July 2016 Committee on School Initiatives Item 2
Review of Proposed Amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 230, Professional Educator Preparation and Certification, Subchapter C, Assessment of Educators
July 22, 2016
COMMITTEE ON SCHOOL INITIATIVES: ACTION
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION: ACTION
SUMMARY: This item provides the State Board of Education (SBOE) an opportunity to review State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) rule actions that would amend 19 TAC Chapter 230, Professional Educator Preparation and Certification, Subchapter C, Assessment of Educators. The proposed amendment to 19 TAC §230.21 would implement the requirement from the 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015, to enforce a limit of five attempts on any certification examination, unless the SBEC approves an additional attempt based on an individual's demonstration of good cause. The proposed amendment to 19 TAC §230.21 would also implement a clarification from the 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015, that the commissioner of education approves the satisfactory level of performance required for certification examinations. The proposed amendment to 19 TAC §230.25 would align terminology with current SBEC rules.
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: The statutory authority for 19 TAC Chapter 230, Subchapter C, is the Texas Education Code (TEC), §§21.031; 21.041(a), (b)(1), (4), (7), and (8), and (c); 21.045(a)(1), as amended by House Bill (HB) 2205, 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015; 21.048, as amended by HB 2205, 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015; and the Texas Occupations Code (TOC), §54.003.
EFFECTIVE DATE: The proposed effective date of the proposed amendments to 19 TAC §230.21 and §230.25 would be August 28, 2016.
PREVIOUS BOARD ACTION: None.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND SIGNIFICANT ISSUES: The SBEC rules in 19 TAC Chapter 230, Professional Educator Preparation and Certification, Subchapter C, provide for rules that establish guidelines and procedures for the assessment of educators. The proposed amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 230, Subchapter C, shown in Attachment II, identify proposed changes based on recent legislation passed during the 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015, and reflect input received from the SBEC, stakeholders, and Texas Education Agency (TEA) staff.
§230.21. Educator Assessment
Subsection (a) would be removed because the basic skills assessment that is required for admission to an educator preparation program (EPP) is described in 19 TAC Chapter 227. Subsections (b)-(e) would be relettered accordingly.
In accordance with the TEC, §21.048, as amended by HB 2205, 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015, language would be amended in proposed subsection (a) to limit the number of times an individual may retake a certification examination to four unless the limitation is waived for good cause. A candidate seeking a waiver of the limitation would be responsible for providing proof of the good cause.
Proposed subsection (a)(1) would be added to define an examination retake. An examination retake would be defined as a second or subsequent attempt to pass any examination required for the issuance of a certificate, including an individual core subject examination that is part of the overall examination required for the issuance of a Core Subjects certificate. An examination score that is cancelled would not be considered an examination retake.
Proposed subsection (a)(2) would be added to define good cause in one of six ways. The first four ways would be based on the candidate's highest score on an examination and a conditional standard error of measurement (CSEM) table that would be published annually on the TEA website. A CSEM is the measure of the precision of scores for an assessment based on a specific score point and the design of the assessment. CSEM would be used in this context to determine how likely a candidate will pass an examination on his or her next attempt if a candidate completed a number of clock-hours of additional educational activity. If a candidate's highest examination score was within one, two, or three CSEMs from passing, the candidate would need to participate in 50, 100, or 150 clock-hours of additional educational activity, respectively. If a candidate's highest examination score was not within three CSEMs from passing, the candidate would need to participate in 200 clock-hours of additional educational activity.
If a candidate needs a waiver for more than one of the individual core subject examinations that are part of the overall examination required for the issuance of a Core Subjects certificate, the fifth way of determining good cause would be the combination of the number of clock-hours of educational activities required for each individual core subject examination as described in the first four ways of determining good cause. The maximum number of required clock-hours could not exceed 300 clock-hours. The number of clock-hours for each examination may be divided equally based on the number of examinations in the waiver request, but the number of clock-hours for an examination shall not be less than 50 for each examination.
The sixth way of determining good cause would be if a CSEM is not appropriate for an examination. One reason a CSEM may not be appropriate for an examination is if an examination does not use a scale score. The examinations that are currently used for certification and do not use a scale score are the Texas Assessment of Sign Communication examinations and the language examinations administered by the American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages. A second reason a CSEM may not be appropriate for an examination is if an examination does not have enough test takers to determine a CSEM. The examinations that are currently used for certification and have very low numbers of test takers are the Languages other than English Latin examination and the examinations administered by the American Association of Family and Consumer Sciences. In the event that a candidate was not successful after five attempts on an examination that did not have a CSEM, the candidate would request a waiver, and TEA staff would identify individuals who are familiar and knowledgeable with the examination content. These individuals would review the candidate's performance on the five most recent examinations, identify the areas of deficit, and determine the number of clock-hours of additional educational activity required to demonstrate good cause.
Proposed subsection (a)(3) would be added to define educational activity. An educational activity would be provided by an approved EPP or an approved continuing professional education (CPE) provider or sponsor. Approved CPEs currently include all accredited institutions of higher education, education service centers, Texas public school districts, accredited private schools, and non-profit organizations that have offered professional development in Texas for at least five years. Approved CPEs also currently include private entities and individuals who have been approved by TEA staff to offer CPE activities. An educational activity would need to be directly related to the knowledge and skill competencies in which the candidate answered less than 70 percent of questions correctly on the past five examinations. A competency is a grouping of knowledge and skills on a certification examination that defines what an entry-level educator in Texas public schools should know and be able to do. To provide consistency among candidates when identifying deficit competencies, a candidate would add the number of questions answered correctly in each competency on each of the five most recent examinations, add the number of questions asked for each competency on each of the five most recent examinations, and then, for each competency, divide the total number of questions answered correctly by the total number of questions asked. If a candidate did not correctly answer 70 percent of the questions in a competency across the past five examinations, the candidate would identify the competency as a deficit area that should be addressed by an educational activity.
Proposed subsection (a)(4) would be added to identify how a candidate must document an educational activity. This documentation would include:
• the provider, sponsor, or program's name, address, telephone number, and email address;
• the name of the educational activity;
• the competency or competencies addressed by the educational activity;
• the provider, sponsor, or program's description of the educational activity; and
• the provider, sponsor, or program's written verification of the dates of participation in and the number of clock-hours completed for the educational activity.
One semester credit hour earned at an accredited institution of higher education would be equivalent to 15 clock-hours. Clock-hours completed before the most recent examination attempt or after a request for a waiver is submitted would not count toward meeting the educational activity required to show good cause for a waiver.
Proposed subsection (a)(5) would be added to identify how a candidate would request a waiver. A candidate seeking certification based on the completion of an EPP would need the approval of an EPP to request a waiver. Candidates seeking certification through routes other than an EPP would need to meet the eligibility requirements of the appropriate route. A candidate would need to pay a waiver request fee of $160, which is the same amount for an out-of-state/out-of-country review of credentials. A candidate would need to request a waiver on a form developed by TEA staff. Waiver requests would not be accepted for 45 calendar days after the fourth unsuccessful retake, 90 calendar days after a denied waiver request, or 180 calendar days after the most recent unsuccessful attempt that was the result of an approved waiver request. After a waiver request is received by TEA staff, the request would be reviewed and TEA staff would make a decision to approve or deny the request based on the criteria in proposed §230.21(a)(2)-(5). An applicant who does not meet the criteria in proposed §230.21(a)(2)-(5) may appeal to the SBEC for a final determination of good cause. A determination by the SBEC is final and may not be appealed.
Since published as proposed, a technical edit would be made in subsection (a)(5)(B) to clarify that individuals would be required to pay the $160 waiver request fee beginning September 1, 2016.
In accordance with the TEC, §21.048, as amended by HB 2205, 84th Texas Legislature, Regular Session, 2015, language would be amended in proposed subsection (d) to clarify that the commissioner of education approves the satisfactory level of performance required for each certification examination. The proposed amendment would not change the authority of the SBEC to approve a schedule of examination fees and a plan for administering the examinations. Proposed subsection (e) would adopt as rule the list of appropriate examinations required for certification.
Minor technical edits would be made in subsections (f) and (g) to conform to Texas Register style and format requirements and update cross references.
§230.25. Test Exemptions for Persons with a Hearing Impairment
Minor technical edits would be made in subsection (b)(2) to align terminology with current SBEC rules.
FISCAL IMPACT: TEA staff has determined that there are fiscal implications as a result of the proposed amendment to 19 TAC §230.21. The following fiscal implications are based on offsetting costs and revenues for state government (TEA) and costs for persons (individuals) for fiscal years (FYs) 2017-2020. The proposed new fee for a waiver request in 19 TAC §230.21 would cover administrative costs for the waiver requests so there is neither a projected increase nor a projected loss in revenue for the TEA. The fee collection estimates are based on the number of people who attempted a test for the fifth time over the past four years. While the numbers of people attempting a fifth test have increased over the past four years, the TEA expects fewer people to reach a fifth attempt after the proposed amendments are in effect due to the various requirements for the waiver application as well as other proposed rules that are related to the use of certification examination results for EPP accountability.
The proposed amendment to 19 TAC §230.21 includes a new waiver request fee of $160. This fee would be paid by an individual who requests a waiver to the four-retest limitation. This fee would adequately cover the TEA cost of administering the waiver request. For FY 2016 there would be no anticipated fiscal implications since the proposed amendment to §230.21 that would establish a $160 waiver application fee would not be implemented until the next fiscal year. The TEA estimates the total costs to state government at $62,592 for FY 2017, $49,800 for FY 2018, $35,168 for FY 2019, and $21,912 for FY 2020. The TEA estimates the total costs to individuals at $62,592 for FY 2017, $49,800 for FY 2018, $35,168 for FY 2019, and $21,912 for FY 2020. The costs for state government would be offset by the estimated revenues from the fees collected from individuals.
The TEA staff has determined that there is no additional fiscal impact on local governments to comply with the proposed rule actions. In addition, there is no direct adverse economic impact for small businesses and microbusinesses; therefore, no regulatory flexibility analysis, specified in Texas Government Code, §2006.002, is required.
PUBLIC AND STUDENT BENEFIT: The public and student benefit of the proposed amendments would be the continuation of requirements relating to procedures for testing for educator certification.
PROCEDURAL AND REPORTING IMPLICATIONS: The proposed amendments would have no reporting requirements; however, there would be procedural implications. Proposed 19 TAC §230.21(a)(5)(C) would require a person to request a waiver of a limitation of certification testing in writing on forms developed by the TEA staff. Proposed 19 TAC §230.21(a)(4) would require a person requesting a waiver to provide documentation of educational activity that is evidence of a substantial change in learning. This documentation would be included as part of the waiver request form. Other data that would be collected in the form includes an individual's TEA ID number and recent certification examination score information.
LOCALLY MAINTAINED PAPERWORK REQUIREMENTS: The proposed amendments would have no 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 were shared with the SBOE under separate cover prior to this SBOE meeting.
ALTERNATIVES: None.
OTHER COMMENTS AND RELATED ISSUES: None.
MOTION TO BE CONSIDERED: The State Board of Education:
Take no action on the proposed amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 230, Professional Educator Preparation and Certification, Subchapter C, Assessment of Educators
Staff Members Responsible:
Ryan Franklin, Associate Commissioner
Educator Leadership and Quality
Tim Miller, Director
Educator Preparation
Attachments:
I. Statutory Citations (PDF, 22KB)
II. Text of Proposed Amendments to 19 TAC Chapter 230, Professional Educator Preparation and Certification, Subchapter C, Assessment of Educators (PDF, 112KB)