those who do not know they are ineffective
  • Dutton – is there a standard for an ineffective teacher?
    • There are many factors for effectiveness
  • Dutton – when we measure progress based on standardized test, do you agree with that?
    • That is an important metric but does not capture the whole student?
    • We need to measure civic engagement and goal attainment, etc.

 

Dr. Kent Scribner, Superintendent, Fort Worth ISD

  • What we are talking about is an equity initiative
  • Giving money to all teachers is not the right way to go, need a more targeted approach
  • All of these types of programs require teacher buy-in and sustainability
  • Have replicated ACE program targeted at 5 underperforming schools
  • Have taken IR number from 24 down to 12
    • In large part because the district has identified general fund dollars into five underperforming schools
    • Program requires 6 million dollars
    • Has additional hour of instruction and extracurricular activities
    • Serves dinner before release
  • Cannot scale the program based solely on funding
  • Business community has supported significantly
  • Can import talent but cannot export poverty, need to invest in the neediest schools
  • Dutton – what is the demographics in Fort Worth?
    • 77% are on free and reduced lunch
    • 2/3 are African American or Hispanic
    • 44,000 students come from homes with English as primary language
    • 43,000 English is not the primary language
    • Very diverse
  • Dutton – which demographic is at the bottom of performance?
    • African American boys are the greatest area of needs
    • School board is looking at education disparity between demographics
  • Dutton – need programs that specifically target black male children

 

Bryan Weatherford, Texas State Teachers Association

  • Teachers need a salary increase regardless of merit to keep up with all other economic factors increasing
  • Noted many teachers are looking at taking second jobs
  • Many compensation structures focus on young teachers that are more likely to leave the profession
  • 2018 survey shows teachers spend $730 on classroom supplies out of pocket
  • Housing remains another factor that presses teachers
  • Absence of compensation adversely affects the perception of the profession

 

Paige Williams, Texas Classroom Teachers Association

  • Minimum salary schedule is just a floor, and it should be kept and increased and extended beyond current 20 steps
  • Need to address compensation disadvantage by raising the floor
  • Teachers earn 27% less on average that other college graduates
  • Experience – teachers’ ability to boost test scores occur between 10-20 years on the job in a statistically significant way
  • Recommends incentivizing highly experienced teachers into needy areas
  • Not against differentiated pay
  • Do not support tying teacher compensation with student performance on standardized tests
  • T Test is already rated as reliable for measuring teacher performance
  • Noted the number of other factors that must be addressed to raise student performance
  • Legislature should not be mandating performance pay
    • Should be determined locally
  • King – you are opposed to any performance-based pay?
    • Depends on the determination of performance
    • Opposed to tying it to a standardized test
  • Dutton – if more ineffective teachers are at IR schools, how would you correct that?
    • Incentives are a part of that
    • Teachers today spoke to the learning environment for both students and teachers along with wrap around services
  • Dutton – teaching is a profession and wonder why an employer cannot tell you where to go?
    • That may lead to teacher turnover which could be less expensive than losing that effective teacher
  • Bernal – in programs we have heard of today they still had to pay the teachers significantly more and offer better teaching environments, is there a way to determine which teachers are best for which campuses absent of using a standardized test?
    • Believe that there is, so campuses are doing that now
    • Richardson is using the ACE model not tied to standardized tests, Austin ISD has another program
  • Bernal – the issue is also not the assignment it is the retention

 

Louis Malfaro, American Federation of Teachers – Texas

  • Described personal experience teaching in Austin at a priority school
  • Appreciated discussion of role of A-F
    • Keep discussing fundamental questions regarding closing achievement gaps and how to invest in high quality educators
  • Must spend money to get the results desired utilizing a systematic approach
  • Discussed disparity in compensation compared to other industries
  • Noted many of the old advantages like great health insurance no longer exist
  • Support differentiated pay for high needs certifications and high need campuses
  • Dutton – you are here in Austin right, and know the history of Johnson high school?
    • Correct
    • And now it is one of the high performing schools
  • Dutton – what happened?
    • There were several changes made like involving the parents at a much higher level
  • Dutton – understand they added a lot of higher level courses, there seems to be some additional things we can do with the money we have, and if we know what works why isn’t everybody doing that?
    • There are many instances that did require additional money to affect those types of changes through grant money which in many areas are now drying up
  • Huberty – discussed previous one-time pay raise mandated by the legislature, it should go through the formula or not mandate it
  • Dutton – one reason that happened was that the legislature did not trust the school board to give that pay raise to the teachers
  • Noted there are significant flaws in the TEI model
  • Wants a system that supports, cultivates and maintains quality teachers across the board
  • Bernal – there must be an assessment to determine who those high performing teachers are, Dallas has figured out a way to put effective teachers in those schools, very hesitant to change that. If there is another way of getting these results without using standardized test would like to know
  • Huberty – noted a need to solve the problem, not talk about what you can’t do. Hearing that you want the state to pay but not have input into the process
    • Paige Williams – state should have input but should not base it on a standardized test. There is an evaluation system in place that could work if used with fidelity

 

Monty Exter, Association of Texas Professional Educators

  • Want to be sure we are not doing is conflating things that are correlated in Dallas but not causal
  • The evaluation system was not the solution, the systematic plan involving specifying teachers to go into a specific school was the solution
  • TEI is not the only evaluation system and have not seen that it would be the only evaluation system that would work in an ACE program
  • Bernal – how do you identify those teachers with confidence that they belong at the school?
    • The teachers are the cornerstone of the product, but nothing in the ACE model says using TEI to find a set of teachers is the determinative factor
    • Could go to district evaluation system created locally, or a master teacher system
    • The different factor is that ACE deployed that information effectively
  • Bernal – are there any other system that are not using standardized tests that would create the same solution
    • Would need to look outside of the state or country to find that answer
  • Bernal – why wouldn’t we replicate what works, if there is another way to do it would be supportive
    • Do not think there is anything wrong with replicating that system in Dallas, as long as we are replicating the functional parts of that system and putting those into a district that may be different
    • Discussion of use of the ACE model elsewhere in Texas
  • Meyer – agreed with Bernal regarding using a known quantity program elsewhere in Texas
    • Fear is that an evaluation system is put in place that is seen to be the major factor and not considering all the other changes made in the ACE program
  • Dutton – does the system we have now tell us who the effective teachers are?
    • Yes
  • Dutton – then why wouldn’t we use that?
  • Discussion of the history and methodology of T Test
  • Very important to look at teacher compensation
    • Need to be sure that it is a systemic approach
  • Huberty – discussion of various methods of teacher evaluation and placement
    • Louis Malfaro – believes the solution is to increase the basic allotment to fund as many options as possible

 

Public Testimony

 

Benjamin Becker, Self

  • Does not agree with Huberty’s stance but appreciates the discussion
  • The answer is spending significantly more money on public education
  • High stakes assessments need to be evaluated to determine what the tests can accurately measure
  • Dutton – noted that the school boards also have a responsibility on how to spend funds related to other needs like counselors and APs

 

Velma Ibarra, Texas LULAC and Texas HOPE

  • Time spent on production and achievement is way too high
  • Need to provide significant additional funding
  • Recommends additional teacher pay balanced with improved performance

 

Michael Lee, Texas Association of Rural Schools

  • Need to maintain local control
  • Do not want seed money for a program and then not have continuing funding
  • Need additional health insurance funding
  • Compensation programs should not pit teachers against each other
  • King – if the state were to allocate money for the base pay, how much should it be and how many districts would it affect?
    • More to attract people to the profession
    • To $35,000 base salary
    • Lowered recapture rate would help fund this

 

Lynn Murphy, Disability Rights Texas

  • Shortage of special education professionals
  • Other specialties are lacking in Texas and are necessary on campus
  • A key focal point must be special education as it applies to every district
  • A holistic approach is a large step to solving the special education shortage in Texas
  • Pay structures should award those who stay in the profession
  • Huberty – do you know the differential on average in pay for those who are employed in the shortage area?
    • Will provide that information

 

John Booth, Superintendent, DeKalb ISD

  • Discussed problems with Career Ladder which led to competition and fear for teachers
  • Issue with defining highly rated teacher across the variety of types of teachers
  • Questions who should pay for all of this
  • There are significant needs that are different at rural schools that elsewhere
  • Should add more formula funding to help solve this issue and increase base pay

 

Damica Simmons, Houston ISD Educator

  • Fully supports compensation testing
  • Research showed lower turnover rates at schools that tested teacher’s effectiveness and compensated that appropriately
  • Better teacher retention will lead to more consistency in the classroom
  • Huberty – were you compensated when you achieved those additional credentials? And what did it cost you to get them?
    • Cost about $60-70,000
    • Differential is about $15,000 per year
    • Not many teachers have the same achievements
  • Huberty – are you still in the classroom?
    • Now an administrator

 

Julia O’Kelly, Self

  • Have spent last two years as an instructional coach
  • Need to holistically reexamine teacher pay
  • Incremental pay increase needs to be restructured
  • Has concern with grant programs that could disappear
  • Recommends implementing ACE statewide
  • Financial necessity is a huge part of interest in taking positions

 

Joyce Forman, Self

  • Noted huge historical turnover rate in Dallas ISD and low numbers of teachers that did not receive a raise
  • State could assist by helping pay for professional development and by providing incentives for teacher retention
  • Noted there were other programs like ISN that help underperforming campuses turnaround
    • ISN cost $2.2 million for 18 schools
    • ACE cost $6 million for 5 schools
  • Huberty – as a board member, do you support evaluation measure for teachers based on standardized tests?
    • Yes, but we lose teachers that are not compensated through that
    • We would go to T Test
  • Huberty – what system should the teacher be looking for?
    • Pay for performance program is good, but this TEI pay for performance does not work
    • Noted not every teacher in ACE program is a distinguished teacher
  • Huberty – do you believe every one of the teachers in Dallas ISD should have gotten a pay raise?
    • No but more than 43% should have received a raise

 

Susie Belgosley, Self

  • Proposes improving the mentor program, need more money spend directly in the class room, more education teachers, need wrap around services, need instructional coaches
  • Standardized testing is not the best method for evaluating teaches

 

Sheila Mata, Self

  • What teachers are able to do revolve around the time they have and the pay they receive
  • Teachers want to grow in their profession
  • Recommends a system that ties additional pay to direct student interaction and development
  • Huberty – you are ok with differential pay and similar programs?
    • A little torn, already doing that without the pay now
  • Bernal – the additional commitment would be the duty as assigned

 

Steve Swanson, Self

  • Believe TEA is not fulfilling is responsibility and has not over the past 2 decades
  • Should be focused on excellence in governance

 

Review the charter school system in Texas. Determine if changes are needed in the granting, renewal, or revocation of charter schools, including the timeline for expansions and notification of expansions to surrounding districts. Review the educational outcomes of students in charter schools compared to those in traditional schools, and to what extent schools participate in the alternative accountability system. Monitor the implementation of facilities funding for charter schools. Consider differences in state funding for charter schools compared to their surrounding districts and the impact on the state budget. Consider admissions policies for charters, including appropriate data collection to assess demand for additional charter enrollment, compliance with access by students with disabilities and the effect of exclusions of students with criminal or disciplinary histories. Consider differences in charter and district contributions to the Teacher Retirement System on behalf of their employees and make appropriate recommendations to support the retirement benefits of all public-school teachers.

 

Heather Mauze, Director of Charter School Administration, Texas Education Agency

  • Gave presentation
  • Established in 1995 and meant to encourage innovation
  • 4 types of charters schools in Texas
  • Admission and enrollment procedures: prohibited from discriminating and must identify geographical boundaries, and must not exclude based on discipline history
  • Each school and campus must establish an enrollment policy
  • PEIMS data shows charters employ more administration and less employees classified as teachers compared to traditional schools
  • Described charter school demographics based on PEIMS data
  • Student enrollment in Texas equates to 5.5% and continues to grow
  • Appears to be a decline in charter school LEAs
  • Presentation shows award and closure of charter schools
  • TEA has 9 staff members overseeing the Texas charter school portfolio
  • Have worked to create a robust application
  • Renewal process has 3 pathways to renewal
  • Have processed 70 renewals in the last 5 years
  • Described 64 charter campuses closed
  • Charter school expansion is the largest segment within the portfolio
  • Since 12/1/17 have processed 134 amendments and 170 campus expansions
  • When expanding, there must be a notification to TEA and the local District
  • Described the accountability categories for charters
  • Reviewed ratings and categories of charter schools that met standard
    • 70% of charter schools met standards
    • 14 charter schools did not meet standard (decrease of 2 since last accountability ratings)
  • Dutton – regarding the high poverty campuses, what does the slide explain?
    • Charter schools serve a greater population of economically disadvantaged students than traditional ISDs
    • May mean that there are inherent struggles that they may face
  • Dutton – should we take that into account when rating them?
    • Not necessarily
  • Huberty – upon passing SB 2 in 2013, there was a reported long wait list to get into a charter school, where does the empirical data come from?
    • TEA does not collect that information
  • Huberty – related to the closures, how many are subject to being closed this year?
    • 1, with 12 campuses
  • Huberty – looks like the number of applications have gone down, but less than 20% of the applications were accepted, how does that process work?
    • There is an external and internal review leading to a score for various standards (85% cut score)
    • Robust vetting follows initial application process
  • Huberty – how many expansion requests have been granted?
    • Will provide that information
  • Huberty – do charters have to get permission to provide Pre-K?
    • Yes, and is part of the initial application or can request an expansion or amendment
  • Huberty – why would they be denied?
    • Many factors like accountability ratings, financial accountability, complaints, etc.
  • Huberty – if there is a general charter that is for k-12, how easy is it for them to get expansion, or what percentage gets expansion?
    • Will provide numbers but many more get approved than get denied
  • Huberty – charters can create a geographical boundary; do you know of instances of students being denied within that boundary for disciplinary reasons?
    • Charter schools are allowed to create a discipline policy, and can admit based on that policy
  • Huberty – what happens if the student gets expelled from the charter school?
    • Typically, the ISD is the default school they would go to
    • They would have to serve out the expulsion before being admitted back into the ISD
  • Huberty – discussed rates of standards that are not met, where does the Windham School fall among the categories?
    • It is not a charter
  • Huberty – 92% meet standards?
    • That is correct
    • 8% are not in a position to be rated for various reasons
  • Huberty – charter schools have a higher percentage of economically disadvantaged?
    • That is correct
  • Huberty – there has been marked improvement among charters?
    • That is correct
  • Allen – what percent of the students are disciplined out of charter schools?
    • 43% expulsions, which can be attributed to lack of capacity for charter schools to house disciplinary students
    • Will provide specific numbers
  • Allen – what is the dropout rate?
    • Will provide that information
  • Allen – how many schools are in IR?
    • Roughly 49 campuses
  • Allen – number of districts in IR?
    • 15
  • Allen – is this the first year we have rated districts for IR?
    • No
  • Huberty – is approval for expansion based on campus or by LEA?
    • At the LEA level, but review campuses within LEA met standard
    • Threshold is 90% met standard
  • Bernal – how are free and reduced numbers obtained?
    • By PEIMS data provided by the charter

 

Leo Lopez, Texas Education Agency

  • 4 topics:
    • TRS Contributions between districts and charters
    • HB 21 facilities
    • Charter FSD funding
    • SB 1882
  • Gives overview of TRS staff/teacher salary contribution, 6.8% against the teacher’s salary for TRS
  • With school districts, there is a minimum salary with adjustments at the district level based on CEI, school districts must pay the contribution amount of the 6.8% above the minimum salary schedule
  • $65 million is roughly the amount of the total contribution, if Charters were required to pay the local component it would be $16 million
  • Chair Huberty – Essentially, you’re cutting funding by $16 million?
    • Yes
  • Huberty – When was the TRS formula created?
    • Has been on the books for a while
  • Huberty – If the formula was created when the minimum salary schedule had meaning, 30 years ago it was relevant, but today it is not; similar to other non-indexed fees not related to inflation
  • Huberty – What is the delta if the state picked up the tab?
    • Roughly $300 million/year
  • Huberty – So $600 million/biennium into TRS to continue to shore up the pension system
    • It would replace the local component, so it would be $600 million/biennium reduced cost for school districts
  • Huberty – So if I’m a recapture district & we change this in statute, as a 42 it wouldn’t change, would a 41 be able to keep the additional?
    • Every school is subject to the provision, so they would have to pay the amount above the minimum
  • Huberty – I understand that, but if we were to pay the 6.8%, would it change what an ISD like Houston ISD pays in recapture?
    • It would not
  • Beginning this year, charters will be eligible to receive a facilities allotment based on the average debt service, statutory limitation of $60 million statewide resulting in average tax rate of $.07
  • King – We asked you last Spring if this money could be used to rebuild after Harvey?
    • I recall this being about the new Instructional Facilities Allotment
  • King – I wanted to know if charters can use that funding to rebuild
    • Depends on how you interpret maintenance as a potential use of these dollars
  • There is an academic requirement to be eligible, charters must achieve a minimum standard; rulemaking is ongoing to determine which rating we will use
  • TEA is planning on using the rating for the previous academic school year to determine eligible charters, then decisions in the Fall after any charters appeal
  • Charters are public schools entitled Tier 1 and Tier 2 state aid, but they do not have authority to levy property tax; without a local component, state funds 100% of their entitlements
  • Charters are not eligible for traditional facilities programs, but they do qualify for certain programs & will qualify for the new facilities funding
  • Funded at average adjusted allotment of $65.40, 2/3rds of charters have ADA below this amount, but represent only a very small percent of statewide charter ADA
  • Over 95% of students enrolled in public ISDs are attending a district with an ADA below average of $65.40
  • VanDeaver – Because this is an average, doesn’t it also include the weights for charters?
    • Includes the amount before the weights, charters do get the benefit of the weight, but the starting amount is the $65.40
  • Bernal – Are you saying they get the average of the average?
    • If you take each district, divided them up, you would get 65.40 as the average
  • With golden and copper pennies, charters average rates are about 5.7 pennies and 4.9 pennies, as more districts hold TREs and go above $1.04, charters naturally get more of a benefit of Tier 2 funding
  • Huberty – So you have $65.40 as the baseline, then you take Tier 2 funding based on average of all districts
  • Huberty – There is a group that thinks charters should get benefit of M&O, but not considering all of the extra dollars above the $65.40
  • Over time, district funding has increased at a slightly higher rate than charter funding, districts do benefit from the 1-year lag and can benefit from property value growth
  • Presents info on largest districts compared to charter funding
  • Charters ultimately receive both more and less funding than traditional school districts, depending on the questions asked and the funding considered
  • Factors include assumptions about identical enrollment profiles, actual funding flow, etc.
  • Student profiles are not the same on the aggregate; charters have higher ELL, low-income, but lower special education, etc.
  • Not enough to take the total and divide, but need to consider weighted allotments for the different populations
  • SB 1882 (85th) controls for the differences in student enrollment, e.g. Houston ISD receives more funding generally, but under charter formulas would also receive more funding
  • Huberty – the only way a charter can do this is with a waiver to become a complete charter district, there is a cap right?
    • Yes
  • SB 1882 says to take students in the partnership and run them through the charter formulas, with Houston ISD it is roughly $1,800 for Houston, plus additional funding
  • For example, Austin ISD is in an approved partnership, the SB 1882 is not comparing Austin ISD to average charter, but instead looking at Austin ISD under the charter formula; also leads to more funding for Austin ISD, $1,688/student for Austin ISD
  • Huberty – Is there a possibility you have a school district that could be penalized as a result?
    • Not penalized, but if there were a negative number it would go to offset other expenses
    • This model doesn’t make sense for rural districts
  • Huberty – So if it’s less than $65.40 it makes sense, but if you’re above $65.40, no point?
    • Generally
  • Huberty – For a Fast Growth district that wants to do this & this is one of the provisions for them to not have a takeover, we would need to fix this for it to make sense?
    • Each campus will have a slightly different number
  • Bernal – The $15.67 in the written material, this is not money that can be spent on the ISD side for classroom expenditures?
    • Correct, only for voter-approved debt service
  • Bernal – Seems like what each entity can spend money on is different, changes context of the conversation
    • Correct, SB 1882 only looks at the Tier 1/Tier 2 entitlement

 

Joe Siedlecki, Texas Education Agency

  • Speaking to SB 1882, ISD initiated partnership with charters to operate schools, ISDs see benefits in funding or in accountability
  • 3 types:
    • Turnaround between organization and the district to manage a current IR campus
    • Innovation when a district partners with an organization to run non-IR campus
    • Also possibility to partner and create a brand new campus
  • Different districts have pursued all three types
  • Districts must authorize campuses as in-district charter schools, district has to sign a performance contract between district and operating organization,
  • Agency is not approving or denying these, districts have authority to enter into any partnerships they like, Agency only monitors to see if they meet minimum requirements
  • Agency looks to see if there is an agreement, assurance that partner has capacity to manage, etc.
  • Presents info on partnership applications and statuses, within this list there are partnerships between districts and state-operated charters, partnerships with new or existing nonprofits to manage schools

 

Starlee Coleman, Texas Charter Schools Association

  • Texas has made good strides for charters recently
  • Charters are not competitors to district schools, but should be thought of as a compliment
  • Makes notes that charters do not expel 43% of students in response to question during prior testimony
  • National and state outcomes show charter performance is increasing, charter students were shown to have received the equivalent of 17 extra days of learning; performed well in other metrics like Math STAAR scores
  • 2016 STAAR results showed Hispanic and economically disadvantaged students at charters scored higher on all tests, aside from Social Studies
  • Current accountability metrics are working
  • Challenges include requirement to submit expansion amendment between February and April in year prior to a campus’ opening; requesting it be modified to at least 12 months in advance
  • There are also challenges involved in superintendent notice when new campuses open even when school boards are notified; e.g. superintendent may not be notified
  • Huberty – So a superintendent wouldn’t be notified on new campus opening, but board members are?
    • Correct, superintendents are required to be notified on expansion, but not for new campuses
  • 19 steps to charter authorization process, cannot be created wherever, whenever
  • Local governments are creating regulations blocking charters opening new campuses, strongly oppose these efforts
  • New facilities funding is greatly appreciated, many campuses are expanding facilities and paying down debt service
  • Charters do receive less funding that ISDs, charters do not receive benefit of property tax
  • Huberty – So the 12-month process for an expansion, is this a rule you can change or is there rationale?
    • Heather Mosay, TEA – Correct in that window for expansion is February to April, TEA looks at most recent year’s financials to make decision; this is available in January
  • Huberty – Could you create a rule that allows for expansion applications if financials are given to TEA before the Jan. 29 deadline?
    • We open the window after the audits are complete, TEA looks at the final rating
  • Huberty – When would you award expansions then?
    • An amendment could be for the following year, could be 6-months later or 18-months later
  • Huberty – Asks after the notification portions?
    • Statute requires notifications to board of trustees; TEA policy is to notify superintendents on top of this

 

David Anderson, Raise Your Hand Texas

  • Very excited about SB 1882 & opportunities for school districts to act as an authorizer
  • Presents letter to TEA from Dr. Hinojosa in Dallas, detailing how you must get to 800-1,000 students enrolled before you receive more money
  • Huberty – Is this all districts?
    • You can do this for all districts, it is district as a whole compared to charter funding; TEA is campus compared to charter
  • Huberty – Looking at this, Fort Worth ISD would get >$1,900, but you would need the waiver to get to this point
    • This is an averagely weighted normal student compared to charter funding
  • Huberty – In the case of San Antonio, they partnered with an organization and received significantly more per student
  • This is operations funding, charters do not have the ability to hold elections and have voters agree to tax for facilities funding
  • If you fund facilities for charters, you can get close to I&S for districts, but districts would likely criticize that the state does not buy facilities for districts, the yields in the state facilities funds has not changed since 1997 – the balance is funded by local effort
  • If you make the policy decision that the state should fund local I&S equivalent for charters, you get close to an even comparison
  • The differential plays out in terms of cost to FSP; if a student withdraws from Houston to Dallas, it is about a $200 difference, but it is largely a wash; if a student withdraws from Houston and enrolls in a charter, then the state is responsible for about $1,800 additional
  • Thinking on transfers, all of this creates an additional cost to the FSP
  • Charter enrollment will in many instances accelerate recapture as well; tax base is divided by number students & see relatively more spent per student; districts can be knocked into recapture
  • Huberty – This is essentially part of what is happening to Houston, districts are losing population
    • Have seen calculations that Houston and Dallas would not be in recapture if you could count these students
  • Huberty – But you aren’t educating these kids, would be receiving money for children you aren’t educating
    • Recapture can be paid to the state and fund the student in the charter, but state needs to find the $1,800 somewhere in the budget
  • SB 1882 is an exciting opportunity for districts to partner with several entities, will need some conversations on outlook changes
  • Can trust school districts to act as authorizers due to the accountability being placed directly on the district; incentives are very good
  • Benefits to districts are the 2-year accountability
  • Many good models for these partnerships, only one we do not have is a relationship with higher education; districts working cooperatively with higher education entities to operate a campus is a huge movement towards state goals with higher education
  • Huberty – So if we have a campus that is IR the first time, let’s say it moves in and out of IR & the board decides to do something, you have recommendations on how to facilitate this?
    • TEA is moving in this direction, not worried about TEA approving the applications, worried about process that looks daunting & uncertain where districts have to sell it to the community college
  • With charter funding, you have this big operations gap between charters and districts, funding facilities leads to using sate resources to construct parallel and possibly redundant facilities; SB 1882 has promise in using these dollars for classroom instruction
  • Koop – In a lot of the urban counties, how do you see this manifesting itself with a community college?
    • This is where most of the relationships between districts and higher education are, but you can go past that
    • Have had conversations with your district about partnership with a hospital, marrying community colleges with a large employer is a great idea
  • Koop – So if you have students that can receive a certification, you could incorporate hospitals into the junior college and potentially have multiple certifications
    • Funding would run out after student leaves high school, specifics would be in how you want to organize credits, etc.; pulling in employers could create a track with tremendous possibilities
  • Bernal – My district is the urban core of San Antonio with 3 traditional ISDs, and 10-14 charters, struck by the challenge of the one-size funding mechanisms for charters across the state; system seems to be set up to create tension, like the idea of encouraging districts and charters to work together
  • Bernal – Are we able to create unique funding mechanisms, concerned about where comparisons meet up and where they fall apart
    • Coleman, Texas Charter Schools Association – Would hope state is looking at school finance in a comprehensive way; cannot have an apples-to-apples comparison; e.g. SB 1882 could be used as a pathway to CTE programs, etc.
    • Anderson, Raise Your Hand – Discussion is very complex because of the issue with facilities, one possibility is to have charters receive the same funding as the district plus sate average I&S funding per student, you’d have no budget impact
    • I do think you can get too simple, TEA’s numbers are correct, but looking at revenue per enrollment ignores needs of certain students
  • Huberty – I think the answer is we’ve had this debate before, some direct us to just give the same as we give the school districts, entities like KIPP would readily agree
    • Statewide this would be about a wash, would vary in individual districts and charters
  • Huberty – I think you would have charters locating in high M&O/I&S areas
    • This is why I say sate average I&S, M&O is roughly equal across the state
  • Bernal – I think it’s interesting, even in Humble the on-size mantra would still apply
  • Huberty – I’m thinking about district charter perspective
  • Bernal – I just want peace, criticism of charters and districts is treated very differently

 

Dr. Kelli Moulton, Superintendent, Galveston ISD

  • Discussed growing relationships with the public/charter partnership
  • School board is invested in Lone Star Governance
  • Instituted strategic plan based on intention and not hope
  • TEA has been supportive
  • Have had a large philanthropic effort
  • is a school of innovation
  • Providing high continuum of care
  • Future SB 1882 agreements rely on shared power
  • All employees are TRS eligible
  • Excited about moving forward
  • Huberty – do you think there are more opportunities in your district?
    • There are, but are also working on looking into added value from SB 1882

 

Mohammed Choudhury, Chief Innovation Officer, San Antonio ISD

  • First SB 1882 partnerships with relay graduate school
  • Took over 2 IR elementary schools
  • Turnaround model includes master teachers and residents
  • Local colleges have stepped up to work with residence programs
  • Only a few operators can be trusted to turnaround a school
  • Stewart elementary will begin its turnaround this school year
  • Working through bureaucratic issues like getting everybody signed up for TRS, etc.
  • Highland high school used for Texans Can Academy for over age students
  • Huberty – have they opened yet?
    • Not yet
  • Discussed snapshot from January related to applications to Choice Schools offered
    • Over 9,000 applications
  • Recommends:
    • The bar for SB 1882 approval remains very high
    • Should have admittance requirements to serve the population desired
    • District should have the ability to have first right of refusal to work with the charter school
    • Can a district have exclusive authorizing rights in the region

 

Dr. Scott Muri, Superintendent, Spring Branch ISD

  • 2 middle schools and one high school share campuses with Kipp and Yes Prep
  • Desire for post-secondary success
  • Better provides choices and options to families
  • Described timeline of creating MOU and contracts, through opening of the program
  • Noted the constant communication and collaboration between the schools
  • Wants the legislature to open more opportunity with charters in partnerships that work

 

Dr. Melissa Chavez, Executive Director, The University of Texas Charter School System

  • An accredited university sponsored charter school district serving k-12
  • In 21st year of operation, all employees are UT employees
  • Charter school for alternative education
  • Over 20 current partnerships across Texas
  • Data from 2017-2018: >3000 students, 90% at risk, high mobility rate
  • 33% of students are in special education
  • Use blended learning environments
  • All 20 partnerships are involved with making decisions for the school
  • Graduate 40-70 students per year
  • Huberty – does your charter fall into ‘not rated’?
    • Fall into alternative education
    • Fall into alternative-met standard
  • King – when the law was changed from days to minutes, was your problem fixed after last session?
    • It absolutely was

 

Robert Bleisch, Superintendent/CEO, Ector College Prep Success Academy

  • Have been a part of 4 turnarounds
  • Highlighted key changes
    • able to pay employees 15% more by utilizing SB 1882 funds and restructuring management strategy – would like to get to 25%
    • Implemented the Texas Tech Turnaround model
    • Establishing new culture on campus
  • Intensive monitoring and immediate support are the benefits for the students
  • It is working because of a wholistic approach including partnerships and communication
  • Sourcing facility charges and others by contracting with the district – renegotiating initial MOUs
  • Partnership has been overwhelmingly positive

 

Roy Garcia, Assistant Superintendent of Secondary Education, Ector County ISD

  • The partnership with Ector College Prep has been very beneficial
  • It is an in-district charter
  • Will be looking to transfer as many successful practices into other schools
  • Huberty – how much extra funding did you get through SB 1882?
    • Extra $2 million
  • Huberty – will be put back into support?
    • The changes with the master schedule allowed for savings and surplus
    • The $2 million will be banked at this point
  • Huberty – you are considering doing this with other IRs?
    • Have not yet but would like to

 

Public Testimony

 

Rosie Kahn, Self

  • Supports charter schools
  • Was a charter school student
  • Appreciated the flexibility allowed at charter schools

 

Sam Duell, Foundation for Excellence in Education

  • Provided written testimony
  • Believes Texas is a very good model for charter schools
  • Despite the reputation it has never been harder to get a charter in Texas
  • Recommendations are listed on written testimony
  • Many of the recommendations related to administration are already being looked at by TEA
  • The external review process is where the bulk of the issues are found
  • Huberty – discussed what inter-rated reliability is and how it functions
    • Deals with how grades are calibrated and normalized
    • Would like a similar system for the external review process

 

Rebecca Goode, Legacy Charter

  • Bilingual ESL grew 37 % in three years
  • Noted difficulty in finding Bilingual ESL teachers
  • Dyslexia population continues to grow
  • Written testimony shows title funding amounts and use

 

Jamie Mathais, TASB

  • Domain 1 should have a greater weight – 33%
  • Believes charters are opening without complete transparency and without sufficient notice
  • Should not allow charters to purchase property when the ownership of that property is in limbo
  • Consider equitable funding allotment for charters in line with public school funding
  • Huberty – received numbers from TEA that charters actually do not get more than charters
    • Can speak to that off line
  • Huberty – related to buying property, what does that recommend?
    • Should require property ownership should be made clear before charters before purchase of property
    • Will follow up

 

Sarah Becker, Self

  • Property owners and community members should have input into the process of approving charter schools in their neighborhood due to the direct impact on the local public-school system
  • Less oversight does not correlate to more innovation
  • Frustrated with bills like SB 1882
  • Charters do not have the same democratic control as traditional school districts

 

Louis Malfaro, Texas AFT

  • Concerned with rapid expansion by charter schools
  • Believes there should be a stop of the expansion
  • Wants the committee to look deeper into the charter expansion process

 

Brian Moy, North East ISD

  • Described the ISD
  • 32,000 students in charter schools in Bexar County
  • Discussed disparity in state formulas for students moving into charter schools

 

Emily Sass, Texas Public Policy Foundation

  • Discussed disparity between traditional ISDs and Charters

 

Megan Walen, Self

  • Supports charter partnerships
  • Autonomy allowed through partnerships have opened many opportunities with unique opportunities
  • Bernal – the model for CasTech is in district 50% and countywide 50%, how is that working out?
    • Have students from all over and very diverse

 

Amy Bineski, TASA

  • Major concern is the sustainability of the dual system
  • Concern with Chapter 41s
  • Concern with timing relative to notice of new campuses – supports 12-month lead time
  • Would like to clarify notice language adding more precise location and demographic language

 

Closing Remarks

  • This was the last planned House Public Education Committee Hearing for the interim