Tag Archives: suspension

New School Year, New Laws: Curriculum and Instruction

When the 86th Texas Legislature convened for its 2019 regular session, members of the state Senate and House of Representatives focused much of their attention on school finance and school safety. Issues that once held center-stage in a legislative session, like accountability, vouchers, and payroll deduction took a backseat (or weren’t even in the car). However, there were several bills passed this year that will impact teachers’ bread and butter – teaching and learning. In this week’s “New School Year, New Laws” post, we will fill you in on legislative changes impacting curriculum and instruction.

House Bill (HB) 391 by Rep. César Blanco (D-El Paso): Printed instructional materials

By law, parents are entitled to request that their child be allowed to take home instructional materials. Districts and charter schools must honor this request. However, in some cases, those instructional materials are online and the parents do not have the appropriate technology at home to access them. In this event, HB 391 dictates that the district or charter school provide the materials in print, which could be printouts of the relevant electronic materials. This law became effective immediately upon its passage.

HB 2984 by Rep. Steve Allison (R-San Antonio): Technology applications TEKS

Technology applications is part of the “enrichment curriculum” offered by school districts. HB 2984 directs the State Board of Education (SBOE) to revise the grades K-8 Texas essential knowledge and skills (TEKS) for technology applications, specifically by adding in curriculum standards for coding, computer programming, computational thinking, and cybersecurity. The SBOE must complete this task by Dec. 31, 2020, so be on the lookout for information from ATPE about opportunities to participate in the process and provide public comment.

HB 3012 by Rep. James Talarico (D-Round Rock): Providing instruction to students who are suspended

Most teachers have probably experienced what happens when a student is placed in either in-school or out-of-school suspension (ISS/OSS). The student often comes back to the classroom having missed days or weeks of instruction that can be hard to make up. HB 3012 requires districts to provide suspended students with an alternative means of accessing all “foundation curriculum” or core coursework (math, science, English language arts, and social studies). The district must also provide at least one option for receiving the coursework that doesn’t require access to the Internet. Whether or not this requirement for providing coursework will trickle down to the individual teacher level is still unclear. This bill became effective immediately.

HB 4310 by Rep. Harold Dutton (D- Houston): Time for scope and sequence

HB 4310 applies to the scope and sequence created by districts for foundation curricula. Under the new law, a district must ensure sufficient time for teachers to teach and students to learn the TEKS in a given scope and sequence. Additionally, a district cannot penalize a teacher who determines that their students need more or less time and thus doesn’t follow the scope and sequence. However, the law does say that a district can take action with respect to teachers who don’t follow the scope and sequence if there is documented evidence of a deficiency in their classroom instruction. This law became effective immediately.

HB 3 by Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood): G/T programming and funding

The gifted and talented (G/T) allotment was eliminated in this year’s big school finance bill, HB 3, but the requirement that school districts provide G/T programming did not go away. When HB 3 was heard by the House Public Education and Senate Education committees, many parents and students testified on the importance of keeping gifted and talented programming and urged lawmakers to maintain the allotment. In response, Chairman Huberty and other lawmakers explained that funding for G/T through the allotment has been capped at 5% of average daily attendance, even though a district may actually enroll more than 5% of its students in G/T programs. As a result, every district essentially received the maximum amount possible. HB 3 rolls this amount into the new basic allotment as the mechanism for funding G/T, rather than having a stand-alone allotment.

To quell fears that G/T programs might disappear along with the allotment, HB 3 states that districts must provide a G/T program consistent with the state plan for G/T and must annually certify to the commissioner of education their compliance with the law. If a district does not comply, the state will revoke its funding in an amount calculated using the same formula for the old G/T allotment. The bill also requires districts to comply with the use of G/T funds as outlined in State Board of Education (SBOE) rule.

These changes to how G/T programs are funded took effect immediately upon the passage of HB 3. Learn more about the new G/T requirements and funding expectations in this “HB 3 in 30” video provided by the Texas Education Agency (TEA).

HB 4205 by Rep. Tom Craddick (R-Midland): Teacher effectiveness and value-added modeling in turnaround schools

HB 4205 was originally introduced as a bill to allow a campus in Midland ISD to be repurposed by a nonprofit entity while maintaining the same student population. As the bill made its way through the legislative process, it was expanded beyond Midland ISD and amended to include language from Senate Bill (SB) 1412 by Sen. Charles Perry (R-Lubbock) regarding accelerated campus excellence (ACE) plans. ACE is a campus turnaround option that prescribes personnel, compensation, and programming decisions meant to improve student performance. A last-stage amendment also added a requirement that personnel decisions under a school’s ACE turnaround plan must be made using a value-added model (VAM) for determining instructional effectiveness. After this change was made, which ATPE opposed, the House unfortunately voted to concur in the Senate amendments and the bill was signed by the Governor.

Under the final version of HB 4205 as passed, at least 60 percent of teachers assigned to the campus must have demonstrated instructional effectiveness during the previous school year. For teachers who taught in the same district in the prior year, this effectiveness standard is to be determined by classroom observation and assessing the teacher’s impact on student growth using VAM based on at least one student assessment instrument selected by the district. For teachers who did not teach in the district the previous year, instructional effectiveness will be determined by data and other evidence indicating that if the teacher had taught in the district, they would have been ranked among the top half of teachers there. Teacher pay under this type of plan must include a three-year commitment to provide “significant incentives” to compensate high-performing principals and teachers.

In the 2019-20 school year, the ACE provisions in HB 4205 will only apply to one district that received an unacceptable rating for 2017-18, as chosen by the commissioner of education. In 2020-21, the ACE option under HB 4205 will open up to all districts that have been required to complete a campus turnaround plan.

There are many aspects of this new law that ATPE opposes, which we expressed to lawmakers through oral testimony and written input on SB 1412 and HB 4205 as they were moving through the legislative process earlier this year. Our opposition was based on the following formal positions that have been adopted by ATPE members:

  • ATPE opposes the use of student performance, including test scores, as the primary measure of a teacher’s effectiveness, as the determining factor for a teacher’s compensation, or as the primary rationale for an adverse employment action.
  • ATPE believes students’ state-level standardized test scores should not be a component of teacher evaluations until such time as they can be validated through a consensus of independent research and peer review for that purpose.
  • ATPE opposes the use of value-added modeling or measurement (VAM) at the individual teacher level for teacher evaluation purposes or decisions about continued employment of teachers. (Learn more about our VAM concerns here.)
  • ATPE supports incorporating measures of student growth at the campus level or higher into evaluations of educators as long as the measures are developed with educator input, piloted, and deemed statistically reliable.
  • ATPE opposes incentive or performance pay programs unless they are designed in an equitable and fair manner as determined by educators on a campus basis.

Your ATPE Governmental Relations team will be monitoring these pieces of legislation as they are implemented.


Next Monday, we will continue ATPE’s “New School Year, New Laws” series here on Teach the Vote with a post on assessment-related bills passed during the 2019 legislative session.

New School Year, New Laws: Student Discipline

As you re-enter the school building this year, it will be important to know how the more than 80 bills passed during the recent Texas legislative session will impact you and your students. Besides the obvious – the high-profile House Bill (HB) 3 by Rep. Dan Huberty (R-Kingwood) offering many schools and educators additional funding and a potential salary bump – there were a number of other bills passed in 2019 that will affect areas such as student discipline, charter schools, safety, and testing.

ATPE’s lobbyists will be here on Teach the Vote blogging about major bills in these areas every Monday over the next few weeks as part of our “New School Year, New Laws” series. This week, we will discuss changes you will see in your school due to new discipline-related legislation.

Senate Bill (SB) 2432: Student behavior towards teachers

SB 2432 by Sen. Larry Taylor (R-Friendswood) allows for students who harass teachers to be removed to a Disciplinary Alternative Education Program (DAEP). Harassment is defined in Section 42.07 of the Texas Penal Code in several ways, each with an overall intent to harass, annoy, alarm, abuse, torment, or embarrass another. This bill takes effect on Sept. 1, 2019.

SB 712/HB 3630: Prohibiting aversive techniques on students

SB 712 by Sen. Eddie Lucio, Jr. (D-Brownsville) and HB 3630 by Rep. Morgan Meyer (R-Highland Park) are identical bills that prohibit the use of certain techniques on students that are meant to discourage recurring behaviors. These aversive techniques are defined in physical terms, such as inflicting pain on a student, as well as in social, emotional, and mental terms, such as verbally demeaning a student or using a timeout when such breaks are not a part of the student’s individualized education plan (IEP). This legislation does not affect a teacher’s ability to remove students under Texas Education Code Section 37.002, which allows teachers to remove students who are repetitively disruptive and limiting the learning of others. Both bills were effective immediately upon their passage earlier this year.

HB 692: Suspension of students who are homeless

HB 692 by Rep. James White (R-Hillister) prohibits a school district or charter school from placing a student who is homeless in out-of-school suspension, with certain exceptions for serious offenses. The bill allows the campus behavior coordinator to work with the district’s homeless liaison to help identify alternatives to out-of-school suspension for students who are homeless. This bill was also effective immediately upon passage.

HB 811: Discipline of students who are homeless

HB 811, also by Rep. White (R-Hillister), requires a school district board of trustees to include in their code of conduct certain provisions relative to students who may be homeless. Specifically, when determining student suspension, expulsion, or removal to a DAEP or Juvenile Justice Alternative Education Program (JJAEP), consideration shall be given to whether a student is in the conservatorship of the Department of Family and Protective Services (DFPS) or is homeless. This bill was effective immediately upon passage.

It is important for educators to know how this legislation will impact their rights as educators, their classroom practice, and their students’ rights. Please see the recently released To The Administrator Addressed correspondence from the Texas Education Agency (TEA) for more legislative changes affecting student discipline.


Be sure to watch for a new Teach the Vote blog post next week on more changes coming to your school as a result of the 2019 Texas legislative session.

House Public Education Committee hears 38 bills on charters, assessment, and discipline

On Tuesday, April 9, 2019, the House Public Education Committee heard 38 bills, which were overwhelmingly related to charter schools. A few bills regarding accountability, assessment, and student discipline were also heard. The vast majority of charter schools bills focused on raising the transparency and accountability of charters and on creating parity between traditional districts and charters.

ATPE registered support for the following bills:

  • House Bill (HB) 43 (Hinojosa, et al., D-Austin): Would add “discipline history” to the list of prohibited factors a charter can take into account when accepting students and removes the ability of charters to exclude students with documented history of criminal offense, juvenile court adjudication, or discipline problems. Does allow charters with at least 75% students who are 18 years or older to provide for these exclusions.
  • HB 139 (González, M., D-Clint): Would require charters to provide notice of an expansion amendment to open a new campus just as is required for entirely new charters. The notice must be provided no later than 18 months before the campus opens and include geographic specificity.
  • HB 228 (Krause, R-Fort Worth): Would create new eligibility standards for districts to become a District of Innovation (DOI), including academic performance eligibility and financial eligibility, as determined by the commissioner. Requires that the DOI plan establish performance objectives for the district.
  • HB 570 (Capriglione, R-Southlake): Would require the governing bodies of charter holders and charter schools to hold each open meeting in the geographic area in which the charter served and to be broadcast over the Internet (these changes were made in a committee substitute).
  • HB 636 (White, R-Hillister): Applies to the disclosure of interested parties involved in contracts that require a vote by the governing body of the governmental entities or have a value of at least $1 million. Would include open-enrollment charters as governmental entities, just as public school districts are.
  • HB 1730 (Davis, Y., D-Dallas): Would require that new and expanded charter campuses be more than one mile from another open-enrollment charter campus, unless the other campus has been operating at maximum student enrollment described by their charter for at least the two preceding school years.
  • HB 1853 (Pacheco, D-San Antonio): Would require charters to hire certified educators and protect educator rights, including for principals.
  • HB 1981 (Cole, D-Austin): Would expand notification requirements to apply to charter expansion amendments and would require the notice to identify the closest public school campus to the charter.
  • HB 2487 (Dutton, D-Houston): Would make charters subject to the provision of Government Code chapter 617 regarding collective bargaining and strikes.
  • HB 2510 (Hinojosa, et al., D-Austin): Would require that charters post their code of conduct on their website and require it to include suspension policies. Requires that charter policies and procedures for suspension and expulsion comply with Chapter 37 of the Texas Education Code and that suspensions not exceed three days.
  • HB 2621 (Bailes, R-Shepherd): Would create a common admission application form for charters and requires the commissioner to manage a waiting list. Each charter would be required to report to the commissioner information on enrollment and waiting list numbers. Would also require the commissioner to identify which charters are corporate affiliates or substantially related charters holders and aggregate this information, to be posted online with the aggregated enrollment and waiting list numbers reported from the charters.
  • HB 2760 (Allison, R-San Antonio): States that districts can submit a statement to the commissioner regarding the impact a new charter school or charter expansion will have on the district. The commissioner would be required to issue an impact report on the charter application that includes information related to how the charter will affect the community, educational availability and duplication, financial burden on district, cost to state, and the written statement aforementioned. The impact report will be made public on the TEA website and provided to the charter or applicant and the others who are to receive the currently required notice.
  • HB 2776 (Allison, R-San Antonio): Would require charters to prepare and submit to TEA an “informed choice report” that includes academic information, demographic information, their calendar, information on transportation and meals, information on extracurriculars and academic course offerings, parental requirements, rights, and responsibilities, teacher statistics including salary, number on the waiting list, admission criteria, discipline policies, rates of disciplinary action, if the school uses an online program, number of school counselors and nurses, and if students have access to a library.
  • HB 2824 (VanDeaver, R-New Boston): Would extend Rep. VanDeaver’s writing pilot from the 84th session (HB 1164) through 2022-2023. This writing portfolio assessment tests the feasibility of replacing the current 26-line essay requirement. Would require the agency to develop methods to determine the validity of the scoring process. Rep. VanDeaver said that there were 30,000 students participating in Spring of 2018, and only 5-6 staff members in charge of the pilot at TEA.
  • HB 2964 (Davis, Y., D-Dallas): Would prohibit the employment of those who have engaged in misconduct that presents a risk to students, as documented by either a school district or the State Board for Educator Certification.
  • HB 2983 (Huberty, R-Humble): Would reduce the number of state-administered assessments for students who have already demonstrated mastery in certain subjects, potentially reducing tests from 17 to 10.
  • HB 2987 (Ramos, D-Richardson): Would require charters to post for each governing board member their biographical information, business interests, if they are elected or appointed, and the length of their service.
  • HB 3013 (Talarico, et al., D-Round Rock): States that charters are subject to the law regarding the suspension of students and restricts the reasons charters can expel students only to Section 37.007 of the Texas Education Code.
  • HB 3069 (González, M., et al., D-Clint): Would require the commissioner to establish a professional development grant program to encourage teachers to obtain computer science certification and continue professional development in coding, computational thinking, and computer science education.
  • HB 3263 (Allen, D-Houston): Would protect charter school employees under the Whistleblower Act, just as school district employees are.
  • HB 3877 (Ramos, D-Richardson): Would require charter schools to post their financial statements through a clearly identifiable link that appears in a prominent place on their home page.
  • HB 4242 (Bernal, et al., D-San Antonio): Would require that state assessments be evaluated by an independent group of qualified educators with Texas teaching experience for readability. Requires the commissioner to hold a public hearing before determining the readability of the assessments and requires that the readability be released for each questions and passage along with the questions and answer keys (at the appropriate time). Requires the State Board of Education to review assessment instruments and places a one-year pause on accountability and testing until unless the readability standards are met. Requires the commissioner to request a federal waiver if standards are not met.

ATPE submitted  written, neutral testimony on Chairman Dan Huberty’s (R-Humble) HB 3904. HB 3904, in general, is a “clean-up” bill for last session’s HB 22, and aims to clarify and specify the law to match the original intent of the policy. The bill clarifies the treatment of dual credit as an accountability measure and adds in complete coherent industry certification course sequences, students who participate in extracurriculars, and ninth graders who are on track to graduate with their cohort. For K-8, the bill adds indicators accounting for students who participate in full-day pre-K, students who participate in math and literacy academies, and students who participate in extracurriculars. Importantly, the bill limits the domain performance ratings to be no more than 50% reliant on test scores. For the student achievement domain, 40% would be attributed assessments, 20% from high school graduation, and 40% from CCMR. The bill also makes changes to accountability for dropout recovery schools. Individual graduation committees are also continued in this bill.

ATPE did not support the provision in the original bill that allowed the commissioner to order reconstitution of a below-standard campus and implement “strategic staffing”, which was largely based on test performance-based measures of teachers. The Chairman has changed the bill in a committee substitute to eliminate this provision, which is great!

The following bills were also heard in committee:

  • HB 769 (Davis, S., et al., R-West University Place): Would require the board of trustees to receive approval from the commissioner for any severance payment to a superintendent who has been terminated based on malfeasance. Further requires that Foundation School Program funds may not be used to pay the severance and that no severance may be paid to a superintendent who has completed less than 51% of their contract. The committee substitute for the bill clarifies the definition of malfeasance and removes retroactive reporting.
  • HB 1003 (Collier, D-Fort Worth): Would create an admission preference for students who reside in the attendance zone of the school district within which the charter is located. Allows for a separate lottery for these students.
  • HB 1301 (Davis, S., R-West University Place): Would require school districts with enrollment of 10,000 or more to publish monthly web reports on board minutes, plans, and objectives, and quarterly reports on academic achievement and district finances. This bill is aimed at only affecting Houston ISD.
  • HB 2190 (Hunter, R-Corpus Christi): This bill only applies to a charter with an enrollment greater than 200 located in a county with less than 400,000 that contains a municipality of least 300,000 (aimed specifically at a Corpus Christi area school). Allows the charter to admit a child of a school employee. Testimony on the bill was positive and Hunter said that he would entertain the bill being statewide. Chairman Huberty said they could change the bill to impact the entire state as an amendment on the House floor.
  • HB 2406 (Geren, R-Fort Worth): States that a charter may not spend public funds for political advertising or for communications describing measures that are false or could influence voters. Brings parity to charters, as school districts are already subject to this law.
  • HB 2488 (Dutton, D-Houston): States that if a charter school has 5,000 or more students in average daily attendance, it is considered to be a state agency for purposes of Chapter 2161 of the Government Code regarding Historically Underutilized Business (HUB). Just as school districts do, charters would have to comply with provisions regarding HUBs, which would include a commitment to increasing contracting opportunities with these businesses.
  • HB 2991 (Talarico, D-Round Rock): Would require, rather than allow, districts and charters to develop and implement a positive behavior and restorative justice program. Through the program, the district or school can provide an alternative to suspension. Creates, in Chapter 37 of the Texas Education Code, a restorative justice coordinating council to assist the agency and school districts in developing restorative justice programs and training.
  • HB 3012 (Talarico, et al., D-Round Rock): Would require that school districts provide students an alternative means of instruction for the classes the student misses while in in-school suspension (ISS) or out-of-school suspension (OSS), and that at least one option should not require the use of the internet. The committee substitute for this bill reduces this requirement to only apply to core courses and states that the instruction doesn’t have to be in-person.
  • HB 3155 (Deshotel, D-Beaumont): Would require municipalities to regard charters as school districts for purposes of zoning, permitting, code compliance, and development. Also applies land development standards to charters. Would prohibit municipalities, counties, or political subdivisions from enacting or enforcing an ordinance that prohibits a charter school from operation.
  • HB 3219 (Allison, R-San Antonio): Would allow campus behavior coordinators to create behavior contracts for students who violate the code of conduct and require their parent to sign the contract as a condition of not taking immediate action against the student.
  • HB 3322 (Burns, R-Cleburne): Would require school districts to post who is responsible for discipline on their website. According to testimony, the bill arose out of a town hall by Senator Kolkhorst.
  • HB 3398 (Johnson, Jarvis, D-Houston): Would require the TEA committee responsible for reviewing accountability appeals to review the challenges by school districts or charters. Requires that the commissioner not limit the challenge if the school district or charter created the inaccuracy and requires that the commissioner correct the rating if the rating assigned was too low.
  • HB 3861 (Bohac, R-Houston): Would allow districts who have been granted program charters by their board and who have contracted with a charter to jointly operate the campus and receive district-charter funding under last session’s SB 1882. Rep. Bohac said that this would only affect Spring Branch ISD and Aldine ISD in the Houston area, as these districts already have such program charters.
  • HB 3941 (Deshotel, D-Beaumont): Would require TEA to develop a process for providers to apply for the authority to operate an online adult high school diploma from for eligible students. Student must reside in Texas, be 19 or older, have been unable to satisfy high school graduation requirements at the normal time, have been unable to meet the graduation requirements of any other program, and meet any other requirements as set out by the commissioner.
  • HB 4209 (Davis, Y., D-Dallas): Would require that charter governing board members are elected and that their terms do not exceed four years. Parents of students enrolled would be able to vote. Rep. Davis said that the bill will be revised.

The Committee will meet again this Thursday for a formal meeting just to vote out bills that have been heard by the Committee so far. Chairman Huberty stated at the end of the hearing that most of the controversial bills have been heard now, but that nearly 600 bills have been referred to them. There are still several weeks of session to go and many more important bill topics to cover! Stay tuned.