Video & Transcript Research : 'TEA'

Page 1 of 40
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Education Aug 21st, 2025

Public Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • , and we're going from benchmarks that aren't mandated to TEA-created benchmarks that are.
  • I think that the change is interesting, because we talk about what TEA develops. TEA develops...
  • Has our students taking more TEA-created tests.
  • Do you do any work for TEA? No. What do you do?
  • TEA because that information is under an audit working paper exception under state law.
Bills: HB8
TX

Texas 89th Regular

Public Education Aug 21st, 2025

Public Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • Okay, and then we've heard discussions about TEA getting more power, but then I think I'm correct in
  • It could mean anything that TEA wants it to mean.
  • This is going to be a TEA-created test, and we don't know, to your point.
  • Data from the TEA indicates that our middle schools really got hit hard in Austin in this last round
  • I did not, but a different TEA fellow did go. Okay, so your organization did testify.
Bills: HB8
TX

Texas 89th 2nd C.S.

Public Education Aug 21st, 2025

Public Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • benchmarks that aren't mandated to TEA-created benchmarks that are.
  • Really, the change is interesting because we talked about what TEA develops.
  • Is Ed Trust a subcontractor for TEA? They're still educating the students.
  • Do you do any work for TEA? No. What do you do?
  • Um, is there a safeguard in there for a teacher to confidentially report to TEA?
Bills: HB8
Summary: The House Committee on Public Education met to hear House Bill 8, which would replace STAAR with a new assessment and accountability system beginning in the 2027-28 school year. The chair described the bill as reducing testing time, limiting benchmark tests, adding beginning-, middle-, and end-of-year assessments, requiring faster score turnaround, involving Texas teachers in test development, and tightening accountability timelines and transparency rules. Members also discussed provisions on A-F ratings, cut scores, CCMR, local accountability plans, and TEA reporting requirements. Committee members and invited witnesses split sharply on the bill’s approach. Supporters, including the chair, TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, and Ed Trust’s Nicholas Munyon Penny, argued the bill would reduce high-stakes pressure, provide quicker and more actionable data, limit over-testing, and better align assessments to Texas standards while preserving criterion-referenced accountability. They said the new system would help teachers and parents intervene sooner and would improve transparency, including parent access to student responses and automatic rescoring in some writing cases. Opponents, including Rep. Hinojosa and student witness Ella Moran, argued the bill still increases testing and replaces one high-stakes test with multiple TEA-created tests. Moran testified that STAAR creates anxiety, disrupts instruction, and does not reflect real learning, while Hinojosa said the House had previously passed a better bill based on a nationally norm-referenced model and criticized the new proposal as a concession to the Senate. Questions also focused on AI scoring of writing, rescoring rates, and whether the bill’s new accountability rules would be reliable and fair. The committee did not take a final vote during the portion provided, but the chair said a vote on HB 8 would be called after public testimony later in the day.
TX

Texas 89th Regular

S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education Apr 3rd, 2025

S/C on Academic & Career-Oriented Education

Transcript Highlights:
  • I believe TEA is here if there's any further information needed.
  • Does, I mean, does TEA look at what's best for students coming into the program?
  • Does TEA care whether the programs are successful or not? Yes, we do.
  • Was it a recommendation from TEA, a task force, or something?
  • I think TEA determines the curriculum, and they're like, "We can't."
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • As a result, the TEA recently mandated that in-school suspension cannot exceed three days.
  • teacher reports a violation of our school discipline laws to another employee of the school district, TEA
  • some of these provisions, and as we just mentioned, the removal of the ISS three-day limit that the TEA
Summary: The committee heard a series of school safety and discipline bills, beginning with SB 870, which would codify an attorney general opinion allowing local school boards to decide whether school marshals may openly carry, conceal carry, or store a firearm in a secure safe on campus. The bill was laid out with no public testimony and left pending. The chair then moved to a combined discussion of SB 1871, 1872, 1873, 1874, and 1924, all focused on school discipline, teacher authority, and student safety. Senators Perry and Creighton described the package as a response to rising classroom disruptions, assaults on teachers, and concerns that districts lack effective tools to maintain order. SB 1871 would expand teacher removal authority, require return-to-class plans before a student removed for certain conduct can return, make some serious offenses mandatory for placement in juvenile justice settings, and provide telehealth mental health services through a consortium. SB 1872 would require expulsion to a JJAEP for assaults on teachers or school volunteers and extend certain expulsion-eligible conduct to off-campus offenses. SB 1873 would restore the prior understanding that in-school suspension is not subject to a three-day limit. SB 1874 would grant teachers immunity from disciplinary action for reporting discipline violations or acting in compliance with Chapter 37. SB 1924 would restore authority for local police and school district police to issue Class C citations for school offenses and require criminal referrals for students posing an imminent threat or assaulting a teacher, with a substitute clarifying referral rules when a citation has already been issued. The committee adopted the substitutes for the bills and moved them forward. Invited witnesses from teacher and administrator groups largely supported the overall goal of stronger discipline and safer classrooms, while asking for refinements. The Texas Classroom Teachers Association testified that teachers need more autonomy to remove disruptive or violent students and that classroom removals should not mean removal from learning. Superintendents from San Angelo, Grandview, and Wiley ISDs supported the bills’ emphasis on safety, expanded ISS flexibility, mandatory placement for serious offenses, and telehealth mental health services, but asked for more local control, flexibility for Districts of Innovation, more than one campus behavior coordinator in large districts, clearer timelines for return-to-class plans, and more precise definitions for disruptive conduct. Several witnesses stressed that teacher retention and student learning are being harmed by current discipline problems, while some members raised concerns about vague standards and the risk of overuse or public humiliation through citations and removals.
TX
Transcript Highlights:
  • proceedings if a teacher reports a violation of school discipline to another employee of the school district, TEA
  • As we just mentioned, the removal of the ISS three-day limit, which was a TEA-imposed situation, drastically