Category Archives: federal

Commissioner update on STAAR glitches, SpEd plan, NAEP

The State Board of Education (SBOE) kicked off its April meeting Wednesday with an update from Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner Mike Morath.

Morath informed the board that the agency will seek an amendment to the state’s plan under the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in order to implement changes to the accountability system under House Bill (HB) 22 passed by the 85th Texas Legislature. The agency released its accountability framework on Tuesday.

Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) meeting April 11, 2018.

With testing week underway, Morath updated the board on a recent glitch with the STAAR exam. According to the commission, the failure of a single server caused a roughly 20-minute disruption in the exam. No data were lost, although 40,000 students were affected and forced to log out, then log back in, while taking the exam online. Some 1,000 school systems had one or more students affected, and it appears the glitch was largely confined to those taking the English I end of course (EOC) exam, although exceptions have been reported. Roughly 460,000 tests have been taken online so far.

SBOE Member Pat Hardy (R-Fort Worth) suggested the board avoid scheduling meetings during testing week in the future, as it makes it nearly impossible for educators to get time off to attend board meetings or to testify before the board. TEA staff indicated they are aware of the scheduling conflict and are working toward avoiding such a situation in the future.

The commissioner next proceeded to run down the state’s recent results on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). Texas saw a slight decline in 4th grade math proficiency this year and has experienced a downward trend in 8th grade math since 2011. The state has been a middling performer in 4th grade reading and saw a slight recent dip. Scores on 8th grade reading have been similarly flat, with a slight recent decline. Morath called the NAEP scores “somewhat disappointing nationally.”

“It does appear that accountability matters a great deal, and resources appear to be a factor,” Morath added.

Member Hardy pointed out that Texas has different demographic challenges than other states; in particular, it is home to a high percentage of students who are economically disadvantaged. Hardy suggested this makes for apples-to-oranges comparisons to other states when it comes to national test scores. Morath conceded Hardy’s point, but noted that “life doesn’t grade on the curve.” The commissioner warned the real world deals in absolutes, and suggested it’s important to celebrate success where appropriate while continuing to pursue improvement.

Finally, Morath updated the board on the agency’s corrective action for special education. A January letter from the U.S. Department of Education found Texas was deficient in three areas of special education: Child find, providing a free and appropriate public education (FAPE), and compliance monitoring.

According to the commissioner, the core corrective action response will be provided to the federal government for compliance purposes, while a strategic plan for the state will focus on broader reforms. The commissioner identified five key components of the strategic plan: State monitoring, identification, evaluation, and placement; training, support, and development; student, family, and community engagement; and support networks and structures. The final corrective action response is due to the federal government April 23.

Responding to funding questions from Member Keven Ellis (R-Lufkin), Morath indicated the agency has already begun making staffing changes with federal funds available to the agency under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The agency has already hired 34 full-time equivalents (FTEs) in order to begin implementing the necessary changes. The nature of the plan calls for spending shifts in allocation. The state is allocated roughly $100 million in IDEA funds each year, all of which Morath said are being “re-tooled” concomitant with the corrective action plan.

Asked by Ellis how formula funding under the Foundation School Program (FSP) would be affected by the plan, Morath said the special education formulas are “quite sophisticated,” making it hard to give a specific number. As a ballpark estimate, Morath estimated the plan would add another $5,000 for each new special education student. The agency estimates another 200,000 students could enter the system, which would translate to about $1 billion in additional FSP funding. Morath noted the figures are only rough estimates, and actual funding would depend upon which services are provided to each child under his or her individualized education program (IEP).

Member Sue Melton-Malone (R-Waco) asked about training provided to educators under the plan. The commissioner said the agency is preparing to launch a statewide professional development network involving summer programs and ongoing training. This training will be primarily targeted at mainstream setting educators.

On a separate note, Member Lawrence Allen, Jr. (D-Houston) voiced concern to Commissioner Morath over the board’s lack of oversight of contracts between school districts and charter schools as a result of Senate Bill (SB) 1882 passed by the 85th Texas Legislature. This bill provides financial incentives and a pause in accountability ratings for districts to contract with a charter holder, nonprofit or higher education institution to operate a campus under a “partnership” model in which the district surrenders control entirely to the operator. As ATPE has warned, this has potentially troubling implications for school staff and students in the feeder pattern.

While the SBOE has the final authority to approve new charters, it has no formal input regarding these arrangements. Rather, each contract must be approved by the commissioner. Agreeing with Allen, Member Hardy warned that charters may be less faithful to the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), which are required curriculum approved by the board.

The board is scheduled to consider a variety of items Wednesday, including potential action regarding the creation of a Mexican American Studies class. Continue to check TeachTheVote.org for further updates from this week’s SBOE meeting.

TEA seeking public input on special education plan

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) announced Tuesday it is accepting public comments on the draft strategic plan for special education through noon, April 18.

As reported previously at Teach the Vote, the agency released its Draft Special Education Improvement Plan and Corrective Action Response last month to fix critical failures in the state’s special education system. The draft plan varies little from an initial draft the agency circulated in January, and the agency is seeking additional input on the latest version. You can e-mail feedback to TexasSPED@tea.texas.gov.

The plan carries a $211 million price tag, which does not include a substantial cost anticipated to be incurred by local school districts. The districts will be expected to perform the bulk of the work meeting the needs of children who were wrongfully denied special education services in the past due to districts’ following a TEA directive to limit special education enrollment. Because of this funding challenge, many school administrators are warning they will need additional financial support from the state in order to properly serve qualifying children. The Texas Council of Administrators of Special Education (TCASE) noted this in a press release last month, saying the TEA plan “is rich with school district monitoring and compliance measures, but fails to offer adequate financial and other support to districts.” Read the full TCASE press statement here.

The TEA will aggregate feedback and send a final version of the special education improvement plan to the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) at the U.S. Department of Education by April 23, 2018.

Texas ESSA plan approved by feds

Texas Commissioner of Education Mike Morath announced today that U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos has given final approval to Texas’s plan to implement the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the federal education law that replaced No Child Left Behind.

The final approval bookends a years long process to implement the legislation at first the federal level and then at the state level. Most recently, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) submitted its revised ESSA plan based on feedback received from the U.S. Department of Education (ED). A full, high-level recap of the process beginning with passage of the new law in December 2015 can be found here.

In TEA’s press release relaying ED’s final approval of the plan, Commissioner Morath said the plan “reflects a commitment to reinforcing public education outcomes for more than five million schoolchildren while continuing to strengthen the economic future of Texas.” Read the full press release here.

Secretary DeVos, among other national leaders and advocates, has been critical of states’ plans in light of the lack of creativity, but plans have largely been approved without extensive revisions required to further innovation and creativity.

To read the final plan or learn more about the Texas ESSA plan and related content, visit TEA’s ESSA web page.

 

Congressional leaders reach deal on spending that includes boost to education dollars

Budget negotiators in Congress have reached an agreement on a deal to keep the lights on in Washington. The deal represents $1.3 trillion in total spending and a boost of $3.9 billion to spending on education. Congress now has until the end of Friday to pass the bill, preventing another government shutdown.

If Congress is able to pass the legislation in its current form (Republican and Democratic leaders are backing the final negotiation) and President Trump signs the legislation (he seemed to support the legislation Wednesday night after waffling throughout the day), many programs at the U.S. Department of Education (ED) will see boosts to funding.

Boosts include funding for Title I and special education (IDEA), the two largest sources of funding at ED, as well as a program aimed at recruiting, supporting, and training educators. Other boosts to funding include programs pertaining to STEM education, technology enhancements, counseling and mental health, social and emotional learning, after school curricula, and rural schools. There is also new funding for school safety in the form of training and safety technologies like metal detectors.

Many of the funded programs are ones President Trump and Education Secretary Betsy DeVos cut under their budget request. For example, the president’s budget proposal suggested defunding the $2 billion program aimed at recruiting, supporting, and training educators primarily in high-needs schools. Aside from an increase to charter school funding, Congress also ignored the administration’s requests regarding public and private school choice. There is no funding for a $500 million investment in expanding existing state voucher programs or establishing new voucher programs, and the $1 billion in Title I funding Trump wanted to see invested in a system termed Title I portability (a refresher on that can be found here) is not included. Secretary DeVos faced a congressional committee just this week in an effort to advocate for a number of major reforms at ED, but those were largely overlooked by congressional leaders under the spending plan.

While the deal looks poised for passage, there are still several procedural measures that could prevent its passage ahead of the Friday midnight deadline. Check back for more on how the latest deal on federal funding plays out.

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.)

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.

Federal Update: Efforts to protect educators’ Social Security benefits

An Update from David Pore, ATPE’s Washington, DC-based lobbyist

David Pore

David Pore

For many years, your ATPE Governmental Relations team has worked to fix two provisions in federal law that unfairly reduce the Social Security benefits of some retired educators and other public employees. The Government Pension Offset (GPO) reduces the spousal benefits of some educators based on their eligibility for a government pension, and the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) reduces the individual benefits of public retirees who have worked in jobs covered by Social Security in addition to their non-covered teaching careers. The WEP hits Texas educators particularly hard because the vast majority of our school districts in Texas do not pay into the Social Security system.

Every Congress, legislation is introduced to fully repeal both the WEP and the GPO. So, what’s the problem you ask? Why won’t the Congress repeal these unfair offsets and bring much-needed relief to retired public educators, cops, and firefighters living on fixed incomes? In short, it’s about the money, the politics, and the policy. Full repeal of the GPO and WEP would cost the Social Security trust fund tens of billions of dollars and create new inequities in the benefits formula, which in turn would create new winners and losers.

While ATPE has supported federal legislation to fully repeal these offsets, we have done so with the knowledge that passage of a full repeal bill is extremely unlikely in the current fiscal and political climate in DC. Therefore, consistent with our ATPE values, we have been working on bipartisan legislation that will take a huge first step in the right direction by repealing the arbitrary WEP and replacing it with a much fairer formula that will base your Social Security benefits on your service and contributions, just like everyone else. In the last Congress, Rep. Kevin Brady (R-TX)  and Rep.  Neal (D-MA) introduced HR711, the Equal Treatment for Public Servants Act.  Working through a coalition of other associations, including the Texas Retired Teachers Association (TRTA), ATPE had significant input on this important bipartisan legislation that would have also provided a modest annual rebate check to current retirees who have had their benefits reduced by the WEP. We were able to get 29 of Texas’s 36 U.S. House members to cosponsor HR711, and in July of last year, it was scheduled for consideration by the House Ways and Means Committee, which Congressman Brady chairs.  Unfortunately, the bill stalled when one organization in the coalition demanded changes that would have upset the careful funding balance necessary to repeal the WEP going forward and provide current retirees some relief as well.

ATPE's Monty Exter, Carl Garner, and Gary Godsey meet with U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady in June 2017.

ATPE’s Monty Exter, Carl Garner, and Gary Godsey meet with U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady in June 2017.

This year, we have been working with Chairman Brady, his committee staff, and the coalition to reach a consensus that will allow the bill to be reintroduced in the near future and hopefully attached to larger package of “must-pass” legislation. ATPE’s lobbyists have been in frequent contact with the Chairman and his committee staff and have been assured as recently as yesterday that reintroduction and passage of this bill is Chairman Brady’s top Social Security priority as Ways and Means Chair and will happen during this Congress. Meanwhile, the Congress continues to grapple with enormously challenging reform of our healthcare and tax systems, which has delayed consideration of other federal legislation.

What can you do? Continue to stay active and informed on the policy issues that affect your profession as well as the retirement benefits you have earned. When the bill is reintroduced, we will need ATPE members to mobilize and contact your Members of Congress and urge co-sponsorship and support to get this legislation to the President’s desk for signature. Stay tuned to Teach the Vote for more updates on this important topic.

ATPE shares input on draft Texas state ESSA plan

Earlier today, ATPE submitted the following formal input to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) on its draft state plan for compliance with the federal Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). The agency is accepting input from stakeholders until Aug. 29, 2017.

 

ATPE_logoATPE Input on the
Texas ESSA Draft Plan
August 24, 2017

 

The Association of Texas Professional Educators (ATPE) appreciates this opportunity to offer the following input on the draft Texas plan to implement new federal requirements under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA), as amended by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA).

ATPE remained actively engaged at the federal level as Congress worked to reauthorize ESEA and the U.S. Department of Education (ED) worked to develop, alter, and, in some cases, omit associated rules and regulations. Over the course of a series of comments submitted to both Congress and ED, ATPE weighed in on various aspects of the law, including strengthening the teaching pipeline, avoiding overly simplistic and stigmatizing summative school ratings, promoting innovative assessment strategies, ceasing the overreliance on standardized testing, and addressing the role of the federal government in K– 12 accountability and testing. While the final rewrite of the law is not perfect, ATPE is pleased that ESSA omitted outdated and onerous policies required by the previous version of the law (as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act), ended the failed policies forced through waivers under the previous administration, and restored more control at the state and local level while maintaining many necessary protections at the federal level.

Accountability and Assessments

ATPE acknowledges that the 85th Texas Legislature, as well as previous legislatures, implemented state laws pertaining to accountability and assessments that constrain portions of the Texas Education Agency’s (TEA) draft plan to satisfy federal requirements under ESSA. We hope that future legislatures will be more thoughtful in providing innovative approaches to accountability and assessments at the state level, giving TEA more latitude to take advantage of changes at the federal level. In the meantime, ATPE encourages TEA to take advantage of all opportunities to make meaningful change through funding provided at the federal level.

One promising new opportunity is the innovative assessment pilot available to states and districts. We encourage TEA to consider opportunities for pursuing this funding and to support any districts that show promise and interest in making a lasting impact on the manner in which student performance is assessed in this state. The current system of over-testing that has sparked nationwide backlash in recent years originated in Texas; our state has the opportunity once again to impact the way we assess student progress in schools throughout the country—this time in a more positive and formative way.

State Long-term Goals

ATPE appreciates the move under ESSA to eliminate Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), instead allowing states to establish their own ambitious, long-term goals. We also agree with TEA’s decision to align goals under ESSA with rigorous goals already set by the state; in this case, aligning them with the state’s 60X30 plan to have 60 percent of high school graduates completing some form of post-secondary credential by 2030. Setting the state’s long-term goals under ESSA at 90 percent of all students and all student subgroups at the “Approaches Grade Level” performance target by 2032 is a reasonable approach, and holding all students to the same standard and high aspirational goal focuses on ensuring that all students get the same access to a great public education.

However, while the plan sets the same high standards for all students and all student subgroup populations, it falls short of identifying specific strategies for educators working with certain subgroups most in need of support. For example, the chart in Appendix A shows that students in special education programs are currently meeting the Approaching Grade Level target at rates of 35 percent in reading and 42 percent in math. English Language Learner students are currently at 51 percent in reading. Both subgroups face a significantly larger gap to overcome than other subgroups on which the state collects data. Long-term, ambitious goals are important, but they must be accompanied with targeted strategies for meeting those goals, especially when current data shows that achieving those goals will be significantly more difficult for certain student populations.

School Quality Indicator

ATPE appreciates that the school quality indicator for high school students uses something other than state standardized assessments to measure school quality. However, the indicators are still heavily focused on testing, and non-high schools are still measured based on standardized testing in math and reading. ESSA specifically outlines the option for states to utilize something other than assessments, among them identifying school climate as an option. ATPE has long advocated for the addition of a school climate study in Texas or a measure of school climate as an indicator in our accountability system. This is a great opportunity for Texas to gain a better understanding of how school climate looks across the state, which affects student learning. We encourage TEA to consider the inclusion of school climate as a measure of school quality under the final ESSA school quality indicator.

Educator Training and Support

ATPE has made educator training and preparation a primary focus of our advocacy efforts. We recognize that Texas does a disservice to educators by placing ill-prepared educators in the 21st century classroom and expecting them to achieve excellence. We appreciate that recent efforts by the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) and TEA have resulted in some positive outcomes to raise standards for educator preparation programs and certification requirements, and that the agency identifies educator preparation as an ongoing focus under the state ESSA plan.

As noted in the draft state plan, educator training and ongoing support play a vital role in ensuring every student has access to a well-prepared, productive educator. As the state moves forward on this front, ATPE will continue to advocate for efforts to raise standards in a fair, meaningful, and reliable way, and we encourage TEA to do the same as it remains focused on related ongoing efforts identified under the ESSA plan.

Additional Input

A piece of ESSA that is not addressed by the ED template for submitting a state plan involves federal requirements for state and local report cards. A positive outcome of ESSA was the requirement to calculate and report publically per-pupil spending and educator qualifications. The new law requires that TEA develop ways to calculate federal, state, and local per-pupil expenditures, including a means for districts to calculate individual school-level per-pupil expenditures. State and local report cards must also include the number and percentages of inexperienced educators, teachers teaching with emergency and provisional credentials, and out-of-field teachers. ATPE is interested in how this piece will be implemented and asks that TEA seek the input of stakeholders as they work to determine this federal requirement.

TEA releases draft Texas plan to satisfy ESSA

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) released its draft plan Monday to satisfy requirements under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), the federal education law that replaced No Child Left Behind (NCLB). Texas’s draft plan offers an initial look into how TEA intends to implement the federal policy and funding parameters involving accountability, educator effectiveness, struggling schools, and more. The public has through August 29 to submit feedback on the draft plan.

Since President Obama signed ESSA into law in December 2015, the U.S. Department of Education (ED), under the direction of both the Obama and Trump administrations, has spent time developing, altering, and in some cases even omitting the rules that govern the law. Now that they’ve been finalized, it is on states to submit a plan telling ED how they intend to implement the law at the state and local level. Like other states, Texas has until September 18 to finalize and submit its ESSA state plan, which will then go through a peer review process for approval.

Texas’s draft ESSA plan can be read in its entirety here; below are some initial takeaways:

Long-term goals

ESSA removed adequate yearly progress (AYP) from federal law, instead giving states the task of establishing their own long-term, ambitious goals for academic achievement. Texas’s draft ESSA plan establishes an academic achievement (as measured by annual STAAR results in reading/language arts and mathematics) goal intended to align with the state’s 60X30 goal, which seeks to have 60% of Texans aged 25-34 possessing some form of post-secondary credential by 2030. To assist in accomplishing that, TEA sets a goal under ESSA of having 90% of all students and subgroups at the “approaches grade level” performance level by 2032.

Other long term goals include a four-year graduation rate of 96% and a 46% threshold for students making progress toward English language proficiency, all by 2032. The plan includes interim targets in five-year intervals. These are laid out in the chart in Appendix A, with some targets not yet identified.

Accountability indicators

Indicators defined under federal accountability requirements include an academic indicator, an indicator of achievement specific to schools other than high schools, a graduation rate indicator, an English language proficiency indicator, and a school quality or success indicator. Texas’s accountability system, which was altered as recently as this year during the 85th Texas Legislature under HB 22, now consists of three domains and indicators within indicators that can be used to satisfy federal indicator requirements.

Texas’s plan intends to utilize STAAR test results (both proficiency and growth), Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) results, graduation rates, and post-secondary readiness rates to satisfy the first four federal indicator requirements. To weigh the school quality and success indicator, which is new under federal law, the draft plan suggests using STAAR results in elementary and middle schools and post-secondary readiness rates in high schools. More on these indicators are found in the table starting on page 17 of the draft ESSA plan.

The state draft plan highlights the state’s A-F system as a way of satisfying differentiation requirements under federal law, which says that states’ accountability systems must be able to “meaningfully differentiate” among all schools in the state.

Identifying and supporting struggling schools

TEA offers four options for identifying the 5% of Title I schools considered to be the most struggling and in need of comprehensive support and improvement: (1) all F rated schools, (2) all F rated schools and all schools rated D for multiple years, (3) all F and D schools, or (4) all schools existing in the bottom 5% when ranked chronologically. The options work so that if the first option does not constitute 5% of all schools, then the second option is triggered, and so on. Any campus that does meet a 67% 4-year graduation rate would also automatically be identified for comprehensive support and improvement.

For schools that remain in need of comprehensive support for five years, interventions including the following could be implemented: school closure, partnership with a charter school, charter school conversion to include independent governing board and leadership change, or oversight by a Conservator or state-appointed Board of Managers.

The Texas draft plan proposes reserving 7% of the state’s Title I funding for struggling schools, an unidentified portion to be delivered via formula funding and an unidentified portion for competitive grant funding. More on identifying and supporting struggling schools can be accessed beginning on page 21 of the draft plan.

Educator effectiveness

The Texas plan highlights two ongoing strategies for spending educator effectiveness funding under Title II of ESSA: continued investment in the Texas Equity Toolkit and implementation of an instruction leadership initiative, which is “designed to provide to LEAs and schools that did not earn satisfactory ratings on the state accountability system with comprehensive instructional leadership training for principal supervisors, principals, assistant principals, and teacher leaders in an effort to build skills in coaching, growing, and developing educators.” TEA also intends to reserve 3% of the funding for district grants focused on improving principal practice, potentially through “principal residency programs.” The plan also highlights recent changes made to the certification structure for educators in Texas and ongoing efforts to change Texas’s principal preparation as improvements to educator effectiveness. The draft plan’s portion covering Tittle II of federal law begins on page 37.

Equitable access to educators

TEA identifies in its draft plan three “priority contributing factors” why schools with high concentrations of low-income and minority children have inequitable access to experienced and effective educators teaching within field. They center on insufficient training, support, and alignment between and within districts. For teacher training, the draft plan proposes addressing this through continued support and implementation of T-TESS, the Educator Excellence Innovation Program (a grant program supporting innovative retention, training and support within districts), the recent changes to teacher preparation rules, and Lesson Study (a professional development program). More beginning on on page 27 of the draft plan.

Assessments

The state, at least currently, is poised to continue federal testing requirements that, in Texas, amount to annual STAAR assessments in reading and math in grades 3-8 plus three science assessments (in grades 5 and 8 plus once in high school). The new federal law does offer states some minimal flexibility to assess students and provides for a pilot program where states and districts can more meaningfully address alternate approaches to assessing students.

 

The public comment period is open now and runs through Tuesday, August 29. Comments on the draft plan can be submitted via email to essa@tea.texas.gov.

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: June 23, 2017

The weekend is here, and it’s time for your wrap-up of education news from ATPE:


ThinkstockPhotos-462761867We’re less than a month away from a 30-day special session ordered by Gov. Greg Abbott. Passing sunset legislation to keep a handful of agencies from going out of business during the interim will be the first order a business, after attempts to pass such a bill during the regular session fell victim to a battle of wills over ideological issues. Gov. Abbott has laid out 19 additional issues for lawmakers to consider during the special session, with signs that even more topics could be added to the agenda as we move closer to the start date. The governor’s wish list, featuring a number of Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s questionable “priorities” from the regular session, includes regulating local school bathroom policies, funding private school vouchers, mandating that school districts come up with their own funds for a teacher pay raise, tinkering with teachers’ employment and due process rights, and prohibiting educators from using payroll deduction for their voluntary membership dues to professional associations like ATPE.

Aside from the need to deal with the agency sunset matters that were allowed to falter during the regular session, the governor’s declaring this particular score of issues as being “extraordinary” and urgent enough to warrant spending a million dollars of the taxpayers’ money to debate is a decision that has left many scratching their heads. Arguably the most important priority that did not get addressed during the regular session was school finance reform, but that issue has barely registered as a blip on the governor’s special session radar. Abbott made it clear during his recent press conference that he intends merely for the legislature to appoint a commission to study the issue over the next two years. Many lawmakers, especially in the House, have indicated that they do not share the governor’s views on the urgency of spending another month arguing about such petty concerns as how local bathroom policies are written and how educators spend their own hard-earned money.

Gary Godsey

Gary Godsey

ATPE weighed in on the merits of the special session plans this week in an opinion piece written by Executive Director Gary Godsey and published by The Texas Tribune on its TribTalk website. Godsey explained that the founders of our state government gave governors the ability to call special sessions “under ‘extraordinary occasions.’ Examples noted in the Texas Constitution are the presence of a public enemy or a need to appoint presidential electors. Nowhere does it mention attacking teachers, schools, or political enemies merely to score points heading into the next election cycle.” Read the full piece republished on our blog here.

17_web_Spotlight_AdvocacyCentral_1With the renewed attacks on public schools and hardworking educators that are anticipated in the new few weeks, it is important for educators to stay engaged and share their input with legislators. ATPE members are encouraged to visit Advocacy Central to send messages to their own lawmakers about protecting educators’ rights, properly funding the needs of our public (not private) education system, and preserving local control. The special session will convene on July 18.

 


The State Board of Education hears from education commissioner Mike Morath at the board's June 2017 meeting.

The SBOE hears from Commissioner Mike Morath at the board’s June 2017 meeting.

The State Board of Education (SBOE) has been meeting this week in Austin, and ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins has been in attendance to report on all the action.

As Mark reported for our blog on Tuesday, the board began its meeting hearing from Commissioner of Education Mike Morath and learning about legislative revisions to the state’s “A through F” accountability system and the recent roll-out of new STAAR report cards by the Texas Education Agency (TEA). Much of the SBOE’s work this week has been centered around revisions to the curriculum standards for English and Spanish language arts and reading. The board also looked at its process for TEKS revisions, as Mark described on Wednesday. Appointing board members to serve on a new Long-Range Plan Steering Committee was also on the agenda this week. On Thursday, Mark reported that SBOE committees took a closer look at education bills passed by the 85th Texas Legislature this year and considered impacts on the Permanent School Fund. It was also reported this week that the fund surpassed its investment benchmarks and hit the $32 billion mark for the first time.

For a wrap-up of this week’s SBOE action, check out Mark’s latest blog post here.

 


ATPE State President Julleen Bottoms and Vice President Carl Garner in Washington, DC

ATPE State President Julleen Bottoms and Vice President Carl Garner in Washington, DC

This week, a group of ATPE leaders and staff traveled to Washington, DC to discuss federal education concerns. ATPE State President Julleen Bottoms and Vice President Carl Garner were joined by Executive Director Gary Godsey and ATPE lobbyists Kate Kuhlmann and Monty Exter. David Pore, ATPE’s Washington-based lobbyist, arranged meetings for the team with several key officials in the nation’s capital.

The team had a jam-packed schedule of more than 20 meetings this week, visiting with both the U.S. House and Senate committees that cover K-12 education issues, staff of the U.S. Department of Education, and a sizable chunk of the Texas congressional delegation. ATPE’s representatives primarily focused the discussions on three issue areas: the repeal and replacement of the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP) that limits many educators’ access to Social Security benefits; implementation of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA); and troubling signs that the country’s new Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is pushing for privatization of the public education system.

ATPE's Monty Exter, Carl Garner, and Gary Godsey meet with U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady in June 2017.

ATPE’s Monty Exter, Carl Garner, and Gary Godsey meet with U.S. Rep. Kevin Brady in June 2017.

One of the first meetings our team conducted this week was with Congressman Kevin Brady (R-Texas), the chair of the powerful U.S. House Ways and Means Committee. Rep. Brady has been working with ATPE and other stakeholder groups on a bill that will repeal the current WEP and replace it with a much fairer system. During the meeting, he told ATPE Vice Present Carl Garner that he is looking forward to reintroducing his legislation and that when he does so, he expects it to move through Congress quickly.

Overall the visiting ATPE team reported that they received a very positive reception to our message during their many visits with lawmakers and staff. Executive Director Gary Godsey called it the most productive trip to Washington he’s taken since joining the organization. For more highlights of the Washington trip, check out ATPE’s Facebook page.

ATPE's Monty Exter, Kate Kuhlmann, Julleen Bottoms, Gary Godsey, and Carl Garner in Washington, DC, in June 2017

ATPE’s Monty Exter, Kate Kuhlmann, Julleen Bottoms, Gary Godsey, and Carl Garner in Washington, DC, in June 2017