The SBOE Committee on School Initiatives met on February 1 to take up the agenda here. A video archive of the hearing can be found here.
This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight the various topics taken up. It is not a verbatim transcript of the discussions but is based upon what was audible or understandable to the observer.
- Amendments changing 5 to 3 years, adding specialties
- Changing standards for attorneys to be independent hearing examiners; hopefully expanding pool of people who can be hearing examiners
- Childs moves to recommend approval for publication
- Childs – I think the amendments are a good change, see there is no negative impact Counsel has found; great way to get people involved,
- Motion passes
Item 2. Open-Enrollment Charter School Generation 29 Application Updates
- Standard update on current Generation 29 process
- Currently in the external review period, all applications deemed complete & eligible are in this process
- Received 21 apps, 19 made it to standard review, 18 moving to external review; roughly the same as Gen 28
- 17 are new operators, 1 experienced operators, 7 returning, 11 new; 7 returning have made it through different parts of the process before
- Hickman – How many came to the SBOE?
- Staff – None
- Next steps in the process if for applicants to get through external review, scores will determine who moves to capacity interview & also exhaustive internal review
- Determinations will be made no later than April 15, no contact period will also end
- Two weeks in May for capacity interviews
- Pickren – Can you provide regional breakdown
- Staff – Roughly equal spread between Austin, Houston, and San Antonio; one in West Texas
- Childs – What about applicant who didn’t make the external review?
- Staff – They didn’t submit the required documents
- Discussion item, part of 4 year rule review process
- Not anticipating any revisions to the rule in either section; subchapter A was modified for the no contact period last Fall
- Next to step is to open for public comment, will bring action item in April
- Hickman – No home rule charters? What are these and how would these be created?
- Staff – ISD Board would need to take vote, changes structure
- Hickman – Same as 1882?
- Staff – Different in that it applies to the entire district
- Rule review is required, item is just a starting place for discussion
- Childs – Would be helpful to have a side-by-side or deep dive on what these are?
- Staff – Can put this together
- Francis – Is this the charter where SBOE has authority to charter and not the Commissioner?
- Staff – I don’t believe so, but can get back to you
- Francis – This charter allows SBOE to propose rules governing these types of charters?
- Staff – Correct
- Franics – Would SBOE have authority to create these independent of ISDs or would we need to seek permission?
- Staff – Would have to follow up
- Pickren – When an ISD has a failing campus they can covert it to a charter and slow down investigation; if they have multiple campuses failing can they switch to multiple charters to stop a takeover? SBOE 7 we had an ISD completely dissolve
- Staff – Need to follow up with legal & can get back to you
Item 4. Approval of Revisions to Required School Safety Training for School District Trustees
- Hickman – Have a potential motion for the school safety training curriculum, has this already been circulated?
- Staff – Yes
- Staff – Here to talk about training established in 87th and updates from the 88th; presented changes in November
- Hickman – Could we come back to you so we can get copies and look over?
- Staff – Don’t believe we have a hard copy, but have a representative who can speak on it
- Hickman – Would like to see something, whether a presentation or a copy; happy to table or come back when we’re ready
- Tabled temporarily
Item 5. Recommendation for One Reappointment to the Boys Ranch Independent School District Board of Trustees
- Approving reappointment of Joshua Sprock to the Boys Ranch ISD Board as term is expiring
- Motion to recommend reappointment passes
- 2 reappointments to the Fort Sam Houston ISD Board; Willy White and Andrea Nicholas
- Motion to recommend reappointment passes
Item 7. Recommendation for One Appointment to the Lackland Independent School District Board of Trustees
- Approving one appointment to Lackland ISD due to a retirement
- Motion to recommend appointment passes
- Members discuss accountability and residency requirements for appointed members with witnesses
- Hickman – Would ask that questions are relevant to the item posted
- Francis and Hickman discuss accountability; Board accountability can be added to the rule, staff is checking with legal counsel; witnesses state the easiest modification would be to have designated contacts for issues
- Hickman – We have the same issue with charter boards, charter boards are not elected, military districts are not elected, etc.; citizens wanting to contact nominated boards, is anything else in rule to address this?
- Staff – Not that I’m aware of
- Pickren – My understanding of the law is that the reason why ISD Boards are elected is because they can set tax rates; for appointed/nominated boards, can parents still go through grievance process?
- Staff – Certainly
- Public comment – there is a detailed process, but there comes a point where there is no remedy for nonresponse to complaints
- Public comment – There is a grievance process, but nonresponsive board members is not a considered a basis for starting this
- Francis – Higher bar for military ISDs, but not sure what the appropriate method for grievances would be, maybe can look to legal to help draft; since SBOE has authority, there has to be clear delineation over what grievances we preside over; difficult & I have challenges in SBOE 2
- Staff – New subsection D incorporates changes from HB 4210 from the 88th
- Francis – Does this draft incorporate things we’ve been hearing today?
- Staff – No, the draft is from November & only incorporates rules derived from HB 4210
- Hickman and Staff discuss SBOE authority to define “commanding officer”
- Pickren – Still okay if people aren’t technically living on base under rule text?
- Staff – Yes, only thing this rule changes is that trustee can continue to serve if they retire
- Francis – Since we had two witnesses testify to possible changes, if we pass this without incorporating changes I’m afraid it wouldn’t allow those issues to be heard
- Hickman – This is first reading, so we have another bite at the apple in the future
- Childs moves to approve rule proposal as presented for first reading and filing authorization
- Hickman – Have a couple options, can adopt this, add language suggested by testifiers, etc.; then next meeting the only amendments permitted would be germane to what was passed on first reading
- Hickman – Could also table until next meeting
- Pickren – Would like to make motion to table
- Pickren moves to table until next meeting
- Hickman – So if we table item comes back up at next meeting
- Motion to table passes (3-1), will be brought back at the next meeting exactly as it is today
Item 9. Discussion of Ongoing State Board for Educator Certification Activities
- Standard update on SBEC activities
- In December, elected officer, approved 6 EPPs that completed reqs under standard process
- Discussed Chapter 228 complete repeal and replacement, initial focus was geared towards increasing readability, adding structure, etc. and adding pieces of effective prep framework and teacher residency prep route
- Expanded to include increasing supports to pre-service and early service teacher candidates
- In February this item will move to adoption & retain supports plus increased flexibility for EPPs
- Also discussed Chapter 233, adding 5 new certs and new bilingual supplemental exam; streamlining process to become an elementary educator
- In Chapter 230, have proposal for new exams aligned to new certs proposals
- Chapter 231 was mostly technical edits, added certificates & also special ed requirements
- Chapter 239 implements SB 798 to remove teaching requirements for candidates pursuing cert in school counseling
- Hickman – I had a call from a candidate, is Chapter 233 required for every elementary teacher?
- Staff – Yes, statutory, every EC-6 teacher
- Hickman – Did you talk through EdTPA, TXTPA? Where is that?
- Staff – Doing work in Chapter 230 to support those working on EdTPA, adding flexibility for workbooks or portfolios, but not moving towards requirement at this time
- Bell-Metereau – Req for teacher cert has been removed for counselors?
- Staff – No, removing req that they be a classroom teacher for 3 years
- Bell-Metereau – What are the requirements for doing school counseling?
- Staff – Does require masters degree in school counseling and completion of EPP school counseling cert path, line requiring classroom teaching has been struck
- Francis – I think we approved a chapter with teacher assignments; why wouldn’t you use this instead of new exams under Chapter 233 triggering Chapter 230?
- Staff – 233 work is intended to streamline path for elementary educators pursing focus in special ed, bilingual, etc.
- It’s bundling those exams so they can take fewer; then need that rule to be parallel with rules for certification exams & certs they can achieve
- Try to keep all chapters in line with each other, do conforming rulemaking for this
- Francis – Wondering if it would be appropriate to specify that certain teachers can also teach this bundle?
- Staff – Believe we had to provide guidance on what certs were related to courses approved by SBOE
- Step 1 on 233 does try to bundle and eliminate number of exams someone needs to get a cert
- When we bring 231, still will be looking thoughtfully about how certain qualifications will also qualify you to teach other cert areas; will be brought to SBOE in the future
- Francis – EPP 5 year approval review, when does that happen?
- Staff – EPPs have two forms of accountability, annual ASEP & 5 year continuing review process for all EPPs
- Send out team or do desk review and look at program from top to bottom
- Have information here on a subset of EPPs who completed 5 year review last year
- Francis – So different EPPs are on a different cycle?
- Staff – Correct
- Pickren – Teacher staffing agencies are becoming popular in TX, how do SBEC rules apply?
- Staff – Not an area in SBEC rules, generally seeing staffing agencies serving as a matchmaker between EPPs and ISDs
- If they are hiring certified educators all rules & regs apply
- Pickren – Is there an option to not hire certified educators?
- Staff – Yes, anything related to certified educators falls under SBEC
- Pickren – On HB 900, any discussion in cert rules that informs a teacher about reqs or reqs teachers to not have certain materials in libraries?
- Staff – Not aware of anything specific in SBEC rule
- Pickren – State law requires civics training program for teachers? SBEC doing anything on this
- Staff – Not aware of any action before SBEC for this
- Childs – Principal certification?
- Staff – Graduate degree, masters degree, principal prep program, cert exams, etc.
- Chapter 232 covers cert renewal and CPE requirements
- Includes small technical edit to support process for individuals who were not able to complete CPE due to hardship & support ISDs in getting retired educators back into classrooms through hardship process
- Also implements HB 2929 removes limit on professional development hours in certain areas
- Notes classroom teachers need 150 hours of CPE every 5 years, school counselors need 200 hours every 5 years
- Hickman – Teachers have 150 years every 5 years, others have 200 every 5 years; had a neighbor caught up in this who needed all 150 hours before she returned to the classroom, is SBEC looking at this?
- Staff – Would love an opportunity to talk with the individual
- ISDs do have the ability to apply for exemptions on behalf of the educator so long as educator is making progress to complete hours
- Hickman – I think the concern was having to do all 150 hours before going back, or can you do a subset
- Staff – To renew you need all 150 hours, but hardship piece would allow for teachers to get back into classroom while they continue to gain hours
- Francis – Teachers currently have a cap on CPEs they can have?
- Staff – Yes, 87th session passed a bill that led to rules making a cap, 37.5 hours in certain subject combinations every 5 years
- Now removing the cap pursuant to HB 2929 as this was never the intention
- Some topics where it is expected every teacher will get training in; there was never supposed to be a cap in place
- Goal of the bill was flexibility, not a cap
- Francis – I know one of the challenges for educators is the number of hours and time to do it; rules modifications help educators
- Pickren – Rules say counselors also have a duty for counseling GT students, is there a reason why it is in code but not SBEC reqs?
- Staff – Not sure, can look at history of rulemaking and provide update
- Francis – Would this approval preclude inclusion?
- Staff – We can go back and look at reasons and if we need to do additional rulemaking we can
- Francis moves to recommend SBOE take no action, passes
- Look at SBEC action on Chapter 234, military-related
- SB 422 had a deadline for all agencies involved with licensure to adopt rules not later than Dec 2023; trying to bring all legislation together at one time while the chapter is open
- Rule changes are specific to military-implementation legislation only; it is staff intent to immediately go into 4 year rule review for Chapter 234 rules in April to allow military members to provide additional public comment
- HB 621 required SBEC to rule make to create 3-year temp cert limited to CT education only which can only be issued to eligible military veterans or certain first responders; rules changes align with
- SB 544 required creation of 1-year temp cert for educators at the Community College of the Air Force
- Hickman – Was the 3-year a CTE only? If you don’t meet these reqs you can get a 1-year intern without this change? If we don’t do this what would these people be doing?
- Staff – If we don’t do this, there are provision through other routes, e.g. teaching permits, DOI, etc.; other provisions are in place to support military servicemembers to go through traditional certification
- Cert is an opportunity for people to immediately move into the classroom
- Hickman – What is Community College of the Air Force?
- Staff – Don’t have a lot of info on this, driven by SB 544 & this program has been implemented in other states
- Bill was written specific to these instructors & intent was to make sure they had credentials and had gone through specific training
- Goal is to make sure we are vetting those credentials
- Hickman – I assume there are branches of the College in Texas, I’m assuming they could collocate and also teach in high school; asks for info to brought back
- Hickman – Are there changes for spouses?
- Staff – Spouses were already in a lot of the provisions; military spouses already have ability to transfer from another state & can work in TX with cert from another state
- Francis – In 234.6, we give protections to military spouses, at the end if they are no longer a military spouse it doesn’t matter?
- Staff – If a military spouse goes through the process for the exemption/designation, goal was to give them the coverage if they part ways if they are already working, etc.
- There is a requirement for spouses to renew, if they are no longer a spouse then benefits can expire
- Francis – Can a military spouse who receives a 3-year, but then separates, renew afterwards?
- Staff – Allows them to move forward in the process
- Hickman – So if they are year 1, they can continue 2 and 3 and pursue a normal certification
- Staff – Yes
- Franics – Temp 3-year can only be obtained once?
- Staff – Yes
- Pickren – In SBOE 7 there is a high school with a Space Force program, will they be allowed to have a cert for the Community College of the Air Force
- Hickman – Not sure if that is relevant to the rules section
- Pickren – Speaking to the Community College of the Air Force
- Staff – Instructors would qualify under provisions if they are instructors at Community College of the Air Force
- Hickman – If there is a brick and mortar
- Pickren – I think there is an online component as well
- Staff – Online or brick & mortar is not identified in rule
- Francis moves to recommend SBOE take no action, passes
Item 4. Approval of Revisions to Required School Safety Training for School District Trustees
- Staff – After consulting with the School Safety Center, recommend you allow them to send the info to you; table the item and can be brought back
- Francis moves to table, passes
- Hickman – Will see you back in April, and members can reach out with any comments
Item 2. Open-Enrollment Charter School Generation 29 Application Updates
- Reopened for questions from Bell-Metereau
- Bell-Metereau – As part of the application process, affected ISDs can submit impact statements to TEA, how does TEA consider these statements? Is opening next to an A or B rated school considered?
- Staff – One of the factors considered by the Commissioner prior to recommendation
- Bell-Metereau – Does TEA consider impact of revenue loss to the ISD, esp. with fixed costs
- Staff – Agency and Commissioner a variety of factors, including ability of applicant to meet criteria
- Bell-Metereau – But specifically revenue loss to the ISD?
- Staff – TEA consider all information submitted and discusses with Commissioner
- Bell-Metereau – But not if it isn’t brought up?
- Staff – Not part of criteria; ultimately decisions is with the Commissioner for recommendation
- Bell-Metereau – Does TEA consider recapture?
- Staff – Look at criteria and any statement in the impact statement
- Bell-Metereau – Would it be possible for TEA to send impact statements to SBOE?
- Staff – Believe it is included in the folders that are submitted to TEA
- Hickman – Is the impact statement what I’ve been receiving in certified mail?
- Staff – Those are notifications
- Hickman – Spoken about wasting paper and funds; possible to send these by email?
- Staff – Working on that as well
- Bell-Metereau – Timeline for interviews, May 7th to 17th?
- Staff – Still the expected date, will know more specifically on April 15th the number of charters moving forward