September 2014 Committee on School Initiatives Item 3
Review of Proposed Amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 229, Accountability System for Educator Preparation Programs, §§229.2-229.8
September 19, 2014
COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL INITIATIVES: ACTION
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: ACTION
SUMMARY: This item provides the State Board of Education (SBOE) an opportunity to review the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) rule actions that would amend 19 TAC Chapter 229, Accountability System for Educator Preparation Programs, §§229.2-229.8. House Bill 2012, 83rd Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2013, requires the Texas Education Agency (TEA), the SBEC, and the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) to perform a joint review of the existing standards for preparation and admission that are applicable to educator preparation programs (EPPs). Due to its related nature, a review of Chapter 229 was also conducted and, as a result, proposed amendments to Chapter 229 are necessary. The proposed amendments would update and make uniform definitions, modify the standards used for enforcing the reporting of data, clarify the standards used for accountability, adjust the small group exception requirements, and establish a new process for challenging sanctions imposed on programs that fail the accountability system.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: The statutory authority for 19 TAC Chapter 229 is the Texas Education Code (TEC), §§21.041(c) and (d), 21.045, 21.0451, and 21.0452.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The proposed effective date of the proposed amendments to 19 TAC §§229.2-229.8 would be October 26, 2014.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: None.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND SIGNIFICANT ISSUES: The TEC, §21.045, states that the SBEC shall propose rules establishing standards to govern the approval and continuing accountability of all EPPs. Current SBEC rules in 19 TAC Chapter 229 provide for rules that establish the process used for issuing annual accreditation ratings for all EPPs.
The proposed amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 229, shown in Attachment II, would update the rules to adjust the small group exception requirements, update the review and appeals process for EPPs, and include technical and clarifying changes. These proposed amendments reflect discussions held during stakeholder meetings with EPPs on January 14, 2014; February 18, 2014; and March 26, 2014, and regional stakeholder meetings held on February 27, 2014; March 3, 2014; and March 4, 2014, with district and regional administrators. Additional changes also reflect input received from the staffs at the TEA and the THECB.
Definitions
Language in §229.2 would be amended to add a definition of consecutively measured years to clarify the effect to changes made to the small group exception size, update the definition of practicum to better reflect the context of professional certification programs, and delete definitions of words and terms that are no longer used in Chapter 229.
Language in §229.2 would also be updated so definitions in 19 TAC Chapter 227, Provisions for Educator Preparation Candidates, and 19 TAC Chapter 228, Requirements for Educator Preparation Programs, would be uniform.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.2(9) and (14) would be amended to correct punctuation in the definition of clinical teaching and add the phrase "that must be" to the definition of educator preparation program, respectively. Also, in response to public comment, 19 TAC §229.2(17) would be amended to reinstate the last sentence of the definition of field supervisor that addresses the assignment of a campus mentor or cooperating teacher.
Required Submissions of Information, Surveys, and Other Data
Under the current rules, individuals who hold certificates, school districts, charters, and EPPs may be held accountable for failure to report required data only if that failure was done willfully or recklessly, which required the SBEC to prove the mindset and intent of those who did not report data and, therefore, made the rule essentially unenforceable in most cases. Proposed amendments to Chapter 229 would remove the willfully and recklessly requirement to allow SBEC the option to hold these entities accountable for failure to report required data without first having to prove mindset and intent.
Since published as proposed, figure 19 TAC §229.3(f)(1) would be amended to reflect technical edits that would remove outdated timeline references and update data submission protocol related to Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA).
In response to public comment, language in §229.3(b)-(d) would be amended to change "shall" to "may" to provide the SBEC with discretion to pursue those individuals and entities who fail to provide the TEA staff with data and information required by this chapter.
Determination of Accreditation Status
Language in §229.4 would be amended to replace consecutive with consecutively measured to accommodate situations where EPPs fall within the small group exception provisions. Subsection (g) would be amended to increase the EPP candidate group size needed to be measured against an accountability standard. The group size would increase from 11 to 21 so that no measure related to a single EPP candidate could be the sole cause of the failure of an EPP to meet a standard. The language would also be amended to more clearly articulate the process for determining a measure when groups fail to meet the threshold of 21 or more candidates.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.4(a)(1) and (4) and (g)(1) would be amended for clarity to change the phrases "shall be" and "will be" to "is" and add the phrase "in the group," respectively. The change to "in the group" would clarify that the number of individuals in the group must exceed 20 for a candidate group to be measured against performance standards.
Sanctions, Reviews and Contested Cases
Under current rule, when an EPP is assigned a failing accreditation rating by SBEC and is subject to sanctions or to suspension or revocation of its ability to recommend educator candidates, the EPP has the opportunity to request a record review by TEA staff. After the record review, the proposal goes to SBEC for adoption. In cases of revocation, the SBEC decision is appealable to the State Office of Administrative Hearings (SOAH), which reviews the SBEC decision under a substantial evidence standard. The SOAH decision is final and not appealable.
Proposed amendments to Chapter 229 modify this process. When TEA staff proposes to assign to an EPP a failing accreditation rating that makes the EPP subject to sanctions or suspension or revocation of its ability to recommend educator candidates, the EPP has the opportunity to request an informal hearing with TEA staff before the proposed accreditation is presented to SBEC for adoption. After the informal hearing, TEA staff will prepare a final recommendation to submit to the SBEC and will notify the EPP of the proposed final recommendation. If the final recommendation proposes revocation, the EPP has an opportunity to request a hearing at SOAH for an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) to address the appropriateness of the proposed revocation before TEA submits the final recommendation to SBEC. SOAH will hear the case on a preponderance of the evidence standard, as SOAH hears disciplinary cases for certifications and licenses, rather than on a substantial evidence standard. The ALJ's proposal for decision will then be sent to SBEC for final determination. After SBEC’s determination would become final, an EPP could contest an SBEC decision, in district court in Austin, subject to the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act.
These changes will simplify the current review process, remove the TEA as acting as a tribunal, provide EPPs with an impartial arbiter for revocation determinations, and restore SBEC as the final arbiter of decisions.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.5(c) would be amended to more clearly state that it is a candidate's performance in a particular field that is being measured.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.5(e) would be amended to modify the phrase "proposed action taken" to read "action proposed to be taken" to more clearly state that notice is given to the EPP before any proposed action is taken.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.6(e) would be amended to clarify that an EPP may agree in writing to accept a final revocation without further proceedings.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.7(c) would be amended to change the word "decision" to "proposed recommendation" to more accurately identify the document that TEA staff issues. Subsection (c)(2)(E) would be amended to modify the phrase "substantial evidence" to "a preponderance of the evidence" to comport with the revised standard of review at SOAH.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.7(d) would be amended to rephrase the provision to make it consistent with the requirement that the request for informal review needs to be received by TEA by the applicable deadline.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.7(f) would be amended to clarify that an EPP may agree in writing to accept a final revocation without further proceedings.
Since published as proposed, 19 TAC §229.8(c) would be amended to modify the phrase "upon a final decision" to read "upon the finality of a decision" to clarify that certain actions that follow from a decision to close a program happen only after a program's right to file such things as motions for rehearing, etc., have expired.
Technical Changes
Minor technical edits such as updating cross references would also be made throughout Chapter 229.
SBOE Review of Proposed SBEC Rules
Under the TEC, §21.042, the SBEC must submit a written copy of each rule it proposes to adopt to the SBOE for review. The SBOE may reject the proposed rules by a vote of at least two-thirds of the members of the SBOE present and voting, but may not modify a rule. The rules take effect as rules of the SBEC if the SBOE fails to review the rules contained in this item by September 25, 2014, which is the 90th day after the date the SBOE first received the proposed rules.
FISCAL IMPACT: The TEA staff has determined that there is no additional fiscal impact on state and local governments and there are no additional costs to persons or entities required to comply with the proposed amendments. In addition, there is no direct additional adverse economic impact for small businesses and microbusinesses; therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis, specified in Texas Government Code, §2006.022, is required.
PUBLIC AND STUDENT BENEFIT: The public and student benefit anticipated as a result of the proposed rule actions would be an accountability system that informs the public of the quality of educator preparation provided by each SBEC-approved educator preparation program.
PROCEDURAL AND REPORTING IMPLICATIONS: The proposed amendments would have no additional procedural or reporting implications.
LOCALLY MAINTAINED PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS: The proposed amendments would have no additional locally maintained paperwork requirements.
PUBLIC COMMENTS: In accordance with the SBEC rulemaking process, a summary of comments received by the SBEC on its proposed rules will be shared with the SBOE under separate cover prior to this SBOE meeting.
ALTERNATIVES: None.
OTHER COMMENTS AND RELATED ISSUES: None.
MOTION TO BE CONSIDERED:
Take no action on the proposed amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 229, Accountability System for Educator Preparation Programs, §§229.2-229.8.
Staff Members Responsible: Ryan Franklin, Interim Associate Commissioner
Educator Leadership and Quality
Tim Miller, Director
Educator Preparation Programs - Accountability and Program Management
Tim Regal, Policy Advisor
Educator Leadership and Quality
Von Byer, General Counsel
Legal Services
Attachments:
I. Statutory Citations (PDF, 28KB)
II. Text of Proposed Amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 229, Accountability System for Educator Preparation Programs, §§229.2-229.8 (PDF, 269KB)