19 TAC §§101.2001, 101.2003, 101.2005, 101.2007, 101.2009, 101.2011, 101.2013, 101.2015, 101.2017, 101.2019
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) adopts new §§101.2001,
101.2003, 101.2005, 101.2007, 101.2009, 101.2011, 101.2013, 101.2015, 101.2017,
and 101.2019, concerning assessment. The new sections are adopted to implement
the grade advancement requirements of the new testing program, the Texas Assessment
of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS), in accordance with Texas Education Code (TEC),
28.0211. Section 101.2001 and §101.2015 are adopted without changes to
the proposed text as published in the March 8, 2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 1629) and will not be republished. Sections
101.2003, 101.2005, 101.2007, 101.2009, 101.2011, 101.2013, 101.2017, and
101.2019 are adopted with changes to the proposed text as published in the
March 8, 2002, issue of the
Texas Register
(27 TexReg 1629).
The 76th Texas Legislature, 1999, mandated a new testing program of increased
rigor, size, and scope that must be implemented no later than the 2002-2003
school year. The 76th Texas Legislature also mandated new grade advancement
testing requirements as part of this new testing program; these requirements
were enacted as the Student Success Initiative and are specified in TEC, §28.0211.
Planning for this new program, the TAKS, began in the fall of 1999. The TEA
is committed to including the widest and best possible input into this important
development process from all stakeholders in Texas education. Planning for
implementing this new program has included careful attention to the role of
assessment in the broader context of the education system, including such
areas as curriculum, staff development, and recommended high school program
requirements. Beginning in January 2000, the TEA has provided the State Board
of Education (SBOE) a progress report on TAKS planning as a regular agenda
item.
TEC, §28.0211, specifies the new grade advancement requirements, enacted
by the 76th Texas Legislature as the Student Success Initiative. This initiative
mandates new passing requirements to be phased in as follows: beginning in
school year 2002-2003 for the reading test at Grade 3, beginning in school
year 2004-2005 for the reading and mathematics tests at Grade 5, and beginning
in school year 2007-2008 for the reading and mathematics tests at Grade 8.
As specified by these requirements, a student may advance to the next grade
level only by passing these tests or by unanimous decision of his or her grade
placement committee as likely to perform at grade level after accelerated
instruction. TEC, §28.0211, provides that admission, review, and dismissal
(ARD) committees will determine the manner of participation in accelerated
instruction of special education students who do not perform satisfactorily
on one or more of the specified assessment instruments. ARD committees will
also make decisions about promotion/retention of these special education students.
The following is a summary of important aspects of the Student Success
Initiative, as specified in TEC, §28.0211.
Multiple (at least three) Test Opportunities. TEC, §28.0211, requires
that students have at least three opportunities during the school year to
pass these statewide tests and provides that the commissioner set the dates
for these administrations. TEC, §28.0211, also allows districts to administer
an alternate assessment instrument after students fail a second time. The
alternate assessment instruments must be approved by the commissioner.
Accelerated Instruction. School districts are required to provide accelerated
instruction in the subject area failed after each test administration. If
this accelerated instruction is group-administered, this setting may not have
a ratio of more than 10 students for each teacher. In addition, transportation
must be provided by the school district if the accelerated instruction occurs
outside regular school hours.
Grade Placement Committee. For a student who fails a second time, school
districts are required to establish a grade placement committee for the student.
The grade placement committee consists of the principal or designee, the student's
parent or guardian, and the teacher of the subject area failed by the student.
The law charges the grade placement committee with prescribing the accelerated
instruction that the district will provide the student before the statewide
assessment is administered a third time.
If the student fails a third time, the student is retained at the same
grade level. The parent or guardian may appeal this retention to the student's
grade placement committee. This committee may promote the student if it determines
by unanimous decision that, in accordance with local school board standards,
it is likely the student will perform at grade level given accelerated instruction
upon promotion. The final decision of this committee cannot be appealed. Regardless
of whether a student who fails three times is retained or promoted, the grade
placement committee must develop a plan for the accelerated instruction the
student shall receive the next school year. The plan must be designed to enable
the student to perform at the appropriate grade level at the end of the next
school year.
Parental Notification. The law sets forth notification requirements that
districts must follow regarding these testing requirements for grade advancement.
In addition to notification of the overall testing requirements, districts
must notify parents or guardians of the grade placement committee process
and the promotion/retention decisions. As part of these requirements, districts
must notify the parent or guardian of the time, place, and purpose of the
committee. In addition, the district must notify the student's parent or guardian
about the student's failure to pass the required tests, the student's assignment
to an accelerated instructional program, and the possibility that the student
may be retained in the same grade level.
Miscellaneous Provisions. Passage of statewide tests does not preclude
retention in accordance with local policy based on other factors such as attendance,
coursework, etc. Results for the tests specified by this law must be reported
to the appropriate school district not later than 10 days after receipt of
the test materials by the agency or its test contractor. The law adds indicators
to the school accountability system that address the requirements of the student
success initiative such as the percentage of students provided accelerated
instruction, the percentage of students promoted by grade placement committees,
and subsequent performance on the state-required tests.
The adopted new 19 TAC Chapter 101, Assessment, Subchapter BB, Commissioner's
Rules Concerning the Student Success Initiative, has been developed in accordance
with TEC, §28.0211. Development of the adopted rules has been guided
by agency commitment to the following policy: to support student academic
achievement of the essential knowledge and skills at each grade level to enable
a student to succeed at the next grade level.
The purpose of these rules is to ensure the effective implementation of
the grade advancement testing requirements as part of an overall system of
support for student academic achievement. This system includes but is not
limited to the following: informal and formal assessment of student needs
at preceding grades and corresponding early intervention activities that address
those needs; continuous and ongoing evaluation by a variety of means; research-based
instructional programs; targeted accelerated instruction informed by multiple
testing opportunities and other means of evaluation; a grade placement committee
which decides on an individual student basis the most effective way to support
a student's academic achievement on grade level; and accelerated education
plans for every student who does not pass the required grade advancement assessments
after three opportunities, whether he/she is retained or promoted by his/her
grade promotion committee.
The following is a summary of the provisions addressed in adopted new 19
TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter BB.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2001, Policy, sets forth the policy of the
TEA relating to the grade advancement testing requirements, defines the proficiency
that students must demonstrate in order to advance to the next grade, establishes
the grade placement committee, and delineates the purpose of the rules.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2003, Grade Advancement Testing Requirements,
specifies the grades and subjects in which eligible students must be tested
by certain school years as well as provisions relative to students receiving
special education services, limited English proficient students, and dyslexic
students.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2005, Test Administration and Schedule, establishes
test administration procedures and schedule, directs school administrators
to maintain the integrity of the test administration, and specifies that TEA
shall provide three opportunities per year for required tests and that the
commissioner will set the dates.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2007, Role of Grade Placement Committee, provides
details regarding the composition and role of the grade placement committee;
notifications concerning student failures; prescriptions for accelerated instruction;
decisions regarding alternate assessment; process to appeal retention; and
development of accelerated education plans for students who do not pass after
three testing opportunities, regardless of whether the student is promoted
or retained.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2009, Notice to Parents or Guardians, sets
forth provisions relating to notices to parents or guardians. In addition
to notification of the overall testing requirements, districts must notify
parents or guardians of the grade placement committee process and the promotion/retention
decisions. As part of these requirements, districts must notify the parent
or guardian of the time, place, and purpose of the committee. In addition,
the district must notify the student's parent or guardian about the student's
failure to pass the stipulated tests, the student's assignment to an accelerated
instructional program, and the possibility that the student may be retained
in the same grade level.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2011, Alternate Assessment, delineates alternate
assessment provisions, including the establishment of an annual list of state-approved
alternate achievement tests and the requirement that the alternate assessment
be given within a three-week window of the third administration of statewide
assessment, that scoring contractors send test results to schools for verification
within 10 days, and that schools follow procedures for test security and confidentiality.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2013, Accelerated Instruction, specifies requirements
for accelerated instruction for students who fail to demonstrate proficiency,
including coordination with previous diagnostic testing and intervention activities,
student-teacher ratio for group-administered accelerated instruction, provision
of transportation to students required to attend acceleration programs that
occur outside of regular school hours, and factors upon which to base accelerated
instruction.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2015, Parental Waiver, directs school districts
to establish a waiver process by which a parent or guardian may request that
a student not participate in the third testing opportunity.
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2017, Scoring and Reporting, requires scoring
contractors to provide assessment results within 10 working days following
receipt of test materials. This section also specifies data that school districts
and charters are required to report to the agency under TEC, §39.051(b)(7).
Adopted new 19 TAC §101.2019, Credit for High School Graduation, establishes
provisions concerning students retained in Grade 8 relative to their earning
high school graduation credit and the placement of these students in an age-appropriate
learning environment.
School districts and charter schools will be required to adopt new procedures
in accordance with these rules. In addition, new reporting requirements of
the student success initiative specify additional information for the Academic
Excellence Indicator System.
In response to public comments, the following changes were made to new
19 TAC Chapter 101, Subchapter BB, since published as proposed.
New subsection (b) was added to §101.2003 to make explicit that if
a Grade 3, 5, or 8 student is enrolled at the time of testing, then he or
she is eligible under these requirements; proposed subsections (b)-(f) were
renumbered accordingly.
Language was added to §101.2005(b) and new §101.2005(c) was added
to clarify requirements in regard to students who are absent for any or all
of the three test administration dates in the student assessment calendar.
Language was added to §101.2007(b) to accept a parent's or guardian's
written and signed waiver of participation in the GPC.
Language was revised in §101.2007(b) to clarify that a good faith
effort must be made to notify both parents and that one or both parents or
guardians could initiate an appeal of the GPC's decision to retain a student
or promote a student if the remaining members of the GPC also agree to the
promotion.
Language was modified in §101.2007(e) to require districts to ensure
a "good faith effort is made toward securing" a parent's or guardian's receipt
of any retention notification, making the language consistent with that in §101.2007(b)(2).
Language was added to §101.2007(h) to clarify that districts may recognize
a promotion decision upon completion of a school year at "a school other than
a Texas public school."
Language was amended in §101.2009(b) to require that the superintendent,
and not the local school board, establish procedures to identify students
at risk of failure on the first administration of the test.
Language was modified in §101.2009(c) to allow districts more flexibility
in fulfilling the requirement to notify parents or guardians within five working
days of their student's failure to demonstrate proficiency on the first administration
of a grade advancement test.
Language was amended in §101.2011(b) to give greater flexibility in
the schedule for administering the alternate assessment, allowing a testing
window period to better coincide with district summer school schedules.
Language was amended in §101.2013(c) to specify that districts, and
not superintendents, should be responsible for providing transportation to
students required to attend acceleration programs outside regular school hours.
Language was added to §101.2017 outlining a district's reporting requirements
pertaining to the Student Success Initiative.
Language was added to §101.2019(a) clarifying that a student may take
a high school elective, but not the required course, in the subject area that
caused the student to be retained; and
Language was amended in §101.2019(b) to specify that school boards,
and not superintendents, should be responsible for establishing policy regarding
the placement of retained students in an age- appropriate learning environment.
The following comments were received regarding the adoption of the proposed
new rules. The comments and corresponding agency responses are organized by
section and, when applicable, by the issue addressed.
§101.2001. Policy.
Issue. Instructional programs in early childhood education.
Comment. Educators at a meeting held by the TEA emphasized the importance
of effective instructional programs in early childhood education and recommended
that Texas should continue to support federal programs like Head Start available
to all students as needed. They also emphasized the importance of identifying
students at risk of reading difficulties prior to third grade testing.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. The Student Success Initiative is based
on a comprehensive set of services, including early diagnostic testing and
research-based interventions that are provided to all students in kindergarten
through Grade 2. Since 1996, the Texas Reading Initiative has provided these
services through such programs as Teacher Reading Academies, Accelerated Reading
Instruction, and Early Reading Instruments such as the Texas Primary Reading
Inventory. Early diagnostic testing will help identify students at risk of
reading difficulties before they reach third grade. Other early childhood
education programs available in Texas include Ready to Read, READ for Texas,
Master Reading Teacher, Pre-K and kindergarten grants, and Academics 2000.
In addition, the agency publishes "Pre-K Guidelines" to help educators make
informed decisions about curriculum content for prekindergarten children.
Scientifically based research confirms the value of early education for young
children. Prekindergarten programs that support effective teaching practices
have been shown to lead to important growth in children's intellectual and
social development, which is critical to their future academic success.
Issue. Impact on students.
Comment. Several individuals and educators, an educator from Cypress-Fairbanks
Independent School District (ISD) and one from Galveston ISD, an educational
researcher, and a professor of educational psychology expressed their opposition
to the Student Success Initiative due to concerns about its potential harmful
impact on students. These concerns included the consequences of increased
stress and anxiety, especially harmful for young students, and of placing
retained students at greater risk of dropping out. Many of these individuals
stated that their concerns were based on research literature showing that
grade retention rarely leads to positive academic results. One individual,
explaining that since grade level typically means that the student scores
at the 50th percentile, stated some students will score repeatedly below this
percentile because of relatively low ability, years of inappropriate education,
or undiagnosed disabilities. This individual recommended a change in the rules
that could address these concerns to give the grade placement committee more
latitude so that a student could be promoted if the student can show he or
she can do the "day-to-day schoolwork at the next grade level."
Agency Response. These comments pertain to the requirements of the law,
Texas Education Code (TEC), §28.0211, and cannot be addressed by a change
in these rules. The agency disagrees that the recommended change is necessary.
Section 101.2007(f) requires the grade placement committee in the appeal process
to consider "all facts and circumstances" in determining whether a student
is likely to perform at grade level if promoted. This should include consideration
of "day-to-day schoolwork," along with other relevant evidence of student
academic achievement. Moreover, the agency disagrees that grade level typically
means scoring at the 50th percentile; this is true of norm-referenced tests,
not of the criterion-referenced tests comprising the Texas assessment program.
With these tests based on the statewide curriculum, the state expects all
students to meet the goal of grade level academic achievement. Additionally,
the state mandates that systematic instruction in reading begin as early as
kindergarten and continue throughout the primary grades. This careful, consistent
instruction is based on thoughtful evaluation of data obtained from classroom
observations, formal and informal assessments, and samples of student work.
In brief, districts and charter schools already know who the students are
that may be at risk of retention due to the grade advancement testing requirements
and have been able to focus accordingly in advance to help them succeed.
While understanding the importance of these concerns about the potential
harm to students, the agency points out the intent of this law is neither
retention nor social promotion, but support for grade-level academic achievement.
The commissioner rules are consistent with this intent and reiterate that
the testing requirements are "part of an overall system of support for student
academic achievement." This system builds upon and extends the work of the
Texas Reading Initiative at kindergarten-Grade 2, begun in 1996, and the Texas
Mathematics Initiative at Grades 5-8, begun in 2001. Together these initiatives
create a comprehensive set of services for students such as: informal and
formal assessment of student needs at preceding grades and corresponding early
intervention activities that address those needs, research-based instructional
programs, targeted accelerated instruction informed by multiple testing opportunities,
a grade placement committee which decides on an individual student basis the
most effective way to support a student's academic achievement, and accelerated
education plans for the following year. This system has been established to
provide the kind of help students need as early as possible in their academic
careers to ensure their future success.
Comment. A teacher at Boling ISD and an administrator from Stamford ISD
expressed support for the law and the rules as necessary and fair to ensure
student academic achievement and stated that the initiative may help students
who do not qualify for special education services but learn at a slower rate
than others.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. As stated in the previous agency response,
the intent of the law and of agency policy, as specified in §101.2001,
"is to support student academic achievement of the essential knowledge and
skills at each grade level to enable a student to succeed at the next grade
level." This initiative can help all students, including those referenced
in this comment, by providing a set of services that are similar in many respects
to special education services. Beginning with the kindergarten class of 2000,
the first class eligible for the Student Success Initiative, the agency has
taken a series of focused steps to assist school districts in preparing these
students to read at or above grade level by Grade 3 and to ensure success
on the new assessment. These efforts include the ongoing Teacher Reading Academy
training for K-2 teachers during the summer, the provision of diagnostic assessment
instruments from the Commissioner's Approved List of Early Reading Instruments,
and the allocation of Accelerated Reading Instruction (ARI) funding for early
intervention efforts on every campus. The 77th Texas Legislature in 2001 also
provided funding for Grade 3 Teacher Reading Academies starting the summer
of 2002 (in preparation for the 2003 test) and for Grade 4 Teacher Reading
Academies starting the summer of 2003.
These efforts include the ongoing Teacher Reading Academy training for
K-2 teachers during the summer. In addition, districts must provide the parent
and/or guardian of every child in kindergarten and Grades 1 and 2 with information
about the requirements of law regarding testing and the Student Success Initiative.
A brochure entitled Student Success Initiative, A Parent Guide to Testing
Requirements has been designed to assist districts with this notification
process. It can be found on the TEA website at: http://www.tea.state.tx.us/curriculum/ssi.html.
Most importantly, the agency recognizes that achieving the goals of this system
of academic support depends greatly on the active involvement of parents and
community members, working in partnership with their schools. The agency and
education service centers have worked since 1999 and will continue to work
with districts and charter schools in providing technical assistance, training,
materials, administrative guidance, and other activities as needed in support
of the Student Success Initiative.
Comment. Several individuals and educators stated that the grade advancement
testing requirements would lead to an increased emphasis on test preparation
in the classroom and the consequent loss of instructional time for all students.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. The Texas Assessment of Knowledge
and Skills (TAKS) tests are carefully constructed to be in line with the state-mandated
curriculum, the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). As true in the
past, employing narrowly focused preparation strategies prior to TAKS testing
is generally counterproductive. The most effective preparation for TAKS is
instruction that is based on the TEKS and that provides students with multiple
opportunities to read a variety of texts, write for a variety of purposes
and audiences, and solve mathematical problems in a variety of real-world
contexts. Challenging, creative activities can certainly be incorporated into
such an instructional program, and students who are engaged in these types
of activities will likely do well on TAKS. If teachers are successfully teaching
the TEKS, there is no need for undue emphasis on "test preparation."
Comment. An individual expressed concern that testing measures "performance"
and many students who are struggling physically and emotionally also struggle
with test performance.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. The Texas Assessment Program requires
that decisions related to appropriate testing and accommodations must be based
on individual student needs and reflect the student's regular classroom instruction.
Issue. Impact on students who learn at a slower rate than others.
Comment. One individual, an educational diagnostician, and educators from
Alice, Argyle, Cameron, Houston, Kerens, Klein, Newcastle, Pampa, Spring,
Waco, and Ysleta ISDs expressed concerns that the law does not take into consideration
the special needs of students who do not qualify for special education services
yet learn at a slower rate than others. As expressed in these comments, these
students are doing the best they can but are not likely to meet the promotion
standard set forth in current law, which specifies that the grade placement
committee (GPC) may only promote a student by unanimous decision if the student
is likely to perform at grade level with further accelerated instruction.
These students are therefore most likely to have adverse consequences such
as lower self-esteem and a sense of failure and be placed at greater risk
of dropping out of school. It was recommended that additional funding might
be needed to help support this group of students.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the importance of these concerns
and will focus on addressing these concerns in its ongoing work with education
service centers to provide technical assistance, training, and other services
to districts and charter schools in support of this initiative. To reiterate,
it is also important to note that the Student Success Initiative provides
a comprehensive system of academic support and individual attention that can
better diagnose and address the needs of these students. Again, upon appeal
by a parent of an automatic retention, the GPC is charged with considering
"all facts and circumstances" whether the student is likely to perform at
grade level if promoted. It is important for all students to stay on grade
level in order to successfully meet the TAKS exit-level requirements for high
school graduation.
Issue. Impact on migrant students.
Comment. Individuals, a curriculum director, a migrant services coordinator,
and representatives of the Texas Migrant Interstate Program (TMIP) expressed
a range of concerns regarding the impact of the law on migrant students. These
concerns included mobility, attendance, access to the TEKS and instruction,
participation in all three testing opportunities, and the exchange of instructional
information between districts serving migrant students. Citing research that
documents "overwhelmingly" that grade retention provides few long-term academic
or developmental benefits and that it places students at greater risk of dropping
out, it was suggested that additional resources such as professional development
were needed to teach migrant students who are at risk of dropping out. These
respondents supported holding districts, administrators, teachers, parents
and students accountable for learning but stated that testing results should
only be used to inform planning, evaluation, and improvement of the curriculum
and instruction, and not as the basis for grade advancement for students.
Of particular concern is a migrant student's access to the TEKS and instruction
in the accelerated instruction required after failed attempts and in the accelerated
education plan for the next year to help a student perform at grade level.
Some suggestions were made that these issues could be addressed by better
coordination of services to migrant students. It was specifically recommended
that an effective and timely communication system should be developed across
Texas school districts. It was also recommended that out-of-state testing
should be available for migrant students and that migrant students should
be allowed to test in the fall when they return to Texas.
Agency Response. The agency is aware of these concerns and agrees with
many of these suggestions. The Texas Migrant Education Program (MEP) identified
approximately 116,000 migrant students in Texas (using 1997-1998 data). A
very large percentage of these students migrate outside Texas, and a significant
percentage migrate within the state to some 550 school districts. Since these
children enroll temporarily in various schools, coordination and continuity
across program, school district, and state lines is essential to ensure that
migrant students and their families have their needs met and are able to access
all services for which they are eligible.
Before discussing migrant student concerns further, an important clarification
regarding eligibility should first be pointed out: the Student Success Initiative
applies only to students who are enrolled in a local school district or charter
school at the time of testing as established in the student assessment calendar.
This clarification has been made explicit in the rules by adding a new subsection
(b) to §101.2003, which is described in the summary of comments related
to §101.2003. Therefore, a migrant student who withdraws from a Texas
public school during the school year of a grade advancement test is not considered
eligible (therefore, not required to test) under the grade advancement requirements
of TEC, §28.0211. Moreover, as provided in §101.2007(h), any student
who has been promoted upon completion of a school year in another state may
be enrolled in that grade without regard to their participation in TEC, §28.0211;
this would apply to many migrant students as addressed in these comments.
In regard to the migrant students who are eligible and required to test,
the Texas MEP and education service center migrant directors are working together
to determine appropriate ways to address the unique issues of migrant students
as related to the Student Success Initiative. It is clear that informed and
continuous communication between all parties involved is critical to the migrant
student's academic success. One strategy under consideration is to assist
migrant service coordinators in working with GPCs to effectively communicate
and address migrant students' needs.
In regard to the testing recommendations, although fall testing is not
an option, out-of-state testing will be available through the alternate assessment
option, which districts may administer instead of the third TAKS assessment.
Through this option migrant students could take any of the state-approved
alternate assessments at the testing centers under the oversight of the TMIP.
The agency has also made a change in the rules, allowing a three-week testing
window for the alternate assessment, in response both to migrant student concerns
and requests from districts for more flexibility in the test schedule during
the summer (see response in the summary of responses to comments about §101.2011(b),
Alternate Assessment). Furthermore, the rules allow any student to be tested
with a state-approved alternate assessment at any time. Although the result
would not count officially if administered outside the testing window in the
Student Assessment Calendar, the GPC could consider this alternate assessment
result as evidence supporting promotion in its review of an automatic retention
upon appeal by a parent.
Issue. Multiple retentions.
Comment. An individual inquired if the law applies to a student who has
already been retained at an earlier grade (K-2).
Agency Response. Yes. The law applies to students retained at earlier grades.
Comment. An educator from Kerens ISD and educators at a meeting convened
by the Texas Education Agency expressed concerns about the potential for multiple
retentions for some students. This would place these students at greater risk
of dropping out because they would be much older than their peers. It was
also asked whether the state law limiting the number of retentions is still
in effect.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees and reiterates as in a previous agency
response that the initiative supports grade-level academic achievement of
the state-mandated curriculum. Several provisions of the rules are intended
to address these concerns: §101.2019(a), which provides that a student
retained at Grade 8 may earn course credit for high school graduation, and §101.2019(b),
which allows local policy to provide for the placement of retained students
in an age-appropriate learning environment. There is no longer any state law
limiting the number of retentions. When the TEC was reorganized in 1995, authority
to set this type of limit was given to local districts. Currently, TEC, §28.021,
Student Advancement, provides: "A student may only be promoted on the basis
of academic achievement or demonstrated proficiency of the subject matter
of the course or grade level."
Issue. Impact on teachers and administrators.
Comment. Numerous individuals and educators expressed concerns about the
impact of this law on teachers and administrators, creating a burden of additional
resources, staffing, time, and paperwork that will be difficult for many districts
and schools to meet. Some stated that many schools have already reached the
limits of accelerated instruction for some students and cannot help these
students to progress any further.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the importance of these concerns
but points out that the law requires adequate funding for all its requirements
in order to be in effect for any school year. As required by TEC, §28.0211(m),
the commissioner of education must certify, no later than July 1, 2002, that
funding is available for these requirements during the 2002-2003 school year.
Additionally, schools received advance notification of the 2002-2003 Student
Success Initiative following its enactment by the legislature in 1999. The
agency has made a significant commitment to schools and students to ensure
students are prepared to succeed on the Grade 3 reading test. These efforts
include the Texas Reading Initiative (TRI), parental involvement initiatives
starting in 1997, the Master Reading Grant Teacher program, and local grants
to schools. Collectively, these efforts represent a total investment of about
$500 million dollars since 1996. The TRI collaborates with the U. S. Department
of Education, national reading educators, universities, colleges, regional
education service centers, and local school districts. This collaboration
provides information, resources, and knowledge to classroom teachers as they
teach Texas children to read.
Issue. Implementation at the same time as first year of new TAKS.
Comment. Several individuals and an administrator from Bastrop ISD expressed
concern that this new law will be implemented at the same time as the first
year of the new TAKS. One individual stated that the law should be postponed
a year so that the agency can fully evaluate the new TAKS tests. It was also
stated that, in contrast to the implementation date for these requirements,
the new accountability system for districts and schools will not be implemented
until the 2003-2004 school year. Recognizing that this time frame is a legislative
mandate, an individual recommended that the agency work with the 78th Texas
Legislature in 2003 to postpone implementation of the law for one year.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that a delay of the Student Success
Initiative is warranted, reiterating that this initiative follows a long and
systemic reform effort in Texas in support of its goals. The 77th Texas Legislature
considered this issue in 2001 and determined that children would be ready
for the requirements in 2003. Additionally, plans for addressing 2003 district
and school accountability are currently under review by the commissioner of
education. As detailed in the following response in regard to the issue of
standard setting on the TAKS, the State Board of Education (SBOE) is expected
to consider this initiative fully when setting standards on the TAKS at the
applicable grades and subject areas.
Issue. Standard setting on TAKS.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
recommended flexibility in setting standards, especially in the first year
of implementation. It was recommended that the SBOE should consider establishing
a phase-in period for the state passing standards on TAKS.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. This recommendation to consider a phase-in
period is included in the standard setting plan adopted by the SBOE at its
January 2002 meeting. The plan also recommends that the SBOE give special
consideration to the TAKS tests at the student success grades. The standard-
setting plan outlines the activities required for the SBOE to carry out their
responsibility to establish performance standards on the new TAKS assessments.
It is designed to ensure that the SBOE is able to set standards at its November
2002 meeting as fully informed as possible. The plan includes the following
critical points: (1) an acceptable and tested standard-setting methodology
will be used; (2) stakeholders, including teachers, administrators, parents,
and business and community leaders, will be involved; (3) the assessment on
which the standards are established will be explicitly linked to the curriculum;
(4) opportunity-to-learn data will be collected and used in the standard-setting
process; (5) the standard-setting process will include all the facts and circumstances
surrounding the assessment program; (6) the standard- setting process will
be well documented and open to public scrutiny; and (7) impact of the performance
standards will be carefully considered during the standard-setting process.
Spring 2002 field test data and a fall study will be included in the SBOE
review. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), composed of prominent educational
testing experts with experience in standard setting for other major testing
programs across the country, has been assembled to advise the SBOE on standard-
setting issues related to TAKS. Finally, the grade placement committee (GPC)
is required to consider all facts and circumstances regarding student academic
achievement in its review of an automatic retention if the parent initiates
an appeal. This process is critical to ensure that decisions are made on an
individual student basis in support of academic achievement.
Issue. Accountability at non-tested grades.
Comment. Several individuals raised the issue of accountability at earlier
non-tested grades.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that this is an important issue. The
agency and regional education service centers will continue to work with districts
to promote instructional leadership that includes an emphasis on the importance
of planning, teaming, collaboration, and coordination across grades to ensure
students learn the TEKS. The TEKS represent a continuum of development across
grade levels and the TAKS reflect this vertical alignment of the state curriculum.
§101.2003. Grade Advancement Testing Requirements.
Issue. Additional local standards for promotion.
Comment. An administrator from Houston ISD asked whether a district could
establish additional standards for grade advancement that exceed these testing
requirements.
Agency Response. Yes, but the district must base promotion decisions on
"academic achievement or demonstrated proficiency," as provided under TEC, §28.021.
TEC, §28.0211, does not supercede the authority of districts and charter
schools, as provided under TEC, §28.002(g), to establish additional local
standards for grade advancement.
Issue. Students who enroll late in school year.
Comment. Individuals and several superintendents asked whether a student
who enrolls in a school after any given test administration date must meet
the grade advancement testing requirements. It was also asked whether a student
who moves in from out of state after the first administration but prior to
the end of the year is required to take the second administration.
Agency Response. Yes. The commissioner's rules provide flexibility for
districts and charter schools to make appropriate decisions in applying the
requirements of the Student Success Initiative on an individual student basis
to ensure grade level achievement of all enrolled students. These requirements
apply to any eligible student who is enrolled in a local school district or
charter school at the time of testing as established in the student assessment
calendar. The agency has added a new subsection (b) to provide clarification
on this issue.
§101.2003(b) (adopted as §101.2003(c))
Comment. Several administrators from Hays Consolidated Independent School
District (CISD) and Cypress-Fairbanks, Houston, Northside, and Ysleta ISDs
recommended that in order to serve the best interests of students with special
learning needs a member of the Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) committee
and/or the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee (LPAC) should serve on
the GPC.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. In the case of students receiving special
education services who are eligible under these grade advancement requirements,
the law and the rules specify that the ARD committee itself serve as the GPC;
there is not an additional GPC for these students. In the case of limited
English proficient (LEP) students, the rules specify that an LPAC member either
serves on the ARD committee or is consulted by the GPC.
§101.2003(c) (adopted as §101.2003(d))
Issue. Eligibility of LEP students who are exempt from testing.
Comment. An administrator from Houston ISD asked whether these grade advancement
testing requirements apply to LEP students who are exempted by their LPAC
from testing.
Agency Response. No. These requirements only apply to students who are
not exempted from the applicable statewide assessment instruments. Section
101.2003(c) states, "A limited English proficient (LEP) student, as defined
by the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter B, who is administered an assessment in
English or Spanish for a grade and subject specified in subsection (a) of
this section is eligible under this section."
§101.2003(e) (adopted as §101.2003(f))
Comment. Educators from Hays CISD, Cypress-Fairbanks ISD, and Houston ISD
inquired about the impact of the law for a student with dyslexia. An administrator
from Houston ISD asked whether the agency will provide further clarification
concerning the definition of the "student's potential for achievement or proficiency
in the tested subject."
Agency Response. The agency is not currently planning to provide further
clarification concerning this definition, leaving this to local policy and
procedures. In regard to the initiative's impact on students with dyslexia,
the commissioner's rules require that individual student needs, including
dyslexia, must be taken into consideration in decisions regarding testing,
accelerated instruction, and promotion. In addition, current administrative
rules and procedures require districts and charter schools to develop programs
to meet the needs of students with dyslexia. The Dyslexia Handbook: Procedures
Concerning Dyslexia and Related Disorders contains the State Board of Education
approved procedures concerning dyslexia and related disorders. The Handbook,
Chapter IV, contains procedures for the identification of students with dyslexia
including whether the student qualifies for services under the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973 (§504) or the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA). Allowable testing accommodations for students, including students
with dyslexia, may be found in Appendix B of The Handbook.
Beginning with the 1999-2000 school year, school districts and charter
schools were required to phase in and implement early intervention programs
to accelerate reading instruction for students identified as at risk for reading
difficulties, including dyslexia. Accelerated Reading Instruction (ARI) funding
has been appropriated to assist districts in providing this intensive, targeted
intervention for identified students on every campus in kindergarten and Grades
1 and 2 for the 2001-2002 school year.
§101.2003(f) (adopted as §101.2003(g))
Issue. Student mobility.
Comment. An administrator from Arlington ISD stated that this subsection
is unclear and requested further description of the requirements regarding
previous testing history and, if applicable, previous accelerated instruction.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that further description is necessary.
Districts and charter schools are responsible to establish policy and procedures
to ensure that this important information follows a student in an accurate
and timely manner.
Comment. Several individuals, a superintendent, and administrators from
Arlington and Weslaco ISDs expressed concerns about student mobility in general
between schools and districts during the school year and the challenges this
presents for effectively administering these requirements to these students.
Students who move frequently often struggle to achieve because they have missed
so much school they receive fewer days of instruction. Other challenges include,
for example, a student who moves from one district to another prior to the
third assessment. The previous school is slow to provide records showing that
the student has been receiving accelerated instruction, the details relating
to that instruction and/or information that the student has failed the previous
two attempts. Because of this the student may not receive the necessary accelerated
instruction and/or the receiving school may not administer the required third
assessment to this student.
Agency Response. In response to the general concerns about student mobility,
the agency has developed the rules with the intent of providing flexibility
and support to local districts and charter schools so that important decisions
can be made on an individual student basis. To support districts in handling
mobility issues, the rules provide that documentation, including accelerated
instruction, testing history, and GPC decisions, must follow a student in
order to allow the receiving school to evaluate individual student needs and
circumstances. A student's prior testing history should be included in their
permanent cumulative folder. If a student is coming from another district
within the state, it is the responsibility of both districts to make a good
faith effort to report and/or request the student's assessment status. This
timely exchange of information between school districts is necessary to ensure
a student's full participation in the multiple testing opportunities and to
deliver the appropriate accelerated instruction to the student. Local districts
have the flexibility to determine, as informed by this documentation, the
extent and type of accelerated instruction that is appropriate for each student
regardless of mobility. Finally, the GPC must consider all facts and circumstances
in its review of appeals, including the specific scenario presented in this
comment.
Comment. A superintendent asked whether each district that withdraws a
student will have reporting requirements to the receiving school. If so, it
was recommended to include student test information in the withdrawal form.
Agency Response. Yes. The agency agrees with this recommendation since
this information should be reported to a receiving district or charter school.
§101.2005. Test Administration and Schedule
Issue. Opportunity to Learn TEKS by first test administration.
Comment. An individual and an educator from Hillsboro ISD expressed concern
about the early date of the first administration of the Grade 3 TAKS, which
is scheduled March 4 for the 2002-2003 school year. This early date would
not allow students sufficient opportunity to learn all grade-level TEKS covered
by the TAKS. While recognizing that it may be necessary to test early because
of the required three test administrations, it was recommended to move the
March 4 testing date toward the end of March to allow students and teachers
more time to prepare.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. This question pertains to the issue
of opportunity-to-learn, which is of vital importance to educational testing
standards of validity and equity. Opportunity-to-learn was addressed in the
TAKS test development process. In the initial phase, educator advisory committees
were convened and a statewide survey of teachers was conducted, in which the
agency received more than 58,000 campus consensus surveys. These educators
selected the reading and mathematics student expectations that were essential
for testing at each grade level and that students were determined to have
sufficient opportunity to learn. For the next steps in the test development
process, item and data review committees composed of Texas educators are convened.
Item review committees review test items to judge the appropriateness of item
content and difficulty and to eliminate potential bias. After item review,
items are field tested with Texas students. Following field testing, data
review committees are convened and trained in statistical analysis of field-test
data. These committees then determine whether items are appropriate for inclusion
in the bank of items from which test forms are built. Both item and data review
committees consider the date of the first test administration when determining
the appropriateness of an item for testing.
§101.2005(b)
Issue. Missed testing opportunities.
Comment. An administrator from Arlington ISD requested clarification concerning
student absences on the day of testing, tests that are not scored, and parent
testing refusals.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that further clarification is needed
and has modified the section to clarify that additional test opportunities
will not be provided and that the superintendent of each district shall establish
procedures relative to an eligible student who is absent or does not receive
a test score for any test administration. The law requires that a student
be given three opportunities for testing; however, no makeup tests will be
given. A student who is absent on test day will be required to take the test
during the next scheduled test administration. Opportunities are defined as
those dates specified on the Student Assessment Calendar for any given school
year. Therefore, a student who is absent for or enrolls at any point after
a designated test date has missed that testing opportunity. As for any student
who does not pass one of the grade advancement tests, the district or charter
school must provide appropriate accelerated instruction for students who are
absent or otherwise do not have valid test results. The rules provide that
this be determined on an individual student basis to match individual needs.
If a student has missed a testing opportunity, the district or charter school
may administer a local test or an individual reading inventory to determine
accelerated instruction needs prior to the next state designated testing date.
Comment. A representative from the TMIP and from United ISD asked for clarification
regarding a student who is absent for all three test administrations.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that clarification is needed and the
rule change described in the previous response addresses this comment as well.
A student who is absent during all three test administrations would be automatically
retained since he or she did not meet the grade advancement testing requirements.
Upon appeal by a parent, the GPC would convene and determine, based on all
facts and circumstances, whether the student is likely to perform on grade
level during the next school year given accelerated instruction. In addition,
the district or charter school could administer the alternate assessment to
a student at any time, and while a successful result would not count officially
as meeting the testing requirements, it should provide evidence to the GPC
that the student "is likely to perform at grade level" if promoted.
Issue. Third test administration during summer.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
requested that the agency move the date of the third test administration to
coincide with the last day of summer school. Many districts complete summer
school programs in June and would have to reopen schools in July for the third
TAKS administration, as presently scheduled. Postponing testing until July
will result in significant cost to the district to pay staff to administer
the tests and possible confusion for parents since testing would probably
need to be held at central locations to minimize costs to the district. It
was recommended that a testing window be created or that a waiver be provided
to districts to allow this testing date to be set at local district discretion.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that rescheduling the third TAKS
administration is necessary. The third TAKS test administration is July 8,
2003, as indicated in the Student Assessment Calendar for the 2002-2003 school
year. While it is difficult to prepare a testing calendar that will meet the
needs of all districts, the agency has made every effort to involve Texas
educators in making decisions about the testing schedule. In setting the student
success Grade 3 reading test dates, the agency carefully considered the need
for sufficient time for accelerated instruction, on the one hand, and the
need required by the GPC to make its final placement decision before the start
of the next school year. A district or charter school can request from the
agency alternate test dates for reasons such as this conflict with summer
school schedules. These are reviewed and granted on an individual district
basis. In addition, as cited in a previous response, the agency has made a
change to the rules to allow a three-week testing window for the alternate
assessment. While still under discussion, the testing window would likely
begin in the last week of June, which would allow districts to schedule this
assessment to coincide with their summer school programs.
Comment. An individual representing the Texas Classroom Teachers Association
(TCTA) commented on the importance of scheduling the tests so that they support
accelerated instruction as needed over the school year. The individual recommended
the following change. "The commissioner shall make sure to schedule tests
early enough so that sufficient remediation opportunities exist, with at least
one administration of the test to occur in the fall semester."
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. A fall administration of the statewide
test would not be a valid measure of grade-level academic achievement and
therefore inconsistent with the goal of the Student Success Initiative. The
agency does agree with the intent of this comment on the importance of ongoing
formative evaluation at interim points throughout the year, including the
fall. However, local school districts and teachers in the classroom, using
a variety of means of evaluation, can more appropriately do this.
Comment. An educator from Kerens ISD stated that all three testing opportunities
would have to be in the spring and questioned whether there was enough time
to support that.
Agency Response. In the Student Assessment Calendar for the 2002-2003 school
year, two administrations are scheduled in the spring and the third administration
is scheduled for the summer.
§101.2007. Role of Grade Placement Committee.
§101.2007(a)
Comment. An administrator from Comal ISD recommended that the GPC should
convene after a student's first failure rather than waiting until the second
failure.
Agency Response. The law and the rules specify only the minimum number
of times that the GPC should meet. Additional meetings may be established
in local procedures set by districts and charter schools.
§101.2007(b)
Issue. Logistical issues regarding convening the GPC.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
expressed concerns about the logistical challenges, especially in large districts,
of convening all members of the GPC in a timely manner. They cited various
potential problems such as conflicts with summer vacations, movement of principals
and teachers to other schools or districts, convening members at the same
physical location, and the mobility of the student population. They recommended
that the agency provide as much flexibility as possible to the districts to
meet this challenge.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that local flexibility is essential
for effective implementation of this initiative. The rules provide additional
flexibility to the law both in the composition and time frame for the GPC.
Section 101.2007(b) states: "The GPC shall be composed of the principal or
principal's designee, the student's parent or guardian, and the student's
teacher(s) of the subject." It further allows a parent to designate "another
individual to serve on the GPC for all purposes." It also provides, "If a
parent or guardian or designee is unable to attend a meeting, the district
may use other methods to ensure parent participation, including individual
and conference telephone calls." It also allows the principal, if the teacher
is unavailable, to designate a "certified professional educator who is most
familiar with the student in the [applicable] subject area."
The agency and education service centers will continue to work with districts
and charter schools in providing technical assistance, training, materials,
administrative guidance, and other activities as needed to address this and
other issues in support of this initiative. Districts have already suggested
several proactive ideas to address this challenge. For example, a district
may consider convening the potential members of the GPC at the end of the
year for the grade preceding the student success grade to prescribe summer
school for at-risk students. This is consistent with this initiative and may
provide advance notice of any logistical challenges. Moreover, the Texas Reading
Initiative has effectively focused on students at grade levels K-2 to ensure
that students will be reading on grade level when they reach third grade.
Therefore, the first year of TAKS implementation should not place an undue
burden on districts in regard to the convening of excessive GPCs.
Issue. Effective working relationships in GPC.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
emphasized that the effectiveness of the GPC process depended greatly on the
quality of the working relationships between its members. Various recommendations
were suggested to ensure a mutually supportive environment for dialogue and
fully-informed decision making. It was suggested that a parent or guardian
be able to consult with an adviser who may have a special knowledge or interest
in the student.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the importance of effective working
relationships of the GPC. The agency will continue to work in support of the
active, ongoing involvement of parents, classroom teachers, administrators,
other educators, and the public in this initiative. The suggestion for a parent
to consult with an advisor is consistent with agency policy; the advisor would
not have a vote on the GPC. The best interest of every student depends upon
the existence of a culture of collaboration and consultation between all members
of the GPC.
Comment. A director of the TMIP stated concerns that many migrant parents
may not fully participate and advocate for their children while serving on
a GPC. It was recommended that the migrant program train the migrant parents
on their role in the GPC and that a migrant educator should be included on
the GPC.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with these concerns and recommendations.
As stated in the previous response, a parent or guardian may consult with
an advisor. The agency Migrant Education Program (MEP) and regional education
service center migrant directors are planning to assist migrant service coordinators
to work in conjunction with the GPC to ensure various issues, including this
one, are appropriately addressed. Moreover, the rules provide that "a district
may accept a parent's or guardian's written designation of another individual
to serve on the GPC for all purposes." A parent could designate someone to
serve who could fully advocate for his or her child.
Issue. GPC composition and participation.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
expressed concerns about the potential problem of a parent who does not attend
GPC meetings.
Agency Response. The rules allow for the GPC to proceed in the case of
a non-participating parent. The district may accept a parent's or guardian's
written designation of another individual to serve on the GPC for all purposes.
If a parent or guardian or designee is unable to attend a meeting, a district
may use other methods to ensure parent participation, including individual
and conference telephone calls. The district may also designate an individual
to act on behalf of a student in place of a parent, guardian, or designee
if no such person can be located. A surrogate parent named on behalf of a
student with a disability shall be considered a parent for purposes of TEC, §28.0211.
Comment. This comment is relevant to the one previous. An associate superintendent
from Arlington ISD, an individual representing Texas Association of School
Administrators (TASA), and an individual representing the Texas Association
of School Boards (TASB) recommend the following addition to the rules: "The
district may accept a parent's written waiver of participation in the GPC
and designates the remaining members of the GPC as the decision-making entity
for all purposes."
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to specify
that a district may accept a parent's or guardian's written and signed waiver
of participation in the GPC and the designation of the remaining members of
the GPC as the decision-making entity for all purposes.
Comment. Superintendents from Midway and Arlington ISDs commented that
divorced parents often do not agree on what is best for a child and requested
clarification on parental representation and guidance on what should be done
when parents disagree. Specifically, it was asked if both parents or guardians
should have one joint vote or two separate votes, and if they have two separate
votes, how should disagreements regarding appeal and promotion decisions be
reconciled.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that clarification is needed but again
emphasizes the importance of establishing effective working relationships
on the GPC. The agency has made an additional change to this subsection of
the rule to clarify that both parents or guardians may be voting members of
the GPC, if they choose. Either parent or guardian could initiate an appeal
and agree to promote a student (if the remaining members of the GPC also agree
to the promotion decision).
Comment. Two individuals, including one representing the TCTA, stated that
the rules exceed the intent of the law in providing that the principal may
designate any certified personnel as a substitute for a student's teacher
on the GPC. It was recommended that the principal should be allowed only to
assign "a certified teacher with actual knowledge of the student's academic
capabilities."
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that a change is needed. This provision
as written is necessary to allow districts and charter schools sufficient
flexibility to carry out these requirements in the best interest of each individual
student. Principals need to have the option of selecting among all certified
educator personnel such as librarians and counselors in order to appoint the
individual most familiar with the work of the student.
Comment. An individual expressed concern that the language providing for
the principal to designate a substitute for a teacher needs to be strengthened
to ensure the substitute exercises appropriate independent judgment and does
not simply follow the recommendations of the principal. It was recommended
to add language providing that the principal could only designate someone
"if and only if the subject-area teacher is no longer a district employee
at the time of the review committee meeting, or, if this teacher is absent
on extended medical leave."
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that this change is needed. The current
rules specify that the classroom teacher must be unavailable for the principal
to designate a substitute and that the substitute must be someone "most familiar
with the student in the [applicable] subject area."
Comment. An administrator asked whether the principal's designee could
be a counselor, observing that in their ISD counselors may not act as the
principal's designee in an ARD meeting.
Agency Response. Yes. The law and the rules do not prohibit a principal
from designating a counselor from serving as his or her substitute on the
GPC.
§101.2007(c)
Comment. Several individuals and directors of the TMIP expressed concerns
about the delivery of required notifications to parents.
Agency Response. As specified in §101.2009(d) for each required parental
notice, "the district shall make a good faith effort to ensure that the notice
is provided either in person or by regular mail, is clear and easy to understand,
and is written in English or in the parent's or guardian's native language."
§101.2007(e)
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
inquired about the documentation that might be generated to adequately notify
parents concerning the GPC requirements.
Agency Response. The agency is considering the development of further administrative
materials, including suggested guidelines on this documentation, to assist
districts and charter schools in effectively implementing this law.
Comment. An individual from Klein ISD stated that the appeal process needs
a time frame within which parents may appeal.
Agency Response. This time frame is provided in the rules. Section 101.2007(e)
specifies that "the parent or guardian may appeal the retention by submitting
a request to the GPC within five working days of receipt of this retention
notification."
Comment. A representative of the TMIP suggests delivering retention notifications
as soon as possible. It was suggested that a migrant advocate represent the
migrant parent on the GPC as a timesaving measure for the delivery of the
notification.
Agency Response. The agency agrees, provided that the written consent of
the parent or guardian is obtained, as required.
Comment. An individual representing the TASA and an individual representing
the TASB commented that ensuring a parent's or guardian's receipt could be
difficult and expensive. They recommended changing the rule text to require
the district to make a "good faith effort" to notify a parent or guardian
to attend the GPC, thus making the language consistent with that in §101.2007(b)(2).
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to accommodate
the district making a good faith effort toward securing parent or guardian
receipt of the retention notification.
Issue. Parental appeal of automatic retention.
Comment. An individual representing the TCTA commented that the rules require
a meeting of the GPC after the automatic retention of a student, whereas the
law requires this meeting only if a parent or guardian initiates an appeal.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. The GPC must meet again if a child
is automatically retained in order to develop an accelerated education plan
for the student the next year, regardless of whether an appeal has been initiated.
In the case of an appeal, the GPC could address this question, along with
the accelerated education plan, at this meeting or hold an additional meeting.
The law and commissioner's rules specify a minimum number of GPC meetings;
local districts and charter schools have the authority for establishing further
GPC policy and procedures.
Comment. An administrator from Ysleta ISD asked whether, in the case of
parents who are not participating in the GPC process, the principal or teacher
could initiate the appeal of the automatic retention.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. The parent is the only one that
can initiate the appeal process authorized under TEC, §28.0211(e). The
rules provide that the principal can designate a surrogate to fulfill the
parent's role only if a parent cannot be located. However, as discussed in
a previous agency response, the parent may designate someone to serve on the
GPC. In addition, in accordance with a rule change to §101.2007(b), a
parent or guardian may waive participation and designate his or her GPC rights
to the remaining members.
§101.2007(f)
Comment. Several directors of the TMIP recommended that the agency's Migrant
Division develop a guide with sample descriptions of extenuating circumstances
that adversely affect migrant students.
Agency Response. The agency agrees to consider this recommendation in its
overall efforts with education service centers to provide technical assistance,
training, and administrative materials to districts and charter schools.
Comment. An individual representing the TCTA suggested broadening the language
in §101.2007(f)(3) to include the word "instruction" to the list currently
specified in the commissioner's rules for this section.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that this change is needed; the rules
charge the GPC with considering "all facts and circumstances" regarding a
student's ability to perform at grade level given accelerated instruction.
The list in subsection (f) is not intended to be exclusive but to offer guidance
to local school boards who by law must establish the promotion standards used
by the GPC. It is more appropriate to provide this clarification in administrative
materials, if needed.
Comment. An administrator from Comal ISD expressed concerns about the liability
of the GPC when a student is promoted even though he or she failed a section
of TAKS.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. Section 101.2007(f) provides, "The
review and final decision of the GPC must be appropriately documented as meeting
the standards adopted by the local school board." This provision is important
not only to ensure that the GPC has considered the best interest of the student
but also to confirm that the GPC has followed established procedures.
Comment. An individual asked whether there were an acceptable number of
promotions made by the GPCs (presumably within a school or district) and how
this would be included in the accountability system.
Agency Response. The law and the commissioner's rules stipulate that a
GPC may only promote a student if it finds by unanimous decision, in accordance
with standards established by the local school board, that the student is
likely to perform at grade level with further accelerated instruction. Districts
and charter schools are responsible for supporting and monitoring GPCs. Further
information regarding the accountability system is not yet available. TEC, §39.051(b)(7),
requires the following information to be reported to the agency: the percentage
of students, aggregated by grade level, provided accelerated instruction under
Section 28.0211(c), the results of assessments administered under that section,
the percentage of students promoted through the grade placement committee
process under Section 28.0211, the subject of the assessment instrument on
which each student failed to perform satisfactorily, and the performance of
those students in the school year following that promotion on the assessment
instruments required under Section 39.023.
Comment. An individual representing the TCTA recommended a change in the
rules to require the GPC to create a written document of its decisions, similar
to the documentation required for ARD committees by federal law. This is needed
to support full discussion and effective participation of all GPC members.
The report should include the date, names, positions, and signatures of its
members. When unanimous agreement is not reached by the GPC, a written statement
for the basis of the disagreement should be included in the GPC's documentation.
The members who disagree should be offered the opportunity to write their
own statements.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the intent of this recommendation
but does not consider that it requires a rule change to make it effective.
Section 101.2007(f) requires that the "review and final decision of the GPC
must be appropriately documented as meeting the standards adopted by the local
school board." The agency is planning to provide further administrative guidance
to districts and charter schools regarding the GPC, including the question
of appropriate documentation.
§101.2007(g)
Comment. Representatives from the TMIP expressed concern about migrant
students who return after the start of the school year in relation to the
requirement that the GPC make a placement decision before the start of the
next school year. In addition, an administrator asked whether this decision
could be made during the Teacher Service days prior to the student's first
day of school.
Agency Response. This concern is addressed in this subsection of the rules,
providing that this decision "shall be made before the start of the next school
year or, if applicable, upon reenrollment of a student after this date." As
detailed in a previous response, the agency recognizes the need to ensure
that GPCs are familiar with the unique issues of migrant students.
§101.2007(h)
Issue. Impact on grade placement decisions made by other states for reenrolling
students.
Comment. Representatives of the TMIP expressed support for this section
but were still concerned about the potential for confusion at the local level
regarding their authority to make appropriate grade placement decisions, including
accepting those made by other states. They requested further guidance from
the agency to clarify that districts may continue to decide on these grade
placement decisions as a local responsibility; that this local authority is
not superceded by the grade advancement testing requirements. For example,
concern was expressed about migrant students enrolled in Grade 3 who leave
Texas in early spring, are placed in Grade 4 in another state the following
fall, and then return to Texas in November. It was recommended that additional
efforts by the agency MEP and TMIP focus on this issue.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with these comments and recommendations.
This subsection states that it "does not limit the authority of a district
to appropriately place a student under TEC, Chapter 25, Subchapter B." As
indicated in other responses, the agency is planning to work with TMIP to
assist districts and charter schools in implementing this law, including this
provision.
Comment. An individual representing TASA and an individual representing
TASB recommended adding, "accredited school," to the language of §101.2007(h).
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that this recommended change is needed;
however, the subsection has been modified to provide further clarification
on this question. Section 101.2007(h) provides that a district or charter
school can place in Grade 4 a student who was promoted elsewhere to that grade
without having to administer the Grade 3 TAKS in the fall of fourth grade.
While a district must recognize a promotion from an accredited school, the
district also has the authority to recognize, if it chooses, a promotion from
any unaccredited private school.
§101.2007(i)
Comment. A representative of the TMIP emphasized the importance of encouraging
open communication between the GPC and the migrant service coordinator(s).
They recommended that the GPC provide the migrant service coordinator with
the student's accelerated education plan.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. No rule change is necessary.
§101.2009. Notice to Parents or Guardians.
Comment. An individual representing TASA and an individual representing
TASB stated that the order of §101.2009 and §101.2007 is confusing
since it is out of chronological order of these notices. In the rules as proposed,
the notification procedures after a student fails the first administration
of the test (§101.2009(c)) follow the procedures required upon failure
of the second and third administration of the test (§101.2007(c) and
(e)). They recommend that the agency switch the order of these two sections
so that there is a more logical sequence of these notification requirements.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. However, the rules will be reordered
through a separate rulemaking process at a later date so that the rules in
their entirety can be adopted by the end of this current school year and thereby
made available to schools to assist in their planning. Rulemaking procedure
dictates that this reordering change would require both affected sections
to be submitted again as proposed rules, requiring another 30-day public comment
period. This would delay their adoption until after this school year.
§101.2009(b)
Comment. The superintendent of Midway ISD asked whether this subsection
also applies to the grade advancement testing requirements at Grades 5 and
8, and if so, when should districts provide this notification.
Agency Response. This subsection regarding early notice to parents or guardians
of students at risk of failure applies to all applicable grades and subject
areas of the Student Success Initiative. Notice should be provided as early
as practicable to allow for timely and effective parental involvement, especially
consultation between parents and principals and teachers.
Comment. An individual representing TASA and an individual representing
TASB recommended changes to this subsection to make the rules consistent with
the appropriate and respective responsibilities of school boards and the superintendent.
Pointing out the school board is responsible for policy and the superintendent
is responsible for procedures or regulations, they suggested language to clarify
that the superintendent shall establish procedures used to identify students
at risk of failure on the first administration of the test.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to specify
that the superintendent must establish the instruments/procedures to be used
to make the determination of students at risk of failure.
§101.2009(c)
Comment. An individual representing TASA and an individual representing
TASB commented that the rules regarding notification of parents provide different
processes and time frames that are disproportional to the expected burden
on districts. This subsection requires a district to notify parents of a student's
failure on the first test administration within five working days of receipt
of test results. Since the first test administration will result in the greatest
number of students who fail, school districts with large student populations
may have to compile and mail a great deal of information within a limited
amount of time. TASA and TASB recommend that the rule be changed to allow
the district to notify the campus principal within five working days of receipt
of test results, and to allow an additional five working days for the campus
principal to notify parents.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the need for a change but points
out that the intent of this subsection is to ensure timely parental notification
given the tighter time frame for accelerated instruction before the second
test administration. The agency has modified the section to allow districts
greater flexibility in light of these comments while still emphasizing timely
parental notice.
§101.2009(d)
Comment. A representative from Klein ISD expressed concern on what to do
if parents say they never got the parent notification.
Agency Response. The law and the rules require school districts to make
and document a good faith effort. The district should be able to show this
documentation to parents in such situations.
Comment. A representative from Ysleta ISD expressed support for the requirements
that parent notifications should be in the parent or guardian's native language
and requested the agency to provide document models for these notifications
and procedures.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and will work with education service
centers to provide this type of information, along with other administrative
materials in support of the Student Success Initiative.
§101.2011. Alternate Assessment.
§101.2011(a)
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
stated that if norm- referenced tests are used as alternate assessments, the
agency should establish a passing standard on each of these tests. Otherwise
there would be inconsistency across districts in how these tests are interpreted,
resulting in a disparity in their consideration by grade placement committees.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that this is an important concern and
is currently researching this and other issues related to the development
and administration of the state-approved list of alternate assessments.
Issue. Options for alternate assessments.
Comment. Several individuals, educators at a meeting convened by the Texas
Education Agency, and educators from Bowie Elementary School asked what type
of tests will be approved for the alternate assessment option. They asked
whether norm-referenced, criterion-referenced, or locally-designed tests could
be administered at the third testing administration in place of the TAKS.
They also inquired whether the tests would be required to be correlated with
the TEKS. An administrator reported that one district faced legal problems
with its local grade advancement policy when they used norm-referenced tests
that did not align with the state curriculum. They also requested that the
agency provide the state-approved list of alternate assessments as soon as
possible to inform their planning for next year.
Agency Response. The agency is currently researching options and issues
in developing and administering the state-approved list of alternate assessments
and all of the issues in these comments will be addressed. It was first necessary
to receive input through these public comments and to adopt the rules related
to the alternate assessment option before these issues could be investigated
more thoroughly. The agency is seeking advice from the Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC), comprised of prominent educational testing experts, that
has been assembled by the agency to advise the SBOE on TAKS standard setting.
The agency also expects to seek further input soon from Texas educators and
stakeholders. Developing the list and making it available to districts and
charter schools as soon as possible to inform planning is a top priority of
the agency.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
expressed support for the local option to use alternate assessments and commented
that they may provide a viable alternative for students with special needs,
such as students who learn at a slower rate than others.
Agency Response. The agency agrees.
§101.2011(b)
Issue. Schedule of alternate assessment.
Comment. Several individuals, educators at a meeting convened by the Texas
Education Agency, and several directors of TMIP expressed concerns about the
requirement in the rules that the alternate assessment must be administered
on the same date of the third TAKS administration. This will make it more
difficult for schools to administer. This schedule creates additional funding
and logistical challenges, especially for districts that end their summer
school programs before the July testing date. Some respondents recommended
that a testing window be provided to allow districts to administer the alternate
assessment on a date that fits their summer school schedule. This would also
help migrant students have greater access to testing opportunities.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and, in response to these concerns and
as discussed in previous agency responses, has modified the section to allow
the third administration to be given during the period established in the
student assessment calendar. The law requires that an opportunity for a third
test administration be given to a student who has not passed the test the
second time. The third testing opportunity allows for the administration of
a state-approved alternate assessment instead of the TAKS. The commissioner
of education establishes the test dates for the three administrations of the
test. The statute further specifies that accelerated instruction be provided
to students who have not passed the test. In order to provide sufficient instructional
time for the student's accelerated instruction program, an adequate number
of days must be scheduled between each administration of the assessment. At
the same time, sufficient time must be allowed the GPC to complete its work
before the start of the school year. To add flexibility to the schedule but
to keep within these constraints, the agency will allow a three-week testing
window for the alternate assessment. The period is expected to start with
the last week of June to better coincide with summer school schedules.
Comment. The superintendent from Comal ISD and several individuals expressed
concern about funding for alternate assessments.
Agency Response. As provided by TEC, §28.0211(b), "a school district
may administer an alternate assessment instrument to a student who has failed
an assessment instrument specified under Subsection (a) on the previous two
opportunities." The alternate assessment is a local option, not a requirement.
The district, however, is required to provide every eligible student three
test opportunities; this may be provided through the required statewide assessments,
for which the commissioner of education is required to certify that funding
is available no later than July 1 for the student success law to be effective
the following school year.
§101.2013. Accelerated Instruction.
Issue. Type of accelerated instruction.
Comment. Three individuals expressed concern about who would determine
the time and place of accelerated instruction and concern about the loss of
instructional time if this accelerated instruction is conducted during the
school day.
Agency Response. TEC, §28.0211, requires accelerated instruction to
be provided to a student in the applicable subject area each time a student
fails to perform satisfactorily on the assessment instrument. The law also
requires the grade placement committee to create an accelerated education
plan for the next year for each student who does not pass after three opportunities,
whether retained or promoted. According to TEC, §28.0211, the student
must receive the accelerated instruction, when administered to a group, in
a setting of no more than 10 students to one teacher. TEC, §28.0211(f),
requires the accelerated instruction included in the student's educational
plan to be designed so that the student will be able to perform at the appropriate
grade level by the conclusion of the school year.
In support of these requirements, the law and the commissioner's rules
provide districts and charter schools flexibility to determine on an individual
student basis the appropriate form, content, and timing of the accelerated
instruction a student should receive. A key component of the Texas Reading
Initiative is training for classroom teachers in frequent and ongoing assessment
and instructional strategies for meeting the full spectrum of student needs.
The concern about the potential loss of instructional time is addressed effectively
through differentiated instruction, in which schools and classrooms are organized
so that students with similar needs receive effective instruction through
flexible grouping.
Comment. An individual representing TCTA stated that the intent of the
law is that the accelerated instruction is a pullout, group-administered program
for students who have failed the test. This is necessary to ensure that students
who fail the test are given the benefit of small classes and that those who
pass are not subject to additional test preparation, thereby losing instructional
time.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. The intent of the law and the rules
is that districts and charter schools have the ability and flexibility to
choose the appropriate accelerated instruction from a full spectrum of intervention
strategies to best address individual student needs. The law does not require
the accelerated instruction to be a pullout program; it requires only that
the student must receive such accelerated instruction, if given, in a group
setting of no more than 10 students to one teacher.
Comment. Several educators from Bowie Elementary asked if the 10 to 1 ratio
for accelerated instruction applied during the school day.
Agency Response. Yes. The 10 to 1 ratio is intended for any accelerated
instruction program required by the Student Success Initiative that is given
in a group setting.
Comment. Representatives of the TMIP stated that districts should make
every effort to provide accelerated instruction regardless of the location
of the student. This will be critical to the success of migrant students.
Agency Response. The agency agrees.
Comment. An individual asked whether districts may implement an accelerated
instruction program before receiving Grade 3 TAKS test results.
Agency Response. Yes. However, this accelerated instruction should already
be provided, as required by the Texas Reading Initiative in Grades K-2. Funding
is provided for an Accelerated Reading Instruction Program that addresses
deficiencies in reading development identified through the early reading instruments
required under TEC, §28.006. The law requires this intensive instruction
for students in Grades K-2. Districts may choose to continue with targeted
instruction for the student at risk for reading difficulties as the student
enters Grade 3.
Comment. An additional focus on early childhood programs is needed to prepare
students to meet the new social promotion requirements.
Agency Response. The agency agrees with the important role of early childhood
education.
Issue. Funding and staffing concerns.
Comment. Numerous individuals and educators from Comal, Dallas, Grand Prairie,
Garland, Hallsville, Houston, Klein, Lubbock, Northeast, Pampa, and Plano
ISDs stated that programs for accelerated instruction are very expensive (e.g.,
public transportation, materials, keeping schools open during the summer,
and trained staff to deliver the accelerated instruction). They expressed
concerns about the lack of funding for staffing and training. Of particular
funding concern was the requirement of a student-teacher ratio of not more
than 10 to 1.
Agency Response. In accordance with TEC, §28.0211(m), the commissioner
shall certify, no later than July 1 for the law to be effective the following
school year, that sufficient funds have been appropriated for administering
the required accelerated instruction, as well as for the other requirements
of this law.
Comment. An individual, referring to a letter from the agency's Office
of Statewide Initiatives that specified accelerated reading instruction should
be provided in a small group setting with a ratio of 1 teacher to 3 or 4 students,
asked why is this standard different from the one referenced in §101.2013(a).
Agency Response. Two different laws mandate accelerated instruction. The
Accelerated Reading Instruction Program is mandated by TEC, §28.006,
and requires districts and charter schools to provide intervention programs
to students in Grades K-2 if identified by a diagnostic instrument as being
at risk for reading difficulties, including dyslexia. The agency Office of
Statewide Initiatives recommends that the accelerated instruction take place
in a flexible grouping of approximately four students to one teacher. In contrast,
TEC, §28.0211, allows for accelerated instruction, when provided in a
group setting, of no more than ten students per teacher for students who fail
to demonstrate proficiency on an assessment required for grade advancement.
Comment. An administrator from Hays CSD disagrees that there is no fiscal
impact as stated in the Texas Register notice.
Agency Response. The notice in the Texas Register applies only to the fiscal
impact of the commissioner's rules. The agency agrees that the fiscal impact
of the rules varies by district; the fiscal analysis published in the Texas
Register represents an average statewide impact. In addition, there will be
a fiscal impact for districts due to the requirements of TEC, §28.0211;
however, the legislature appropriated funds for this initiative and further
requires that the commissioner of education must certify no later than July
1 that sufficient funding is available for the law to be in effect the following
school year.
Comment. An administrator from Arlington ISD expressed concern regarding
the funding of transportation for students receiving accelerated instruction
and recommended adding the following to the existing rules: "…providing
transportation to students who are eligible for school district transportation."
Agency Response. The agency disagrees that this change is necessary. In
accordance with TEC, §28.0211(j), districts and charter schools shall
provide all students required to attend accelerated instruction programs with
transportation to those programs if the programs occur outside of regular
school hours.
Comment. Representatives from both TASA and TASB, finding an inappropriate
delegation of responsibility, requested a change to §101.2013(c) to give
this responsibility for transportation to the district, not the superintendent.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to specify
that each school district and charter school shall be responsible for providing
transportation required by the Student Success Initiative.
Issue. Accelerated education plan.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
recommended that the accelerated instruction plan should be part of a student's
permanent record.
Agency Response. The agency agrees that the accelerated educational plan
should be included in the student's permanent record.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
asked who is responsible for monitoring the student's accelerated education
plan.
Agency Response. In accordance with §101.2007(i) districts shall establish
local policy for monitoring these plans during the school year to ensure that
each student is progressing in accordance with his or her plan.
§101.2015. Parental Waiver.
Comment. An individual inquired about the parent's right to waive the administration
of the third test and if the student is eligible for promotion in this instance.
Agency Response. Yes. As in every case where a student is automatically
retained, the GPC would review the question of retention or promotion upon
appeal by a parent. The GPC would also determine the appropriate accelerated
education program for the next year. The provision of this waiver is intended
to provide flexibility for a parent or guardian in making appropriate decisions
in the best interest of their child. This could be done in consultation with
the other GPC members as they review the student's options.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
asked what appropriate documentation would look like for the parental waiver.
Agency Response. This may be established in local policy and procedures.
The agency will consider providing further guidance on this documentation
as needed.
Comment. Individuals representing TASA and TASB recommend deleting this
subsection in its entirety, stating that it exceeds the scope of TEC, §28.0211.
In addition, it is unnecessary since the parents can voice their concerns
before the GPC or the student could refuse to take the third administration
of the test.
Agency Response. The agency disagrees. This waiver is intended to allow
the parent or guardian to decide whether the third test administration is
in the best interest of their child.
§101.2017. Scoring and Reporting.
Comment. Several individuals requested that the rules include the reporting
requirements related to this initiative that are listed in TEC, §39.051(b)(7).
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to list
the specific reporting requirements of TEC, §39.051(b)(7).
Comment. Several administrators asked how soon test results will be returned
to the district after each test date.
Agency Response. In accordance with TEC, §39.0231, the agency shall
ensure that each assessment instrument administered in accordance with TEC, §28.0211,
is scored and that the results are returned to the appropriate school district
not later than 10 days after receipt of the test materials by the agency or
its test contractor.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
asked which test administration scores will be used for accountability purposes.
Agency Response. The agency Division of Accountability Reporting and Research
is currently developing the new accountability system for the new testing
program. Further information will be provided as soon as it is available.
§101.2019. Credit for High School Graduation.
Comment. Several administrators asked if districts would have to offer
high school credit in middle school for students who have been retained.
Agency Response. The agency has modified subsection (a) to provide clarification
regarding high school credit for middle school students who have been retained.
Existing state administrative rule already authorizes this; the purpose of
this subsection is to reiterate this provision in the context of the Student
Success Initiative. In accordance with 19 Texas Administrative Code (TAC), §74.26,
Award of Credit, districts may offer high school courses in earlier grade
levels. The student shall receive course credit regardless of the grade level
at which proficiency is attained. This is reiterated in §101.2019 but
with an added requirement that course credit cannot be earned in the required
courses in the subject area that caused the student to be retained. For example,
a student who is retained for failing to pass the Grade 8 reading test could
take Reading I, which is an elective, but not English I, which is the required
course in reading at Grade 9.
Comment. Several individuals and a representative of the TMIP expressed
support for providing high school course credit for graduation as particularly
helpful for migrant students.
Agency Response. The agency agrees. Discussion and planning is ongoing
concerning further implementation activities to support migrant students,
including the provisions regarding credit for high school course completion.
Comment. The superintendent of Midway ISD asked whether this subsection
allows districts to move Grade 8 students to a different campus and, if so,
are these students required to take the Grade 8 test if they are at a different
campus.
Agency Response. Yes. The rules encourage local districts to place students
on an age-appropriate campus and these students would still be subject to
the grade advancement testing requirements.
Comment. Several administrators expressed concern regarding the challenge
for districts to find teachers certified to teach the high school courses
for the middle school students that are retained.
Agency Response. Districts and charter schools should already have policy
in place to implement the current requirements of 19 TAC §74.26. If not,
districts will need to develop policy for implementation of both 19 TAC §74.26
and §101.2019.
Comment. An administrator inquired whether a student who has earned enough
high school graduation credit in middle school to place out of Grade 9 would
still take the Grade 9 TAKS test.
Agency Response. No. In accordance with §101.2019 the student may
not earn course credit for high school graduation in the required courses
in the subject areas that caused them to be retained. The grade advancement
requirements for Grade 8 apply to the reading and math portion of TAKS. The
student will continue to take the Grade 8 TAKS until he or she has met the
grade advancement requirements of TEC, §28.0211.
Comment. Several administrators supported placement of students at an age
appropriate campus but expressed concern about the additional responsibilities
this would require for middle and high school campuses.
Agency Response. In accordance with §101.2019 districts shall establish
local policy that provides for the most appropriate placement for retained
students. Districts are given flexibility to specify in local policy the age
requirements for campus assignments as well as other considerations of local
grade configurations.
Comment. Educators at a meeting convened by the Texas Education Agency
asked how the accountability system would handle the situation of students
who are moved to an age-appropriate campus.
Agency Response. The agency will take this question into consideration
in the planning and development of the new accountability system.
Comment. An administrator from Houston ISD asked whether this proposed
rule means that a student could be placed into a grade to which he or she
was not promoted or does this mean that a district would need to start an
"ungraded" class at the next level where the student would remain until he
meets the testing requirements for promotion.
Agency Response. The student is still considered to be at the grade level
of the TAKS test that caused the student to be retained. Whether to create
an "ungraded" class that is consistent with this law is a matter of local
policy and procedure.
Comment. Representatives of TASA and TASB recommend clarifying §101.2019(b)
to reflect that school boards adopt policies and superintendents establish
procedures and regulations. They recommend changing §101.2019 to specify
the school board, not the superintendent, is responsible for establishing
policy regarding the placement of retained students in an age-appropriate
learning environment.
Agency Response. The agency agrees and has modified the section to provide
this clarification.
The new sections are adopted under the Texas Education Code (TEC), §28.0211,
which authorizes the commissioner of education to adopt rules and procedures
necessary to implement grade advancement testing requirements to support student
academic achievement of the essential knowledge and skills.
§101.2003.Grade Advancement Testing Requirements.
(a)
Each school district and charter school shall test eligible
students in accordance with the grade advancement requirements for the grades
and subjects specified in the Texas Education Code (TEC), §28.0211(a).
These requirements pertain to the following assessment instruments under TEC, §39.023(a),
(b), and (l):
(1)
the reading test at Grade 3, beginning in the 2002-2003
school year;
(2)
the reading and mathematics tests at Grade 5, beginning
in the 2004-2005 school year; and
(3)
the reading and mathematics tests at Grade 8, beginning
in the 2007-2008 school year.
(b)
These requirements apply to any eligible student who is
enrolled in a local school district or charter school at the time of testing
as established in the assessment calendar by the commissioner of education.
(c)
A student receiving special education services under the
TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter A, enrolled in Grades 3, 5, or 8 and who is receiving
instruction on grade level in the essential knowledge and skills in a subject
specified under subsection (a) of this section is eligible under this section.
In accordance with §101.5(b) of this title (relating to Student Testing
Requirements) and TEC, §28.0211(i), the student's admission, review,
and dismissal (ARD) committee shall determine appropriate assessment and acceleration
options for each eligible student. Assessment decisions must be made on an
individual basis and in accordance with administrative procedure established
by the Texas Education Agency (TEA). These decisions shall be documented in
the student's individualized education program (IEP).
(d)
A limited English proficient (LEP) student, as defined
by the TEC, Chapter 29, Subchapter B, who is administered an assessment in
English or Spanish for a grade and subject specified in subsection (a) of
this section is eligible under this section. In accordance with §101.1003
of this title (relating to Role of the Language Proficiency Assessment Committee),
the student's language proficiency assessment committee (LPAC) shall determine
appropriate assessment and acceleration options for each eligible student.
The grade placement committee, as specified in §101.1007 of this title
(relating to Limited English Proficient Students at Grades Other Than Exit
Level), shall make its decisions in consultation with a member of the student's
LPAC. Assessment decisions must be made on an individual basis and in accordance
with administrative procedure established by the TEA.
(e)
As specified in §101.1009 of this title (relating
to Limited English Proficient Students Who Receive Special Education Services),
decisions regarding assessments for LEP students who receive special education
services shall be made by the ARD committee, which includes a member of the
LPAC to ensure that issues related to the student's language proficiency are
duly considered.
(f)
In accordance with TEC, §28.021(b), decisions regarding
a student who is dyslexic and eligible under this section shall consider the
student's potential for achievement or proficiency in the tested subject.
(g)
A school district or charter school must determine a student's
previous testing history and, if applicable, the accelerated instructional
program he or she has received.
§101.2005.Test Administration and Schedule.
(a)
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) shall establish the test
administration procedures in the applicable test administration materials.
The superintendent of each school district and chief administrative officer
of each charter school shall be responsible for following these procedures
and maintaining the integrity of the test administration and the security
and confidentiality requirements, as specified in Chapter 101, Subchapter
C, of this title (relating to Security and Confidentiality).
(b)
The TEA shall provide three opportunities per year for
the tests required for grade advancement as specified in the Texas Education
Code, §28.0211(a). The commissioner of education shall specify the dates
of these administrations in the assessment calendar. Additional test opportunities
will not be provided.
(c)
The superintendent of each school district and chief administrative
officer of each charter school shall establish procedures to ensure:
(1)
that each eligible student who is absent or does not receive
a test score for any test administration shall receive appropriate accelerated
instruction as warranted on an individual student basis; and
(2)
that each eligible student who is absent or does not receive
a test score for all three test opportunities and is consequently retained
shall receive other appropriate means of evaluation, including the administration
of an alternate assessment, as provided under §101.2011(a) of this title
(relating to Alternate Assessment), so that the grade placement committee
has sufficient evidence for its review upon appeal by a parent or guardian.
§101.2007.Role of Grade Placement Committee.
(a)
In accordance with the Texas Education Code (TEC), §28.0211,
the superintendent of each school district and chief administrative officer
of each charter school shall establish procedures for convening a grade placement
committee (GPC) for each student who fails to demonstrate proficiency on the
second administration of the test required for grade advancement. Decisions
by the GPC shall be made on an individual student basis to ensure the most
effective way to support the student's academic achievement on grade level.
(b)
The GPC shall be composed of the principal or principal's
designee, the student's parent or guardian, and the student's teacher(s) of
the subject of the grade advancement(s) test on which the student has failed
to demonstrate proficiency. If this teacher is unavailable, the principal
shall designate a certified professional educator who is most familiar with
the student in the subject area to serve on the GPC. If more than one parent
or guardian has the authority to make educational decisions regarding the
student, a good faith effort must be made to notify both parents, but participation
of any one parent or guardian is sufficient. Either parent or only one guardian
may initiate an appeal. If both parents or guardians serve on the GPC but
do not agree, either may agree to promote the student (if the remaining members
of the GPC also agree to the promotion). The district may accept a parent's
or guardian's written designation of another individual to serve on the GPC
for all purposes. The district may accept a parent's or guardian's written
and signed waiver of participation in the GPC and designation of the remaining
members of the GPC as the decision-making entity for all purposes.
(1)
If a parent or guardian or designee is unable to attend
a meeting, the district may use other methods to ensure parent participation,
including individual and conference telephone calls. The district may designate
an individual to act on behalf of the student in place of a parent, guardian,
or designee if no such person can be located. A surrogate parent named to
act on behalf of a student with a disability shall be considered a parent
for purposes of TEC, §28.0211.
(2)
The district shall make a good faith effort to notify a
parent or guardian to attend the GPC. If a parent or guardian is unavailable,
the remaining members of the GPC must convene as required by this section
and take any actions required, except that the GPC may not agree to promote
a student under TEC, §28.0211(e), unless a parent, guardian, or designee
has appealed. A district may allow an appeal to be filed in writing in lieu
of attending the GPC.
(c)
Within five working days of receipt of student test results
for the second administration of the test required for grade advancement,
the district shall notify (for each student who fails to demonstrate proficiency)
the campus principal of student test results. Upon receipt of this notice,
the principal shall notify the teacher and parent or guardian of the test
results. This notice shall include a description of the purpose and responsibilities
of the GPC and the time and place for the GPC to hold its first meeting.
(d)
The GPC is responsible for prescribing the accelerated
instruction the student is to receive before the third testing opportunity.
The GPC shall also decide at this time whether the student shall take the
assessment specified in §101.2003 of this title (relating to Grade Advancement
Testing Requirements) or the alternate assessment, as authorized by §101.2011
of this title (relating to Alternate Assessment). In the absence of unanimous
agreement, the student shall take the assessment specified in §101.2003.
(e)
The GPC must convene again if a student fails to demonstrate
proficiency on the third administration of a test required for grade advancement
and is thereby automatically retained at the same grade level. Within five
working days of receipt of student test results for this administration, the
district shall notify (for each student who fails to demonstrate proficiency)
the principal or principal's designee of student test results. Upon receipt
of this notice from the district, the principal shall inform the teacher and
parent or guardian of the time and place for the GPC to hold a meeting. This
notice shall inform the parent or guardian of the opportunity to appeal the
automatic retention of the student. The district shall establish a procedure
to ensure a good faith effort is made toward securing the parent's or guardian's
receipt of the retention notification. The parent or guardian may appeal the
retention by submitting a request to the GPC within five working days of receipt
of this retention notification.
(f)
If an appeal has been initiated by the parent or guardian,
the GPC may decide in favor of promotion only if the GPC concludes, upon review
of all facts and circumstances and in accordance with standards adopted by
the local school board, that the student is likely to perform on grade level
given additional accelerated instruction during the next school year. A student
may be promoted only if the GPC's decision is unanimous. The review and final
decision of the GPC must be appropriately documented as meeting the standards
adopted by the local school board. These standards may include but are not
limited to the following:
(1)
evidence of satisfactory student performance, including
grades, portfolios, work samples, local assessments, and individual reading
and mathematics diagnostic tests or inventories;
(2)
improvement in student test performance over the three
testing opportunities; and
(3)
extenuating circumstances that have adversely affected
the student's participation in either the required assessments or accelerated
instruction.
(g)
In accordance with TEC, §28.0211(e), the placement
decision by the GPC shall be made before the start of the next school year
or, if applicable, upon reenrollment of a student after this date.
(h)
A student who has been promoted upon completion of a school
year in a school other than a Texas public school may be enrolled in that
grade without regard to whether the student has successfully completed an
assessment required under TEC, §28.0211. This subsection does not limit
the authority of a district to appropriately place a student under TEC, Chapter
25, Subchapter B.
(i)
In addition to the placement decision, the GPC shall develop
an accelerated educational plan for each student who does not pass after three
testing opportunities, regardless of whether the student has been promoted
or retained. This plan shall include the accelerated instruction that the
district must provide during the next school year. The plan must be designed
to enable the student to perform at the appropriate grade level by the end
of the next school year. The district shall establish a policy for monitoring
the student during the school year to ensure that the student is progressing
in accordance with the plan. The accelerated education plan must provide for
interim progress reports to the student's parent or guardian and the opportunity
for consultation with the teacher and/or principal as needed.
§101.2009.Notice to Parents or Guardians.
(a)
As specified in §101.9 of this title (relating to
Grade Advancement Requirements), the superintendent of each school district
or chief administrative officer of each charter school shall notify parents
or guardians of the grade advancement requirements.
(b)
The district shall provide early notice to parents or guardians
of students identified in a preceding grade to be at risk of failure on the
first administration of the test required for grade advancement the next year.
The superintendent must establish the instruments/procedures to be used to
make this determination. In the case of second grade students, it must include
the results of the reading inventory required under Texas Education Code, §28.006.
This notice shall be provided before the end of the school year preceding
the grade advancement requirements.
(c)
The district shall establish procedures to notify the parent
or guardian of a student who has failed to demonstrate proficiency on the
first administration of a grade advancement test. This notification should
be made within five working days of district receipt of student test results
from this administration. This notice shall include the student's test results,
description of the grade advancement policy, the accelerated instruction to
which the student has been assigned, and the possibility that the student
might be retained at the same grade level for the next school year. In addition,
the notice shall encourage parents or guardians to meet immediately with the
student's teacher to outline mutual responsibilities to support the student
during accelerated instruction.
(d)
Whenever the district is required to notify a parent or
guardian about the requirements related to promotion and accelerated instruction
for students at risk of retention, including the notification requirements
for the grade placement committee under §101.2007 of this title (relating
to Role of the Grade Placement Committee), the district shall make a good
faith effort to ensure that the notice is provided either in person or by
regular mail, is clear and easy to understand, and is written in English or
in the parent's or guardian's native language.
§101.2011.Alternate Assessment.
(a)
On the third testing opportunity, each school district
and charter school may establish by local board policy a district-wide procedure
to use a state-approved alternate assessment instead of the statewide assessment
instrument specified in §101.2003(a) of this title (relating to Grade
Advancement Testing Requirements). The commissioner of education shall provide
annually, to school districts and charter schools, a list of state-approved
group-administered achievement tests certified by test publishers as meeting
the requirements of Texas Education Code, §28.0211. This list shall include
nationally recognized instruments for obtaining valid and reliable data, which
demonstrate student competencies in the applicable subject at the appropriate
grade level range. The district shall select only one test for each applicable
grade and subject to be used under this section.
(b)
The alternate assessment must be given during the period
established in the assessment calendar by the commissioner of education to
coincide with the date of the third administration of the statewide assessment.
(c)
A company or organization scoring a test defined in subsection
(a) of this section shall send test results to the school district for verification
within ten working days following receipt of the test materials from the school
district.
(d)
To maintain the security and confidential integrity of
group-administered achievement tests, school districts and charter schools
shall follow the procedures for test security and confidentiality delineated
in Chapter 101, Subchapter C, of this title (relating to Security and Confidentiality).
§101.2013.Accelerated Instruction.
(a)
Each time a student fails to demonstrate proficiency on
an assessment required for grade advancement, the school district or charter
school shall provide the student with accelerated instruction in the applicable
subject. Accelerated instruction should be consistent with previous diagnostic
testing and intervention activities, if any, the student has received. Group-administered
accelerated instruction may not have a ratio of more than ten students to
each teacher.
(b)
Accelerated instruction required after the first and second
testing opportunities should be designed to address student needs to the greatest
extent possible before the next respective testing opportunity.
(c)
Each school district and each charter school shall be responsible
for providing transportation to students required to attend acceleration programs
if these programs occur outside of regular school hours.
(d)
Accelerated instruction shall be based on but not limited
to the following:
(1)
assessment of specific student needs, which may include
as appropriate the following: teacher observations and evaluations; academic
progress reports; previous identification of student needs and corresponding
interventions; and performance on previous assessment instruments in the applicable
subject.
(2)
best instructional practices identified through research
that the district may obtain and implement through technical assistance from
the Texas Education Agency and education service centers.
§101.2017.Scoring and Reporting.
(a)
In accordance with §101.81 of this title (relating
to Scoring and Reporting), the scoring contractor will provide school districts
with the results of the assessments required by the Texas Education Code, §28.0211,
or, if applicable, the results of the alternate assessment specified in §101.2011
of this title (relating to Alternate Assessment), within ten working days
following the receipt of the test materials from the school district or charter
school.
(b)
As specified by Texas Education Code (TEC), §39.051(b)(7),
the superintendent of each school district and chief administrative officer
of each charter school shall report the following information to the Texas
Education Agency:
(1)
the percentage of students, aggregated by grade level,
provided accelerated instruction under TEC, §28.0211(c);
(2)
the results of assessments administered under TEC, §28.0211(c);
(3)
the percentage of students promoted through the grade placement
committee process under TEC, §28.0211; and
(4)
the subject of the assessment instrument on which each
student failed to perform satisfactorily, and the performance of those students
in the school year following that promotion on the assessment instruments
required under TEC, §39.023.
§101.2019.Credit for High School Graduation.
(a)
Students who have been retained in Grade 8 in accordance
with the grade advancement testing requirements may earn course credit for
high school graduation during the next school year in subject areas other
than the required courses in the subject area which caused the student to
be retained.
(b)
The school board of each district and each charter school
may establish a policy that provides for the placement of retained students
in an age-appropriate learning environment. In accordance with local grade
configurations for elementary, middle, and high school campuses, this policy
may specify the age by which a retained student should be placed on the next
level campus even though not yet promoted to the grade of that campus.
This agency hereby certifies that the adoption has been reviewed
by legal counsel and found to be a valid exercise of the agency's legal authority.
Filed with the Office of
the Secretary of State on May 6, 2002.
TRD-200202793
Cristina De La Fuente-Valadez
Manager, Policy Planning
Texas Education Agency
Effective date: May 26, 2002
Proposal publication date: March 8, 2002
For further information, please call: (512) 463-9701