Tag Archives: Legislation 2015

BE THE FIRST IN YOUR COUNTY TO BE AN INNOVATION DISTRICT!

HB 1842, enacted by the 2015 legislature, is worth a good look.  The bill gives your district the opportunity to become an “Innovation District” if your current accountability rating is “met standard.” The selling point is that an Innovation District is sort of a “charter school lite.”  Innovation Districts can seek exemption from some state requirements. Of course you cannot be exempt from curriculum, testing or accountability requirements, or the dictates of federal law.

The bill creates a brand new chapter of the Texas Education Code: Chapter 12A.  It outlines a process the district must pursue to obtain Innovation status.  Someone in your district ought to take a look.

DAWG BONE: WHAT DISTRICT WILL BE THE FIRST INNOVATION DISTRICT IN THE STATE?

DEAR DAWG: OUR BOARD PRESIDENT RECENTLY HAD THE EMBARRASSING EXPERIENCE OF HAVING HIS CREDIT CARD REJECTED AT A NICE RESTAURANT. I’M AFRAID HE WANTS REVENGE.

Dear Dawg:  After our board president had his credit card rejected at the local Fancy Schmancy Restaurant, he started making inquiries about the prepaid meal cards that kids use in our schools.  He wanted to know what happens when the meal card balance goes to zero. Is the kid publicly embarrassed about it? Denied lunch?  Our president seems to think it would be a good learning experience for the little ones to suffer some public shaming now, while they are young, so that they will never screw up about this as an adult.  We think that’s not such a good idea. WADDYASAY?

DEAR WADDYASAY: We think virtually everyone has had a credit card rejected at some point.  Maybe the expiration date passed, or there is some glitch in the system. Or maybe you haven’t paid your bill in a while.  And we see the connection with those prepaid meal cards and your board president’s American Express. But it turns out that the Texas Legislature has weighed in on this.

HB 3562 says that if your district uses a prepaid meal card or account, you must allow the student a grace period when the card is exhausted.  You must notify the parent and you may not charge a fee or interest for the overdrawn account.  The new law does not specifically prohibit public humiliation, but we think that’s the idea.  So tell the board president to get over it, and not take this out on the kids.

DAWG BONE:  WE CALL THIS ONE: GRACE AFTER MEALS.  

LEGISLATIVE ALERT—THE NEW TRUANCY BILL!

No doubt you have heard that the legislature “de-criminalized” truancy.  Here are the highlights from HB 2398, a major overhaul of our laws pertaining to truancy.

1. The court may dismiss a complaint alleging that the parent contributed to nonattendance if dismissal would be in the best interest of justice because 1) a low likelihood of recidivism; or 2) there is sufficient justification for the failure to attend school.

2. All records of “truancy offenses” including convictions, shall be expunged by order of the court, even when not asked for. This includes records held by the school district.

3. 18 year olds are subject to compulsory attendance. 19 year olds are not.  Students are subject to compulsory attendance at age six, but may not be referred to truancy court until they are 12. Students from 6-11 are subject only to TPM—Truancy Prevention Measures.

4. Those 19 and above may be disenrolled after accumulating six or more unexcused absences in a semester, but this may not be done on a day when the student is physically present at school. Schools must issue a warning letter after the third unexcused absence. As an alternative to disenrollment, the district may “impose a behavior improvement plan” as set out by statute.

5. Truancy matters involving students will no longer go to juvenile, county, justice or municipal courts. They will go to “truancy courts.” Complaints against parents can still go to other courts.

6. A peace officer serving as attendance officer may not take the child into custody. Attendance officers who are not peace officers may not enlist the assistance of law enforcement to take a student into custody.

7. TPM must be used if a student fails to attend school without excuse for three or more days or parts of days within a four-week period. As one such TPM, the district must either impose a BIP or refer the student to counseling, mediation, mentoring, a teen court program, community-based services or other in-school or out-of-school services.

8. Schools must offer “additional counseling” and may not refer to truancy court if the school determines that the truancy is the result of pregnancy, being in the foster program, homelessness or being the principal income earner for the family.

9. Districts must either employ a “truancy prevention facilitator” or “juvenile case manager” or designate an existing employee to implement TPM. At least annually, the designated person must “meet to discuss effective TPM with a case manager or other individual designated by a truancy court to provide services” to students of the district.

10. E.A. will develop rules regarding minimum standards and best practices for TPM, and for sanctions for districts that fail to comply.

11. If the student has 10 or more unexcused absences (days or parts of days), within a six-month period in the same school year, the parent is subject to prosecution and the student is subject to referral to truancy court. Referral of the student must be done within 10 school days and is “mandatory”—sort of. The school can delay the referral, or just not make one, if it is applying TPM, determines that they are working, and believes that delay or non-referral would be in the best interests of the student.  Thus it’s not really mandatory.  Prosecution of the parent is discretionary, and requires evidence of “criminal negligence.”

12. The bill creates a new chapter in the Family Code, Chapter 65, which sets out in detail the procedure for these courts. “The best interest of the child is the primary consideration in adjudicating truant conduct of the child.”

13. In a truancy adjudication hearing, a parent and any court-appointed guardian ad litem must attend. An employer may not terminate the employment of a permanent employee who is thus required to attend a hearing.

DAWG BONE: THE EMPHASIS IS GOING TO BE ON TRUANCY PREVENTION —NOT PUNITIVE MEASURES.

REPORTING POSSIBLE MISCONDUCT TO SBEC

GREETINGS from the Dawg’s new home!! I am pleased to let you know that the law firm of Walsh Gallegos Trevino Russo and Kyle, P.C., has acquired the EdLawDaily, or as I like to call it, The Daily Dawg. Henceforth you will be getting your Dawg Bones and other assorted legal nuggets via the law firm. Many thanks to Park Place Publications for giving the Daily Dawg a terrific launch. In particular, my thanks go to Ted Siff, Ambrose Austin and Stephen Markel—the Park Place staff that have made this work so well.

Now, as for today’s content:

We had some concerns that the teacher was “getting involved” with a student.  He quit. Do we have to report to SBEC?

The Legislature continues to tighten up reporting requirements in an effort to keep kids safe at school.  HB 1783, which takes effect on September 1 of this year, is the latest effort along these lines.  This new law makes a subtle but important change in the duty of superintendents and others to report possible misconduct to the State Board for Educator Certification.  Current law requires a report if a certified educator was terminated “based on a determination” that the educator engaged in certain types of misconduct.  Reports are also required under current law if the educator resigned “and reasonable evidence supports a recommendation by the superintendent or director to terminate” employment of the educator.

The new law does the following:

  1. It adds a new category of reportable conduct: if the educator was terminated based on evidence that the educator was involved in a romantic relationship with a student, or solicited or engaged in sexual contact with a student or a minor.
  2. It requires a report if the termination is based on “evidence” of the misconduct, rather than a “determination” that the conduct occurred.
  3. It requires a report if the educator resigned and there is “evidence” that he/she engaged in the prohibited misconduct. Current law speaks of “reasonable evidence” that “supports a recommendation” to terminate.
  4. It requires a report if the district obtains information about an educator’s criminal record via means other than the official criminal history clearinghouse.
  5. It requires superintendents and others to complete the investigation of possible misconduct involving romantic relationships with students, even if the employee resigns before the investigation is complete. Current law requires this only in cases of actual abuse or unlawful acts with students or minors.
  6. It applies these reporting standards to superintendents or directors of open enrollment charter schools.

So if you have an employee who resigns in the face of allegations of romantic involvement with a student, you should contact your school’s lawyer. The issue—as of September 1—will be if there is “evidence” of the misconduct—not whether there is sufficient “reasonable evidence” to support a recommendation to terminate.

DAWG BONE: TEACHERS WHO GET ROMANTICALLY INVOLVED WITH STUDENTS PUT THEIR TEACHING CERTIFICATES AT RISK.

File this one under: LEGISLATION 2015

LEGISLATIVE ALERT! HB 2610 AND THE MINUTES IN A SCHOOL DAY

Dear Dawg,

I've got a plan to complete the school year by Christmas! I’ve been reading up on the new legislation and came across HB 2610.  What an innovative idea! And a return to local control!! This is the one that says we have to have school for 75,600 minutes—not 180 days. So now we don’t count the days—we count the minutes. It also says we can add minutes to the normal day!

So I did the math on this.  If we go to school from 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., that would be 840 minutes per day. With that schedule, we can finish the school year in 90 days! We can knock that out by Christmas!!  I pitched this to the board last night, and they were enthusiastic.  --WADDYATHINK?

DEAR WADDYATHINK: We think you get a good grade for math, but not so good for English Language Arts.  It doesn’t appear that you read the bill very carefully.  First of all, it says that you cannot finish the school year before May 15.  There is an exception to that rule, but only if you are a district that borders another state, and does not offer every grade K-12.

Furthermore, you cannot just add minutes as a routine matter. The bill says that you can add minutes if 1) you lost minutes due to “disaster, flood, extreme weather conditions, fuel curtailment, or another calamity”; and 2) the Commissioner turned down your request to reduce your total minutes.

Nice try!

DAWG BONE: 420 MINUTES PER DAY. 180 DAYS.  IT ALL ADDS UP TO 75,600 MINUTES OF SCHOOL!

LEGISLATIVE ALERT! HB 1842 AND DISTRICTS IN DISTRESS!

This bill 1) allows for the appointment of a “student trustee” in districts that have a campus operating under a “campus turnaround plan;” 2) spells out the procedure for the Commissioner to deny the renewal of an open enrollment charter, or to revoke the charter, or reconstitute the governing body; 3) allows districts to obtain “District of Innovation” status; 4) authorizes the Commissioner to order “monitoring reviews” as well as random on-site visits; 5) requires the agency to adopt written procedures for conducting “special accreditation investigations” which may allow the agency “to obtain information from district employees in a manner that prevents a district or campus from screening the information;”  6) changes “reconstitution” and “repurposing” to “campus turnaround plan”;

A “District of Innovation” must go through a lengthy process to obtain that status, including the development of a Local Innovation Plan. Once obtained, the district may be exempted from certain legal requirements, including the provision that the school board must approve terminations and nonrenewal of Chapter 21 contracts, and the statute pertaining to student uniforms.

DAWG BONE: BE THE FIRST IN YOUR COUNTY TO BE A “DISTRICT OF INNOVATION”!

 

LEGISLATIVE ALERT! TIME LIMITS ON STAAR TESTS!

HB 743 says that assessment instruments must be “determined to be valid and reliable” based on empirical evidence.  This determination must be made by an entity “that is independent of the agency and of any other entity that developed the assessment instrument.”

85% of kids in grades 3-5 should be able to complete the dadgum thing in two hours.

85% of kids in grades 6-8 should be able to finish in three hours.

Time allotted for administration may not exceed eight hours, and must be on just one day.

Also: the bill requires T.E.A. to study the TEKS as compared to the STAAR and issue a report telling us whether or not it all makes sense.  We know that many of you are looking forward to that!  T.E.A. must get this report to SBOE by March 1, 2016. SBOE must send the report, along with SBOE recommendations, to the governor and members of the legislature by May 1, 2016.  Thus it will be ready for further action in the 2017 legislative session.

Also: the bill requires T.E.A. to develop a “comprehensive methodology for auditing and monitoring performance under contracts for services to develop or administer” assessment instruments.   As you may recall, there has been just a bit of criticism of Pearson Education about our testing system.

DAWG BONE: GOOD TO KNOW THAT THE STAAR CANNOT LAST AS LONG AS THE BAR EXAM.

LEGISLATIVE ALERT! HB 18, DUAL CREDIT COURSES & MORE!

HB 18 says that the rules adopted by T.E.A. and/or the Higher Education Coordinating Board may not limit the number of dual credit courses, or semester hours a student can take in a semester, a year, or during high school.  Note: HB 505 says the same thing.

Also: T.E.A. must develop and distribute materials to promote “curriculum change awareness.” This is mostly about the changes implemented by HB 5 in 2013. The materials must be made available in English, Spanish and Vietnamese.  This must be done by December 1, 2015.

I am not sure, but I think that this is the first time that the legislature has mandated publication of a document in three languages.  We have many laws that require publications in English and Spanish, and they usually require a “good faith effort” to provide translations for other languages. But this bill mandates Vietnamese along with our two prevailing languages.  Interesting.

Also: schools must provide instruction to 7th and 8th graders to prepare them for high school, college, and a career.  This must include information about a personal graduation plan, distinguished levels of achievement, endorsements, college readiness standards, career choices and the education needed to enter those careers.  This instruction can be provided through 1) an existing course; 2) an existing CATE course as designated appropriate by SBOE; or 3) through a new course. But it must be provided at least once to every student in either 7th or 8th grade.

Also: The Center for Teaching and Learning at UT Austin is to make “postsecondary and career counseling academies” available for school counselors and other “postsecondary advisors” employed by a school district.

All of this is in effect with this school year.

DAWG BONE: I GUESS THEY LIKE THOSE DUAL CREDIT COURSES.

SENDING STUDENTS TO THE PRINCIPAL… IS ABOUT TO CHANGE

I send the student to the principal. She sends him right back.  I send the student again.  She sends him back again.  I don’t see any improvement!

Classroom teachers have enjoyed the “right” to send students out of the classroom for disciplinary reasons since the beginning of recorded time.  But the legislature decided to codify this in Texas many years ago.  Now, S.B. 107 makes a subtle change in the dynamics between teacher and principal.

Current law says that when the teacher sends the kid to the office “the principal shall respond by employing appropriate discipline management techniques consistent with the student code of conduct.”   T.E.C. 37.002(a).   The new law, which goes into effect this school year, calls for the teacher to send the student to the CBC—the Campus Behavior Coordinator, rather than the principal.  And it says that the CBC (who will very likely be your principal or assistant principal) is to employ techniques “that can reasonably be expected to improve the student’s behavior before returning the student to the classroom.  If the student’s behavior does not improve, the campus behavior coordinator shall employ alternative discipline management techniques, including any progressive interventions designated as the responsibility of the campus behavior coordinator in the student code of conduct.”

This makes it sound like the CBC needs to have a toolbox of techniques available.  Moreover, they must be “reasonably” expected to bring about a change in behavior.  Think about this as you develop changes to your code of conduct this summer.

DAWG BONE:  CBCs ARE GOING TO NEED SOME TRAINING!

 

 

WHO WILL BE THE CBC (CAMPUS BEHAVIOR COORDINATOR) ON YOUR CAMPUS NEXT YEAR?

Nothing is important in education until we attach an acronym to it, so I’m proposing right now that we start using the term CBC—Campus Behavior Coordinator. This term comes from S.B. 107, which adds a brand new section to Chapter 37 of the Education Code, Section 37.0012.  That section requires that each campus in the state must have a CBC.  S.B. 107 does not say that it applies to charter schools, so it doesn’t. But the traditional schools will have to designate someone as CBC on each campus next school year.

The principal can be the CBC.  The law also permits the principal to name “any other campus administrator” to serve as CBC, so we expect this new title will go to principals and assistants. The specific duties of the CBC can be established by campus or district policy, but if you don’t adopt any such policy, the law spells it out for you.

“The campus behavior coordinator is primarily responsible for maintaining student discipline and the implementation of this subchapter.”  T.E.C. 37.0012(b).  The new sets out some of the specifics of that “primary responsibility.”

For example, it’s the CBC who must “promptly notify” a parent whenever a student is placed into ISS, out of school suspension, DAEP, expulsion or JJAEP, or when the student is taken into custody by law enforcement. This notice is to take place by telephone or in person on that day.  Our CBC must also make a “good faith effort” to get written notice to the parent on the day of the disciplinary action.

It’s also the CBC who decides what to do when the teacher exercises her right to dismiss a student from the classroom.  Teachers have had this right for a long time, but many of them complain that nothing much happens when they exercise this right.  S.B. 107 makes a subtle but important change in the law of “teacher removal.” We’ll take that up in tomorrow’s Daily Dawg.

DAWG BONE:  LAST YEAR YOU WERE JUST THE PRINCIPAL. THIS YEAR YOU CAN BE THE CBC!!