Print 🖨

The House committee on Public Education met on March 30 to take up a number of bills. This report covers discussions concerning HB 3270 (Dutton) and HB 1468 (K. Bell,). Part one of the hearing can be found here and part two can be found here.

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.

HB 3270 (Dutton) – Relating to public school organization, accountability, and fiscal management

  • Dutton – Provides history on lawsuit background with Houston ISD and TEA; found there are inconsistencies in the campus turnaround plan and the Commissioner’s appointments
  • This bill clears these inconsistencies up; changes that a school must be failing for five years
  • Kashmere HS was failing because they did not do well on math portion of standardized test; they did not have a certified math teacher
  • Many school board members do not feel like there is any skin in the game with a failing campus
  • HB 1842 said that campuses needed to be failing for five years in a row before intervention; were 60% fewer failing campuses
  • Need all school board members to realize they have just as much responsibility for campus across town as the one they were elected to represent
  • Environment that exists in this state that needs to be addressed
  • King – 3 three years is too long for a campus to be failing; if the district is improving, will this bill put them under purview? Need to put something in the bill that recognizes if schools have improved
    • Do agree with that; moving from F to D is progress
    • Do not want district to remain stagnant at the D
    • Will have a CS that will take care of that particular problem
    • King – Have language for you that recognizes progress, but does not reward failure
  • Huberty – Believe we have to take into consideration Harvey and other things, but I would say Kashmere has been failing 9-10 years?
    • Absolutely; given waivers for things beyond our control but constant failing is   unacceptable
  • Huberty – Kashmere never actually submitted a plan to TEA for turnaround, is that correct?
    • Yes; superintendent had a 180 plan, but had to scale it back
  • Huberty – The court basically came in and ruled against Commissioner Morath; was a significant issue with governance on the board, is that correct?
    • Yes, was part of the lawsuit too; is a statewide bill, not an HISD bill
    • Dr. Allen’s daughter now president of Houston school board and doing a wonderful job
    • Governance issue has been prolonging the agony and translating to the failures of so many children
  • Huberty – Has been complaints on the inaction of the board in connection to pattern holding back students of color and in relation to students with disabilities; appreciates this bill
    • Situation is dire; students should not have to get on a bus and go across town
    • Choice is not a bad school around the corner and a good school across time
  • Bernal – Testimony similar to HB 3 with a focus on poverty, getting students to achieve without rearranging student body, etc.
  • Bernal – Have not fully seen HB 3 unfold yet, how do we reconcile? Nothing in HB 3 attached to governance, but still has same central spirit
    • HB 3 allowed more money for teachers going to schools that need the most help, but if it is a governance issue that will not work
    • Never dreamed a school board would let a school fail for 5 consecutive years, now at 7
    • Can pass whatever we want but will continue to come back if governance not addressed
    • Committee has an obligation to help students; will end up importing workers into Texas if we cannot educate our children
  • Allen – Did that 180 proposal garner any support for the school district? Did they make any progress?
    • Some of them did due to amount of funding requested
  • Allen – Many of them did, when we got to the end only Wheatley was left; how many points were they down?
    • Yes, it was very close; only down a few points
  • Allen – What does Wheatley do to attract students?
    • Son toured, saw no foreign language options, led to discovery that there was large drop-off of important programs
  • Allen – This is a statewide bill; what is the solution presented in this bill?
    • Hope that districts will be motivated to put in the kinds of programs that promote high student achievement levels
  • Allen – TEA has taken over several school districts, have they gotten better?
    • TEA has never taken over for academics, only financials
    • If TEA has to take over a district, it will be to ensure district is getting what they need
    • Provides an example from fixing failing school; it is not the kids
  • Allen – So you are telling me if the state takes it over it will improve?
    • I am saying if the state does not, they will “deprove”
  • Allen – There are many things you can do besides taking over the school
    • Then why aren’t they being done?
  • Allen – This bill gives the state the right to take over education in Texas, I do not think that is the solution
  • Allen – We do not attract the brightest and best when state is not paying proper wages, no respect for teachers
    • I would ask, why does not that affect Bel Air etc.
  • Allen – Because they are not putting those teachers in our schools; TEA will drain the school and the state needs to put money in other schools
    • I disagree with you; if this bill passes, there will be a change in Wheatley and other schools
    • Need to do everything we can to make improvements for children, children do not fail us we fail them
  • Allen – We do not want to fail every school by having the state take over
    • Then we need to stop having failing campuses; if campuses are not failing, they will never have to deal with the state taking over
    • We have created an environment that is not a good place, needs to be recognized

 

Bob Harvey, President and CEO of Greater Houston Partnership – for

  • HB 3270 allows HB 1842 to function as legislature intended it to
  • Allows state to take action to fix campuses that have been problematic for years and years
  • Estimate 27,000 kids in Houston attending failing campuses; 45% met 8th grade reading, 49% math
  • HB 3270 clarifies the statue of 1842; allows the state to act when school board is not responding to clearly created incentives

 

David Thompson, Texas School Alliance and TASA – oppose

  • Legitimate state oversight is appropriate
  • But this bill dramatically expands the Commissioners authority and discretion
  • Under special investigations the Commissioner can commission one for any purpose, may rely on unsworn anonymous information/complaints
  • There is no opportunity for a meaningful hearing in the special investigation approach and no impartial decision maker
  • Under this bill the decision would be final and completely insulated from any judicial review
  • Commissioner does even have to follow legislative procedures in statute on page 5 of bill
  • Commissioner can delegate this authority to employees
  • Concerns of Chair Dutton deserve attention, but this bill is not the solution to those concerns
  • Shifts balance of authority to an appointed individual with no judicial review, etc.
  • Huberty – Bill has a mechanism in place, reality is Commissioner was moving towards installing a board of managers and we have a process to do that
  • Huberty – Asked them to install a turnaround plan in a window of time and they chose not to do that, not even complying with current law; bill is the solution to this
  • Huberty – What courts did was not specific to Houston, but statewide
  • Huberty – Houston ISD never did anything but what do you do?
    • That provision does not do what he thinks it does
    • Concern is procedures and provision of minimal due process in these investigations
    • This bill is a statewide proposal
    • Concerned that the Commissioner ultimately becomes insulated from judicial review
  • Would suggest expanding options in tool chest available to Commissioner, but need due process
  • Refers to final and unappealable clauses as bully on playground; Commissioner infallibility
  • Huberty – Did you agree or disagree with appellate courts?
    • They were right, nothing on the merits yet
    • Only issue to date is if Commissioner followed procedures, thinks it is very clear they did not follow the procedures in statute
  • Huberty – Encourages him to talk about tweaks with Dutton, argues there was not a turnaround plan done
    • As counsel for the board does not think that is an accurate representation
    • The campus did develop a turnaround plan
    • Commissioner was supposed to have ordered the development of the turnaround plan and did not; anticipates the state will see improvement
  • Huberty – Was in some of those meetings and remember specifically asking if they were submitting a plan and response was yes, but they never did
  • Dutton – Do you know if the board is opposed? Are any here to testify?
    • To his knowledge the board has not taken a position and has not seen any of board here
  • Dutton – Asked more questions on the case
    • Again, have not heard case on merits
    • Everything that has happened for last year and half has been procedural arguments
  • Dutton – You agree with court interpretation on expansion of authority of TEA Commissioner?
    • Again, have not gotten to merits
    • Court spoke to issue raise in temporary injunction, but has not been a trial on the merits of any of these issues
    • Legislation is overcorrection and inappropriate of discretionary authority with no checks and balances to appointed entity
    • Protections of law and due process are fundamental to the rule of law
  • Dutton – While we discuss words, thousands of kids get failed by our system
    • Would expand range of potential sections
    • But there has to be an orderly procedure that provides fundamental fairness
  • Dutton – Is inclined to do whatever it takes to address the “fire in the house”
  • Dutton – If have to make choice of going into house burning down or due process would probably ask for forgiveness over permission
    • Does not think it is an either or situation; would expand options
    • Do not have to discard the laws to accomplish with what he is trying to accomplish
  • Dutton – Do your recommendations survive another legal challenge?
    • If you provide appropriate procedural safeguards, it absolutely should survive

 

Anne Williams, Alief ISD and Texas Caucus of Black School Board Members – oppose

  • Opposes Commissioner to have sole authority
  • See it as a bill directed toward HISD and consequences of impacting districts with higher population of students of color
  • Agree with Rep. Allen that HB 3 has not be provided opportunity to do its perfect work yet
  • No evidence to support handing district over to the Commissioner will improve district performance

 

David Thompson, Texas School Alliance and TASA – oppose

  • Allen – Head a lot about a few campuses but this bill would impact all campuses, can you inform on numbers of schools coming out of IR?
    • Does not have those particular numbers at hand
    • HISD had significantly larger, maybe 55 districts in IR
    • Progress has been made across the board but there is still room for improvement
  • Allen – Are there other districts that could be impacted by this?
    • Believe so but do not have those details at this moment
  • These problems have developed over the years but points out a benchmark year
  • In 2013 the Commissioner directed annexation of North Forest to Houston ISD, district spent well over $100 million out of fund balance to make transition effective
  • The district was supposed to receive transition funds that would have helped but they only got 2 years’ worth because of a glitch
  • Dutton – If everyone in classroom is failing would you say there is teaching going on?
    • That should be reviewed
    • More teachers are leaving the profession vs those coming in
    • HB 3270 is not solution is a procedural bill that gives Commissioner broad discretion with no checks and balances
    • Issues Dutton are raising need attention but do not see bill solving unless suggesting Commissioner has some secret knowledge
  • Dutton – When CPS comes to house and see abuse of 1 kid, they take all the kids
    • Yes, but there is a process

 

Ruth Torres, Self – on

  • Is a parent, we need fiduciary duty from charter schools
  • Not seeing accountability from charter schools
  • Welcome opportunity to discuss with members increase transparency and accountability

 

Von Byer, TEA – resource witness

  • Provides more details on background of case and TEA response
  • Notes court process is a slow one and offers committee may want to be aware
  • Statute does not require them to look at a turnaround plan, etc.
  • There are alternative readings of intent of legislature; the one from the court and TEA
    • TEA suggests theirs is the appropriate reading
  • Believes as result of an investigation they can use any tools under 39A, Court said they believe interventions the agency uses must separately satisfy the requirements
  • Would then need to settle what are the interventions available for a special investigation
  • Continues to walk through TEAs reading of intent of legislature in statute
  • Bernal – What happens when a campus gets an F for the first time? There is a plan but are there additional resources deployed to a campus?
    • Not that he is aware of, agrees that is the same if they get a F for a second time
    • Child does have a Public Education Grant
  • Bernal – No statement to the district, that state is employing additional resources? Does TEA in a takeover bring additional monies or only change in governance?
    • No pot of fund devoted to this cause
  • Bernal – Do we have anything that makes a district make use of opportunities?
    • Campus Turnaround plan needs Commissioner approval that he thinks will turn campus around in a timeline
    • Bernal – agree with sense of urgency but longstanding D or F campuses, not sure governance accounts for all of those schools D or F
    • Bernal – suspects consecutive F campuses are in low income areas and attended by brown and black kids
  • Bernal – If we know low income areas are responsible for D and F campuses then is there some sort of required intervention of resources?
    • From his understanding HB 1842 is there is a reason why it gets to closure or board of management
    • Board of Trustees should feel pain of not addressing problems of campus
  • Huberty – Do you view this in the same way of testimony presented by David Thompson?
    • A couple of ways of looking at this; thinks its incorrect that Commissioner would not be held accountable
    • Legislature reviews Commissioner work
    • Courts are taking more time than for legislature to come back and weigh in on issues
    • Have had difference of opinions on what final and unappealable mean, would require the courts to recognize it
  • Huberty – Asked more about district’s turnaround plan
    • Transition provision does not require a turnaround plan; Wheatley was not ordered to do a turnaround plan because they were working on school redesign plan using federal funds
  • Dutton – Did they propose closing Wheatley?
    • No, they did not
  • Dutton – Is there due process in HB 3270? Do we really have accountability system?
    • Still requirement to do an informal hearing
    • Due process is normally talking about a person who has due property rights
    • Rights are limited in sense of district public education
    • This bill has provision of not rated, if court logic continues then campuses receiving not rated last two years would essentially have to start accountability system all over again

 

Jonathan Feinstein, Education Trust – on

  • Testimony is on Sect 2.03 on bottom of page 8 and 9 on not rated and reset accountability ratings
  • Fixing the not rated loophole is necessary

 

Dutton, in closing

  • The failure of one child anywhere in Texas is a threat to Texans anywhere

HB 3270 left pending

 

CSHB 1468 (Bell, Keith) (CS) – Relating to curriculum and eligibility requirements for the provision of local remote learning to qualify for state funding and calculation of average daily attendance

  • Worked together with stakeholders on this bill
  • Understand virtual is not for every child but there are benefits for some
  • Virtual education will continue to be the future
  • Is about kids, 21st century learning, and local control

 

Justin Terry, Superintendent Forney ISD – for

  • Equipped students with 1-1 chrome books six years ago, did this to prepare students for a 21st Century global society
  • Trajectory of remote work has increased substantially
  • Creates financial efficiencies for districts, helps maximize taxpayer dollars
  • Creates personnel efficiencies across campuses
  • Bell – Can you tell us difference putting this into hybrid model?
    • Have opportunity in Fast Growth setting to create time is now variable
    • Create flexible schedule for kids
    • Can bring and centralized kids in different learning environment and teacher can serve multiple campuses
    • Can maximize dollars in I&S as well
  • Dutton – Student outcomes in virtual?
    • Still collecting data
  • Do not have ability to develop rule, standard for learning environment but bill allows districts to do that and set parent engagement as a component of this
  • Talarico – Curious about age ranges? Seems to be successful for older students but not elementary?
    • Seeing similar engagement
  • Benefits in bill are students are still local, will yield to ARDs committees on needs for students
  • Bell – If students were outside district could you provide services for student outside district?
    • I think it would be a huge challenge to meet some of needs

 

David Vroonland, Superintendent Mesquite ISD – for

  • 3 key elements on bill; local control and sets expectations and standards of performance
  • Need for new model restricted to districts serving own district students, not about recruiting other students
  • Virtual schools aligned to district programs and allows for UIL participation

 

Brian Woods, TSA and South Texas Associations of Schools – for

  • Allows the local discretion they would like to see
  • Bill provides funding for virtual learning and allows for hybrid learning models
  • Appreciate for decision locally on participation in UIL
  • Ghere is a question about grade levels, for below grade 3 does not see this as a long-term consideration but perhaps for next year

 

David Anderson, RYHT – for

  • Models for remote learning have been limited
  • Enrolling students hundred of miles away is not way to expand virtual services
  • Limiting remote learning to students in district, same district or charter that had to remediate if remote learning does not work
  • Bill is thoughtful opportunity to address
  • King – Limits were put in place because of RYHT, has Mr. Butt changed his mind and why has RYHT changed mind on limits?
    • Does not take limits off, this bill empowers districts and charters to have a different program
  • King – You could have full time virtual learning?
    • A student could do that
  • King – Spent a lot of time talking about kids being kept in seats with RYHT, want to know when RYHT changed?
    • Full time virtual programs that enroll kids hundred of miles away are not successful, not a good way to implement and have not changed position on it
  • King – Not sure enough data to say what is successful? Cannot say there is enough data to say this is successful for the state?
  • Talarico – Could this lead to atrophy of school community? Student could opt for entire virtual?
    • Keeps kids tied to community with this bill
    • District could say we have standards and if you meet those standards you could continue in that program
  • Talarico – Is there any situation where entirely remote is healthy?
    • Happy with bill not serving students below 3rd grade, success is at higher grades once they have socialization established
    • Bill is thoughtful way to obtain additional data, incentives are properly aligned and financial is not about preferring one over the other
    • Educators given as much flexibility as possible to make decision individually for each student
  • Talarico – Concerned about overworking teachers, causing them to do more with less
    • Bill will be learning experience
    • Is a brave new world we will enter; attraction of bill is not that we know it will work every time but it is a thoughtful way to approach
    • Good way to do it but do not know everything we are going to learn
  • Huberty – Problem with rural districts wanting a person back in person after being in virtual, unusual circumstance which required everyone back; is this circumstance there?
    • Yes, it’s in local standards, can at anytime return to in person
    • This is not about stuff in chapter 38, this is a new program
    • District would not have to do that and scuttle whole program – would not be required in this bill

 

Laurie Steckner, Public School Options – on

  • This is a district choice bill, but not a parent choice bill
  • Bill limits options

 

Michael Hinojosa, TSA and Urban Council and Dallas ISD Superintendent – for

  • Applied for a waiver that was not granted pre-COVID
  • Had already signed up 75 students to participated
  • Will do it whether they get appropriations for it or not because it what the kids want
  • Do not be too prescriptive because great educators know how to do this
  • Do not prefer for teachers to do both in person and online and we have some teachers that are phenomenal at this, request as much as flexibility as possible
  • Only found one Superintendent to agree with him on one issue
  • Huberty – Who is the other Superintendent?
    • Colleyville ISD
  • Huberty – Just synchronous says bill but you want options; the bill has hybrid component but does not allow for asynchronous?
    • Agrees, but thinks they need more flexibility
  • Bell – If you have more option to do asynchronous, what is needed?
    • Students can do assignments and research on their own which is the premise of what Dallas ISD wants to follow
  • Bell – Is there a range of grade levels?
    • Hybrid school is 4th thru 6th
    • Would eventually want to go pre-k if they have biters

 

Jenna Dunnage, Self – on

  • Local district did not have platform in place
  • Student spends much of her day with offline learning
  • Dutton – You testified neutral, so are you on?
    • Want parent choice added back in the bill language

 

Angela Marcellus, Area Superintendent ILTexas RCI – for

  • Not for all but perfect fit for many
  • Average daily attendance of 96%
  • These types of programs are what many of our Texans need

 

Bruce Gearing, Leander ISD – for

  • Virtual learning can be effective for some, some teachers thrive working with those students
  • Need virtual offering next year for virus but that is not the only reason
  • Anxiety is also addressed in virtual
  • Also provides opportunities for more courses to make
  • Appreciate for in district

 

Christian Merritt, Live Oak Public Finance – for

  • Represents rural to Fast Growth schools
  • Appreciates MOU for other districts
  • Schools can maximize efficiency of bonds

 

Kurtis Indorf, Executive Director of Great Hearts Online – on

  • Believes in partnering with families
  • Serving 500 students across State of Texas, handout provided to show diversity
  • Confirmed in questioning will provide services, just last week highlighted SPED program
  • Dutton – How many students?
    • Over 500 online

 

Tommy Hooker, Superintendent of Thrall ISD – for

  • Should be a choice for the local district moving forward
  • Bell – What is your enrollment?
    • 775 and growing

 

Ruth Torres, Self – on/for

  • Thinks bill is critical; would suggest a few changes
  • This is an option and can give resources to kids
  • Would like to leverage bill completely and see additional amendments to open up flexibility

 

Elizabeth Nelson, Lone Star Online Academy – for

  • Provides the committee with a letter concerning online learning

 

Chris Bigenho, Lewisville ISD Virtual Academy – on

  • Likes opportunity to serve own students online
  • Now also serve in TxVSN catalog
  • This bill would not allow us to serve own students in the modality that works well for us
  • Students are looking for choice and flexibility
  • Like local control about bill but need asynchronous piece in there
  • Bell – Were you doing this prior to COVID?
    • Yes supplemental, using TxVSN so they could take 2 courses on campus or online
  • Bell – Kids taking classes on virtual school network?
    • Have own courses run through catalogue, 30 programs for own students
  • Bell – You get funding because approved through TxVSN, this bill would not prevent you from doing that?
    • Yes, want to do full time online and cannot do that right now
    • Bill allows for this in part but difficult if it does not include asynchronous
  • Bell – What prevents you from continuing asynchronous on TxVSN because if they complete it you will still get paid? You were not going to have all classes as asynchronous
    • Their asynchronous is designed to be high touch
  • Bell – Trying to define asynchronous would make the bill much longer, tried to give as much local control as possible and bill does not prevent you taking asynchronous in TxVSN since they have completion model
  • Bell – This is a beta, they can come back a few years from now and work on that as well
  • Bell – Need to make hybrid between TxVSN and virtual synchronous
    • But does not meet need of students
    • If do not have ability to serve full time online in asynchronous learning they will lose far more in virtual schools
    • Know they can do it full time online local
  • Bell – If we let anyone be virtual than you will have more leaving Lewisville ISD
    • Not advocating for expanding out
  • Dutton – Do you notice any difference in achievement levels?
    • High touch, use Canvas as LMS, etc.
    • Just want to serve own kids

 

Andy Wilson, Superintendent Roscoe Collegiate ISD – on

  • Believes in innovation
  • Virtual academy delivered in partnership with online provider
  • Bill language would prohibit them from operating in same manner they are doing today
  • Asynchronous learning is environment they use as well

 

Jasmine Odlemoore, Self – on

  • Uses Great Hearts Online with their kids
  • Have seen a positive impact online learning for her 5 year old in just a few months

 

Jennifer Bergland, Texas Computer Education Association – for

  • Believes there is a fundamental misunderstanding on what asynchronous learning is such as homework
  • Concern about tying students to a boring modality where you watch the teacher in synchronous vs students having time to discover on their own in asynchronous

 

Bell, in closing

  • Its an important subject and one to not take lightly
  • Empowers districts to serve needs of students
  • Need synchronous learning on current basis to get funded but anything extra after classroom online they can do it
  • Will have some more discussion on K-2
  • Appreciate everyone participating and willingness to listen

HB 1468 left pending