SBEC Recap: Board Focus on Long-Range Planning and Stakeholder Engagement

The State Board for Educator Certification met in Austin on July 18-19. While this agenda was light on decision making, it was full of portents for future action by this body.

Thursday, the SBEC conducted their annual work session. The day was divided into two major areas for discussion:

Long-range planning occupied most of the day and included discussions of the board's plan to move forward with the development of a Texas-specific performance assessment. While there is much to be worked out in terms of scope and specifics, it is the Texas Education Agency's (TEA) plan to have the certification exam vendor (yet to be named, but likely Pearson) develop the exam in collaboration with as many as five educator preparation programs (EPPs). While we maintain that a performance assessment is not appropriate as a certification exam, having EPPs help guide the process is a positive move, and we will continue to monitor these decisions as they unfold.

In the afternoon, TEA staff reviewed existing stakeholder feedback to learn how to improve future engagement. The feedback centered on transparency for both SBEC and participants, expanding the circle of expertise, and providing sufficient time to provide meaningful feedback to the board. Details are forthcoming, but as a long-standing partner in this work, we look forward to the opportunity to work alongside additional organizations with a vested interest in educator preparation.

Little action was taken on Friday, but that did not stop the day from being laden with some hefty discussion items related to educator sanctions and discipline, teacher pedagogy standards, teacher assignment rules, and the clinical teaching experience.

Texas AFT delivered testimony in alignment with its partners at the Texas Coalition for Educator Preparation (TCEP) regarding the proposed revisions to the teacher pedagogy standards in 19 TAC Chapter 235. In April, several testifiers spoke out against the removal of lesson design from the pedagogy standards to align with HB 1605. This bill is not a mandate to use more prescriptive high-quality instructional materials (HQIM) or open education resources (OER), but the initial changes would have driven teacher preparation exclusively in the direction of their use. At the board's direction, the foundational skill of lesson design was added back into the standards. Minor corrections are still needed, but consistent advocacy has ensured this essential teacher skill remains in teacher training. It is critical that these standards align with best practices in teaching because they will be the primary drivers in how future teachers are certified (PPR and TxTPA) and how practicing teachers will be evaluated (T-TESS). The intent is to bring these rules forward for proposal in September. Approval of these rules will prompt additional rulemaking, and we will follow that process in future editions of the Hotline.

TEA staff also brought forward for discussion proposed changes to 19 TAC Chapter 249 related to educator discipline. Conversation focused on so-called "grooming behaviors." However, the suggested changes do do not account for differences in patterns of behavior that would amount to solicitation and similar actions that lead to forming positive relationships with students. After hearing testimony, the board seemed to agree with witnesses asserting the board has sufficient authority to act against inappropriate behavior without adding more nebulous language that would call for automatic certificate revocation. Additionally, TEA legal staff suggested language that might add to the burden of proof for a medical exemption in the case of contract abandonment. This documentation could cost the educator both significant time and money, and it was argued that rules already allow for individual consideration in these cases. Educators should not have additional barriers placed in front of them if they need to leave the classroom for medical reasons. Texas AFT legal staff will continue monitoring these deliberations.

Discussion from the previous meeting carried over on TAC Chapter 231 related to teacher assignments for special education and the need for content area certification. TEA maintains that current requirements (and thus previous flexibility) are not compliant with federal law. However, their initial proposed changes would have overburdened some special education teachers with new content-area certification requirements. Texas AFT joins other groups in advocating for continued flexibility for inclusion teachers, especially at the secondary level so that students can get the support they need from a qualified special education teacher. These rules are expected to come up for proposal in September.

In what was perhaps the most consequential decision of the week, the SBEC chose to again reject a settlement agreement with the embattled alternative certification program, Texas Teachers of Tomorrow. The discussion took place in closed session, so specifics are unknown, but the presumption is that we will see another proposal from A+ at the next SBEC meeting.

As promised to the State Board of Education in April, SBEC is immediately taking up discussion to make minor changes to the recently adopted 19 TAC Chapter 228 rules for educator preparation. The overarching goal is to create more flexibility-including time spent in professional development or supervising extracurricular activities-in meeting the hours required for clinical teaching. The board hopes to have these approved by the spring.

The board also approved changes to its educator certification rules that allow additional options for demonstrating English language proficiency for bilingual education certification. The intent is to minimize barriers to bilingual certification candidates, a critical shortage area for the teacher workforce.

SBEC is slated to meet next on September 19-20 in Austin.

Public link

Please use the above public link if you want to share this noodl on another website.