Analysis of the Major Provisions of HB 3

Published by the Texas Institute for Education Reform
July, 2009

HB 3 by Rep. Rob Eissler and Sen. Florence Shapiro is the omnibus public education accountability bill that was passed in the 2009 regular legislative session.  The following are the major provision of the bill broken down by category.  In the analysis, the following abbreviations are used:

Accreditation:

• The Commissioner determines the accreditation status (“accredited”, “accredited-warned”, “accredited-probation”, or “unaccredited”) for each school district by evaluating and considering performance on student achievement indicators and performance under the financial accountability rating system (Section 59).
• A district’s accreditation status may be lowered based on the substandard performance of one or more campuses (Section 59).
• Student achievement indicators must include:  (a) assessment results aggregated across grade levels by subject area for both the passing and college-readiness standards; (b) dropout rates; and (c) high school graduation rates.  Assessment results must also include the percentage of students who passed the assessment and the percentage of students who failed but met the standard for annual improvement—also aggregated across grade levels by subject area (Section 59).
• Each year, the Commissioner will set the state standard for each student achievement indicator and will project the state standards for the following two years.  The commissioner must raise standards periodically so that, by the 2019-20 school year, Texas ranks in the top 10 states in terms of college readiness and so that there are no significant achievement gaps by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (Section 59).
• In computing dropout rates and completion rates, the Commissioner shall exclude: students ordered by a court to attend a GED program but who have not yet earned a GED; students previously reported as dropouts; students not included in average daily attendance calculations; unschooled asylees or refuges who initially enter school in grade 7 or later; students residing in the district solely because they were assigned to a county detention facility in the district; and students in state and federal jails certified to stand trial as adults (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may investigate a school district and may change the accreditation status, change the accountability rating, or withdraw a distinction or a district or campus as a result of the investigation (Chapter 59).
• The Commissioner must authorize a special accreditation investigation under certain circumstances.  The new circumstances include: (a) when decreased academic performance occurs as a result of social promotion; (b) when excessive numbers of students graduate under the MHSP; (c) when excessive numbers of students fail to complete Algebra II; and (d) when there is evidence of poor resource-allocation practices. As a result of the investigation, the Commissioner may lower the district’s or school’s accreditation status, accountability rating, or may impose interventions and/or sanctions (Chapter 59).

Performance Ratings:

• By August 8 of each year, the Commissioner must assign a performance rating to each district and school (“acceptable” or “unacceptable”).  Districts and schools that will receive an unacceptable rating must be notified by June 15 (Section 59).
• Performance evaluations are based on the student achievement indicators.  To be rated acceptable, a district or campus must meet the state standard on 85% of the performance measures for that year or meet the state standard as averaged over the last 3 school years.  Districts and schools that fail to meet the same performance standard for 2 consecutive years will not be rated as acceptable (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may grant an exception if the district or school is within an established percentage of the minimum performance standard or if the Commissioner chooses to establish another performance standard for the district or school due to special circumstances (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may investigate a school district and may change the accreditation status, change the accountability rating, or withdraw a distinction or a district or campus as a result of the investigation (Section 59).

Financial Accountability:

• The Commissioner, in conjunction with the Comptroller, must develop separate financial accountability rating systems for school districts and open-enrollment charter schools (Section 59).
• The systems may not require districts to spend at least 65% of operating funds for instructional purposes or penalize them for doing so (Section 59).
• The Comptroller will identify districts and campuses that use resource allocation practices that contribute to high academic standards and cost-effective operations by (a) integrating and evaluating academic and financial data; (b) rank results to identify relative performance; and (c) identify areas of improvement (Section 59).
• The Comptroller will also review the operating cost for each student, the operating cost for each program, and the staffing cost for each student (Section 59).
• The TEA must develop a financial solvency review for each district that looks at the preceding school year, the current school year, and the following two school years.  Districts will submit financial information electronically as required by the Commissioner.  The system will alert the TEA and the district if student-to-staff ratios fall outside the norm, the general fund balance is rapidly-depleted, or there is a substantial discrepancy between actual budget figures and projections (Section 59).
• If the system shows that a district has a projected deficit, the district must submit a financial plan to avoid insolvency to the TEA.  If the district fails to submit a plan, the plan is not approved, or they fail to comply with the plan, the Commissioner must assign them “accredited-warned” status (Section 59).
• Districts must post their approved budget on their website as soon as it is approved and for three years thereafter (Section 59).

Interventions and Sanctions:

• Under current law, if a campus was rated “academically unacceptable” the previous year, the principal must participate in a school leadership pilot program.  HB 3 waives this requirement if a new principal is hired and he or she was not employed by the school during the previous year (Section 59).
• For campuses that fail to reach performance standards or required improvement for a given year, the commissioner may require the school representatives to explain the performance and plans for improvement or establish a school-community partnership team (Section 59).
• For campuses that meet performance standards for the current year but are below standards for the following year, the campus must submit an improvement plan for the areas needing improvement (Section 59).
• For campuses that fail any standard, the Commissioner must assign a campus intervention team to conduct a targeted needs assessment or a comprehensive needs assessment.  The assessment must include recommendations for curing the deficiencies.  The plan and recommendations must be approved by the school board, presented in a public hearing, and approved by the Commissioner.  The team will continue to work with the campus until it satisfies all performance standards (Section 59).
• For campuses that are rated unacceptable for two consecutive years, the Commissioner will order the reconstitution of the campus.  The campus intervention team must assist the school in updating the targeted improvement plan, submitting the plan to the board of trustees for approval, presenting the plan in a public hearing, and obtaining plan approval from the Commissioner.  If the school principal was employed for the preceding two years, the principal must be replaced unless the team determines that the principal should stay.  The Commissioner may appoint a monitor, conservator, management team, or board of managers to oversee the campus.  If the Commissioner determines that the campus is not fully-implementing the plan or if the campus does not show substantial improvement, the commissioner may order repurposing, alternative management, or closure of the campus (Section 59).
• For campuses that are rated unacceptable for three consecutive years, the Commissioner must order repurposing, alternative management, or closure of the campus.  The Commissioner may waive this requirement for one year if he or she determines that the campus has made significant improvement and is likely to earn an acceptable rating for the following year (Section 59).
• If the Commissioner orders the repurposing of the campus, the district must develop a comprehensive plan that includes a “rigorous and relevant” academic program.  The plan must be approved by the school board and the Commissioner.  The Commissioner cannot approve the plan unless:  (a) all the students in the attendance zone are given the opportunity to transfer to another school in the district; (b) the principal is not retained at the campus; and (c) teachers are not retained at the campus.  The Commissioner may retain the principal or some of the teachers under certain circumstances (Section 59).
• If the Commissioner orders alternative management, he or she must solicit proposals from non-profit entities.  If no non-profits submit a proposal, the Commissioner may solicit for-profit entities (Section 59).
• If the Commissioner determines that the unsatisfactory performance is due to a specific condition that may be addressed with targeted technical assistance, he or she may require technical assistance in lieu of other sanctions.  However, the Commissioner may no longer grant a one-year waiver under this option (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may not require that a school change its name as part of any intervention or sanction (Section 59).

Transitional Interventions and Sanctions:

• The Commissioner may suspend assignment of accreditation statuses and performance ratings for the 2011-12 school year (Section 59).
• As soon as possible after the 2011-12 school year, the Commissioner will report district and campus performance under the new student achievement indicators (Section 59).
• For the 2012-13 school year, the Commissioner must report district and campus performance under the college-readiness standard.  The Commissioner must evaluate district and campus performance, assign district accreditation statuses, and assign district and campus performance ratings based on the minimum performance standard (Section 59).
• From 2013-2014 forward, the Commissioner must evaluate district and campus performance and assign ratings based on both the minimum and college-readiness performance standards (Section 59).
• During the 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years, the Commissioner will continue to implement interventions and standards based on the 2010-11 standards and may increase or decrease interventions and sanctions based on performance during those years (Section 59).
• In determining the appropriate interventions and sanctions, the 2010-11 and the 2012-13 school years will be considered consecutive (Section 59).

Distinction Designations:

• By August 8th of each year, the Commissioner will award distinction designations to qualified districts and campuses.  Districts and campuses must meet student achievement standards in order to be considered for a distinction (Section 59).
• The Commissioner will establish, by rule, a “recognized” and “exemplary” rating based on the percentage of students in each grade level and subject who: (a) met the college-readiness performance standard; or (b) met the standard for annual improvement as set by the TEA (Section 59).
• The Commissioner will also establish campus distinction designations based on a campus being in the top 25% of eliminating performance gaps among groups (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may establish criteria for awarding campuses distinction awards based on academic achievement in each of the following:  math, science, social studies, English, fine arts, physical education, 21st-century workforce development, and second-language acquisition (Section 59).
• The Commissioner may assign distinctions to Job Corps diploma programs (Section 20).
• The Commissioner may investigate a school district and may change the accreditation status, change the accountability rating, or withdraw a distinction or a district or campus as a result of the investigation (Chapter 59).

Curriculum/Graduation Requirements:

• The SBOE must adopt rules requiring students to complete at least one fine arts course in grades 6, 7, or 8 (Section 25).
• The SBOE determines the graduation requirements under the MHSP, RHSP, or AHSP.  However, the SBOE may not require students to take a specific course or a specific number of credits in the enrichment curriculum under the RHSP (Section 30).
• For the RHSP, students must complete the 4-by-4 (including ½ credit in government and ½ credit in economics in social studies), 2 credits in a foreign language, and 6 elective credits that must include 1 credit in fine arts and 1 credit in physical education.  One credit must be in a course that includes a research writing component (Section 30).
• For the AHSP, the requirements are similar except students must also take a third credit in a foreign language and 5 elective credits (Section 30).
• School districts, with the approval of the Commissioner, may allow a student to earn the required physical education credit by taking a private or commercially-sponsored physical education activity program.
• Students in any program may satisfy 4-by-4 or foreign language courses requirements by taking appropriate college courses (Section 30).
• School districts may not vary the curriculum for a course within the required curriculum based on whether a student is taking the MHSP, RHSP, or AHSP.  For example, all student taking Algebra I will be taught the same material—regardless of the program they are pursuing (Section 25).
• Before a student can take the MHSP, the student’s parents or guardians must be notified and sign a confirmation that they have been notified (Section 30).
• A research university may participate in a pilot program to award high school diplomas to students who demonstrate early readiness for college.  To participate, a university must adopt specific standards to measure college-readiness that are equal to entry-level courses that earn college credit, partner with at least 10 area school districts, and develop assessments that students must pass in order to receive a diploma.  Students who receive a diploma under the program are considered to have completed the RHSP (Section 32).
• The Commissioner will establish a scale score for the end-of-course exams in each core subject area.  The Commissioner will also establish a minimum score that must be achieved on each exam.  To graduate, a student must (a) exceed the minimum score on each exam, and (b) achieve the scale score in each subject area.  For example, if the scale score in math is 210 and the minimum score is 60, the student must average 70 points on the three exams and have no score below 60 in order to fulfill the math requirement (Section 54).
• If a student scores below the minimum score, the score does not count and the student will be required to retake the assessment (Section 54).
• If a district determines that a student—who has completed grade 11—is unlikely to earn scores in a subject area that are high enough to graduate, the student may take a college preparatory course in that subject.  The student will be required to take an end-of-course exam and may earn up to 20% of the cumulative score requirements on that test (Section 54).
• The Commissioner will also establish a passing score on the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams.  In addition to the requirements above, students must meet or exceed the passing score on the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams in order to graduate under the RHSP or AHSP (Section 54)
• The Commissioner, by rule, will also establish an alternate method for graduation.  Under this method, student scores on advanced placement tests, the international baccalaureate exam, the SAT, or other assessments that are at least as rigorous as the end-of-course exams, may be used as a factor in determining whether the student has met the graduation requirements.  The Commissioner may also choose to include PSAT or the ACT scores (Section 54).
• Students entering the 9th grade during the 2011-12 school year will be the first ones required to take the end-of-course assessments.  Students entering grade 10, 11, and 12 during the 2011-12 school year will be subject to existing requirements (Section 54).

Assessments:

• The TEA must develop assessment instruments that allow the score a student receives to indicate whether the student is on track to graduate at the college-ready level (Section 50).
• The assessments must also have a wide enough range of possible results to measure student growth from year to year (Section 50).
• The TEA and the THECB will study the feasibility of allowing students to satisfy end-of-course exam requirements by successfully completing a dual credit course at a college or university.  They will report the results of this study to the legislature by December, 2010 (Section 50).
• On or before September 1 of each year, the Commissioner will release information on the assessments, including the number of questions on each assessment, the number of questions a student must answer correctly to pass, the number of questions a student must answer correctly to meet college-readiness standards, and the corresponding scale scores (Section 50).
• Starting with the 2011-12 school year, the TEA and THECB must ensure that the Algebra II and English III end-of-course assessments are capable of measuring college readiness.  The agencies must perform research studies to determine the correlation between a certain level of performance on these assessments and college readiness.  Based on this research, the agencies must establish performance standards on the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams that correspond to college readiness (Section 52).
• Once the Algebra II and English III standards are established, the TEA and the THECB will ensure that the performance standards and assessments for each grade level correlate with adjacent grade levels and culminate in college readiness—as defined by the performance standards on the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams. In other words, Algebra I prepares students for Algebra II, grade 8 math prepares students for Algebra I, grade 7 math prepares students for grade 8 math, and so on (Section 53).
• To confirm performance standards for each grade level, the TEA must collect and analyze data from assessments in each grade to ensure that the standards correlate with satisfactory performance in later grades.  This research must be conducted during the 2009-10 and 2010-11 school years and no less than every three years thereafter. If the data show that the performance standards need to be raised, the TEA and THECB will increase the rigor of the standards (Section 53).
• Districts may not administer practice tests to students on more than 10% of instructional days during the school year.

College Readiness:

• “College readiness” is defined as “the level of preparation a student must attain in English language arts and mathematics courses to enroll and succeed, without remediation, in an entry-level general education course for credit in that same content area for a baccalaureate degree or associate degree program . . .” at a university, college, or community college (Section 52).
• Starting with the 2011-12 school year, the TEA and THECB must ensure that the Algebra II and English III end-of-course assessments are capable of measuring college readiness.  The agencies must perform research studies to determine the correlation between a certain level of performance on these assessments and college readiness.  Based on this research, the agencies must establish performance standards on the Algebra II and English III end-of-course exams that correspond to college readiness (Section 52).
• By December, 2012, the TEA and the THECB shall complete research studies on the feasibility of establishing college-ready standards for science and social studies.  If the research determines that there is a correlation between certain scores on the end-of-course exams in these subjects and college readiness, the agencies may establish college-ready performance standards for science and social studies.  The results of the studies and a summary of any implementation procedures must be delivered to the legislature (Section 52).
• The TEA and the THECB must review the college-readiness standards at least every three years.  They must also compare the standards to established national and international standards.  If the review shows that our standards are not high enough to compare favorably with the other standards, the agencies will recommend changes to our standards (Section 53).
• The TEA and THECB must also determine whether or not our standards are sufficient to ensure student success in military service or in workforce training that culminates in associate degrees or industry certificates or credentials (Section 53).
• Each year, the Commissioner will set the state standard for each student achievement indicator and will project the state standards for the following two years.  The commissioner must raise standards periodically so that, by the 2019-20 school year, Texas ranks in the top 10 states in terms of college readiness and so that there are no significant achievement gaps by race, ethnicity, and socioeconomic status (Section 59).
• Students that complete the RHSP or the AHSP and demonstrate college-readiness on the Algebra II and English III assessments may not be required to take placement exams or remedial college courses in those subject areas (Section 61).

Career and Technology Education:

• Whenever the THECB revises its statewide inventory of workforce education courses, the SBOE must revise the TEKS of any corresponding CTE course to reflect the changes that were made (Section 25).
• The SBOE must approve a variety of math and science courses that a student may substitute for 4th year math and science courses in the 4-by-4.  These courses may be taken after the student completes Algebra II and Physics.  To be approved, courses must either be eligible for college credit or a prerequisite for a course that is eligible for college credit (Section 30).
• School districts may also offer 4-by-4 courses that are taught in an applied manner (i.e. biology for health care careers).  However, these courses must cover the TEKS and students taking these courses must take the applicable end-of-course exam (Section 30).
• The state’s plan for CTE is amended to recognize that CTE must be a rigorous course of study consistent with the required curriculum that leads to an industry-recognized license, credential, or certificate, an associate or baccalaureate degree, or opportunities to earn college credit while in high school (Section 30).
• The TEA, the THECB, the Comptroller, and the Texas Workforce Commission may award a grant up to $1 million to a higher education institution to develop advance math and science courses to prepare high school students for employment in a high-demand occupation.  To qualify for the grant, the institution must partner with at least one district and a business entity. Once adopted, the institution must periodically review and revise the curriculum to accommodate changes in industry standards (Section 63).
• The Comptroller will establish the Jobs and Education for Texans (JET) Fund which will be overseen by an advisory board. The fund will be used to provide grants to public junior colleges, public technical institutes, and eligible nonprofit organizations to develop programs to prepare low-income students for careers in high-demand occupations, develop new CTE courses or programs, or provide scholarships to students attending public junior colleges or public technical institutes (Section 64).

Promotion to Subsequent Grade:

• Under current law, students in the 3rd, 6th, and 8th grades must pass the TAKS in order to be promoted to the next grade.  HB 3 removes the requirement that 3rd grade students pass the TAKS before being promoted (Section 29, 58).
• In other grades, promotion will be based on the recommendation of the student’s teacher, the student’s grades, and the student’s TAKS scores.  The school district may use other necessary academic information in making this determination (Section 28).
• However, if a student fails any assessment in grades 3 through 8, the district must provide the student with accelerated instruction in the subject areas in which the student failed—regardless of whether or not they are to be promoted.  If the student is to be promoted to the next grade level, the student must complete the accelerated instruction before being placed in the next grade (Section 29).
• The Commissioner must provide districts with research-based best practices and effective strategies for accelerated instruction (Section 29).
• A student that fails the TAKS and is promoted must be assigned to a teacher who meets all state and federal qualifications to teach the subject(s) the student failed (Section 29).

Reporting:

• In addition to the academic indicators used for accountability purposes, the TEA will develop “quality of learning” indicators for: (a) the percentage of students who graduate under the MHSP, the RHSP, and the AHSP; (b) the results of the SAT, ACT, postsecondary degree programs, and certified workforce training programs; (c) the performance of students who failed an assessment on later assessments; (d) the number of students, by campus, that opt to take the MHSP; (e) the percentage of students who were socially-promoted and their results on assessments in the following school year; (f) the percentage of students with limited English proficiency that are exempted from assessments; (g) the percentage of special education students taking a alternate assessment; (h) the percentage of students who meet the college-readiness standard; (i) the measure of progress toward dual-language proficiency; (j) the percentage of student who are not economically disadvantaged; (k) the percentage of student who immediately enroll in higher education; and (l) the percentage of students who complete the first year of higher education without needing remedial courses (Section 59).
• The TEA will report the above data—along with the academic indicators used for accountability purposes—to districts and parents (Section 59).
• At the beginning of each school year districts must prepare reports for each teacher showing assessment results for each student on the 5th and 8th grade assessments. The report must indicate whether each student passed or failed and whether or not the student met annual improvement goals (Section 59).

Data Systems:

• The TEA must establish and maintain a student assessment data portal for use by districts, schools, colleges and universities, teachers, parents, and students. The portal must contain detailed information on student assessment results, beginning with the 2007-08 school year. The portal must also allow the general public to access general student assessment data (Section 49).

Other Provisions:

• Unschooled asylees or refugees are exempted from taking state assessments for up to five years (Section 56).
• Under current law, if the Commissioner and the THECB have different methods for computing a student’s GPA, the THECB’s method controls. HB 3 gives the Commissioner sole authority to develop the standard method by which a student’s grade point average is computed (Section 31).
• The bill expands TEA’s best practices clearinghouse by including the best practices of open-enrollment charter schools (Section 1).
• The Commissioner will adopt standards to ensure that gifted and talents student programs meet the guidelines of the Texas Performance Standards Project or a similar program (Section 59).