The Texas Commission on Virtual Education met for their first meeting on February 23 and heard from Commissioner Mike Morath as he clarified online learning terms, educated the committee about the existing virtual learning programs, and reported on virtual learning performance during the 2020-2021 pandemic school year. Commission also heard from Operation Connectivity about student access to internet and broadband and how it poses challenges to virtual learning. A link to the hearing can be found here.

 

This report is intended to give you an overview and highlight of the discussions on 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 and the desire to get details out as quickly as possible with few errors or omissions.

 

Item 2: Chair’s Opening Remarks

  • Gore – Commission established last legislative session to fulfill goals written in HB 3643; author of bill, Ken King, is on board
  • Introduces four key ideas to frame approach to virtual education
  • Quality virtual education encompasses a spectrum of models such as hybrid, asynchronous and virtual learning
  • Pandemic lead to emergency response virtual education not quality virtual education which put pressure on staff; owe it to students and staff to establish quality remote learning
  • Can improve virtual education by looking at success methods from other states
  • Strong stance on in-classroom teaching and learning; commission will help districts accommodate the 5-10% of students who work best virtually
  • Potential to expand specialty and advanced education opportunities for rural students; hybrid schedule will promote career advancements for technical career paths
  • Potential for districts to re-coop enrollment and gain outside talent; teachers can teach from home and increase time flexibility

 

Commission Introductions

  • Josue Tamarez – 11th year teacher for Dallas ISD and only teacher on the commission; looking forward to the results of commission
  • Ken King – Author of the first virtual equal education bill, author of HB 3643; excited to give legislation best practices proposal by next session
  • Bernie Francis – Board of Regents Chair for Texas State, business reform education advocate, served for Bush and Perry on several commissions; wants to find a way to share talents of effective teachers with low-income students
  • Danny Lovett – 19 years as a science teacher and coach, 5 years as administrator and superintendent, past five years spent as Executive Director Region 5; lives near Texas coast where education is disrupted by natural disaster and thinks improvement in virtual education will also help bridge this gap
  • Paul Bettencourt – Senator for District 7; virtual education is our reality and looking to improve the process
  • Royce West – Senator for District 23; pandemic widened gaps that already existed in education and agrees with chair that looking at infrastructure and other state’s success is for the commission’s benefit
  • Hannah Smith – Attorney, studied public policy at Princeton, Carroll ISD Trustee, and certified social studies teacher
  • Pam Little – Vice Chair of SBOE, 20 years in education publishing; sees huge potential for virtual leaning in rural areas and wanting to explore bettering training for virtual teachers
  • Matt Shaheen – Representative for District 66 with a background in technology; looking forward to building commission recommendations in the legislature
  • Eddie Morales – Representative for District 74, attorney, and small business owner; two daughters that are teachers and looking forward to bettering teacher preparedness and training
  • Anette Tielle – Teacher for 14 years, 16 years in administration, and current Superintended; Pandemic showed connectivity and accessibility issues for low-income students, and looking to improve virtual learning
  • Larry Taylor – Senator for District 11; sees benefit in diversity of experience on commission and thinks virtual learning will help give access to a great education for all students
  • Intent for all commission meetings to start at 10 and last around 3-5 hours; most meetings will include only invited testimony with one day of public comment

 

Item 4: State of Virtual Education in Texas; Mike Morath, Commissioner of Education, TEA

  • Morath – Virtual Program is a group of students experiencing virtual in a broader program; not an entire dedicated school
  • Hybrid learning is some combination of virtual learning and in-person learning
  • Blending learning is an approach using technology and instruction; these techniques are applicable in a virtual learning scenario, but it is different from hybrid
  • Concurrent learning is live instruction either online or in-person; split scheduling provides instruction virtually and in-person but in sperate class periods where the teacher provides both forms of instruction
  • Split staffing is like split scheduling except the teacher is either fully remote or fully virtual
  • Concurrent synchronous Instruction is live learning with an instructor; asynchronous learning includes a lot of independent study that is partnered with synchronous discussion
  • In 2001 SB 975 authorized a pilot program that provided electronic courses to students; in 2007, SB 1788 established Texas Virtual School Network (TXVSN)
  • In 2013 HB 1926 established “moratorium” on future TXVSN full-time schools
  • 2020 remote learning emergency framework was established followed but SB 15 in 2021 that provided ADA for remote learning; This commission launched in 2022
  • LEA Remote Learning Options and Funding
    • Remote learning as a short-term option for students with a medical need to stay home; fully covered under ADA funding
    • SB 15 Local Remote Learning Program applies to full-time virtual or hybrid instruction; fully covered under ADA funding
    • TXVSN Catalogue Courses are individual courses provided but approved catalogue course providers and are fully covered under ADA funding; typically used for rural students with no access to specialty teachers
    • Other remote courses or programs are ad hoc programs that provide course credit for remote learning; fully covered under ADA funding
    • Non-SB 15 full-time remote or hybrid learning options are eligible for certain FSP allotment funds but not full ADA funding
  • Remote conferencing is another option for remote learning; agencies way of defining attendance for students who might be out of school for a bust of time
  • Remote conferencing must meet two requirements; student is unable to attend because of temporary medical condition and the total amount of remote conferencing does not exceed more than 20 instructional days over the entirety of the school year
  • Remote conferencing also must meet one of these listed requirements; students’ medical condition is documented by a physician, the student tests positive, or the student has been in close contact with COVID-19
  • Remote conferencing can be difficult for smaller schools because it requires a separate instructor; unless they enter a subcontracting partnership with other school districts
  • Pre-technology sick children would be sent home with homework packets which was never funded; questions how and if the state should fund remote conferencing moving forward
  • Taylor – Typically when a child is home sick, they should not be doing school
    • Morath – That is correct; could also work for a child who is traveling
  • King – Could kids be allowed to remote learn during sports or stock show season and not be counted absent?
    • Morath – We can get you a list of all the requirements to review; some of those events are excused
  • SB 15 allows school systems in Texas to set up a remote learning program; not required
  • SB 15 can be asynchronous or synchronous, allowed for K-12, and allows for hybrid and school partnership; school district level has to have a C grade or higher, complete in a STARR-assessed grade, and no concurrent instruction
  • No concurrent instruction because there could only be one student on zoom which would draw attention away from a classroom full of children
  • Performance reports will be done on all remote learning students; does not directly affect performance but just for transparency purposes
  • Only receive funding if the student has performed well or not at all remotely
  • No data to report how well SB 15 is going but should have data soon
  • Gore – I understand motivation behind 10% cap, but it does not make sense for smaller schools
    • Morath – The smaller the school the less likely people are doing remote; also filed a waiver to regulate this
  • Taylor – There was lots of education that virtual learning is forced; just wanted to report that a lot of children were unsuccessful, so we want to make sure that no one is forced into online learning
  • West – SB 5 was in place to test how well this would work
    • The question is how to create a policy that support all the differing LEAs
  • West – I think we need to review what other states are doing and learn what to do or not to do
  • Francis – There are so many options; has there been conversation about streamlining the process
    • Morath – Yes; each process has a statutory difference, but it could be bundled down if that is what the commission wanted
  • Morath – Pandemic virtual instruction was pushed on schools overnight; VSN is chosen and has a different funding process
  • In 2020-2021 42% of students statewide were majority remote and 58% were majority in person during pandemic virtual instruction; this varied widely, for example, near the Rio Grande valley was almost entirely remote
  • King – Did rural superintendents want kids back in classes or did they not have the tech resources to support them
    • By November, all school leaders wanted their kids back in schools
  • Reasons for virtual learning are family, parental schedule, and time; a variety of reasons
  • West – Is their data for reasons for remote learning?
    • Morath – This is hypothetical; a few organizations did surveys, but we did not conduct one
  • STARR scores in reading dropped 4% from 2019-2021 and dropped 15% in math; negative impact of COVID-19 erased years of improvement in reading and math
  • 2020-2021 worst academic year in Texas history and maybe in the country
  • There was little change in reading scores for children attending in-person during 202-2021 and a 3% decrease in math scores; remote learners showed historic declines in mathematic proficiency and severe drops in reading scores
  • Individual test scores were also measured from 2019 versus 2020; students failed to gain a year’s worth of academics
  • What I am sharing is the results of instruction during the pandemic; this is not saying all virtual instruction is a failure because even people who did attend school in-person still suffered academically
  • Gifted and Talented students also failed to improve as we are used to
  • Math suffered worse than reading because literacy and language are practiced daily through normal interactions; math does not have the same response
  • Tamarez – Kids need a lot of hands on activity to learn mathematics; that component was missing during the pandemic
  • Morath – Low income students who were virtual were at a greater risk to decline; the degree to which the family can provide support at home matters in a student’s academic performance
  • West – In future presentations I would like it broken down by race as well
  • Frisco was a very successful school district with virtual learning, and they listed a few things they deemed essential for this success; students need access to technology and Wi-Fi at home, learning management systems have to foster good communication with students and parents and classes should be tailored to online format
  • Staffing patterns matter and the effort of a school to view parents as a children’s first teachers matters
  • 7 VSN schools in Texas; the data you will see is just from the full time virtual schools
  • VSN schools are funded on an “all or nothing” basis; if the student advances to the next grade level the school receives full funding
  • VSN schools still do not show the same improvements and academic growth that in-person schools do
  • Francis – Is there any thought given to how to remediate the slip in math?
    • HB 1525 funded $2 billion in resources to aid this issue and HB4545 gave right to free tutoring for the year if students are behind
  • Important to note that VPN’s academic performance varies greatly by school; IUniversity Prep highly outperformed in-person schools
  • West – I would be interested in hearing from these VSN schools who have performed highly that are also racially diverse
  • Morath – Some schools provide continuous enrollment and others have a set enrollment; reviewing these procedural differences can help shape future programs
  • Top four VSN schools in the state only allowed enrollment in the fall, the next four had one enrollment in fall and one in spring, and the lowest performing schools allowed for enrollment at any point in the school year
  • Lovett – State has used remote Spanish instructors successfully; other areas of curriculum not been successful with using remote learning
  • The pandemic brought lack of success to a head and forced educators to fix weaknesses with remote learning; remote learning allows student to get the core instruction they need effectively and efficiently
  • Morath – For remote learning to be successful, TEA must set standards for how it is to be presented and what requirements that are needed for it to be a viable alternative option as we move out of the pandemic
  • The number of kids who have become college ready from the asynchronous college bridge courses speaks for itself and show it works
  • Gore – Spanish learning may be teaching kids from their homes, but she could be teaching students from across the state
  • we could leverage this for districts who have less availability

 

 

Item 5: Operation Connectivity; Gabby Rowe, Director of Strategic Projects, TEA

  • Rowe – 19,000 households signed up for state internet program; goal is to increase web capabilities for Texas families and provide better opportunities for online learning
  • Program looks to provide fiber connections to qualifying homes, with Wi-Fi routers and internet services coming too little to no cost for the family
  • Currently, there are close to two million low income students within the state of Texas
  • West – What is your professionally opinion on the access these families have to Federal internet programs compared to our state’s internet program?
    • Rowe – It is my opinion and that we should do our best to maximize our plan and the federal governments, so we reach as many families as possible
    • Using both plans to their fullest allows not only Texans every opportunity to receive high speed internet, but also incentivize private communications companies to further invest in the internet infrastructure of the state
  • Gore – While these programs have the funding necessary to operate, why have these programs have not been successful in getting people to sign up for either one these programs?
    • Rowe – it is a combination of a few things; lack of knowledge of the existence of these programs has been a major hurdle for our efforts and the federal government’s
  • We have had issues convincing communications companies work with us in our efforts, be it expanding their network or discounting their services for in need families
  • Families are trying to assist just simply do not understand the need for fiberoptic cable in their homes and how that it will improve their situation
  • Ware not able to assist families that are not tied to one location; cannot get fiber cable because they are not in the same home long enough to receive it
  • Currently working to find a way to get Wi-Fi hotspots to these families
  • West – Do we have a breakdown of where these low-income children are currently living; percentage of rural versus urban students?
    • Rowe – There is data available to determine an approximation of the percentages for both categories, they may not be accurate, due to inconsistent reporting from school districts and surveys filled out by needy families
  • In the past legislature, the state congress passed measures to create the broadband office that gives us data to fill the gaps in the internet grids across the state
  • The broadband office gives us the data necessary to separate out the public and private networks, so as to better determine how to use the existing networks to weave the two together to naturally bridge the gaps without creating net new grids to fulfill the same task
  • King- How is the older copper cables that run throughout of Texas effecting internet services in rural areas compared to next gen fiberoptic cable?
    • Rowe – A lot, the copper cable grid was made for the sole purpose to transmit voice, not gigs of data
    • The copper cable cannot handle the amount of information that comes with high-speed internet and high-speed computers
    • Currently working with the broadband office to update these areas that have copper cable to fiber cables, incentivizing private companies to extend off of the updated grids
  • King – When will most of Texas be able to have access to 5G broadband?
    • Rowe – There are some major hurdles to be jumped over to get to a point where a real number of years can be determined
  • Rowe – First, we must bolster the broadband office with staff that is knowledge in not only the current fiber tech out there but where the technology is going in the future
  • For the state to completely wired to receive 5G internet, it will take massive amount of funding to be able accomplish that, an amount that the state cannot shoulder by itself
  • It will take an infusion of money by the federal government and private interests to make such a feat possible
  • Installation of fiber optic cable requires a lot of digging, something that is hard to do in the mountains and the forests of Texas; in addition to the natural elements of Texas, there are historical buildings that will need to be gone around, in some cases preventing whole sections of towns being off limits for excavation