The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) met in Austin on Dec. 6. There were three items up for proposal that Texas AFT has been closely following for many months.
Texas AFT again 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. As presented to SBEC, the proposed standards contained revised language that reflects many of the requested changes stakeholders have been articulating since April 2024. The proposed text includes:
- A definition for “initial lesson plan design.” This definition acknowledges this foundational skill that must be cultivated by all teachers.
- Explicit acknowledgement the critical role of lesson plan design in classroom practice and the continued role it must play in instructional planning, while high-quality instructional materials continue to be reviewed and adopted by the State Board of Education (SBOE) over the next several years.
- Edits that reflect both the autonomy and choice in instructional materials expressly maintained in House Bill 1605.
There was additional conversation in the room concerning the requirement to capture video evidence of instruction, and we perhaps can anticipate some minor adjustments to this standard at adoption. SBEC members also discussed the need to be explicit about when educator preparation programs would be expected to begin implementing these standards, as well as when they would start being held accountable for their instruction.
The board next took up TAC Chapter 231 related to teacher assignments for special education. The proposed revisions would provide requirements for school districts to make special education personnel assignment decisions based on the correlating certification and demonstration of content proficiency requirements. Based on feedback received at the Sept. 2024 SBEC meeting, Texas Education Agency staff continued to work with stakeholders to revise and address board member feedback. The revised worksheet includes:
- Embedding quality measures in the professional development option as a means of demonstrating content competency;
- Awarding increased points for passage of both the Science of Teaching Reading (STR) exam and Reading Academies; and
- Including “closely related fields” for demonstration of particular content in the options for college semester hours, teaching/paraprofessional experience, residency, and professional development at the secondary level.
Public testimony regarding the worksheet was virtually unanimous in support of the final product; only a few minor changes were added before proposal. Additionally, the board decided to approve alternate rule text that specifically identified that special educators who had already met federal content competency requirements are exempt from the new requirements. Those testifying, including TCEP coalition members, pointed out that without the more explicit rule text, the original draft of the proposed rule would be insufficient to give educators notice that not all educators must complete all of the substantive requirements of the new worksheet.
Finally, staff brought forward proposed changes to 19 TAC Chapter 249 related to educator discipline. The primary focus of the discussion surrounded the definition of “solicitation.” Oral testimony stipulated that definition of solicitation as proposed by the board unfairly shifts the burden of proof that solicitation has not occurred to the accused educator rather than TEA having to prove that it did occur.
Outgoing board member Tommy Coleman, who is an attorney, agreed with this interpretation as did superintendent board member Michael McFarland (Crowley ISD). McFarland took issue with comments made by TEA staff that the reason for this change was to make it easier for them to prove their cases to an administrative law judge (ALJ). He reminded board members that their job is not to make things easier for TEA, but to do what was best for all stakeholders and write clear and actionable rules. In the end, the words “prima facie” as related to what acts considered in context constitute evidence were removed leaving a much more satisfactory text that no longer included the objectionable burden shift. An associated change to the new “grooming behaviors,” definition stating that potential grooming behaviors would be “considered in context and on the totality of circumstances” made stakeholders more comfortable with the language in this section.
Other positive changes to this proposal included elimination of requesting medical leave as a requirement of documentation in contract abandonment. It was also made clear that the SBEC retains authority to apply mitigating factors to reduce the length of a suspension, even to the point of elimination.
While not all proposals met our ideal, Texas AFT has been proud to partner with TCEP to develop and deliver consistent advocacy on these items over the last several SBEC meetings, resulting in substantive positive changes to all three items up for consideration. All three proposals will move to adoption at the February 2025 SBEC meeting and, if approved, will go before the State Board of Education (SBOE) for ratification in April 2025.