Tag Archives: teacher pay

Early budget proposals include boosts for educators, classrooms

The Texas House of Representatives and Texas Senate released their initial budget recommendations this week, and each includes significant additional funding for public education.

The proposals drafted by the Legislative Budget Board (LBB) represent each chamber’s opening bid in budget negotiations for the 2020-21 fiscal biennium. The budget is the only bill the legislature is constitutionally required to pass within its 140-day session. If it fails to do so, lawmakers will be called back into one or more special sessions until a budget is passed.

The 2020-21 House budget proposal includes $7.1 billion in additional general revenue funds appropriated for public education, which represents a 17.2 percent increase over the 2018-2019 biennium. Looking at all funds, public education would see a $10.1 billion, 16.7 percent increase, under the House’s proposal.

The base budget is structured around sufficient funding to maintain services at the current level, and the additional funding comes from a single budget rider that appropriates an additional $9 billion contingent upon the 86th Texas Legislature enacting legislation to increase the state’s share of Foundation School Program (FSP) funding, enhancing district entitlement, reducing recapture, and providing local property tax relief.

Details of the House proposal are spelled out under Rider 77 (page 301 of the House budget):

77. Additional Foundation School Program Funds for Increasing the State Share, Enhancing School District Entitlement, Reducing Recapture, and Providing Tax Relief. It is the intent of the Eighty-Sixth Legislature to adopt comprehensive school finance legislation and provide local property tax relief. In addition to amounts appropriated above in Strategy A.1.1., FSP – Equalized Operations, and Strategy A.1.2., FSP – Equalized Facilities, $4.5 billion in fiscal year 2020 and $4.5 billion in fiscal year 2021 is appropriated out of the Foundation School Fund No. 193 to be used for the purposes specified in this rider.

The amounts appropriated in this rider are contingent on enactment of legislation supporting school districts and charter schools by increasing the state share of the Foundation School Program, enhancing district entitlement, reducing recapture, and providing local property tax relief, while maintaining an equitable system of school finance. Options may include, but are not limited to, increasing the Basic Allotment and providing additional funding for early childhood education, special education, and teacher compensation.

A portion of the amounts appropriated in this rider shall be used to provide local property tax relief. Funds shall be used to enable the compression of local maintenance and operations (M&O) property tax collections, pursuant to the provisions of the legislation, while ensuring school districts do not receive less total state and local funding through the FSP.

The $9.0 billion in Foundation School Fund No. 193 appropriated in this rider represents new state funding for school districts and charter schools above amounts estimated to fully fund current law. The $43.6 billion in current law appropriations provided above in Rider 3 includes the amount necessary to fully fund $2.4 billion in enrollment growth and $2.2 billion in additional state aid above 2018-19 funding levels associated with the increase under current law in the Guaranteed Yield associated with the Austin Independent School District in accordance with §41.002(a)(2) and §42.302(a-1)(1) of the Texas Education Code.

The Senate’s proposal would increase public education funding by $4.3 billion or 10.3 percent from general revenue, or $7 billion all funds — an 11.6 percent increase. This proposal includes an additional $3.7 billion to provide all teachers with a $5,000 raise effective at the start of the 2019-20 school year and $2.3 billion to reduce reliance on recapture. Senate Bill (SB) 3 filed Tuesday by state Sen. Jane Nelson (R-Flower Mound) would authorize the pay raise, if passed. Lower bill numbers are generally reserved each session for high-priority bills.

The governor, lieutenant governor, and speaker have each declared increasing teacher pay a high priority this session. Due to the publicity surrounding teacher pay, ATPE expects several teacher compensation bills to be filed this session. Our governmental relations team will be analyzing each one to determine how it is structured with regard to who is eligible and the extent to which it includes stable, reliable, and long-term state funding.

Providing additional money for teacher compensation and public education funding were the main topics in Tuesday’s Inauguration Day speeches at the Texas Capitol. Educators should note that this shift in focus among the state’s leaders is a direct result of educators’ increased involvement in the 2018 primary and general elections. Teachers, parents, and public education supporters sent a strong message that Texans demand better school funding and teacher pay. Even in instances where the pro-public education candidate was not elected, the strong showing by public school advocates successfully forced many elected officials to reexamine their stance on public education issues.

Make no mistake, we are only at this point because educators voted, rallied, and lobbied legislators like never before. Educators must keep a close eye on lawmakers over the next five months to ensure they follow through on their promises. ATPE will be bringing you regular updates on legislative proceedings, including changes to these early drafts of the budget and various compensation bills, and educators should remain vigilant and ready to make your voices heard at a moment’s notice. Visit ATPE’s Advocacy Central to learn more and share your own views on school funding and educator compensation with your own elected officials.

House releases public education recommendations

The House Committee on Public Education issued its interim report this month, which serves as a summary of testimony taken during the interim and includes a set of recommendations for the 86th Texas Legislature to take up.

The 88-page report addresses the response to Hurricane Harvey, teacher compensation, student assessment, students with disabilities, charter schools, implementation of legislation passed by the 85th Texas Legislature, educator preparation programs, and school safety.

Chairman Dan Huberty (R-Houston) thanked members of the committee for their work, noting, “the extraordinary events that occurred since the last session adjourned spurred members to delve deeply into what some may view as difficult topics without the time constraints of a legislative session.”

Hurricane Harvey

Recommendations include making local education agencies (LEA) whole for financial losses due to enrollment changes, property value decline, and facility damage. The report suggests the committee consider possible legislation to help schools quickly access replacement instructional materials, provide timely assistance to Chapter 42 districts that experience facility damage, and improve the Texas Education Agency’s (TEA) dropout calculation methodology.

Teacher Compensation

Recommendations include creating an additional certification for teachers in leadership positions, such as “Master Teachers,” to allow for career growth without having to leave the classroom and move to administration. The committee also recommends creating new allotments through the Foundation School Program (FSP) to fund mentoring programs and to provide differentiated compensation plans. The report specifies:

TEA should create at least two compensation plan options for use by LEAs that do not have the capacity or desire to develop their own version. While LEAs should be allowed the flexibility to create programs that benefit their own particular circumstances, locally-designed programs should be required to include the following components:

1. a multiple measure evaluation system, such as the state-developed Texas Teacher
Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS);
2. incentives to encourage top performing teachers to work at campuses with the highest
need students;
3. a requirement for top performing teachers to serve as mentors and that at least first and
second year teachers are assigned a mentor; and
4. stipends for teachers or teacher candidates that participate in additional, rigorous training
such as clinical residency programs or the National Board-certification process.

Student Assessment 

Recommendations include supporting efforts by the State Board of Education (SBOE) to streamline the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS), limiting STAAR to readiness standards, making individual graduation committees (IGC) for students who have difficulties with the STAAR permanently available, eliminating high stakes testing for elementary and middle school students, splitting the STAAR in early grades into subtests scheduled on separate days, and providing funding to continue the Writing Assessment Pilot Program.

Students with Disabilities

Recommendations include monitoring TEA implementation of the corrective action plan and Strategic Plan for Special Education, providing additional funding for dyslexia identification and instruction, monitoring for the potential negative impact of changes under the Student Health and Related Services (SHARS) program, and extending funding for dyslexia and autism pilot programs.

Charter Schools 

Recommendations include requiring expansion amendment requests for additional campuses or sites to be sent to TEA and notice given to districts at least a year before a new campus is openened, ensuring uniformity among which district officials receive expansion amendment notifications, reconsidering current laws that allow charters to exclude students based on disciplinary history, ensuring charters have the ability to fulfill their responsibilities towards students with disabilities before authorization, reducing funding disparities between charters and traditional school districts, and expanding the Texas Partnership program.

Implementation of Legislation 

The report focuses on the implementation of anti-cyberbullying legislation under House Bill (HB) 179, known as David’s Law, and to changes to the accountability system under HB 22. Regarding the accountability system, recommendations include monitoring the inclusion of extra- and co-curricular indicators and local accountability systems, revisiting certain college, career, and military readiness (CCMR) indicators, exploring options to alleviate timing issues that exist with regard to the accountability system and rulemaking, and including additional funding to cover the costs of federally-mandated SAT and ACT assessments for certain students.

Educator Preparation Programs

Recommendations include monitoring TEA implementation of the educator preparation program (EPP) data dashboard, collecting disaggregated longitudinal data on student outcomes of teachers by EPP, and incentivizing EPP partnerships that provide affordable options to gain additional credentials and certifications.

School Safety

In response to the deadly school shootings in Santa Fe, Texas, and elsewhere, the committee’s report includes four pages of recommendations regarding school safety. The recommendations are broken in subcategories covering mental health and well-being, school mental health professionals, school safety planning and training, school safety infrastructure, law enforcement resources, and charter school specific issues.

These recommendations are expected to become the basis of major bills that move through the House Public Education Committee this session. Under new House rules adopted Wednesday, the committee will expand to 13 members from 11. The committee’s chair and membership for this session will be assigned by newly-elected Speaker Dennis Bonnen (R-Angleton). The full interim report can be accessed here.

School finance commission discusses initial recommendations

School finance commission meeting Dec. 11, 2018.

The Texas Commission on Public School Finance met Tuesday in Austin to discuss recommendations for the commission’s report, which is due to the legislature by the end of the month. The initial draft recommendations can be viewed here, and additional resources can be found here.

The draft report includes a recommendation that the 86th Texas Legislature “inject significant additional annual state revenue” through new strategic allotments and weights outlined in the commission’s report, including about $1.7 billion in specific areas. The report adds that for the purposes of new funding, members should note that an increase of $500 million in state funding is equal to a roughly 0.9 percent increase over the last budget biennium. This would be formula funding, targeted at the neediest studies, and tied to specific outcomes.

Commission Chair Scott Brister voiced reservations, suggesting that asking the legislature for significant additional funding is not the commission’s job. He later clarified that his chief opposition was to placing a dollar figure on additional funding. Several members pushed back, including House Public Education Committee Chair Dan Huberty (R-Houston), who said he would not sign a report that does not call for additional school funding.

The report also calls for reallocating $5.34 billion in existing funds to more impactful spending and greater system-wide equity. The commission recommends significant investment to substantially increase third grade reading levels. Outcomes-based funding would be targeted toward early literacy and post-secondary access of career, military, or higher education without remediation.

The commission is recommending a high-quality teacher allotment, initially funded at $200 million, for districts wishing to offer differentiated compensation to pay their most effective educators higher salaries sooner in their career. This would be contingent on districts creating locally-developed, multi-measure evaluation and compensation systems based on an outline created by the legislature. This includes the state setting a goal that top teachers have a path to a $100,000 salary and incentivizing districts to assign top teachers to the most challenging campuses.

Finally, the draft report calls for statutorily increasing the basic allotment, though it does not specify a specific amount. It calls for increasing the yield on “copper pennies” and compressing the rate in order to provide tax relief, as well as reducing the role of recapture in the school finance system. The report makes no recommendations regarding special education, instead suggesting that the current corrective action plan approved by the U.S. Department of Education should be completed before any additional reforms are discussed.

Discussing the commission’s major findings, Brister acknowledged that schools are being asked to do more than ever before. This includes higher security standards and providing for the physical and mental well-being of students in addition to educating them. He then asked to strike language from the report that says the state has failed to adequately fund public education.

After breaking for lunch, the commission returned for more in-depth discussion on individual recommendations. Commission member Todd Williams of the Commit Partnership in Dallas pointed out that the teacher compensation portion of the plan (Section D) does not include specific funding for strategic staffing such as that implemented by the Dallas ISD ACE program, which is intended to incentivize top teachers to teach at the highest-need campuses. Williams argued the evaluation system and strategic staffing system should be treated as separate and funded accordingly.

State Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R-Houston) then laid out the recommendations from the working group he chaired on revenues. The group’s primary recommendation is to adopt Gov. Greg Abbott’s plan to cap local property tax revenue growth. The plan suggests capping growth at 2.5 percent annually, and replacing revenue lost by school districts with state funding. The governor’s office does not specify how much this would cost or from where the replacement funding would come.

Texas Education Agency (TEA) Chief School Finance Officer Leo Lopez presented a chart addressing the three plans endorsed by Bettencourt’s group, which suggests that the governor’s plan would reduce local maintenance and operations (M&O) tax collections by nearly $1 billion and increase school district revenue by $300 million in 2020 at a cost of roughly $1.3 billion. By 2023, the governor’s plan is projected to reduce M&O tax collection by $3.7 billion while increasing school district revenues by $74 million. Lopez pointed out that this is primarily a tax relief plan, as opposed to a school finance plan, which explains why future funding is projected to flatten out.

The commission discussed the level of emphasis that should be placed upon the governor’s revenue cap plan. Members pointed out the interrelation of property taxes and school finance, as well as the need to focus on the commission’s statutory charge, which is to fix the school finance system. The governor’s plan alone would not change the fundamental mechanics of the school finance system.

Sen. Bettencourt has argued that the state’s coffers will be flush heading into the next budget cycle based on tax revenue from booming oil and gas production, but the state comptroller has yet to release a formal biennial revenue estimate (BRE) with hard numbers upon which to base a budget. State Rep. Ken King (R-Canadian), who represents oil and gas-dependent west Texas, cautioned against relying on oil and gas as a reliable, long-term funding source. A combination of the governor’s plan and the commission’s recommendations for additional public education spending could add up to a price tag north of $5 billion for the upcoming budget biennium.

The commission is scheduled to meet next Wednesday, Dec. 19, 2018, to vote on final recommendations. The commission is required by law to submit its report to the legislature by December 31.

ATPE’s Shannon Holmes facilitates teacher pay discussion

ATPE Executive Director Dr. Shannon Holmes moderated a panel discussion on teacher compensation Thursday at a conference for the Texas Association of Midsize Schools (TAMS). The discussion included state Reps. Gary VanDeaver (R-New Boston), who is a member of the Texas House Public Education Committee, and Travis Clardy (R-Nacogdoches), who filed a high-profile teacher compensation bill in 2017 during the 85th Texas Legislature.

Both representatives agreed about the need to increase teacher compensation, which has become a major topic of discussion heading into the 86th Texas Legislature. Some of the most serious plans proposed thus far have featured differentiated pay, in which top-performing teachers are eligible for higher paychecks. Rep. VanDeaver noted that the major concern with these plans revolves around how top-performing teachers are identified. ATPE has consistently warned that student test scores should not be the primary metric for this purpose.

Rep. Gary VanDeaver, ATPE Executive Director Shannon Holmes, and Rep. Travis Clardy at the TAMS conference on Dec. 6, 2018

Rep. Clardy acknowledged that a critical part of any raise this session will be identifying state funding for that purpose. Legislation addressing teacher pay during the 2017 special session did not include state funding and instead asked districts to pay for raises out of their own pockets, which effectively tabled the discussion.

The conference featured other panels related to public education, including one featuring state Reps. Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) and Ken King (R-Canadian), both members of the House Public Education Committee, as well as State Board of Education (SBOE) Member Keven Ellis (R-Lufkin). All three serve on the Texas Commission on Public School Finance, which was created in part by the failure of a House-sponsored school finance reform bill last session. Rep. Bernal vowed that if the commission fails to come up with a real plan to reform the finance system before the new session begins, the House will come up with its own plan and challenge the Senate to pass it.

Thursday’s event furthered underscored the extent to which the focus will be on public education in the upcoming legislative session. Many lawmakers who have seemed uninterested in addressing school finance in the past are now championing reform efforts. Rep. King and others suggested Thursday that the results of the most recent election sent a strong message that Texas voters want legislators who will advance the interests of public education.

Guest Post: Dan Patrick is lying about teacher raises

As an educator, I find Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick’s bogus $10,000 raise claim offensive

By Carl Garner

 

Carl Garner

There seems to be no end to what the lieutenant governor will say in his attempt to convince Texans that he is pro-public education.

Among the daily barrage of television ads to which Texans have been subjected recently, one lie stands out for its particular audacity.

In his most recent ad, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick (R-Texas) doubles down on an already debunked claim that he proposed giving teachers a $10,000 raise during the last legislative session.

As an educator, I am startled by this claim for a number of reasons.

At no point during the regular session did Lt. Gov. Patrick show any concern for increasing educator pay. Only after the close of the regular session, when it became clear that his anti-education agenda might finally push educators into action at the polls, did Patrick entertain talk of a raise. The Senate briefly considered a far more modest $1,000 raise but refused to fund it – suggesting cash-strapped districts simply “find the money” to make it happen.

Had that proposal passed, many districts would have had to fire good educators to be able to fund the raises of their former colleagues. Once educators realized Lt. Gov. Patrick and his Senate weren’t serious about truly helping us, we walked away frustrated, if unsurprised.

As far as Lt. Gov. Patrick’s respect for teachers goes, it was nowhere more evident than in his push last session to effectively kick them out of the Capitol through legislation hindering their ability to voluntarily participate in professional associations that advocate for higher standards and more student resources.

Politicians lie. I get it.

But I confess this lie cuts me in a way that is deeply personal.

As an educator, I know what it’s like to spend $400 out of my own pocket every year on classroom supplies for my students. I know the suffocating feeling of watching my healthcare costs go up as my salary stays the same. I know what it’s like to work 12-hour days only to flip on the radio and hear people like Dan Patrick accuse us of failing our kids.

Under Lt. Gov. Patrick, the Texas Senate has steadily decreased the state’s share of public school funding to just 36 percent, forcing local school districts to make up the difference by hiking up local property taxes. Now we’re to believe this same lieutenant governor secretly proposed a $10,000 raise for 350,000 teachers – which would cost more than $4 billion a year – and somehow we missed it?

In fact, the lieutenant governor was so loath to invest another dime in public education last session that he killed a bill that would have contributed as much as 1.9 billion additional dollars to our state’s 5.4 million schoolchildren. Why? He wanted a taxpayer-funded voucher for his private school friends.

Who exactly is failing our kids, Mr. Patrick?

The $10,000 raise claim is so ludicrous that the non-biased fact-checkers at PolitiFact Texas found it false back in February, but Mr. Patrick keeps repeating it. In doing so, he cheapens the genuine personal struggles I and other educators face as a result of his politics.

Perhaps if he’d gone to school in Texas, he’d have been taught that it’s wrong to lie. Perhaps he’d help Texas teachers instead of attack us. Despite his attempts to rewrite history, educators know who Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick is.

Perhaps that’s his problem.

Carl Garner, Jr., is ATPE’s Past State President. He is a teacher in Mesquite ISD.

12 Days of Voting: Teacher Pay

Early voting is underway NOW for the November 6 elections, so we’re taking a look at some of the reasons why it’s so important that educators vote TODAY!

In this series, we plan to post an article on each of the 12 days of early voting that highlights a specific reason to vote. For our first post, we’re taking a closer look at teacher pay.


By now, you’ve probably seen the recent campaign advertisements by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick regarding pay raises for teachers, which PolitiFact has determined to be FALSE. This brings us to an important reason for educators to head to the polls this year: Teacher pay.

The average Texas teacher earned $52,525 in 2016, below the national average of $58,064. Nationwide, average teacher salaries in 2016 ranged from $42,025 in South Dakota on the low end to a high end of $77,957 in New York.

Texas educators have tirelessly advocated for better pay. Each legislative session, pro-public education legislators file bills to raise teacher salaries, while anti-education legislators file bills to eliminate salary minimums. Because of the costs associated with increasing pay across-the-board for more than 350,000 teachers, raises have historically been blocked by legislators who argue schools already get too much state funding. These same legislators are often the ones behind bills that would allow schools to pay less by repealing the minimum salary schedule that functions as a minimum wage for educators.

Recently, some anti-education officeholders have begun to offer lip service in support of raising teacher pay as a means of providing cover for their efforts to defund schools and weaken teachers’ political voice.

Examples of this can be found in the special session of the 85th Texas Legislature. Gov. Greg Abbott, Lt. Gov. Patrick, and others spent the entire regular session promoting unpopular and harmful voucher programs that would have stripped desperately-needed resources from public schools in order to subsidize private businesses. At the same time, they pushed deeply offensive legislation that singled out educators in an attempt to make it more difficult for them to join professional associations like ATPE. Meanwhile, educators learned that their healthcare costs would soon be going up dramatically.

Faced with withering criticism by outraged educators at the start of the 2017 special session, Gov. Abbott and Lt. Gov. Patrick hastily proposed giving teachers a $1,000 raise – but refused to offer any state funding to pay for it. The Texas Senate quickly whittled the idea down to a one-time bonus, before abandoning it altogether. In the meantime, more serious proposals were left to wither on the vine.

Make no mistake, Lt. Gov. Patrick’s claim to have sought a $10,000 raise for teachers is laughable. However our effort to secure better pay is no joke. ATPE has spent the interim in discussions with lawmakers about various ways in which to increase teacher pay, and we expect to see a robust conversation around teacher pay in the upcoming legislative session.

Perhaps ironically for Abbott and Patrick, the ordeal had the rather unintended consequence of galvanizing educators to pursue a meaningful, permanent, and fully-funded increase in teacher pay. Yet the only way such a raise will be successfully passed is if Texas voters elect enough pro-public education legislators willing to prioritize this issue. Otherwise, teacher pay will continue to take a back seat to other issues during future legislative sessions.


Go to the CANDIDATES section of our Teach the Vote website to find out where officeholders and candidates in your area stand on this and other public education issues.

Remind your colleagues also about the importance of voting and making informed choices at the polls. While it is illegal to use school district resources (like your work e-mail) to communicate information that supports or opposes specific candidates or ballot measures, there is NO prohibition on sharing nonpartisan resources and general “get out of the vote” reminders about the election.

Early voting in the 2018 general election runs Monday, October 22, through Friday, November 2. Election Day is November 6, but there’s no reason to wait. Get out there and use your educator voice by casting your vote TODAY!

ATPE testifies at Texas Capitol regarding teacher pay

The House Public Education Committee met Wednesday at the Texas Capitol to discuss interim charges relating to teacher compensation and charter schools. Chairman Dan Huberty (R-Houston) began by noting that this meeting concludes the committee’s interim charges, and he does not plan on calling another committee meeting this year.

House Public Education Committee meeting August 8, 2018.

Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner Mike Morath kicked off the day’s invited testimony with an update on the state’s “A through F” accountability system. The agency is expected to release the first round of ratings for districts on August 15, while campuses will still be rated under the “met standard/improvement required” system until next year. Morath explained a number of adjustments to the system that were made as a result of stakeholder feedback.

Asked by Rep. Huberty how the ratings compare to last year when measured under the current system, Morath said the state lost a total of 260 improvement required (IR) campuses, representing a historic year-over-year improvement. Asked about the impact of the TEA waiver for IR campuses affected by Hurricane Harvey, the commissioner explained that 1,200 campuses were eligible for relief under the Harvey protocols. Of those, “something like 86” campuses that were on track to receive an IR designation instead received a “not rated” designation under the waiver.

Rep. Gary VanDeaver (R-New Boston) expressed concern over the system’s dependence on high-stakes testing, and cautioned members of the committee against using tests in ways for which they are not intended. Morath indicated his belief that summative assessments such as the STAAR are perfectly suited for evaluating campus-level effectiveness.

Morath then shifted to the following interim charge designated by Speaker Joe Straus (R-San Antonio):

Review current state mechanisms for identifying and rewarding educators through state-level strategies. Examine how providing additional funding to enhance compensation in districts facing a shortage of experienced, highly rated teachers would affect retention and teacher quality, in addition to whether it would encourage teachers to provide additional services through extracurricular activities, tutoring, and mentoring.

The commissioner began by laying out the new teacher appraisal system, T-TESS, as well as currently available training and curricular resources. Morath said teachers are the TEA’s first strategic priority, but said compensation is only part of the puzzle. The commissioner highlighted research showing that only 23% of new U.S. teachers came from the top third of their graduating class. Pay is the top reason college graduates choose not to become teachers, and average pay has fallen compared to other professions. Compensation similarly does not grow at the same rate as other professions. Morath praised the performance pay program in Dallas ISD, but Rep. Huberty steered the commissioner toward focusing on how to pay for such programs.

The commissioner indicated that in order to implement strategic staffing programs like the Dallas ISD ACE program that incentivizes high-performing teachers to teach at the most at-risk campuses, the state could provide additional formula funding through the Foundation School Program (FSP) tied to levels of economically disadvantaged students. Rep. Alma Allen (D-Houston) suggested the state should raise the base pay, including the minimum salary schedule. Morath indicated part of the challenge of instituting a performance-based pay system is identifying top teachers, but noted that many school systems have done so successfully. The commissioner also indicated that any funding to raise teacher pay should provide administrators a guarantee that funding will continue.

Chairman Huberty asked Morath direcly what it would cost to implement Dallas ISD’s performance pay program across the state of Texas. According to Morath, the program would carry a startup cost of around $50 million and an annual cost of roughly $1 billion over a ten-year period. This would provide average raises between $4,000-5,000, with top teachers able to earn up to six-figure salaries.

Vice-chair Diego Bernal (D-San Antonio) repeatedly questioned invited witnesses who cautioned against basing teacher evaluations on their students’ high-stakes test scores to provide an alternative metric to accurately identify top teachers. Representatives from educator organizations noted that standardized tests have not been validated for use evaluating the performance of individual teachers and pointed out there are a variety of alternatives.

ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter testifying before the House Public Education Committee, August 8, 2018.

ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter testified that the positive results from the Dallas ISD ACE system are not necessarily correlated with the district’s teacher evaluation system, which is called the Teacher Excellence Initiative (TEI). Exter clarified that designating top teachers to utilize under the ACE model could be done equally effectively by utilizing T-TESS or another alternative evaluation system. Chairman Huberty expressed frustration, and indicated any program involving additional money from the state should provide the state with policy input. Asked by Chairman Huberty to offer specific recommendations, Exter suggested that lawmakers must take a systemic approach to directing the best teachers to the campuses facing the highest challenges. Such an approach would begin with the teacher pipeline and include wraparound supports as well as the possibility of differentiated pay.

The committee next considered the following interim charge regarding charters:

Review the charter school system in Texas. Determine if changes are needed in the granting, renewal, or revocation of charter schools, including the timeline for expansions and notification of expansions to surrounding districts. Review the educational outcomes of students in charter schools compared to those in traditional schools, and to what extent schools participate in the alternative accountability system. Monitor the implementation of facilities funding for charter schools. Consider differences in state funding for charter schools compared to their surrounding districts and the impact on the state budget. Consider admissions policies for charters, including appropriate data collection to assess demand for additional charter enrollment, compliance with access by students with disabilities and the effect of exclusions of students with criminal or disciplinary histories. Consider differences in charter and district contributions to the Teacher Retirement System on behalf of their employees and make appropriate recommendations to support the retirement benefits of all public school teachers.

TEA staff opened testimony with an overview of charter school statistics and the metrics for evaluating new charter applications. Chairman Huberty noted that the number of charter school campuses has increased while the number of charter holders has held steady around the statutory cap. Members had several questions regarding the statistics, including how student discipline is handled, the higher percentage of IR campuses than traditional school districts, and types of services offered.

Chief School Finance Officer Leo Lopez provided information regarding TRS contributions, facilities funding, and the implementation of district partnership contracts through Senate Bill (SB) 1882. Lopez noted that charters are not required to pay teachers the minimum salary schedule. Chairman Huberty pointed out that TRS contributions are not indexed to anything other than the minimum salary schedule, which has been long outdated as a current reflection of teacher salaries. As a result, contributions have not automatically increased along with inflation.

This year, charters will be eligible for facilities funding equaling on average just over $200 per student. This funding is capped at $60 million dollars annually. Regarding the amount of funding charters receive compared to traditional school districts, Lopez contended charters receive both more and less. Lopez noted at the outset that student profiles are different for each. While charters have higher levels of economically disadvantaged students, they have fewer special education students. It is also important to note that there are significant differences even among economically disadvantaged students, and traditional districts continue to serve the most students in extreme poverty.

From The Texas Tribune: Texas teachers’ pay is average. But their pensions are among the lowest in the country.

By Alex Samuels, The Texas Tribune

Photo by Jacob Villanueva/iStock

Today’s Texplainer question was inspired by reader Tiffany Adair.

Hey, Texplainer: How do employment benefits for Texas educators compare to those in other states?

This question has been a point of contention between lawmakers and educators for many years. Texas teachers say they’re frustrated due to a lack of state funding for public education. But lawmakers say the uncertainty surrounding the budget makes it hard to allocate better benefits for educators.

If you look at the raw numbers, Texas ranked 27th in the nation for teacher pay in 2016, according to the National Education Association. On average, Texas teachers earned $51,890 — roughly $6,500 below the national average.

However, teachers have long argued that inadequate funding for public schools cuts into their salaries. During the 2008 fiscal year, the state covered roughly 48.5 percent of the cost of public education, according to the Legislative Budget Board. By the 2019 fiscal year, that figure will be closer to 38 percent. Over the same period, teacher salaries remained about the same [Texas teachers, on average, earned roughly $47,000 in 2008].

“One of the biggest costs to education are the teachers and other employees at a school district. That’s the biggest cost to the state,” said Clay Robison, a spokesman for the Texas State Teachers Association. “When you start cutting education in Texas, you’re shortchanging teachers. We’re already behind the national average when it comes to teacher pay, and we’re getting further behind.”

But salaries aren’t the only component to consider when looking at how Texas teachers fare compared to their peers in other states, said Ed Allen with the American Federation of Teachers.

“When looking at a nationwide comparison, most people factor in the salaries. But when teachers get older, what’s being paid into retirement and the health insurance becomes a really big deal,” Allen said.

When it comes to health care benefits, advocates say Texas teachers are stuck in 2002. That’s when state lawmakers created the plan known as TRS-ActiveCare. The teacher health insurance program, which is run by the Teacher Retirement System of Texas, requires the state to contribute $75 per employee toward monthly health care premiums.

Nearly 430,000 public school teachers and retirees are covered under the plan, which is used by many of the state’s 1,200-plus school districts. Since the program went into effect, employees’ share of premiums have more than doubled, while the state’s contribution to teacher’s health care has remained the same.

“When your salary is barely going up year after year, health care costs are going up considerably and you’re not getting any additional money put toward those healthcare cost by your employer — which is the state in this case — then effectively you’re taking a year over year cut to your salary,” said Monty Exter, a lobbyist at the Association of Texas Professional Educators.

Under the TRS-ActiveCare program, districts are also required to put a minimum of $150 per employee per month toward health insurance premiums, with the option of contributing more. But Exter said that can be difficult for districts as education budgets are squeezed.

Joel Solomon, a senior policy analyst with the National Education Association, said it’s hard to compare Texas teacher health insurance programs to other states since the structure of such programs varies nationwide. But, he said, “when we look at educators’ health benefits around the country and how important … ensuring quality health benefits to educators are, what we see in Texas is deeply troubling.”

When it comes to retirement funding, a majority of states pay into both a pension plan and Social Security. Texas is in the minority of states that only pay into a pension fund and does not pay into Social Security for the majority of its teachers — which means most Texas teachers won’t have access to Social Security benefits when they retire. Fewer than 50 of the state’s districts participate in Social Security on their own.

Among states that only offer a pension plan for teachers, Texas is dead last when it comes to funding its pension programs — by a lot.

For years, Texas only paid 6 percent — the constitutional minimum — into the Teacher Retirement System. It now pays 6.8 percent, according to the National Association of State Retirement Administrators. And the Texas Constitution says the state’s contributions to pension funds can’t eclipse 10 percent without a constitutional amendment approved by voters.

“The next closest non-Social Security state had a retirement contribution rate at least double ours,” said Ann Fickel, the associate executive director of the Texas Classroom Teachers Association. The median contribution for the other 14 other states that don’t pay into Social Security for their teachers is around 18 percent, she added.

“As retirees’ costs rise, especially for medical care, there will be pressure on lawmakers to find a way to increase benefits for retired teachers,” Fickel said.

The bottom line: When it comes to teacher pay, Texas ranked 27th in the nation — right around the middle. But Texas is dead last in teacher retirement funding and puts a little more than the minimum into the Teacher Retirement System.

Disclosure: The Texas State Teachers, the Association Association of Texas Professional Educators and the Texas Classroom Teachers Association have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

This article originally appeared in The Texas Tribune at https://www.texastribune.org/2018/04/20/texas-teachers-employee-benefits-dead-last-retirement-funding/.

 

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.

SBOE wraps April meeting with inspiring educators

The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) wrapped up its April meeting Friday, which began with moving remarks by Texas Association of School Boards (TASB) 2017 Superintendent of the Year LaTonya Goffney and Texas Association of School Administrators (TASA) 2018 Teacher of the Year Tara Bordeaux.

TASA 2018 Teacher of the Year Tara Bordeaux addressing the SBOE April 13, 2018.

At the age of 16, Bordeaux had dropped out of school and decided to take her life when one of her teachers showed up at the McDonald’s where she worked and turned her life around. Bordeaux went on to become a teacher herself, eventually landing at Lanier High School in Austin ISD, where she teaches audio-video production. Bordeaux emphasized the need for better training, support and compensation for teachers – explaining that teacher pay is important to make hardworking teachers feel like the valued, life-saving professionals they are.

Dr. Goffney moving board members to tears with her story of growing up amid poverty, addiction, and abuse. The love of her grandmother and the power of education propelled her rise from extremely difficult circumstances to a strong, successful educator. Bordeaux told the board, “This is the story of so many of our children.”

“But how many of you know there is a God?” asked Bordeaux, “And how many of you know there’s a God through public education? And both of those saved me.”

The board gave final approval to the creation of a Mexican American studies course under the name “Ethnic Studies: An Overview of Americans of Mexican Descent,” to be based on an innovative course developed by Houston ISD. Members voted against an amendment offered by Member Ruben Cortez (D-San Antonio) to restore the name to “Mexican American studies.”

“The Mexican American experience has been one of great struggles and great triumphs as clearly set out in the HISD Innovative Course proposed,” said SBOE Chair Donna Bahorich (R-Houston). “It is my sincere hope, and I believe I’m speaking for the entire board, that by encouraging the study of this beautiful and strong branch of our American family in a deeper way, we will engage and connect more of our Mexican American students in a way that is important for the future of the country. America is and always has been a land of dreams and hopes where everyone has a vital part to play, where we can be both proud of our own story, culture and heritage and yet hold close to our hearts what it means to be deeply proud Americans.”

 

The board approved initial curriculum for a high school course on the proper interaction with peace officers. Members also gave the green light to a number of items from Thursday’s committee meetings, which are detailed in this post.

Member Tom Maynard (R-Florence), vice-chair of the Committee on School Finance/Permanent School Fund, introduced a discussion regarding the development of branding and a logo for the Permanent School Fund (PSF) in order to increase awareness. Maynard suggested holding a student competition to come up with a logo design.

The board’s next meeting is scheduled June 12 through 15.

Long-Range Plan work ramping up

Members of the steering committee for the Long-Range Plan (LRP) for Public Education met Monday morning in Austin to get down to the work of preparing a report due this fall to the State Board of Education (SBOE). The work consisted of developing vision statements and recommendations for each of the four deep dive topics identified by the committee: Student engagement, family engagement and empowerment, equity of access, and teacher preparation, recruitment and retention.

Long-Range Plan steering committee meeting April 9, 2018.

The meeting began with an update from SBOE Member Barbara Cargill (R-The Woodlands), who recapped her testimony before the March 19 meeting of the Texas Commission on Public School Finance regarding the LRP. Cargill informed the commission that almost 700 people attended ten public meetings around the state, and nearly 11,500 people participated in an online survey regarding the LRP.

Members next discussed the purpose of the LRP, which has tentatively been described as sharing a “vision for where Texas could be in 2030 and how the state can work together to get there.” In addition, members aim to inform legislation and to inform stakeholders how to use the report. The group also discussed the primary audience for whom the report is intended, and chose to focus broadly on all education stakeholders, including teachers, administrators and elected officials.

Steering committee members discuss educator preparation, recruitment and retention.

Those participating in a focus group on educators Monday indicated several important areas in pursuit of an overall vision statement. These included a competitive teacher compensation system, elevating the teaching profession, highly qualified educator preparation programs, an effective support system for all teachers, teachers equipped for the classroom environment, and helping teacher demographics better mirror student demographics.

SBOE Member Georgina Perez (D-El Paso) was vocal in advocating for hiring more teachers trained by minority serving institutions (MSIs). This has been shown to correlate positively with better teacher retention rates when serving an increasingly diverse student population. Members engaged in a spirited debate about the role of less rigorous alternative certification when one of the committee’s goals is to promote education as an elite profession.

After Monday’s meeting, members will provide feedback and revisions before meeting again on May 14, when the committee will discuss, revise and finalize recommendations before submitting the report to the SBOE. Facilitators suggested an additional meeting in June may be required, depending upon how much work remains to be done. SBOE Chair Donna Bahorich (R-Houston), who also chairs the 18-member steering committee, suggested submitting the report before the June SBOE meeting. This would allow the SBOE to offer the report up for public comment, then approve the report at its September meeting.