Print 🖨

The House Public Education Committee met on April 18, 2018 to discuss the following agenda items:

  • Monitor the agencies and programs under the Committee’s jurisdiction and oversee the implementation of relevant legislation passed by the 85th Legislature. In conducting this oversight, the committee will also specifically include: H.B. 21 (85R), H.B. 22 (85R), and S.B. 179 (85R).
  • The committee will hear testimony regarding the implementation of H.B. 21 (85R), H.B. 22 (85R), and S.B. 179 (85R).
  • The committee will also receive an update from the Texas Education Agency regarding issues related to Hurricane Harvey.

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on the various topics the committee took up. This report is not a verbatim transcript of the hearing; it 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.

 

Implementation of HB 21

Leo Lopez, TEA

  • Gave background on HB 21 grant program.
  • The bill appropriated $100 million dollars for FY18 and those funds were awarded to over 100 school districts. Prosper ISD received $10 million, at the largest percentage of the award.
  • Huberty: How did it happen that Prosper received 10% of the award?
    • The funding accounts for losses due to ASATR and is capped at $10 million.
  • The grants were automatic, and districts did not need to apply.
  • Next year, the grant program is appropriated $50 million.
  • TEA is awaiting tax information from the Comptroller’s before awards can be calculated and issued in early October.
  • Explained how HB 21 increased yield on allotment.
  • Existing debt allotments (EDA) payments will go out next fall.
  • Allen: Everybody will receive the EDA?
    • Everyone that qualifies.
  • Explained how charter schools which reach minimum requirements can facilities funding based on the average tax rate in the state.
  • Bernal: Do charters have to spend funding on facilities?
    • The bill prescribes requirements- mostly having to do with facilities.
  • Allen: Is that an equal appropriation for charters and regular schools?

 

Monica Martinez, TEA

  • ‘Services to Students with Dyslexia’ and ‘Services to Students with Autism’ are two different grants that were authorized by HB 21.
  • The purpose of these grants is to provide funding to schools serving these specific types of students.
  • The programs target pre-K – mid-elementary.
  • We are looking for applicants with research a based approach and a robust parent/stakeholder component.
  • We are looking for programs that can be potentially replicated across the state.
  • Dutton: What are some of the barriers to ‘implementation of effective practices’?
    • Looking at best practices and applying them to this specific group of students is what we encourage.
  • Allen: What is the group of other kids who do not have dyslexia or autism that can enroll?
    • It would depend on the way the program is structured. This must be a separate program from the rest of the campus. This setup allows the district to explore benefits of combining gen-Ed and special-Ed students in a mutually beneficial way.
  • Meyer: Did you receive any applications post deadline?
    • We may have.
  • Meyer: What will you do with those?
    • They will likely be disqualified.
  • Bernal: These deadlines are the same for both grants?
  • Bernal: It is 28 working days – is that a typical window for TEA?
  • The cap on the amount of funding is in the legislation.
  • A good example of the separate program from the school is one that is a “school within a school” with the intent of serving these students.
  • Dutton: How will we know if the program works?
    • All the grantees will be required to report data to us, some of which was outlined in the application. We want to make sure we ask applicants for as much information as we can get so we can provide detail to the legislature.
  • Allen: Will these students also receive the regular ADA?
  • Huberty: How many applications did you get?
    • For dyslexia, fewer than 50. For autism, just over 30.
  • Huberty: Were any applications partnered with private providers?
    • I do not have the details at the moment. We asked them to identify districts or charter schools as well as external partners they plan on partnering with.
  • Huberty: Could you provide those details to us?
  • Huberty: Where were these schools located?
    • I will get the information once we get all the reviews back. It is my understanding that geography was varied.
  • Bohac: There were about 80 applications that were received?
    • Just under that.
  • Bohac: Assuming the school qualifies for the 19-20 school year, will they need to go through the application process again?
    • There will be an opportunity for us to use the same info they provided, rather than them reapply.
  • Huberty: TRS funding was one-time money at one time also?
    • I would need to review that.

 

Rhonda Skillern-Jones, Houston ISD

  • Thanked the committee for fighting for HB 21.
  • Explained HISD’s budget woes, including $1 billion in recapture payments and insolvency.
  • HISD recommends,
    • An increase in the basic allotment.
    • Decreased state reliance on property taxes.
    • Increase the state share of funding for public education to 50%.
  • HISD offers full-day pre-k but cannot include those students in our calculations.
  • Meyer: What is the number of students in your pre-k program?
    • About 6,000 students.
  • Meyer: Those students are not counted toward funding for the district?
  • Meyer: How much are you losing on those students?
    • We will get the numbers to you.
  • Dutton: How many students does HISD bus daily?
    • We have about 25,000 magnate students and another 15,000 students transporting to their local school.
  • Dutton: Most of the magnate transfers are from east to west?
  • Dutton: So, most of the magnet schools are in the western part?
  • Dutton: Why is that?
    • When the districts were supposed to integrate schools in the 60s, they tested and bussed children from predominantly African American schools to predominantly white schools, not the other way around. Now our magnates are mostly concentrated in that area.
  • Dutton: Has there been any thought to placing magnate schools on the east side of town?
    • I did that in 2015 when I was president. We plan to open five more.
  • Bernal: Are pre-k students part of the calculation according to attendance?
    • They’re counted in half-day numbers. We’re asking that the ADA be counted as full-day students.
  • Dutton: The number of charter students in HISD is close to 30,000?
    • Correct, and those students are not included in our count.

 

Bill Gruesendorf, Texas Association of Rural Schools

  • Announced retirement and gave thanks to the Committee for action on HB 21.

 

Steve Swanson, Self

  • Extended thanks to the Committee for their work.

 

Kevin Chisum, Guthrie ISD

  • Explained budget woes of Guthrie ISD.
  • We appreciate the hardship grants.
  • Define the word equitable. With equal funding, I cannot provide the same equitable opportunities to our students as an ISD like Houston.
  • VanDeaver: What is your tax rate?
    • $1.4
  • VanDeaver: Have you considered a TRE?
    • We have. We are 10-15% recapture. If we raise our tax rate, we will be sending it back to the state.
  • Huberty: Are you sending money back now?
    • No, if I raise it two pennies I will.
  • Huberty: How much is in your fund balance?
    • About 6.5-7. We can use that to keep the ‘band aid on the wound’ until 2024.

 

Christy Rome, Texas School Coalition

  • Expressed gratitude over HB 21.
  • Hardship grant districts demonstrate a need.
  • Districts face the real possibility of closing their doors if the funding does not continue.

 

Leo Lopez, TEA

  • Huberty: What’s the ability to increase timing on what the Texas School Coalition spoke about?
    • We plan to do grants based on LPE data. We do not get that data until July-August.

 

Donna Hill, Miami ISD

  • Explained budget woes of Miami ISD.
  • We would greatly appreciate any funding the state could offer so that we can meet the requirements.
  • King: What is your tax rate?
    • $1.4.
  • King: How much do you recapture?
    • About 80%.

 

Implementation of SB 179

Leo Lopez, TEA

  • SB 179 added cyberbullying to the definition of bullying and amended various sections of the education code.
  • TEA has worked with Health and Human Services and drafted language for a stakeholder group. That language should be back at TEA by the end of the week.
  • Some of the information is already on the TEA website.
  • Huberty: We’re adding this to the counselor’s responsibility, what kind of additional training will they be getting?
    • I can get that answer for you.
  • Huberty: How many children have taken their lives this past school year?
    • We do not track that information.

Monica Martinez, TEA

  • One of the steps taken recently updated the model guide for implementing effective school counseling programs. This document includes some information related to this topic. In addition, we provide information on best practices, but it is up to each school district to provide training to counselors.
  • Allen: You need to find some way to get this information out to the public.

Maurine Mollack, David’s Legacy Foundation

  • Thanked the Committee for supporting David’s law.
  • Our foundation has recently partnered with 77 schools and ESC’s who are proactively educating students and parents on cyberbullying.
  • Gave quoted testimony from persons lauding the legislature’s action on cyberbullying which they believe will protect kids for years to come.
  • Information dissemination has been widespread, and feedback has been positive.
  • Gave comments from students who appreciated action of David’s Legacy Foundation who feel it has helped improve the environment of their schools.
  • Gave info on recent partnerships, including ISDs and universities, in which they will advise on cyberbullying.

 

Matt Mollack, David’s Legacy Foundation

  • We’ve not yet heard negative feedback on the implementation of the bill.
  • The fact that Maureen will be recognized for her work demonstrates to me that the bill has been well received.
  • This legislation has expanded beyond the Texas border. We are aware of legislation in other states that models itself after David’s law.
  • Huberty: In 2013, 3.5% of high school students reported suicide attempts that required medical assistance. Those statistics are alarming. I appreciate the work you are doing.

 

Steve Swanson, Self

  • TEA’s new governance training as well as the Supreme Court’s decision on finance both demand change.
  • I am for any action to prevent bullying and harm to our kids.

 

Jeff Irvine, Self

  • David’s Law is a good first step.
  • We can use modern technology to identify harmful situations and promote social and emotional learning.
  • We need to be proactive and learn how to use technology to help us do that.

 

Statement from Representative Bernal

  • Last week I visited a charter school and they had just dealt with the David’s Law issue for the first time. By using and implementing the law, the situation worked out for them. By the end, it had fulfilled its goal. We are moving in the right direction.

 

Impact of Hurricane Harvey

Mike Morath, Commissioner TEA

  • 60 counties were in the disaster area.
  • All affected schools were reopened in October.
  • We’ve tried to coordinate resources with partner organizations. FEMA has been a critical long-term funding partner, despite the slowness with which the funding flows.
  • Huberty: We’ve got campuses that are still waiting on Ike money.
    • That is correct. There are campuses that are years away from receiving their funding.
  • We’ve launched a variety of mental health resources related to the storm.
  • Student accountability waivers have been issued.
  • Information on school closures was gathered.
  • 112,000 students were displaced by the storm.
  • We will be using this data to determine if a rating will be issued. This proposed rule will be available in June. I anticipate a large number of campuses receiving exemption.
  • Huberty: Is that appealable at all?
    • It goes to proposed rule, public comment, then final rule. Once it is final then it applies to accountability ranks which may or may not be released on August 15th.
  • Cross district displacement will show in the settle-up.
  • Allen: The fallout from the damaged school would affect nearby schools as well.
    • Yes, that is why the rules for this will be exceptionally more generous than they were in Ike.
  • Allen: That will impact the schools financially.
    • Not in the accountability rating.
  • Allen: This all has to do with the performance of the students.
    • We’re working that all schools will get reimbursement for facilities funding. There is no issue that is cut and dry on this topic.
  • Explained near term federal assistance funding.
  • If a school district files with insurance and FEMA, they will be able to file a claim with us for the remainder of their funding. We anticipate about $30,000 in reduced recapture payments.
  • Virtually every school in a region was economically disadvantaged for two months.
  • There appear to be some decline in collections.
  • Huberty: Relative to where we thought we would be in October, you’re saying it could be somewhere between $1.2-1.7 billion?
    • That’s correct.
  • Huberty: The worst case scenario would be a supplemental budget request?
    • In the next biennium you should expect a significant increase in what was projected.
  • Huberty: In the next budget cycle, is it safe to say that it could be a $2.5-3 million problem?
    • It is hard to give a good number, but that is possible.
  • Huberty: That’s without enrollment growth or anything else?
    • That’s also without a change in special education participation rates in which we also predict an increase. We do not have that modeled now.
  • Bernal: Could TEA give us recommendations for alternate revenue streams? Everyone has ideas and we need to put our heads together to figure out what we can do. If TEA has ideas about revenue sources I would appreciate that.
  • Huberty: I’m not sure that is TEA’s role.
  • Bernal: Don’t they have ideas?
  • Huberty: You might want to have your own discussion internally about that. You’re asking them to be a legislator almost, that is not their role.
  • Bernal: I think there is a fair amount that TEA does that contributes to rulemaking.
    • I’m not sure we have the expertise in our organization to provide good recommendations on tax policy.
  • Huberty: My recommendation is to let the legislators and those who were elected to do that job do that. But that’s just my opinion.
  • Bernal: I agree with that too. I’m simply asking for help with that.
  • Facility damage estimates are roughly $907 million in damage to schools and facilities.
  • Huberty: We have school districts writing significant checks to get their schools up and running. When do they anticipate getting their resources back?
    • There is not one answer since each district is its own grant recipient under FEMA. We are months or years away from that. We anticipate FEMA will provide at least a 90% reimbursement.
  • Huberty: So if a district had to write a $90 million check, and they have a $100 million fund balance, then they have a problem.
    • That is correct. What you will see is a noticeable reliance on tax anticipation financing.
  • Huberty: Is that something we should be looking at as far as funding them?
    • We have considered that as a change in the statutory framework. I don’t have authority to give funds to districts, but in some cases that would make sense. If the statutory framework were to modify how some advanced payment from the agency could be made, that would solve some cash flow issues.
  • Instructional materials were well past this phase of the storm. Districts have IMA allocation and used that to buy replacement supplies.
  • Huberty: Out of the 18 that requested, you show 2 listed incomplete. You have 16 districts completed?
    • This is dated information. At this point you can be confident that all districts have the replacement materials they need.
  • The agency stood up a mental health task force.
  • Meadows Institute for Mental Health and HHSC were tremendous helps.
  • We received a $4 million dollar grant to provide counseling in the region.
  • The need is ongoing and only gets worse over time.
  • Bohac: Best and worst-case scenario on what the legislature will be facing when we come back?
    • For the supplemental, worst case is $1 billion and best is $.5 billion.
    • Concerning FSP for the next biennium, enrollment growth, property value decrease, and a significant increase in special education services would be the biggest drivers of change in terms of state level contributions.
  • Huberty: I’m assuming you’ve presented this to the appropriations committee?
    • Yes, although I’m not sure they’ve gotten the most recent update.
  • Huberty: Anything legislatively we need to think about to address this issue?
    • Cash flow provision to allow the commissioner to adjust in case of a disaster would be helpful. We will get you other things we think worthy of consideration.

 

Rhonda Skillern-Jones, Houston ISD

  • Explained losses in state aid due to Harvey as well as facilities damage.
  • Insurance and FEMA only cover cost of restoration, but Houston code requires that we rebuild these damaged schools completely.
  • We spent $89 million to get the schools up and running.
  • In order to rebuild the schools, we have to dip into our fund balance.
  • To date, we have received $25 million from insurance.
  • Insurance and FEMA are quarreling about who must pay more to HISD.
  • We’ve increased mental health training for our teachers.
  • To hold our kids to the state standard is unreasonable.
  • I encourage the committee to allow an accountability waiver in all disaster declared areas.
  • Dutton: How did the storm affect the local forming schools?
    • All of those were included in the 200 that had water intrusion.
  • Dutton: What you’re asking is for a 1-year reprieve?
    • All of those schools, but they’re in consideration for alternative management anyway.
  • Dutton: That is the district’s approach?
    • Those schools are under 1842, because we’re exercising 1882 options the reprieve would not affect those schools.
  • Dutton: Has the district decided what to do with those schools?
    • No, we’re voting on that next week.
  • Dutton: I guess you haven’t decided then whether to close schools?
    • No decision yet.
  • Dutton: Has there been any decision regarding what is wrong with the schools? Why are they more than five consecutive years low performing?
    • Resources have been allocated to those schools recently.
  • Dutton: When is the meeting?
    • 24th of April.
  • Huberty: You’re advocating that no school in HISD should be rated, even if they have not been impacted?
    • Yes, but we have schools of choice.
  • Huberty: HISD faces different issues because of the IR campuses. You’re telling us you’ll make decisions. One is to do nothing, and TEA will take over. I’m assuming you’re working with TEA on that?
  • Allen: We heard about students being bussed from various parts of town, not to mention the teachers. I want TEA to consider the whole district getting a reprieve. Explain what you meant by alternative management earlier.
  • IR schools under 1842 have to either be closed or partnered with alternative management, meaning a non-profit, government entity, or a charter operator.

 

Implementation of HB 22

Mike Morath, Commissioner TEA

  • HB 2804 created a tiered accountability system which is pass/fail.
  • This put us on a path to create tiering designations with labels that are easier to understand.
  • As we are working to implement HB 22, we are wrestling with various issues.
  • What conclusions should someone draw when looking at the A-F rating? We are developing communication resources to make the answer to that as quick and easy as possible.
  • Read TEA’s written explanation of A-F rating- that they are used to tell TEA how well schools are preparing students for life after school.
  • The rating system is based on student achievement for the overwhelming majority.
  • The relationship between student poverty and performance is much lower than it would be if we were just looking at passing rates alone.
  • As achievement rises in our schools, more campuses can achieve A status.
  • We have attempted to align our goals with the state’s 60 by 30 plan, which states that by the year 2030 we want 60% of our people to possess some degree of post-secondary credential.
  • In high school, 40% of your rating is based on STAAR. Another 40% is college/career readiness.
  • At the elementary school level, we have fewer data points to use besides STAAR.
  • This August, A-F ratings will be issued based on this domain model for districts, but campuses will still be rated “improvement required” or “met standard”. That label will be based on the 3-domain model.
  • August of 2019, campus labels will be issued in the A-F system.
  • Meyer: Are we still rolling it out as we’re working through it? When do these become final?
    • Proposed rule will be finalized in summer. That is the last time we hope to do significant rulemaking for the next few years.
  • The current year will be evaluated upon this system. A-F labels don’t start until next year. The methodology is fundamentally the same.
  • Allen: If the accountability system changes, then they start all over again?
    • The law uses the word ‘unacceptable’. So, whatever the underlying mechanism is, unacceptable is still the threshold.
  • Huberty: When ‘no child left behind’ was rolled out, the bar was moving every year.
    • We’re committed to keeping the bar at the same level for five-year increments. Each year you will see more and more A campuses and fewer F campuses. Therefore, we want to maintain a system of continuous improvement.

 

H.D. Chambers, Alief ISD

  • HB 22 is a very valuable piece of legislation.
  • The most powerful portion of HB 22 is the moving of our desired outcomes to be equal to college/career readiness.
  • There has been discussion concerning what the accountability system will be based on.
  • We are working with TEA to work out the details.
  • The current weights should be more evenly distributed between, graduation rates, college/career readiness, and STAAR. I would like to see 33% weight given to each of these.
  • Meyer: Why the 40-40-20 rating system?
    • Morath: That was a compromise. We want students to graduate, but also want to ensure they are prepared for what’s next. Getting them college/career ready seems to be very important to all parents. There are other issues that are more data specific that are also challenging.
  • Allen: Once you devalue one area, people start to lean the other way. 40% and 40% would give you what rating? ABCDEF?
    • Chambers: It is one domain.
  • Allen: When you devalue one, people tend to think graduation is not as important.
    • Morath: The current accountability system has four indexes in it and only one of those is graduation at 25%. This represents an aggregate increase in graduation rate weight.
  • Huberty: We have a panel of education experts who come up with a recommendation. Why did TEA not accept the recommendation?
    • Morath: We can provide you a summary document. We must balance recommendations that come from that committee and stakeholder opinions.
  • In grades 3-8, I would have preferred an attempt at adding additional indicators to STAR.
  • These expectations are in place through HB22. Unless the State begins aligning resources, so we can meet these expectations, this Committee and our stakeholders will be sorely disappointed.
  • I would love a meaningful discussion to determine the cost to give educators the ability to do their job.
  • Dutton: A lot of more resources are dedicated to these schools, as opposed to school’s kids didn’t choose to go to. If you put an equal amount of resources into a school around the corner, they would perform just as well.
    • I agree to an extent. When we make judgements on the integrity of a system, there is differentiation between these students but they’re not in a school of choice.
  • Dutton: This ties economically disadvantaged to an inability to learn. I don’t believe there is a correlation at all. If you set a low bar for the kids they will only reach the low bar. If you put the same resources in every school, you will get a better product.
  • VanDeaver: It seems to me that someone at home is interested enough to have the student apply for the school of choice.
    • I believe it is obvious that the more involved a parent is, the more apt a student is to be successful.
  • Huberty: Not all the A campuses that are high poverty are ‘choice’ campuses.
  • Bernal: In the past, all our measures only tracked poverty. I think it is not so much whether the student can learn, but how much weight we give to a single measure on which they are judged.
  • Dutton: Why are the schools you described all one color? That bothers me that poor performance is always in black and brown schools. If one of your campuses was all Anglo, you wouldn’t accept poor performance. There may be something different required about how we educate the children. The more money you have the more you can buy. People tend to accept that when it comes to education, but that is absolutely not true. I don’t believe it has anything to do with having a mother or father. Why do districts limit resources in these areas?

 

Keith Haffey, Spring Branch ISD

  • We struggled to look at what other opportunities there are for points and how we can award points to schools with different challenges.
  • We want to reward schools for enabling ESL students.
  • Domain 1 is not just passing, but meeting college level and mastery.
  • Huberty: For the next 2-3 years, the only measurement we have is the one in place. One of the flaws with the old system is that we included attendance measures and other things. The issue is, from a policy perspective, what are we supposed to do to resolve that?
    • Local accountability and co-curricular components are in the bill. The degree to which it is local is a struggle. We are wrestling with how to come up with a local system that allows districts to come up with other indicators. There are pieces in the system now that give opportunities to expand without losing sight of the bill.
  • For a system that will go to an ABCDF, our potential A campuses have the possibility of moving them down a letter grade.
  • We hoped for a local accountability system that is rigorous and reflects the holistic approach.
  • There is a feeling among members that there are dynamics in the choice schools that put them at an advantage over the neighborhood schools.
  • Dutton: I’ve got a solution. Create a domain for the neighborhood schools.
    • There has been a huge effort to look at how to address the different dynamics and make the system as fair as possible.
  • Dutton: If you really believe its related to the children, then you need to recognize that and create a domain for them. It makes no sense to tie ED to learning.
    • Morath: The accountability system tries to recognize this. You have a student achievement domain that is based solely on what students know and can do, because frankly that is what life is based on. Then you have the progress domain that tries to take into account a variety of factors that a school is dealing with. Because you have the balance of that in a three domain world you get the best of both worlds. You don’t have to sacrifice education for any kid, but you can also provide educators the ability to achieve high levels of performance increase.
    • Chambers: If this body really wants to help with that, have students come to us kindergarten ready, which means full day pre-k.
  • Dutton: The money we were spending on the border is the same amount that should have gone into pre-k. Texas should be more afraid of an uneducated populace rather than people coming across the border.

 

Dee Carney, Texas School Alliance

  • Indication decisions matter a lot, especially when allocating grades.
  • There are 358 campuses identified as improvement required.
  • When you have to differentiate between A-F, point values make a big difference.
  • In order for school alliance campuses to give better feedback, we feel it is important to model what it could look like using TEA’s methodology and publicly available data.
  • Huberty: In fairness to where we’re at today, part of the problem is we’ve been operating under pass/fail with no idea of how relatively well you did. Based on this data, a D is a passing score, but simply calling that a passing score does not specify the condition of the school.
  • In our model, 700 elementary campuses would earn an A with roughly half of those with economically disadvantaged students. Economically it is possible for campuses to earn an A, but not reasonably likely.
  • 1600 campuses in the middle school model with a similar trend.
  • Huberty: Out of 1600 campuses, there are maybe 80 campuses with economically disadvantaged students who would make an A.
    • Carney: Correct.
    • Morath: In one of three domains.
  • The 40-40-20 causes quite a few campuses, almost all high schools, to be above the 60 line.
  • We modeled districts as well. Non-test indicators allow them another metric beyond test scores to talk about achievement.
  • Huberty: Why was there a zero percent counted in domain 2?
    • Morath: There are two parts to domain 2, longitude and academic growth of students. For graduation, there is no way to measure those. You only graduate once.
  • Closing the gaps domain is very valuable. It helps identify student groups that might be missed if you only looked at all students.
  • Five of the TSA districts modeled to see how their district would do in that domain. Almost half of those campuses will miss less than 20% of their indicators.
  • Alliance districts often ask about required SAT testing for Algebra 1 students and who will pay for testing.
  • Huberty: How much do you think that costs across the state? (asking Chambers)
    • Chambers: $25 per test. I budget a quarter of a million every year for testing.
    • Morath: There is a provision in law that allows the state to recover the cost of testing.
  • Huberty: Why don’t we do that?
    • I would recommend that. Students who take the TSI in high school are better qualified for college.
    • Carney: There are some districts which feel they could not afford testing.
  • Huberty: Chambers, you do that for all your students no matter what?
    • Chambers: That is correct. We do three tests.
    • Haffey: We do that also.
  • Huberty: Is that just an appropriation or do we need a legislative fix?
    • Morath: There is an old law that says, “If there is an appropriation, the schools have to do this”.
    • Chambers: We used to be reimbursed years ago.
  • Huberty: Could you get back to us and figure out when that got cut and when we last funded it?

 

Mike Morath, Commissioner TEA

  • There is a slight misalignment between PEG and A-F that probably needs to be fixed.
  • We are required by statute to issue ratings on or by August 15. Because of this date, we have two logistical challenges. For college/career readiness, the previous year’s data is always used. Local accountability requires districts to do their own number crunching. They may not be able to reach this date.
  • Huberty: The issue is that data is a year old?
    • The thing that triggers for PEG, is not the A-F for campus.
  • Huberty: Wouldn’t it be related to the parent deciding to attend a campus or not?
    • If you made the timing change, for PEG you probably want to use last year’s data as well.

 

Laurie Yaeger, APAC Member

  • Is the goal to sort campuses or to evaluate how they are doing? If the goal is to evaluate, then campuses should receive credit for meeting standard and not have the standard changed.
  • College campuses question the alignment of STAAR and college readiness exams.
  • Dual credit should get the same value as AP. Small districts will be discriminated against if we do not allow it to count.

 

Mike Maroney, Texas Association of Manufacturers

  • We support the 33% split in the student achievement domain.
  • King: On CT, about 80% of school districts out there cannot fulfill the list.
    • That is why we support the coherent sequence because that often means the student is much readier to progress. Whether or not it is tied to a certification.
    • Kids in CT courses graduate at higher rates.
  • King: Right, because no kid chooses to go to school because of English class alone.
  • Huberty: You wanted the 33% split, I suspect TEA decided based upon input. Would you say everyone in your group wanted to see the result be different than what it is?

 

Steve Swanson, Self

  • We encourage oversight of the lawmaking process to ensure TEA provides documentation to reveal if they are fulfilling their governmental responsibilities.