Author Archives: Kate Kuhlmann

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: March 9, 2018

Here is this week’s wrap-up of education news from ATPE:

Tuesday was primary Election Day in Texas, and there is a lot to unpack. ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter has an inital analysis of the primary results here, and he highlights two major takeaways after Tuesday night: voter turnout increased and incumbents did well.

Voter turnout hit record highs in both parties. Like Exter points out in his post, a Texas Educators Vote Coalition statement praising  voter turnout in the primary election also notes that turnout increased across Texas by almost 700,000 voters compared to the most recent midterm primary election in 2014. The number of Democratic voters getting to the polls exceeded 1 million, while Republican voter totals topped off at more than 1.5 million. Both parties saw an increase in their voter turnout, with Democrats nearly doubling the total number of voters since 2014 (a number that represented a midterm primary record high for the party not hit since 1994). Republicans experienced a more modest increase in the largely red state, but the party’s turnout still represented record numbers.

As a proud member of the Texas Educators Vote Coalition, ATPE is thrilled to see the uptick in civic engagement and encourages educators and other voters to maintain that energy through November and future elections. ATPE was also excited to see a large percentage of ATPE-supported candidates prevail in their elections; Exter’s recap of the election has more on those results. While many are focused on the bigger races at the top of the ticket, it is important to consider all of the great candidates elected further down ballot. One thing is clear based on voter turnout, the energy built among educators, and the impact already felt: this movement is only beginning!


The Texas Education Agency (TEA) submitted Texas’s final state plan to satisfy the new federal education law, the Every Child Succeeds Act (ESSA), this week. The final plan has been in the making for quite some time. Here is a quick recap:

The final plan submitted this week reflects a number of revisions required by ED in their initial feedback. TEA’s press release announcing this week’s submission can be read here. To read the final plan or learn more about the Texas ESSA plan and related content, visit TEA’s ESSA web page. The plan must now receive a final review by Secretary Betsy DeVos, but she is not tied to a certain time period for revisions. On Monday, DeVos addressed members of the Council of Chief State School Officers at their annual conference, offering them “tough love” over what she considered state ESSA plans that lacked creativity and innovation.


ATPE submitted comments this week on new proposed Commissioner’s rules regarding certain out-of-state educators. These rules would exempt educators that are certified out of state and who meet certain qualifications from Texas required certification assessments as they work to obtain certification in Texas. The rule proposal stemmed from legislation passed last session. ATPE encouraged the commissioner to raise the standard from one to at least two years of experience in order for an out-of-state educator to benefit from the exemption. ATPE Lobbyist Kate Kuhlmann writes more about ATPE’s comments, the proposed rules, and context for the legislation here.


The Texas Commission on Public School Finance met again in Austin this week, this time to discuss “efficiency” at the classroom, campus, and district levels. A panel of invited witnesses was dedicated to each category. The classroom efficiency panel focused on blended learning, while the campus efficiency panel featured partnerships with charters and higher education. The district efficiency panel largely entailed discussions regarding charter schools. ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins attended the meeting and has a full report here.



ATPE weighs in on proposed rules addressing out-of-state educators

ATPE submitted comments this week on new proposed commissioner’s rules regarding exempting certain out-of-state educators looking to teach in Texas from state certification assessments. Our comments acknowledge that “certain exceptions to certification testing may have a place in helping to get high-quality, experienced teachers in Texas classrooms,” but stress that “the focus must remain on high standards that help ensure we are limiting exceptions to only those educators with a proven track record of success in educating students.”

The new proposed rules stem from legislation passed during the 85th Legislative Session that gave the commissioner of education the ability to create this specific certification flexibility. In lieu of the current process overseen by the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC), which currently compares other state certification requirements to Texas’s standards before exempting out-of-state educators from certification assessments, the new proposed commissioner’s rules would instead outline a number of requirements an out-of-state educator must prove in order to receive the exemption. The requirements primarily entail obtaining certification in another state or country, but also include a one year experience requirement for all classroom teacher candidates.

ATPE argued in its comments that the experience requirement should be raised to at least two years of teaching experience. This is because the proposed rules don’t only exempt these out-of-state educators from certification assessments, they also exempt them from preparation and certification standards Texas policymakers and stakeholders have deemed necessary. For instance, some preparation standards these educators would be exempted from include the minimum GPA requirement placed on candidates entering a certification program; the number of curriculum hours educators in training must complete; the amount of clinical training a candidate must possess before obtaining full certification; the amount of time new teachers must spend working with mentors and coaches to develop their craft; and training specific to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), the Texas educator standards, and the Texas Educator Code of Ethics.

“If we are going to exempt certain educators prepared out of state from these standards of preparation and certification, we should at a minimum be ensuring they bring valuable experience to Texas classrooms,” ATPE argued in its comments.

For more regarding ATPE’s position on the proposed rules, read ATPE’s full comments here. Commissioner Morath will now consider the public comments submitted before issuing the final rule.

Recap of today’s SBEC meeting

The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) met today for its first meeting of 2018. ATPE engaged the board on several agenda items.

Among the items requiring action at today’s meeting, ATPE expressed support for the adoption of changes to the board’s continuing professional education (CPE) rules. Those changes originated from laws passed during the 85th Legislative Session that dealt with CPE for understanding appropriate relationships with students, digital learning, and educating students affected by grief and trauma. ATPE shared with the board that it worked actively with the legislators who wrote and passed SB7 (the educator misconduct bill that stemmed from media reports focused on an issue termed “passing the trash”) to encourage the inclusion of preventative measures in addition to appropriate sanctioning. While ATPE knows that educators engaging in this misconduct make up an extremely small percentage of the overall educator population, we recognize that one incident is too many. We support the SBEC’s and the legislature’s efforts to address these issues, not only with sanctioning on the back end, but also through ensuring educators receive ongoing education in an effort to prevent this from happening in the first place.

Other items adopted by the board today included new language involving educator preparation admission requirements, testing security and confidentiality for certification assessments, and standards specific to the new Early Childhood through Grade 3 Certificate. The board also reelected Haskell teacher Jill Druesedow as chair, made Harlingen Superintendent Dr. Art Cavazos the vice-chair, and voted to make citizen member Leon Leal the secretary. The remaining items on the agenda were dedicated to discussion only.

One of today’s discussion items dealt with several proposed Educator Code of Ethics (COE) revisions requested by Texas Education Agency (TEA) staff. Several members of the board and other educator stakeholders joined ATPE in expressing concerns over pieces of the item, particularly the broad nature of one piece regarding written directives from administrators. SBEC directed staff to continue working on the language proposed at today’s meeting, and TEA staff expressed intention to hold a stakeholder meeting before the next SBEC meeting. ATPE will continue to work collaboratively with TEA and SBEC to find a more appropriate approach.

Finally, ATPE weighed in on a discussion item that dealt with educator preparation program (EPP) requirements. We offered support for a piece that defines long-term substitute experience as a 30 consecutive day assignment, encouraged the board to increase the minimum number of hours required for an abbreviated Trade and Industrial Workforce Training certificate program, and supported the addition of an EPP curriculum requirement specific to training on appropriate boundaries, relationships, and communications between educators and students. To learn more about the long-term substitute experience definition and how it plays into educator preparation, read our post covering the last meeting where ATPE member Stephanie Stoebe called for raised standards.

ATPE asks Congress to support teacher training, retention programs

The Higher Education Act (HEA), the federal law outlining higher education policies, was last renewed 10 years ago. As the U.S. Congress works to rewrite the law, ATPE is working with key members to weigh in on Title II of the HEA, where several federal programs pertaining to educator recruitment, training, and retention are housed.

Last week, ATPE submitted comments to the U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) as education leaders in that chamber develop their bill to reauthorize the HEA. On the other side of the Capitol, the U.S. House Committee on Education and the Workforce has already advanced its version of the bill: HR4508, the Promoting Real Opportunity, Success, and Prosperity through Education Reform (PROSPER) Act. That bill still awaits a vote by the full U.S. House, but without change, it would omit Title II of the HEA altogether. ATPE expressed concern over that move this week in a letter to Texas members of the U.S. House and asked them to support the inclusion of Title II as the bill advances.

Carl Garner

“Initiatives like the Teacher Quality Enhancement program, TEACH grants, and loan forgiveness programs specific to educators are important HEA Title II programs that help attract strongly qualified candidates into the profession, prepare our educators in programs that are held to high standards of training, and retain our well-qualified and experienced teachers in the classrooms with students who need them most,” ATPE State President Carl Garner wrote to the Texas delegation.

As we state in our letter, educator training and preparation is a primary advocacy focus for ATPE, because we recognize that we cannot place ill-prepared educators in the 21st century classroom and expect them to achieve excellence. We base this on our strong, evidence-backed belief that quality training and support prior to full certification for all educators supports improved student learning and better rates of educator retention.

“Research consistently shows that access to a high-quality teacher is the most important in-school factor leading to a student’s success,” Garner wrote to the Texas congressional delegation. “Programs like these are a vital piece of the overall landscape that supports student success in the classroom, and the federal government should maintain its valuable role, especially when challenges continue with regard to recruiting and retaining classroom educators.”

ATPE asked members of Texas’s U.S. House delegation to support future and current Texas teachers and students and their peers throughout the country by backing amendments to reinstate HEA Title II under the PROSPER Act. The bill is not currently set to be heard by the full U.S. House. On the other side of the Capitol, the U.S. Senate is expected to release its version of the bill soon. ATPE state officers will make their annual visit to Washington, D.C. in June, where this bill is likely to be among the topics of discussion on our agenda.

Why March 6 Matters: Payroll Deduction

Early voting is underway NOW for the March 6 Texas primary elections, so we’re taking a look at some of the reasons why it’s so important that educators vote in this election! Today, we’re taking a closer look at payroll deduction.

Politicians like Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick and state Sen. Joan Huffman (R-Houston) have led the effort for two sessions now to make it more difficult for educators to join professional associations such as ATPE by attempting to ban educators from voluntarily deducting membership dues from their paychecks. Gov. Greg Abbott added his support ahead of last year’s special session when he followed Patrick’s lead in deeming the issue a “priority.”

Proponents have marketed payroll deduction bills as an effort to keep the government from collecting “union dues” with taxpayer resources. The truth is that it isn’t about unions or taxpayer resources at all; it’s about educators.

Consider this: The major bills on this topic have explicitly singled out educators, regardless of union status — but exempted major unions representing other public employees. These bills would actually have a greater impact on NON-union professional associations such as ATPE, and they specifically protect other public employee professionals who are members of unions that collectively bargain. Collective bargaining is illegal for school employees, and no one in Texas is forced to join a union or pay union dues thanks to our right-to-work laws.That’s why the legislative efforts to make it harder for educators to spend their own money to voluntarily join a professional association are so misguided here in Texas.

Further evidence of the politically motivated nature of these bills is the fact that payroll deduction of professional dues does not cost the state or taxpayers anything. That’s a fact that authors of the bills were finally forced to concede during the 2017 legislative sessions but other politicians have continued to ignore. Payroll offices exist regardless of whether association membership dues is among the long list of optional deductions available to public employees. Those other deductions include things like taxes, insurance, newspapers, health clubs, and charitable donations. Furthermore, a school district can even charge associations a fee if it determines there is any additional cost associated with deducting dues for the group’s members. (See Texas Education Code, Section 22.001.)

During debate on the issue last year, bill author Sen. Joan Huffman said she was comfortable exempting certain public employees deemed “first responders” because they “serve the community… with great honor and distinction.” Educators — just like firefighters, police officers, and EMS professionals — are public servants and everyday heroes. In the wake of last week’s tragic news stories of the horrific violence that took place at a Florida high school, it is hard to imagine educators, many of whom took bullets or sheltered their students to protect them from the gunfire, would be considered anything other than first responders who serve their communities with great honor and distinction.

The real goal behind discriminatory payroll deduction bills like these is to weaken the combined influence of educators (as well as public education supporters as a whole) at the Texas Capitol by attacking their ability to conveniently and safely support professional associations that fight to ensure teachers have a seat at the table when it comes to setting public education policy at the state level.

There are elected officials and candidates who respect your profession, and there are those who don’t — and who are already attempting to weaken your voice. Bills like these aimed at silencing educators at the Capitol will certainly be filed again in 2019. If Texans don’t turn out in force during the 2018 elections and select more officeholders who value educators and respect their service, those bills will become law and more of the doors of government will be closed to educators.

Go to the CANDIDATES section of our Teach the Vote website to find out where officeholders and candidates in your area stand on payroll deduction and other public education issues. Because voting districts in Texas are politically gerrymandered, most elections are decided in the party primary instead of the November general election. That’s why it is so important to vote in the primary election. Registered voters can cast their ballot in either the Republican or Democratic primary, regardless of how you voted last time.

Remind your colleagues also about the importance of voting in the primary and making informed choices at the polls. Keep in mind that it is illegal to use school district resources to communicate information that supports or opposes specific candidates or ballot measures, but there is no prohibition on sharing nonpartisan resources and general “get out of the vote” reminders about the election.

Early voting in the 2018 primaries runs Tuesday, Feb. 20, through Friday, March 2. Election day is March 6, but there’s no reason to wait. Get out there and use your educator voice by casting your vote TODAY!

U.S. Senate education committee seeks input

The U.S. Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP), the committee that oversees federal policy pertaining to prekindergarten through post-secondary education, is seeking input from stakeholders as it works to rewrite the Higher Education Act (HEA). Included within the HEA are programs aimed at recruiting, preparing, and retaining high quality teachers in classrooms throughout the country, but the U.S. House of Representatives has made initial moves to eliminate those programs.

The HEA contains several key programs pertinent to educators: the Teacher Quality Enhancement program, which supports strengthening educator preparation programs that work to fill high-needs schools and fields; TEACH grants, which invest in students training to be teachers; and various loan forgiveness programs specific to educators.

While the U.S. Senate HELP Committee works to develop its version of a bill to rewrite the law, on the other side of the Capitol the U.S. House of Representatives is waiting to debate its own. The House proposal, which has already advanced out of that chamber’s education committee, would eliminate Title II of the HEA, where these programs focused on educator preparation and retention are housed.

Stakeholders like ATPE are concerned that the elimination of such programs would set back efforts to attract and retain strong educators in the profession. Check back next week for more on ATPE’s submitted comments to the committee and other key legislators. For those interested in submitting their own comments and suggestions, do so by emailing the U.S. Senate HELP Committee at The deadline to submit comments is Friday, February 23.

Trump releases education budget proposal

President Trump released his 2019 federal budget proposal this week, a proposal that presidents issue annually for consideration by lawmakers on Capitol Hill as they work to hash out a budget for the country. Much like last year’s budget request, Trump’s 2019 budget proposal requests a big chunk of funding for public and private school choice, maintains funding levels for Title I and special education, and seeks large cuts to hand-chosen K-12 programs within the Department of Education (ED).

Trump’s new budget proposal entails a $7.1 billion cut to funding for ED, which represents a 10.5% decrease. Of the overall requested cut, $4.4 billion comes from complete elimination of 17 programs deemed by the administration to be “duplicative, ineffective, or more appropriately supported through State, local, or private funds.” A $2 billion program aimed at recruiting, supporting, and training educators primarily in high-needs schools is once again on the chopping block. Other programs cut under his latest budget proposal include a $12 million program for gifted and talented education and a more than $1 billion program for before-school, after-school, and summer enrichment programs.

Expanding public and private school choice is once again a signature piece of Trump’s plan, totaling $1.1 billion. The proposal notes that the billion dollars requested is intended to be “a down payment toward achieving the President’s goal of an annual Federal investment of $20 billion—for a total of an estimated $100 billion when including matching State and local funds—in school choice funding.” Of that billion, $500 million would go toward a grant program for expanding existing state voucher programs and establishing new voucher programs, among other potential options. Another $500 million would go toward charter school expansion, which saw an increase in funding from Congress following Trump’s last request, and just under $100 million would be dedicated to expanding the number of public magnet schools.

Aside from the bump in funding for charter school expansion, Trump’s school choice funding requests largely fell flat in Congress last year. However, the president does use his budget proposal to tout a piece of the recently passed tax plan that allows families to use 529 college savings accounts to pay for private school tuition or home schooling costs.

Funding levels for Title I are requested at $15.5 billion and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) would be funded at $12.8 billion. New to President Trump’s budget proposal this year is a funding request for $43 million aimed at opioid addiction prevention. Check back for more from Washington as Congress works to negotiate future federal appropriations.

(Note: the budget deal recently struck in Washington set overall funding levels for the federal government, which entailed an increase in non-defense discretionary spending or the category of funding that covers agencies like ED; the appropriations bills hash out how those overall approved funding levels will be divvied up among specific departments, agencies, programs, and etc.)

From The Texas Tribune: Feds say Texas illegally failed to educate students with disabilities

  • by Aliyya Swaby, The Texas Tribune
  • Jan. 11, 2018

Vanessa Tijerina addresses the panel about her 13-year-old special needs child who has been denied special education for 4 years on December 13, 2016. U.S. Department of Education officials held a meeting in Edinburg on their tour of Texas to hear community members’ experiences with special education, continuing an investigation of whether Texas is capping services for students with disabilities. Photo by Eddie Seal/The Texas Tribune.

A U.S. Department of Education investigation concluded Thursday that Texas violated federal law by failing to ensure students with disabilities were properly evaluated and provided with an adequate public education.

After interviews and monitoring visits with parents, school administrators and state officials, the federal investigation found that the Texas Education Agency effectively capped the statewide percentage of students who could receive special education services and incentivized some school districts to deny services to eligible students.

It also told TEA that it needs to take several corrective actions, including producing documentation that the state is properly monitoring school districts’ evaluations for special education, developing a plan and timeline for TEA to ensure that each school district will evaluate students previously denied needed services and creating a plan and timeline for TEA to provide guidance to educators on how to identify and educate students with disabilities.

“Far too many students in Texas had been precluded from receiving supports and services under [the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act],” said U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos in a statement Thursday. “I’ve worked directly with TEA Commissioner [Mike] Morath on resolving these issues, and I appreciate the Texas Education Agency’s efforts to ensure all children with disabilities are appropriately identified, evaluated and served under IDEA.

“While there is still more work to be done, leaders in the state have assured me they are committed to ensuring all students with disabilities can achieve their full potential.”

In response to the report, Gov. Greg Abbott sent a letter to Morath demanding that TEA prepare an initial plan to reform special education within the next seven days, with the input of parents, advocates and educators. He also demanded TEA develop legislative recommendations to help ensure districts comply with federal and state special education laws.

Legislators passed a law in May prohibiting Texas from capping special education services. Special education advocates and parents had lobbied for a number of smaller reform bills during the session, few of which passed.

“Federal officials have provided no definitive timeline for action by TEA, but parents and students across our state cannot continue waiting for change,” Abbott wrote. “I am directing you to take immediate steps to prepare an initial corrective action plan draft within the next seven days.”

In a statement Thursday, Morath said he will continue to increase training and support for educators on educating students with disabilities.

“We have added significant resources focused on increasing technical assistance and training for our school systems, including 39 statewide special education support staff in the last year,” he said. “I am committing today that there will be more.”

The federal investigation was prompted by a series of reports from the Houston Chronicle alleging TEA had denied needed special education services to thousands of students with disabilities across the state. Texas provides special education to a small percentage of students compared to other states. That number has gone up from 8.5 percent in 2015-16 to 8.8 percent last school year, according to TEA’s statewide academic performance report.

TEA has denied all allegations that it capped services for students.

The report comes more than a year after federal officials traveled to five Texas cities in December 2016 and heard parents tell numerous stories about educators who had not been properly trained on what services they were legally required to provide students with disabilities. The agency also collected more than 400 public written comments from those who could not attend a meeting in person.

Federal officials returned to Texas last February to tour selected school districts for a firsthand look at local special education data and policies.

The report Thursday confirmed the complaints of many the parents who spoke out at those meetings. It said:

  • TEA was more likely to monitor and intervene in school districts with higher rates of students in special education, creating a statewide system that incentivized denying services to eligible students. School district officials said they expected they would receive less monitoring if they served 8.5 percent of students or fewer.
  • According to internal reports reviewed by federal officials, administrators at multiple districts worked to decrease the percentage of students identified for special education services — even though there was no evidence to indicate those actions were necessary.
  • School administrators provided some students suspected of having disabilities with intensive academic support as a way of delaying or refusing to evaluate them for necessary federally funded special education services. Teachers and staff did not understand how to deploy this support in a way that complied with federal law.
  • Texas has a policy to only provide federally funded services to students with dyslexia if those students also have another disability. That violates federal law, the report said, since it denies some eligible students federally funded special education services. School districts were found to be inconsistent in how they interpreted and carried out this state policy.
  • Many school district staff members said they saw evaluation for federally funded special education services as a “last resort” for students who were struggling to learn. They did not understand that students could receive these services in both special education and general education classrooms.

The agency’s attempts to address some of these problems in the last several months collapsed recently after it awarded a contract to overhaul special education to a company with a short track record without letting other firms bid for the job. After parents of students with disabilities argued the contract was poorly thought out, Morath terminated it — with $2.2 million in federal funding already spent for services rendered. The agency is now conducting an internal review of its contracting processes.

Texas now lacks both a special education director and a long-term plan for overhauling special education, leaving parents and advocates frustrated and concerned.

Reference Material

USDE special education monitoring visit letter

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at


Texas Tribune mission statement

The Texas Tribune is a nonprofit, nonpartisan media organization that informs Texans — and engages with them — about public policy, politics, government and statewide issues.

TEA submits revised federal ESSA plan

Commissioner of Education Mike Morath wrote school administrators yesterday to inform them that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) submitted its revised plan to implement the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The U.S. Department of Education (ED) issued feedback in December to Texas’s original state ESSA plan, which required some revisions and asked for additional clarity.

Morath’s letter to administrators largely focused on how the revised plan would impact the implementation of House Bill (HB) 22, a piece of accountability-related legislation passed by the 85th Texas Legislature, as the major areas addressed by ED involve the new academic accountability system.

“Due to federal timeline requirements, the Agency was forced to make preliminary decisions on the new House Bill 22 (HB 22) accountability system ahead of the timeline for our state rulemaking,” Morath wrote. “I want to emphasize the decisions laid out in our revised ESSA plan do not reflect final stakeholder input and are an effort to comply with federal timelines and requirements.”

Among the changes made to address issues outlined by ED, TEA’s revised plan:

  • alters the long-term goal for ESSA to entail 30 percent growth based on baseline scores from the 2016-17 school year (the original long-term goal didn’t cut it for ED because, for example, it failed to anticipate graduation rate growth for certain student subgroups, in this case white males; proficiency goals are also now based on a meeting grade level expectation rather than the originally proposed approaching grade level expectation);
  • removes writing, science, and social studies test results from the academic achievement considerations (ED interprets the law to say only math and reading/language arts results can be used to calculate this indicator; the other test results will still be used for calculating student success and school quality);
  • aligns the accountability impact for failing to meet the required 95 percent testing participation rate with federal stipulations, which will impact schools where parents opt their students out of state standardized testing;
  • adjusts the federally required summative rating calculation so that either student achievement or progress (the better score of the two) makes up 70% of the rating, while 30% consists of progress towards closing the gaps (the original calculation would have averaged the two percentiles); and
  • changes accountability for recently arrived English language learners so that it begins in their second year in U.S. schools (the original plan would not have included some recently arrived ELL students in some accountability results for the first two years and would have omitted some asylum/refugee students for up to five years).

The revised state plan also adds language to clarify various aspects of the proposal. For example, ED asked for more information on how Texas plans to satisfy a federal requirement to track and publicly report the disproportionate rates at which poor and minority children have access to experienced, qualified educators, an issue on which ATPE has long advocated for change driven by research-based solutions. The revised plan dives deeper into Texas’s landscape and the way TEA intends to calculate and report the data.

The letter goes on to inform administrators that TEA will submit amendments to the plan if additional feedback leads to “decisions different from what is proposed and already submitted in our ESSA plan.” Similar language in the original plan submitted to ED was omitted in the revised plan.

Read Morath’s full letter and access the revised state ESSA plan here.

Texas receives feedback from feds on ESSA plan

Over the holiday break, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) issued feedback to Texas on its final plan to implement the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), which it submitted in September. The letter requests that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) revise its plan consistent with the feedback identified by ED and resubmit its plan by Monday, unless the state chooses to request a later date of re-submission.

The full letter, which includes 11 pages of feedback, identifies issues with various aspects of the state’s plan. Among the revisions requested, ED disputes the state’s calculation of graduation rate progress for accountability purposes (for some subgroups, progress is not anticipated); strikes down the exclusion of test results for certain English language learners (recently arrived English language learners would not be included in some accountability results for the first two years and some asylum/refugee students would not be counted for up to five years); and questions whether the state’s inclusion of the new 95 percent testing participation rate requirement is adequate for calculating school accountability (Texas would use it to calculate accountability, but ED isn’t sure it’s being used appropriately within the system).

Another revision noted by ED is one resulting from a strict interpretation of the statutory language. TEA proposes using STAAR results in science, social studies, and writing to calculate results under the Academic Achievement indicator, but ED asks TEA to move those elsewhere in the accountability system because the law states that only reading/language arts and mathematics are permissible under the Academic Achievement indicator. ED also asks for more clarity on the School Quality or Student Success indicator, which TEA would calculate using STAAR math and reading scores in grades 3-8 and college, career, and military readiness indicators in high school.

Watch Teach the Vote next week for more on the Texas ESSA plan as TEA meets its deadline to respond. In a statement released last month, education officials in California stated they appreciated the feedback but noted “areas of disagreement over the interpretation of federal statute.” The statement is an example of uncertainty with regard to how ESSA compliance plays out at the state level while the federal government seeks to shift more control to states and sticks to strict interpretation of the law in lieu of rulemaking.