Tag Archives: teachers

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: June 15, 2018

Here’s your weekly wrap-up of education news from ATPE Governmental Relations:


ATPE leaders and staff meet with Rep. Kevin Brady.

A delegation of ATPE leaders and staff were in Washington, D.C. this week for several days of meetings covering multiple topics pertaining to public education policy at the federal level. Primarily, the contingent met with members of the Texas delegation in Congress as well as other key decision makers about the Windfall Elimination Provision (WEP), which negatively impacts the Social Security benefits of too many educators in Texas and across the country. Among their agenda was a meeting with U.S. House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-TX), who has led a push to replace the current WEP with a fairer formula for calculating the Social Security benefits of those affected. The team of ATPE advocates also discussed our recent efforts to prevent federal vouchers and pressed for maintaining Title II funding within the Higher Education Act that supports educators, among other issues. Learn more about the work ATPE did in Washington this week in this post from ATPE Governmental Relations Director Jennifer Mitchell Canaday.

 


The Senate Select Committee on Violence in Schools and School Security met Monday and Tuesday for its inaugural meetings. The committee was established late last month by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick following Gov. Greg Abbott’s roll out of a 40-page plan to address school safety following the school shooting tragedy in Santa Fe. So far the Lt. Gov. has assigned the committee four charges to study between now and the end of August, when he expects the committee to wrap up its work and offer recommendations on next steps. Two of the four charges were discussed this week. ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins has a recap of the the Monday meeting covering school infrastructure and design techniques aimed at improving school safety. ATPE Lobbyist Kate Kuhlmann was at Tuesday’s hearing, and she has more on that day’s discussion covering school security programs. ATPE provided written testimony to the committee encouraging members of the committee to respect that the needs of local school districts differ broadly, understand that adequate funding must accompany proposals to address school safety, and engage educators as conversations on school safety continue. The committee is expected to meet again in July to focus on mental health.

 


The Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) met this week in Austin. Leading the headlines from the four-day meeting was coverage of developments regarding a long fought battle to establish a course focused on Mexican-American studies. That began on Tuesday when a meeting allowing public comment on a number of curriculum issues was largely focused on public comments regarding the newly approved course. A set of Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) were adopted for the course, and it was ultimately renamed based on input from public testifiers. Originally titled “Ethnic Studies: An Overview of Mexicans of American Descent” the course was changed by the board to “Ethnic Studies: Mexican American Studies.” The board also heard updates from TEA Commissioner Mike Morath regarding Hurricane Harvey, the Santa Fe school shooting, and assessment woes; voted to approve new charter applicants; and amended the dyslexia handbook. Linked in the text above are a series of posts from ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins who attended the meetings and reported extensively on their work this week. Today’s final meeting gave the board the opportunity to finalize all of its work earlier in the week.

 


 

Senate committee talks school security programs

The Senate Select Committee on Violence in Schools and School Security met for the second day in a row Tuesday. While Monday’s hearing was dedicated to discussing school infrastructure and design that can help address school safety, Tuesday’s hearing centered around school security programs and resources. Invited testimony was primarily represented by law enforcement officers who discussed the following charge:

“Study school security options and resources, including, but not limited to, the school marshal program, school police officers, armed school personnel, the Texas School Safety Center, and other training programs to determine what improvements can be made to provide school districts and charter schools with more robust security options.”

In addition to representatives from various levels of law enforcement, invited testifiers included the director of the Texas School Safety Center, a superintendent, and a principal. All were there to highlight existing programs in Texas and offer other options. A considerable amount of time was spent on the School Marshal Program, which allows Texas school districts to appoint School Marshals on campuses who are authorized to carry firearms. On the School Marshal Program and other programs discussed, panelists emphasized strong training for participants.

One of the invited panelists, a retired principal from Friendswood ISD, also made a strong case for reducing class sizes in schools to address school safety. She highlighted what she has heard from educators in schools and what she knows from her own experience in the field: relationships are a key element of school safety and teachers cannot have meaningful one-on-one relationships with their students when there are 35 or more students in a classroom. She argued that reducing class sizes could improve the opportunity for teachers to really know and understand their students.

ATPE provided written testimony to the committee that highlighted relevant positions in our member-written-and-approved ATPE Legislative Program and pressed committee members to keep several things in mind as they continue these important discussions: (1) respect that the wishes of local school districts and their communities differ broadly based on local needs, (2) understand that adequate funding must accompany any proposals to address school safety, and (3) engage educators in the discussions as they continue.

Public testifiers included a number of Texas students and a big contingent of activists from the group Moms Demand Action, who were largely there to oppose the discussion around arming educators. The committee is not scheduled to meet again at this time, but future hearings are expected. Chairman Larry Taylor (R-Friendswood) said that the committee will host a meeting dedicated to mental health in July.

ATPE succeeds in stopping military voucher amendment

The military voucher proposal that ATPE’s federal and state lobby teams have been working hard to fight in Washington was ruled not in order this week by the U.S. House Committee on Rules. The committee was responsible for determining whether the military voucher would be considered as an amendment on the floor of the U.S. House when the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (NDAA) is set for a vote. While we were successful in stopping this attempt to advance vouchers for military families, we remain focused on future efforts aimed at creating federal vouchers in any form.

ATPE sent a letter to Rules Committee Chairman Pete Sessions (R-TX) two weeks ago that urged him to reject the misguided legislation as an amendment to the NDAA. The amendment was based on a bill titled HR 5199, the Education Savings Accounts for Military Families Act of 2018. We stressed in our letter to Chairman Sessions that “the $2,500 voucher program created by HR 5199 would drain limited dollars from both the public school system in Texas as well the Federal Impact Aid Program, hurting the very military-connected students it purports to help.” Our federal lobby team also spent the last two weeks successfully working with the Texas delegation in Congress to stress our opposition to the bill and build support for rejecting the bill as an amendment.

As we reported last week, the author of HR 5199 was facing stiff opposition from members of Congress, even those in his own party, who didn’t support the bill or the amendment. Despite the pressure generated by ATPE and other groups who strongly oppose the amendment, like the Military Coalition, Rep. Jim Banks (R-IN) pressed forward with offering his amendment for consideration by the Rules Committee. Several members of the Texas delegation, including Chairman Sessions, are co-sponsors of the HR 5199, but even with that support the bill as an amendment ultimately failed this time.

The support for this bill from powerful members in Congress is why ATPE continues to stress the importance of educators staying actively engaged in both the state and federal advocacy process. Your voice is meaningful to your members of Congress and state legislators, and it is critical that they hear from you about these important issues. As a reminder, we offer an advocacy tool that allows educators to easily contact their representatives about key issues. The tool, Advocacy Central, offers email templates, phone scripts, tweets, and Facebook posts, that allow you to engage on multiple platforms with your state and federal representatives. On issues just like this one, your representative needs to hear from you! Stay engaged and tuned in to Teach the Vote to know when your voice needs to be heard!

 

SBEC gives initial approval to weakened abbreviated educator preparation program

The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) is meeting today in Austin. The board spent significant time this morning on a proposal to create an abbreviated path to the Trade and Industrial Workforce Training certificate. As the board received word of the heartbreaking news regarding a school shooting developing in Santa Fe ISD, members held a moment of silence and broke for a fifteen minute recess.

The abbreviated educator preparation and training program for candidates seeking the Trade and Industrial Workforce Training certificate was codified into law by HB 3349, a bill by Representative Gervin-Hawkins, during the 85th Legislature last year. The law requires SBEC to implement the new abbreviated pathway. The board has seen and discussed the proposal for its past two meetings, but the proposal the board saw today was a vastly different version based on input from the bill’s author and others out of the San Antonio area. ATPE and other educator groups were not a part of that stakeholder group that singularly drove the changes. Today, ATPE joined a chorus of stakeholders from the education community in opposing the changes.

Stressing the board’s recent focus on raising standards for teacher training in Texas, ATPE highlighted three major changes under the new proposal that are of concern:

  1. It expands the abbreviated program path to the Marketing and Health Science certificates. These are not included in the bill and were not discussed by legislators as desired abbreviated pathways.
  2. It reduces the number of training hours required before the candidate enters the classroom as the teacher-or-record from 180 to 110. While trade and industrial workforce career individuals bring valuable subject matter expertise to the classroom, they lack the training required to ensure they understand the science behind teaching that subject matter to a child. ATPE sees no reason these candidates should receive less pre-service training than other teacher candidates.
  3. It allows entities other than approved EPPs to provide the remaining 90 hours of training, which is again outside the bounds of the bill and, further, calls into question who is responsible for, approved for, and accountable to training educators.

Rep. Gervin-Hawkins was the only attendee present at the board meeting expressing support for the new trade and industrial workforce training proposal. All four teacher organizations and testimony from a classroom teacher shared the concerns expressed above by ATPE. Teacher board member Suzanne McCall was the only board member to oppose the new proposal. She highlighted testimony from the fourth grade Texas teacher who sees too many of her fellow teachers enter the classroom ill-prepared and watches them struggle. McCall stressed the importance of the foundational knowledge teachers receive before entering the classroom, and reminded the board that teacher pre-service training entails important exposure to things like how to teacher students with special needs. Her attempts to improve the proposal through amendments failed to receive any support from her fellow board members.

Many of the remaining board members seemed poised from the beginning to support the new proposal. Several members seemed unconcerned that these teacher candidates would receive less training than other teachers prior to entering the classroom as the sole teacher responsible for the students of a classroom. Superintendent member Dr. Susan Hull said these candidates don’t need more than 110 hours of training, which equates to roughly 3 weeks. Citizen member Leon Leal said we are disrespecting the career knowledge these candidates bring by expecting them to have the same amount of pre-service training as other teachers. There was interest from superintendent member Dr. Cavazos in removing the addition of the Marketing and Health Science certificates, but he ultimately only expressed concern and chose not to offer an amendment to remove them. Other members of the board advocated for the added certificates. The board’s action today granted only initial approval to the proposal.

The board also gave initial approval to proposals pertaining to the Educators’ Code of Ethics and educator discipline. At the board’s previous meeting in March, ATPE engaged with the board over a proposal to amend the Educators’ Code of Ethics. Texas Education Agency (TEA) staff at that time was looking to add several items that ATPE, other stakeholders, and board members felt didn’t belong because they weaken the Educators’ Code of Ethics and the high regard to which it should be held. Board members asked TEA to come back to them with more appropriate revisions. ATPE and other stakeholders worked with the staff to revise the text and was ultimately successful at moving a key piece of concern to the disciplinary chapter, where it is more appropriately housed.

The board will be back to consider the above items for final adoption at the August 3 meeting.

Calling all “new” teachers: TEA needs your feedback

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) is calling on “new” teachers to provide feedback on how well they were prepared to teach by their educator preparation program (EPP). The information collected is a critical piece of the system that holds EPPs accountable. The input you provide is valuable!

If you are a new teacher, which in this case refers to teachers teaching in their first year under a standard certificate, you should have received an email on April 18 containing the link to fill out the new teacher survey. The survey contains multiple choice question that are based on the Texas teacher standards and can be filled out in one sitting or in more than one session, if needed. Once you have submitted the survey, you will receive 10 continuing professional education (CPE) credits.

Even if you are not sure you qualify as a new teacher, please take a moment to fill out the survey you received. The prompts at the beginning of the survey will direct you to the end if you do not qualify. Your feedback on this survey is valuable to ensuring educators in Texas receive the quality training they deserve prior to standard certification.

Please fill out the survey by June 15. If you have any questions or would like to request another link to the survey, please email TEA at pilotteachersurvey@tea.texas.gov.

From the Texas Tribune: Are charter schools private? In Texas courts, it depends why you’re asking.

Texas charter schools are sometimes private and sometimes governmental — a legal framework that has helped them avoid costly lawsuits.

by Emma Platoff, The Texas Tribune

May 7, 2018

istock.com

In 2006, in Dallas, a construction company sued a charter school, alleging that the school stiffed workers on a building contract to the tune of a couple hundred thousand dollars.

Eight years later, in Houston, a third grade teacher sued the charter school where she worked, alleging that it had falsified test scores, that it failed to properly provide for students with disabilities and that mold in her classroom had made her sick.

Their claims did not make it very far.

The teacher couldn’t sue the charter because, the Texas Supreme Court said, it’s not a government entity. The construction company couldn’t sue, the same court said years earlier, because it was.

Questions about the legal status of charter schools — which receive taxpayer money but are privately run, usually by nonprofit corporations — are broad, existential ones in Texas, where disputes over school funding are among the Legislature’s most contentious. But those categories take on intense practical significance in the courtroom, where the rules that govern private- and public-sector employers vary widely. In two significant Texas Supreme Court cases over the last decade, charter schools and their lawyers have sidestepped lawsuits over employment and contract issues by playing both sides of that fence. In some cases, charter schools can’t be sued because they’re government entities; in others, they’re immune because they’re private.

That difference is intentional. Charter schools were designed, as former Texas Supreme Court Justice Don Willett wrote in the construction company opinion, to “operate with greater flexibility than traditional public schools, in hopes of spurring innovation and improving student achievement.”

Because of that aim, charter schools are not subject to all the same laws as their traditional counterparts. That legal structure helps charter schools retain their “freedom and flexibility,” said Joseph Hoffer, who argued successfully for the charter school in the Houston case.

But some advocates point out that the rules for charter schools seem to target the wrong things.

The Whistleblower Act — which did not allow the teacher to sue — is perhaps the best example.

“How is it innovative to ensure that your employees are silenced if you are doing something inappropriate?” questioned Monty Exter, a lobbyist for the Association of Texas Professional Educators. “I would think that you would want to have those internal watchdogs looking out for kids.”

“When do the rules apply to you?”

There are a lot of unresolved legal issues surrounding charter schools, which are still relatively young educational institutions. Most of them center, as former State Board of Education Vice Chair Thomas Ratliff puts it, on the question, “Is a charter school a public school or a private entity?”

“It’s not that easy,” Ratliff said. “The answer, in a lot of cases, is both.”

In 2015, lawmakers said that for the purposes of the law, charter schools should be considered government entities when the lawmakers say so — and only then.

Some of those “when”s are common sense. Charter schools are subject to the Texas Public Information Act and the Open Meetings Act. Their teachers can be covered by the Teacher Retirement System of Texas. And they enjoy, for the most part, the same protections and immunities from lawsuits that traditional public school districts have, said David Anderson, who worked as the Texas Education Agency’s general counsel for two decades.

In other instances, charter schools are considered private; in many cases, they’re protected from suit. That’s a good thing, Hoffer said.

“Remember,” he said, “since they’re publicly funded, we want to protect the public funds from being attacked.”

But traditional public schools subject to whistleblower claims are also publicly funded. Employees who claim retaliation under the law can win monetary damages or even get their jobs back. That’s not the case with charter schools, and advocates say it’s unfair that those schools are given essentially all the protections of a school district while also enjoying some benefits of private employers.

“You have a charter school that can, in one breath, say, ‘Hey, we’re a public school, don’t sue us,’ and in the next say, ‘Hey, we’re not a public school, don’t sue us,’” said Lorna McMillion, who defended the would-be whistleblower in Houston. “If you’re a charter school who wants to get funding like a public school and wants to be treated like a public school, when do the rules apply to you and when do they not?”

The public-private dance has saved charter schools, in several cases, from lawsuits — like those filed by the third-grade teacher (the charter school’s lawyer dismissed her as a “serial litigator” — the TEA looked into a “testing security” complaint but determined it did not merit a full investigation) and by the construction company (the charter school’s lawyer in that case said the school followed its written contract). In the case of the few charter schools not run by nonprofit corporations, the legal waters are even murkier.

Lindsey Gordon, general counsel for the Texas Charter Schools Association, said the organization supports the Legislature’s current framework and protested that charter schools are not harder to sue than school districts. Every lawsuit, she argued, succeeds on its individual merits.

But would-be litigators have at least some options for suing a traditional public school that they can’t use to sue charter schools. McMillion said the Texas Supreme Court has made it impossible to sue charter schools using the most common legal avenues.

Meanwhile, charter schools have to follow some of the laws that many educators argue most directly impede schools’ ability to innovate. Charter schools are subject to the same test-based accountability system as school districts.

The legal exemptions, advocates said, seem not to foster creativity but rather to help the non-traditional schools avoid costly litigation.

“Charter schools are straddling the fence, on both sides, to make sure they have an advantageous legal position where it is harder to get them,” sad Evan Lange, a Dallas workers’ rights attorney who recently lost a case to an area charter school. “They take the benefits of being private and the benefits of being government. They’re choosing both.”

The Legislature has, in the past, added legal restrictions to charter schools when the need presented itself. In 2013, the Legislature brought nepotism laws for charter schools in line with those for other public schools. The change came after the Texas Education Agency investigated several potential abuses where charter school board members hired family members and paid them generous salaries.

The Whistleblower Act might very well go that way, said Thomas Fuller, a North Texas lawyer who works mostly with charter schools. While the law continues to develop on the relatively new species of school, there may be some “curious outcomes,” he said.

“It left a lot of us scratching our heads, too,” Fuller said. “I wouldn’t be surprised at all to see a number of those [bills] filed in the next session making charter schools subject to the Whistleblower’s Act.”

But in the meantime, advocates warn, the ruling could deter other charter school teachers from reporting abuse they see at work. Just this year, Michael Feinberg, the founder of one of the country’s most successful networks of charter schools, was dismissed following claims that he sexually abused a student in Houston in the 1990s. Cases like Feinberg’s make clear why it’s important for school personnel to feel safe bringing forward such allegations, advocates said.

And while the Legislature can go back and correct oversights that arise, it will be difficult for lawmakers to predict every possible legal fight that could ensnare a charter school — meaning more oversights are near-unavoidable.

“Not a good place to be an employee”

The peculiar legal status of charter schools has a particular impact on employees.

Teachers in traditional public schools enjoy a suite of protections that is not mandated for charter school teachers — including, for the most part, year-long contracts that grant teachers due process rights, Exter said. Texas charter school teachers don’t all have to be certified teachers, meaning they’re more easily replaced. They’re easier to fire in the middle of the year. And if they’re fired, they have even less recourse for challenging the decision.

And unlike teachers at private schools, charter school teachers don’t get the shield of the National Labor Relations Act, which contains some of the nation’s strongest protections against unfair labor practices. Texas charter schools — unlike other states’ equivalents — are not included in that protection because they are considered arms of the government. Texas is, so far, the only state whose charter school teachers are not protected by that act.

That’s thanks to a ruling that came down in March. The case made a difficult scenario worse for teachers in a state that’s already “not a good place to be an employee,” said Lange, the Dallas workers’ attorney.

Charter school supporters might argue that more freedom for the schools allows them to get rid of bad teachers and bring in better ones.

But in a sector of public education with far less oversight than traditional school districts, it’s easy to see how a teacher could find herself fired and out of options. A public school teacher who speaks out against a school practice she disagrees with — STAAR testing, say — is protected from government retaliation by the First Amendment.

But, Lange said, a charter school employee, who enjoys no such protection, could be fired more easily. Their schools, meanwhile, can in one breath claim the privileges of being public and in the next enjoy the freedom of the private sector.

“They literally want to have their cake and eat it too. That’s all charter schools do,” Lange said.

Disclosure: The Association of Texas Professional Educators has been a financial supporter 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.

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: April 27, 2018

Here’s your weekly wrap-up of education news from ATPE Governmental Relations:


This May, many Texans will be making not one, but two trips to the ballot box. ATPE wants to ensure that all educators are aware of the two important elections taking place next month.

Saturday, May 5th is the uniform election date when municipal propositions, elections, and issues will be decided. Meanwhile, Tuesday, May 22nd is when state level primary runoff elections will be held. While any registered voter can participate in the May 5th municipal election, participation in the primary runoffs depends on whether you previously voted in the March primaries and in which primary election you voted.

For more information about the candidates and your eligibility to vote in the upcoming primary runoffs, check out this new blog post by ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter.

 


Texas has a new “Grow Your Own” grant program designed by the Texas Rural Schools Taskforce to address  challenges faced by rural school districts and foster a more robust and diverse teaching force. This week, TEA released the names of the 25 school districts that received the 2018-19 “Grow Your Own” grant. Read more about them in this blog post from ATPE Governmental Relations Specialist Bria Moore.

 


The Texas Education Agency has finalized its plan to address special education. Professional development for special education teachers; resources and outreach for parents of special needs children; funding at the district level for students previously denied access to special education services; and additional staffing and resources were the four final measures proposed by TEA in its efforts to redress issues plaguing special education in the state. While the proposed measures would cost the state $212 million over the next five years, TEA is unable to commit additional funds to support the plan leaving the burden to fund these measures on the shoulders of the 86th Legislature which is set to reconvene in 2019. ATPE Lobbyist Kate Kuhlmann explains more about the plan in this blog post.

 


Houston ISD has notified district teachers of its plan to begin staff layoffs. As reported by the Houston Chronicle this afternoon, district employees received correspondence informing then that an unspecified number of layoffs would begin shortly due to budget constraints in the district. The financial strain of Hurricane Harvey coupled with new recapture woes have resulted in a projected deficit of $115 million for the district. The HISD administration has said that the number of layoffs will depend on how many teachers leave the district through attrition at the end of this school year.

Today’s announcement comes on the heels of a highly contentious HISD board meeting earlier this week that was shut down when protests broke out over a planned vote to turn over management of some of the district’s struggling campuses to a charter school operator. That move is part of a plan authorized by new legislation that ATPE opposed in 2017. Schools otherwise facing closure have an option to partner with charter holders for a temporary pause in their progressive sanctions, and HISD has proposed this course of action for 10 of its campuses despite heavy opposition from the community. Waco ISD also took similar action this week, opting to partner with a charter operator to avoid the closure of five struggling campuses in that district.

Stay tuned to Teach the Vote for updates on this developing story.

 


TEA announces “Grow Your Own” grant recipients for 2018-19

On Wednesday, Texas Commissioner of Education Mike Morath announced the recipients of the  2018-19 “Grow Your Own” grant. A brainchild of the Texas Rural Schools Task Force that was commissioned in 2016 to address challenges faced by rural school districts, the Grow Your Own award is designed to help districts cultivate interest in the teaching profession.

According to information provided by recipients, this year’s awards will be used to help districts prepare for the 2020-21 school year by assisting educators currently pursuing their Masters in Education, allowing districts to expand their dual credit courses, and facilitating current paraprofessionals in pursing their teacher certification, adding 59 full-time teachers and 136 full time teachers to the workforce in the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school-years respectively. The Grow Your Own grant funds will also be used to assist student teachers during their clinical teaching assignments and high schools to expand education training programs.

The 25 recipients of the 2018-19 award are as follows:

  • Amarillo ISD
  • Angleton ISD
  • Burkeville ISD
  • Chapel Hill ISD (Smith County)
  • Cumby ISD
  • Everman ISD
  • Fort Stockton ISD
  • Grand Prairie ISD
  • Lamar CISD
  • Lometa ISD
  • Midland ISD
  • Moody ISD
  • O’Donnell ISD
  • Pearsall ISD
  • Region 2 ESC
  • Region 5 ESC
  • Region 6 ESC
  • Snook ISD
  • Socorro ISD
  • Springtown ISD
  • Stafford ISD
  • Stephen F. Austin University
  • Texas Tech University
  • Texas Woman’s University
  • Timpson ISD

ATPE congratulates all the recipients of the Grow Your Own grants.

TEA finalizes plan to improve special education

The Texas Education Agency (TEA) has released its final action plan to address special education in Texas, which has been under scrutiny since 2017. That’s when reporting unveiled what the agency is now acknowledging was an arbitrary and illegal benchmark for the amount of students receiving special education services. After intervention from the federal government and significant stakeholder feedback, TEA’s final plan seeks to repair systematic issues that, in part, denied special education services to a disturbingly large number of Texas schoolchildren.

In a press release issued yesterday, TEA identified four major actions under the plan: a special education professional development system for educators; resources for parents of students who may need special education services and an accompanied outreach effort; funding for school districts providing services to students previously denied; and additional staffing and resources at TEA to support special education services and increase oversight.

TEA has identified some funding for administration of the plan, but highlights that “TEA cannot legally commit additional funds outside of those that are appropriated by the Texas Legislature and the US Congress.” The agency said the plan is designed to work within existing appropriations and identifies a proposed budget of $212 million over the next five years. Stakeholders have argued funding is insufficient to produce effective delivery of the plan, but it will be up to the legislature to allocate additional money for the purpose of increasing adequate services under the plan. The plan does include a commitment from TEA to request additional funding from the 86th Legislature during the 2019 regular session for local special education needs.

The state’s final strategic special education plan and more related information can be viewed at TEA’s Improving Special Education in Texas webpage. The full press release announcing the final plan can be found here.

Teach the Vote’s Week in Review: April 20, 2018

Here’s your weekly wrap-up of education news from the ATPE Governmental Relations team:

 


The Teacher Retirement System (TRS) of Texas board of trustees held multiple meetings this week in Austin.

Highlights of the quarterly meetings included discussions of new rates and policy designs for TRS-ActiveCare for the 2019/2020 school year; the need for increased authorization to hire additional full time employees (FTEs) at the agency; the introduction of the new TRS Communications Director; and a discussion of and failed vote on lowering the TRS pension fund’s expected rate of return.

ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter attended both the committee and board meetings and penned this wrap-up for our Teach the Vote blog earlier today.

 


The House Public Education Committee held an interim hearing on Wednesday. Topics discussed included the continuing impact of Hurricane Harvey on the state’s public schools, plus implementation of recent education-related bills dealing with school finance, the accountability, system, and student bullying.

Commissioner of Education Mike Morath updated the committee on the state and federal governments’ response to Hurricane Harvey and the 1.5 million students in its affected school districts. Morath indicated that he will propose a new commissioner’s rule in June to provide a plan for accountability waivers for school districts that were forced to close facilities and suffered the displacement of students and staff.

The committee also heard testimony about the controversial “A through F” accountability system that is being implemented in Texas. School districts will be assigned A-F ratings in August, while campus A-F ratings will be released the following year. A number of witnesses during Wednesday’s hearing expressed concerns about the new rating system and its heavy emphasis on student test scores.

For more on the hearing, check out this blog post from ATPE Lobbyist Mark Wiggins.

 


With interim committee hearings in full swing this month, paying for Texas public schools and teachers remains a hot topic.

On Wednesday, the House Appropriations Committee heard from Texas Comptroller Glenn Hegar and others about the status of the state’s Economic Stabilization Fund, often referred to as the “Rainy Day Fund.” Read more about recommendations being made for use of the fund to support the state’s funding needs in this blog post from ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter.

Also this week, our friends at the Texas Tribune shared insights on how Texas teacher pay stacks up against other states. ATPE Lobbyist Monty Exter is quoted in the article republished here on Teach the Vote.

 


The Texas Commission on Public School Finance also convened again this week, with a Thursday meeting focused on tax policy issues and sources of funding for the state’s school finance system. ATPE Lobbyist Kate Kuhlmann has a rundown of that meeting here. She also shared the below update from today’s Expenditures Working Group meeting which covered the cost of education index, compensatory education, and the transportation allotment.

One unsurprising word could be used to summarize testimony from invited panelists at this morning’s Expenditures Working Group meeting: update. On all three topics discussed, expert witnesses pointed to updating both the methodology behind the funding tied to each topic and what each topic intends to address. For the cost of education index, Texas A&M University Bush School Professor Lori Taylor noted that the index is based on teacher salaries and employment patterns from 1990. Taylor is the same expert behind a recent Kansas study on school finance, which determined that state should invest an additional $2 billion in school funding. During this morning’s meeting in Austin, Taylor and the other panelist agreed the cost of living index has value, but needs significant updating; it was suggested that to better account for evolving costs of education, the commissioners should consider recommending a requirement that the state update the index (or even the entire finance system) every 10 years.

Similarly, school districts and other school finance stakeholders pointed to the need for better targeted funding for students supported by a broader category of compensatory education services, and the legislative budget board shared different way to approach funding transportation costs. Watch an archived live stream of the full meeting here for more on the discussions.