Current Events Update

(1)

Current Events Update

ACCOUNTABILITY

Texas seeking waiver from federal government

Beginning this past summer, TCTA and others repeatedly advocated for the suspension of A-F ratings for the 2020-21 school year. TEA finally responded in early December 2020 by announcing that it would seek a federal waiver from the following federal Every Student Succeeds Act requirements:

• Ratings

Waiver from calculating or assigning summative scaled scores or A–F rating labels based on 2020–2021 data. Rather, TEA will process and report all available 2020–21 data to districts, stakeholders, and the

USDE without calculating scaled scores or assigning A–F ratings. TEA will assign a label of Not Rated: Declared State of Disaster to all campuses and school districts.

• Assessment participation rates

To report only reading and mathematics STAAR participation rates for districts and campuses (instead of using it for accountability).

• Domain 3/Closing the Gaps

Waiver to delay by one year the inclusion of SAT/ACT results in the Academic Achievement indicator for accelerated students who were administered STAAR end-of-course assessment for mathematics, reading/language arts, or science prior to high school.

Waiver from using one-year growth measure for reading and mathematics based on the outcomes of the statewide annual assessment for the Other Academic indicator (for elementary and middle schools).

•_{Identification of schools}

To retain existing Comprehensive Support & Improvement, Targeted Support & Improvement, and Additional Targeted Support & Improvement labels for school year 2021–22 and delay the

identification of the next cohort of CSI, TSI, and ATS campuses by one year, until August 2022. Campuses will not be able to exit school improvement status this year.

To postpone the escalation of three-year ATS campuses to comprehensive status until August 2023. •_{Methodology for identifying schools}

To receive funding for 2021–22, CSI campuses must opt-in for continued interventions. Campuses that opt-out of continued interventions opt-out of funding and remain CSI identified.

TEA also sought and received USDE approval to adjust the Closing the Gaps domain graduation rate

methodology used in the academic accountability system, as well as the methodology used to identify schools for support and improvement.

2021 Accountability: The 2021 Academic Accountability System Overview contains up-to-date information on

(2)

Summary of 2021 Updates

• No overall or domain scaled scores or A–F ratings

• All districts and campuses labeled Not Rated: Declared State of Disaster • School Progress, Part A & Closing the Gaps: Academic Growth not calculated

• For School Progress, Part B: Relative Performance, TEA will only display raw STAAR and CCMR component scores, as applicable.

• CCMR indicators updated; two previously used indicators will not be used:

1. Enlist in the U.S. Armed Forces (due to data discrepancies and pending direct data from U.S. Armed Forces);

2. Complete CTE coherent sequence coursework and earn credit aligned with approved industry based certifications (this indicator was scheduled to be phased out this year).

• Federal graduation rate methodology in Closing the Gaps modified

(3)

ASSESSMENT

STAAR

TCTA and others have repeatedly called on state leadership to suspend STAAR testing for the 2020-21 school year. In doing so, TCTA noted the likely disruption to learning that would occur throughout the school year, as well as the fact that results are unlikely to be an accurate representation of learning.

A bipartisan group of 68 Texas House representatives in November signed a letter calling on the Texas

Education Agency to cancel the STAAR exam or at minimum not use student scores to rate schools or districts this school year.

However, Commissioner Morath has consistently cited the need to administer STAAR so that there is an accurate evaluation of where students are at the end of the year, in order to build an action plan to address student needs, including learning loss caused by COVID. “Absent the STAAR test, you’re not going to have a valid, reliable view of grade-level mastery of student skills.”

Nonetheless, national test experts have warned against administering standardized tests during the pandemic, noting that statewide tests are not appropriate for diagnosing learning needs for individual teachers and students. Instead, they are designed to assess state, district and school-level efforts to cover a broad set of state standards. These experts suggest using prioritized content standards to scaffold students to grade-level content as quickly as possible.

Additionally, TEA is requiring students to take the test in person, which is very concerning, especially given the health and safety concerns sparked by the pandemic that students and their parents may have about this requirement. This may explain why TEA is seeking a waiver from the federal ESSA requirement for states to assess at least 95% of their student population and to factor that into the state accountability system. Late last year, fourteen school superintendents, including those leading the Dallas, Fort Worth, and Aldine school districts, joined with several business and education advocacy organizations to support the

administration of standardized tests to Texas students in the spring, but to not use the results for school accountability.

Following this, when TEA announced in December that it would not issue A–F accountability ratings for the 2020–2021 school year and will seek waivers of aspects of federal accountability requirements, TEA also stated that “because it remains critical that parents, educators, and policymakers understand the impact of the pandemic on student learning, state assessments will continue this school year through the

administrations of the STAAR, STAAR Alternate 2, the Texas English Language Assessment System (TELPAS), and TELPAS Alternate.”

The Commissioner subsequently made clear that he did not intend to seek a federal waiver for STAAR testing requirements.

(4)

In early February, 2021, a bipartisan group of legislators sent a letter to Commissioner Morath, stating requiring that all students be in-person for the administration of exams creates an untenable environment that puts students and school personnel at immense risk of transmission of the COVID-19 virus, and that since it is evident that the Commissioner has no plans to seek a federal waiver for STAAR, they strongly believe that TEA should reconsider at a minimum allowing students and their families to opt out of the exam.

Subsequently, the Commissioner noted in an interview that if students who are learning remotely choose not to take the STAAR test, “It’s not opting out of the STAAR test — it’s opting for remote instruction.” “They will continue to experience remote instruction, but we don’t have the capability to do the test remotely, so they won’t sit for the STAAR exam.”

And a last note about this: Just this week, the Biden administration announced that states will be expected to continue state assessments this year. The U.S. Department of Education released guidance to states on assessing student learning during the pandemic, with suggestions that states consider administering a

shortened assessment, offering remote assessment when possible, and/or extending the testing window into the summer or even the fall. These suggestions largely line up with decisions Commissioner Morath had already made with regard to the 2021 STAAR exam, though the Commissioner has indicated remote assessment is not feasible.

Finally, TEA anticipates exceeding the 1.0 percent cap imposed by federal law on the percentage of significantly cognitively disabled students that can take an alternative state test in the spring 2021 STAAR Alternate 2 administration, and is submitting a waiver request to the federal government. TEA’s request for a waiver from the 1.0 percent cap requirement was denied for 2019-20.

New assessment contract

When TCTA became aware that TEA reached the conclusion of its assessment contract, TCTA requested the Commissioner to delay entering into a new 5-year testing contract given the uncertainty around how long the unusual learning situations students are experiencing due to the pandemic will continue. Unfortunately, according to news report early this year, TEA entered into new four-year agreements totaling $388 million with two companies to develop and administer STAAR: Cambium Assessment, a Washington D.C.-based testing company, will receive $262 million from 2021 through 2024 to manage the administration, scoring and reporting of all student assessments on one online platform. Pearson, a London-based company whose

longtime role in Texas' testing program was scaled back several years ago, will receive an additional $126 million from 2021 through 2024 to develop and construct the assessments. It will also continue work on an existing testing contract through August.

Grade promotion

Texas has already committed to allowing elementary and middle school students who fail the exams this spring to move up to the next grade, with district permission.

(5)

However, despite calls to also extend the waiver to exams required for high school graduation, state

leadership thus far has not indicated a willingness to do so. According to the Commissioner, he does not have waiver authority, and the opportunity to address it should be by the legislature, since it is in session.

Teacher appraisal

TCTA, early on and repeatedly, advocated for a waiver of teacher appraisal requirements for the 2020-21 school year, due to the disruption of traditional modes of instructional delivery that would likely occur throughout the upcoming school year, rendering typical components of teacher evaluation (observation and student growth) difficult, if not impossible to capture accurately.

Late last year, TEA issued a letter to the field advising districts that they could seek a waiver from some or all aspects of teacher appraisal for the 2020-21 school year.

HB 3906

HB 3906, passed last session provides the following:

More details:

•_{Transition to online assessments: conduct a feasibility study and create a legislative report regarding} transitioning to 100% online testing not later than the 2022-2023 school year.

(6)

TEA released the feasibility study in December of last year. The study estimated that school districts would have to make a one-time payment of about $4 million total to improve internet connectivity, and then spend about $13.4 million more annually for extra bandwidth and staff training. The study estimated that additional statewide annual costs include $6.1 million for bandwidth as well as personnel-related costs of $7.3 million (i.e., additional technology personnel stipends and training). The feasibility study indicates that Texas can achieve 100% electronic assessments by 2022–23, providing that the legislature takes action to:

o Amend TEC §39.02341 to clarify scope and confirm 2022–23 deadline for moving to 100% electronic assessments.

o Expand authorized use of Technology and Instructional Materials Allotment to cover internet connectivity and training for online testing.

o Set up a matching grant fund toward one-time network infrastructure investment, particularly to support small and rural districts.

• 75% multiple-choice cap: explore different item types to limit STAAR test items to a maximum of 75% multiple-choice:

• Reading/Language Arts redesign: incorporate writing in every grade and cross-curricular reading passages that cover content taught in other subjects. Grades 3-8 writing is required by federal government because writing is included in Texas’s ELAR TEKS. Grades 3-8 implementation of the re-designed Reading/Language Arts assessment is expected in 2022-2023. Some writing items will be field tested as part of reading assessments spring 2021. As an interim step, single-select multiple-choice

(7)

items that assess revising and editing will be field tested at every grade level in grades 3–8 in spring 2021.

Writing items will include multiple-choice or new item type items, short constructed response items that will ask a student to provide a 1-2 sentence response (may vary by grade level), and longer constructed response items (essays) that will ask a student to respond to a passage, instead of responding to a prompt (may vary by grade level).

Prioritizing cross-curricular content integration for RLA passages: Passages will link to science, social

studies, fine arts, technology, and, to a lesser degree, mathematics topics. According to TEA, this will create a more level playing field when assessing reading comprehension, because evidence indicates that students with knowledge of the subject matter have higher levels of comprehension. By the spring 2024 administration, 100% of information texts included in STAAR Reading & English EOC will be based on cross-curricular content covered in other TEKS subjects.

• STAAR Interim Assessments: continued optional benchmarks that help monitor student progress, predict STAAR performance, and identify students for intervention. Must be predictive of STAAR outcomes, must be administered electronically, may not be used for accountability purposes.

• Administering assessments in multiple parts: Creates flexibility for districts in scheduling. Grades 3–8 assessments may not be more than three parts; no maximum number of parts for EOCs; 85% of

students in grades 3 and 4 must be able to complete each part within 60 minutes; and 85% of students in grades 5–8 must be able to complete each part within 75 minutes.

According to TEA, per stakeholder input, multiple parts may not make sense for every content area and every grade band and should not be applied across the board. Additionally, multiple parts may be most useful for RLA to allow for differentiation by section so that subtests, such as decoding, can support improved accuracy for students with dyslexia and other learning disabilities.

According to TEA, as a result, allowing assessments to be administered in multiple parts over multiple days is being considered as part of other House Bill 3906 initiatives, including the Integrated Formative Assessment Pilot (below), and the Reading Language Arts Blueprint Redesign (described earlier). •_{Through-year assessment pilot: TEA is required to develop design and pilot a multi-part assessment}

throughout the year that provides more frequent information and can potentially replace the summative. Participation by districts is optional, and pilot participation does not affect district obligations to administer STAAR. TEA will launch the pilot in 2021-2022.

Another part of the initiative is the Texas Formative Assessment Resource, a new tool as of September 2020 with an item bank, test-builder, and data reports to help teachers build & administer classroom quizzes to inform instruction.

(8)

Other TEA assessment initiatives:

End-of-Year (EOY)/Beginning-of-Year (BOY) Assessments: COVID-related resource to measure learning gaps and gauge student understanding of TEKS as they begin the school year.

The EOY and BOY assessments are intended to support district, campus, and classroom-level analysis of student progress and understanding of the statewide curriculum.

•_{Student performance data from EOY assessments could have been used by districts as one of several} data points to evaluate the progress their students made last school year.

• BOY assessments are designed to diagnose understanding of the TEKS from the previous school year and should be administered to students based on their prior year enrolled grade level.

The EOY assessments were available from 05/1/2020 –06/12/2020. BOY assessments opened 07/27/2020 and closed 10/16/2020.

NAEP

In the NAEP math test, fourth-graders in Texas saw significant gains, raising their average scores by 3 points

from 2017. The opposite was true for eighth-graders — their scores dropped by 3 points over the same time period. Math scores increased by 1 point among fourth-graders nationwide over that same time period, while eighth-graders’ scores fell by 1 point.

Despite those gains, and that fourth-graders in Texas scored “significantly higher” than their peers nationwide on average on math, their scores were still “significantly lower” than the national average in reading.

Eighth-graders were roughly on par with the national average in math but also scored “significantly lower” than their peers nationwide in reading. Reading scores in Texas fell in both grades compared to 2017, falling by 1 point for fourth graders and 3 points for eighth-graders.

TEACHER INCENTIVE ALLOTMENT

The Teacher Incentive Allotment/local teacher designation systems was one of numerous programs in HB 3, the comprehensive school finance bill passed in the 86th_{legislative session.}

There are two main parts to TIA: one is that teachers are identified and paid in part on student growth; another is that teachers who have national board certification automatically receive a “Recognized” rating along with teacher incentive allotment earnings.

For the part in which teachers are identified and paid in part based on student growth, local school districts have to develop and submit teacher designation systems to TEA for approval. 26 districts were approved for the first Cohort (A) to offer teacher designation systems in 2019-20. The program distributed about $40

million to about 3,650 teachers across the state for the 2019-2020 school year (as part of the settle-up process in September 2020).

(9)

For the other part, 327 National Board Certified teachers were automatically awarded Recognized status in 2019-20, generating anywhere from $3,000 to $9,000 for the NBCT’s district (the total amount depends on the socioeconomic status of the students and the campus’ rural status). An additional 300 more National Board teachers are expected to earn designations in 2020-2021. However, in order to automatically receive the designation, NBCTs need to make sure they have registered a Texas address in the NBCT directory.

Also, beginning in the 2020-21 school year, NBCT fee reimbursement is available from TEA – these funds can be used to reimburse even those teachers who received national board certification as far back as the 2019-20 school year.

Given the suspension of STAAR during the spring 2020 semester, it is extremely difficult for district designation systems relying partly on STAAR to be able to use STAAR to show growth, and this impact may continue for several years. So some districts are using other measures of student growth, like MAP.

Funding: TIA is not a separate allotment; rather, it is funneled to districts as part of the school funding

formulas, based on the number of teacher designations in a given district. This makes it difficult to ascertain the amount of funding available for TIA. According to the authors of HB 3, the cost of the TIA program for the current biennium is $140 million. But again, the basis for this cost is not itemized anywhere in the

appropriations bill. It is instead included as part of the estimated projected cost for the entire Foundation School Program. Additionally, since HB 3 gives TEA the authority to approve local designation systems, then it is within the Commissioner’s discretion how much funding will be devoted to TIA. This is of concern to TCTA for several reasons:

First, TCTA is not supportive of TIA because of its emphasis on student growth in the form of standardized test performance for teacher designations. TCTA does not believe that standardized test performance is a valid or reliable measure of teacher performance, given that these tests were not designed to measure teacher performance and given the statistically small percentage impact that teachers have on student test

performance. However, the Commissioner made no secret of his support for TIA throughout the legislative process, and TCTA does not believe it wise or prudent to provide the Commissioner with discretion over potentially large sums of funds to use for TIA.

Second, given the budget woes suffered by schools due to the pandemic, as well as the state budget deficit, TIA funding should instead be used to support educators in dealing with the pandemic. TCTA has advocated with state leadership and the legislature for suspension of the TIA program and diversion of TIA funding to directly fund teacher compensation (via a streamlined mechanism that is not governed by complex TEA rules), smaller class sizes, appropriately certified teachers, and mental health/trauma-informed instruction

(10)

PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

During the legislative interim, the Lt. Governor’s office formed a Teacher Workforce Workgroup in response to the Senate Committee on Education's interim charge to review existing teacher continuing education,

professional development and training requirements for teachers, and examine whether they are appropriate, should be reduced, eliminated, or increased to improve student academic outcomes. The Workgroup was comprised of a broad cross-section of stakeholders, including education policy groups and groups representing educators, school boards and charter schools.

TCTA took a leading role in the work and resulting recommendations of the Workgroup, acting as a subgroup chair, presenting the subgroup’s recommendations to the entire workgroup for adoption, and testifying to the Senate Education Committee during its November 2020 hearing in support of the Workgroup’s final

recommendations.

The Workgroup arrived at 30+ consensus recommendations that revised statute or rule which could establish slim but meaningful teacher requirements and enable educators to more freely select training opportunities to improve their craft. Among the recommendations included the Workgroup’s final report are

recommendations centered around training frequency requirements, training reporting requirements, eliminating training that is duplicated throughout statute, reducing required topics in teacher continuing professional education requirements, providing a centralized clearinghouse of all training requirements, including best practices and non-binding industry-recommended frequency suggestions, and establishing an ongoing process of review of teacher training requirements.

Scattered training requirements: After noting the numerous educator training requirements that were

scattered throughout several codes as TEA rule, and recognizing that school districts and educators are

charged with complying with these training requirements, the Workgroup felt that it would benefit everyone if a list of all the requirements were provided in one central place that could be easily accessed. Accordingly, the Workgroup recommended that SBEC create a comprehensive clearinghouse of all training requirements.

Frequency: After noting the various statutory frequency requirements associated with different trainings, the

Workgroup decided it was in the best interest of educators and district personnel to have a more thoughtful, cohesive approach to training frequency. Accordingly the Workgroup recommended that in lieu of statutory training frequency requirements, the clearinghouse should include research-driven, best practices and programs for all training requirements, informed by practitioners/subject matter experts, and including industry-informed frequency recommendations. Local school boards would be required to annually review and adopt professional learning policies guided by the clearinghouse, but tailored to local boards’ preferences.

Ongoing review process: In order to ensure that the clearinghouse remains dynamic, the Workgroup

recommended that it include a formalized process for ongoing review of educator training requirements, in which an SBEC-convened group of public education stakeholders and organizations representing educators regularly examines whether they are appropriate or should be reduced, eliminated, or consolidated; and makes recommendations to the Legislature accordingly.

(11)

TCTA 2021 VIRTUAL CONVENTION COPYRIGHT© 2021 TEXAS CLASSROOM TEACHERS ASSOCIATION #TCTA2021 Reduction of duplicated training topics: The workgroup’s review also noted the duplication of training topics

in different sections of law, including statutory provisions for educator continuing education for certificate renewal and in provisions for required training provided by school districts. The Workgroup examined whether a given topic was more a function of working in a school and with students in general, or more for purposes of honing one’s craft (closely tied to instructional practice) for continuing education for certificate renewal. Using this guidepost, the workgroup concluded that a number of topics should be eliminated from continuing education for certificate renewal because they are covered more thoroughly, and with potential funding available, in statutory provisions for district-required training (including bilingual/ESL, mental health, grief and trauma, and special education). This, in turn, would free up time for educators to pursue more relevant professional learning for purposes of certificate renewal, while still allowing educators to continue counting the applicable district-required training toward their CPE requirements if they so choose.

Recording and reporting of training: The Workgroup found that a number of training requirements come with

statutory record-keeping and reporting requirements, ranging from requiring school districts to maintain records that include the name of each district staff member who participated in the training to requiring districts to annually provide a report to TEA regarding the number/percentage of educators participating in the training for each campus. The Workgroup was concerned about potential liability implications for district staff members due to requirements to list names of training participants as well as the burden of the

requirement for districts to have to report to TEA the number and percentage of educators by campus participating in the training.

Accordingly, the Workgroup recommended that, in lieu of current statutory recording/reporting requirements, districts should be required to maintain records of the number of participants in trainings in case of audit, but no reporting is automatically required. Additionally, upon TEA request, districts shall furnish records.

TCTA has long advocated for reduced teacher training requirements, especially because those requirements have been layered on over the years with few, if any, being eliminated and is pleased to note that the workgroup’s recommendations will be translated into legislation to be considered during the session.

Sen. Beverly Powell has re-filed a TCTA-initiated bill, SB 193, requiring TEA to conduct an audit of professional development and other continuing education and training requirements at least once every four years. Based on the results, TEA with stakeholder and organizational input will consider the value of maintaining existing state-mandated training requirements and seek to eliminate any unnecessary topic-specific requirements. The first audit must be completed by Dec. 31, 2022.