Speaker 1: Hello, and welcome to the Texas Tribune Tripcast for Tuesday,
Speaker 1: September ninth, twenty twenty five. I am Matthew Watkins, editor
Speaker 1: in chief of the Textas Tribune, and I'm all alone
Speaker 1: in trib cast headquarters today as Eleanor is on vacation
Speaker 1: and my two guests are both joining me remotely from
Speaker 1: work travel as well. But because Eleanor is on vacation,
Speaker 1: that means I got sole discretion and deciding what we're
Speaker 1: talking about this week, and that means a topic of
Speaker 1: conversation that is frequent and common in the Watkins household,
Speaker 1: the Star Test and its future, its demise, and its replacement.
Speaker 1: After two failed efforts in the regular legislative session in
Speaker 1: the first special session, lawmakers last week approved a bill
Speaker 1: that would eliminate the Star Test and replace it with
Speaker 1: something new starting in the twenty seven to twenty eight
Speaker 1: school year. And we're going to break that down today
Speaker 1: with two experts on the topic. First off, an education
Speaker 1: reporter for the Texas Tribune. Stay Ha day joining us
Speaker 1: from Indiana? Is that right?
Speaker 2: Stayha, I'm in Chicago right now, so hanging in that.
Speaker 1: Room, all right, Very good, very good, Well, welcome Staha,
Speaker 1: and we also have bridgid warlead, Chief State Impact Officer
Speaker 1: for the Commit Partnership, which is a Dallas County nonprofit
Speaker 1: seeking to improve educational and economic outcomes within Dallas County.
Speaker 1: Bridget is joining us from a hotel in New Orleans.
Speaker 3: I am I am happy to be here all.
Speaker 1: Right, thank you for joining us. So, the Star Test,
Speaker 1: like I said, has been a hot topic for parents, teachers, educators,
Speaker 1: and many other people over the past few months. A
Speaker 1: lot of conversation and debate that got us to the
Speaker 1: place we are right here right now. Steha, I want
Speaker 1: you to kind of start by talking about the present.
Speaker 1: The Star Test, which will remain in effect for a
Speaker 1: couple of school years right now, was very controversial leading
Speaker 1: to the changes that we saw. But tell us a
Speaker 1: little bit about like the testing arrangement that we have
Speaker 1: right now in Texas schools.
Speaker 2: So this is a huge pain point for family, Like
Speaker 2: across the state of Texas, it's been the current standardized test.
Speaker 2: It's one test at the end of the year, it
Speaker 2: runs for it's for hours and hours, and kids once
Speaker 2: they finished taking the test, they have to sit at
Speaker 2: their desk and not move. It's just like stay silent.
Speaker 2: And it's also I think because it's at the end
Speaker 2: of the year and students know that not just them
Speaker 2: are going to be graded on it, but teachers and
Speaker 2: their schools are going to be graded on it. It's
Speaker 2: really really stressful for them. So it's been a topic
Speaker 2: that has I think come up on the campaign trail
Speaker 2: for lawmakers because they are hearing about the stress that
Speaker 2: it puts on students. They hear from their own kids
Speaker 2: this idea that students don't even want to go to
Speaker 2: school on the days that testing is taking place because
Speaker 2: of the pressure. So there's this general consensus across the board,
Speaker 2: across the state, across lawmakers that something needs to be
Speaker 2: done about this test that is really really putting an
Speaker 2: unnecessary amount of stress on students.
Speaker 1: I mean, the idea here, right to take a step back,
Speaker 1: is to measure how successful schools are at educating their
Speaker 1: you know, students and preparing them for life beyond high
Speaker 1: school and things like that. And I guess there's also
Speaker 1: an element bridget two to kind of measure you know,
Speaker 1: whether the individual students have enough you know, have gained
Speaker 1: enough knowledge to complete their schooling or advance in their schooling.
Speaker 1: And things like that. I mean, what does Bridget is
Speaker 1: it sets up a lot of high stakes, right, and
Speaker 1: a lot of nervousness. I have a third grader and
Speaker 1: a seventh grader, my two kids very different attitudes. On
Speaker 1: the one hand, I have my daughter, the you know, perfectionist,
Speaker 1: wants to ace the test, very stressed, very concerned. I
Speaker 1: have to sit her down and be like, look, it's okay,
Speaker 1: like you're going to do fine on this test. They're
Speaker 1: really what the what really matters? This is for the school.
Speaker 1: This is not going to affect your kind of individual
Speaker 1: success as a student. And then I have my son
Speaker 1: who could care less about this test, you know, and
Speaker 1: our teachers like, hey, can you like bribe this kid
Speaker 1: to really focus and try hard? And you know, and
Speaker 1: so we have to sit him down and say like, hey,
Speaker 1: actually this test matters, and if you do well on it,
Speaker 1: we'll get you a lego set or something like that.
Speaker 1: And so, I mean, that's that's the stakes, right. Bridget,
Speaker 1: tell us a little bit about kind of in your
Speaker 1: community in the area you felt face, kind of how
Speaker 1: people feel about, you know, whether the star was doing
Speaker 1: a good job of accomplishing the goals that it was
Speaker 1: set out for sure, So there's.
Speaker 4: A lot in that question, so I'm going to work
Speaker 4: to unpack it.
Speaker 3: Also, legos are powerful, and that's something we should all
Speaker 3: take away. So assessments are incredibly important because they help
Speaker 3: us measure whether students are learning in the classroom. And
Speaker 3: I think one thing that is missed a lot when
Speaker 3: people talk about the high stakes nature of our assessments
Speaker 3: is that Texas is actually pretty unique in our accountability
Speaker 3: system that the result what we measure is the better
Speaker 3: of absolute performance and growth, that is not those two
Speaker 3: things being one or the other the better. That is
Speaker 3: not common in most state assessments. So when we're giving
Speaker 3: students state assessments, what we're really measuring at the end
Speaker 3: of the day is did the student come in at
Speaker 3: least a year further along than they did when they
Speaker 3: walked in, making sure that the instruction that happened in
Speaker 3: that classroom didn't put them further behind. And that is
Speaker 3: something that when I talk to people, everyone generally is
Speaker 3: very supportive of. We want to make sure our students
Speaker 3: are continuing to progress further. So I think part of
Speaker 3: this is also just reframing what assessment and accountability is
Speaker 3: truly measuring. The other thing that I will say is
Speaker 3: I think this whole debate has been a bit of
Speaker 3: a call to action for the adults that are around
Speaker 3: our students around assessments. When I was a student, we
Speaker 3: had state assessments and the only thing I remember is.
Speaker 4: We got pancakes that day.
Speaker 3: My mom made us like a bigger breakfast that day
Speaker 3: than we normally did. I was a teacher. I was
Speaker 3: an elementary school teacher, and my kids didn't. I never
Speaker 3: talked to my students about the assessment having a connection
Speaker 3: to the rating of our school or my evaluation. We
Speaker 3: talked about it as a way for them to demonstrate
Speaker 3: everything that they had learned that year. So I think
Speaker 3: there's a reframing also around the narrative of what this
Speaker 3: opportunity is for students. But then the third thing that
Speaker 3: I think is important is that this debate caused us
Speaker 3: to step back and think what components of our assessment
Speaker 3: system are really necessary? Do we need kids sitting for
Speaker 3: hours in an assessment to determine whether or not they
Speaker 3: have learned what they were taught?
Speaker 4: No, we don't, And.
Speaker 3: We see those changes in here. We also see changes
Speaker 3: to the assessment that are now going to give much
Speaker 3: better actionable data to parents and to teachers at checkpoints
Speaker 3: throughout the year. So it's not here's a test we
Speaker 3: give you at the end of the year, and by
Speaker 3: the way, the results aren't going to be available to
Speaker 3: you until after the student has started the summer break.
Speaker 1: Excellent, Okay, So a lot to unpack there, and I'm
Speaker 1: very interested in a lot of those different topics. But Saiha,
Speaker 1: just briefly, I mean, talk a little bit more about
Speaker 1: the the What was it specifically about this test that
Speaker 1: people were unhappy with?
Speaker 2: You have so you have one test at the end
Speaker 2: of the year, and so that is that is the nature.
Speaker 2: That's like, you have students they are learning all year
Speaker 2: through and then at the end of the day, at
Speaker 2: the end of the year, they're taking one test. It
Speaker 2: runs from it's designed to take about three hours, but
Speaker 2: it can go up to seven hours. Folks are unhappy
Speaker 2: because they are saying that the questions are too rigorous
Speaker 2: and don't actually meet state standards. That's a criticism that
Speaker 2: comes up, and I think the environment that these students
Speaker 2: are in that there it's just like this amount of
Speaker 2: stress that they're putting on their put under is just
Speaker 2: it's not needed that there's a way to do this
Speaker 2: that so that they're not under that much stress. And
Speaker 2: I think there's another there's another piece of it to
Speaker 2: where Bridget, I think you were getting at this idea right,
Speaker 2: like that you need standardized testing in order to be
Speaker 2: able to measure how students are doing in the classroom,
Speaker 2: to measure whether schools are doing a good job educating students.
Speaker 2: But the tests that are in place, that are currently
Speaker 2: those scores will be factored into how schools are assessed.
Speaker 2: But are those tests doing a good job measuring student success?
Speaker 2: School success are how are the tests formatted so that
Speaker 2: they are doing the best job helping students to in
Speaker 2: the learning process.
Speaker 1: So let's talk about HbA. Then this was the bill
Speaker 1: that passed in the special session and it changed how
Speaker 1: these tests will work. Break down for me, I'll go
Speaker 1: to stay on this first and and then go to
Speaker 1: you Bridget for your your analysis. Here, break down to
Speaker 1: me what is different or what will be different once
Speaker 1: these new versions of these tests are put in place.
Speaker 2: Right, so you had currently we have one end of
Speaker 2: the year test. What that will be replaced with is
Speaker 2: three shorter tests taken throughout the year, so first at
Speaker 2: the beginning of the year, then at the middle of
Speaker 2: the year, and then at the end of the year.
Speaker 2: The first two tests in theory, schools should be able
Speaker 2: to swap that out with tests that they're already giving students,
Speaker 2: so tests that are familiar in the classroom, like map
Speaker 2: testing that it's nationally recognized tests that students are taking
Speaker 2: all over the country And so the idea with being
Speaker 2: able to swap those beginning and the middle of the
Speaker 2: year tests is that it'll actually reduce testing since they're
Speaker 2: not actually going to This is the idea, right like
Speaker 2: the idea is that they're not going to have to
Speaker 2: take an additional test because these are tests they can
Speaker 2: just sub in. But it's not really clear yet exams
Speaker 2: are going to be able to be accepted for that
Speaker 2: swap in, and then that last end of the year
Speaker 2: test will still be one that the TEA has a
Speaker 2: big hand in creating those questions that across the board,
Speaker 2: every district has to take the same tests. All these
Speaker 2: three tests should be shorter. They're designed to be shorter
Speaker 2: than that one three hour test. But I think there's
Speaker 2: a lot of questions right now about there's an intention
Speaker 2: for this to decrease testing. There's a lot of questions
Speaker 2: right now about what this actually increased testing. But in
Speaker 2: addition to that, there's a lot of things of the bill.
Speaker 2: In addition to that, there's a lot of discussion about
Speaker 2: how the grading will look like and what the results
Speaker 2: will look like. So the first two tests all three tests,
Speaker 2: but really the first two tests will be known as
Speaker 2: what is like nationally, it's what they're called norm reference tests,
Speaker 2: and so that grading and the results will look like
Speaker 2: percentile ranks. So students' performance is going to be compared
Speaker 2: against the peer, so they may be in the fiftieth
Speaker 2: percentile and there's sevent percentile. So all three tests you'll
Speaker 2: get results that look like that. The end of the
Speaker 2: year test will look really similar to what the Star
Speaker 2: test looks like right now, in that the TEA sets
Speaker 2: these benchmarks, right like you need to get x x
Speaker 2: points in order to be meeting state benchmarks, and so
Speaker 2: they set certain scores that students to reach to say, Okay,
Speaker 2: I basically passed or I didn't pass, and that will
Speaker 2: assess you know, whether how what how many students in
Speaker 2: the state are like meeting state goals or learning those
Speaker 2: like state meeting state standards, and then it's a it's
Speaker 2: a whole, it's a it's a lot of pieces, and
Speaker 2: then there's a piece of like we can expect test
Speaker 2: scores to come back much faster. So in the past
Speaker 2: we've had to wait weeks for parents to get their
Speaker 2: test back, and so that has been an issue because
Speaker 2: schools out and then you've got your test scores, but
Speaker 2: you can no longer reach the teacher, right, and so
Speaker 2: you can no longer talk about it. It's the idea is
Speaker 2: now it's only supposed to take about two days, and
Speaker 2: so the idea is, you know, you have these three
Speaker 2: tests throughout the year. You should be able to use
Speaker 2: these test results and information from the test results to
Speaker 2: actually change what is being learned in the classroom. And
Speaker 2: also you're getting that information back quicker, so you can
Speaker 2: make those adjustments quicker.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Two other just interesting things that I saw in
Speaker 1: the bill. Right, this idea of practice tests. Right, one
Speaker 1: of the big complaints I think among teachers and educators,
Speaker 1: right is they have to spend so much time preparing
Speaker 1: for the Star test that they're not able to focus
Speaker 1: on actual teaching. Right, This would include correct me if
Speaker 1: I'm wrong, a ban on kind of running students through
Speaker 1: practice tests. One expert cited in a story you wrote,
Speaker 1: Steja says, that would buy back, you know, fifteen to
Speaker 1: thirty hours of lost instructional time by replacing that, and
Speaker 1: then also just the number of tests things your tests
Speaker 1: on you know, being paired back a little bit english
Speaker 1: to being one in particular, we no longer need to
Speaker 1: take that test anymore.
Speaker 3: Okay, So I make a point about the practice test.
Speaker 1: Yeah, absolutely, it's important.
Speaker 3: So it does prohibit practice tests, but it also now
Speaker 3: by creating the beginning of the year and middle of
Speaker 3: the year shorter assessments, it gives kids an opportunity.
Speaker 4: To practice for the end of the year.
Speaker 3: Because there is a benefit to practice tests.
Speaker 4: I mean, we all.
Speaker 3: Took practice tests for SAT and ACT.
Speaker 4: You got to get used to the way the questions
Speaker 4: are formatted.
Speaker 3: And so while we're now removing the kind of okay, everybody,
Speaker 3: we're going to take a whole practice assessment, we are
Speaker 3: giving students access to shorter assessments at the beginning in
Speaker 3: the middle of the year that look like the assessment
Speaker 3: they're going to take at the end of the year.
Speaker 3: It is true that in practice beginning of the year
Speaker 3: and middle of the year benchmarks are happening right now,
Speaker 3: but they're a different testing vendor because the state doesn't
Speaker 3: create inter.
Speaker 4: Re benchmark right now.
Speaker 3: Now, they will see similar test questions, similar format beginning,
Speaker 3: middle and end of the year. So practice is still there,
Speaker 3: but these long sit in and take practice.
Speaker 4: Tests are gone.
Speaker 1: You know, it's interesting to watch this because we hear
Speaker 1: these concerns, some of some of them are very much
Speaker 1: legitimate about the frustrations with the test. But Bridget, I mean,
Speaker 1: one of the things that's going on here too is
Speaker 1: you need to measure whether schools are doing what's asked
Speaker 1: of them, and in any situation, you know, it's it's
Speaker 1: hard to come up with a fair and rigorous way
Speaker 1: of doing that without a test. I'm struggle to think
Speaker 1: of how that might look like otherwise. And if you're
Speaker 1: going to have some kind of test that's going to
Speaker 1: measure whether you can advance in a grade, whether what
Speaker 1: you know, what letter grade your school is going to
Speaker 1: get from the tea, and and you know, in extreme cases,
Speaker 1: whether if you are failing that test for enough years
Speaker 1: in a row, whether the TA might have the ability
Speaker 1: or the power or the interest to take over the
Speaker 1: government of your school district. When you have those kinds
Speaker 1: of expectations, there's going to be pressure. And so I mean,
Speaker 1: one of the things that I've wondered about is I've
Speaker 1: watched this sort of play out, is like, is it
Speaker 1: really possible to design a test that teachers and parents
Speaker 1: and other people who are going to feel that pressure
Speaker 1: are going to be okay with, are going to be
Speaker 1: happy with? Do you think that is possible? Do you
Speaker 1: think it's important to do it? Anyways? And I guess
Speaker 1: maybe the last question is do you think this will
Speaker 1: get us closer to that goal?
Speaker 3: So I do think it's necessary, And I will harken
Speaker 3: back to what I said at the beginning that I
Speaker 3: think everyone thinks that the evaluation is just based on
Speaker 3: the ultimate score that the student gets. It is also growth.
Speaker 3: So again, we all want kids to come out of
Speaker 3: each at least one year ahead of where they were,
Speaker 3: or they're going to fall further behind. So I think
Speaker 3: we have to have an assessment to measure whether that
Speaker 3: is happening. And when we reframe it in that way,
Speaker 3: it does take off a little more of the pressure,
Speaker 3: especially for our schools and our teachers that are regularly
Speaker 3: teaching students who come into their classrooms or their campus buildings.
Speaker 4: Behind the other thing.
Speaker 3: That I will say is that the assessment you said
Speaker 3: fair and rigorous, I think the other one is valid
Speaker 3: and reliable. So we have to create an assessment because
Speaker 3: there are things tied to the assessment that we truly
Speaker 3: believe the results are valid and reliable. And so that
Speaker 3: leads to some of the environment in which the testing
Speaker 3: is happening, and I think that that is absolutely necessary.
Speaker 3: I think you asked whether this assessment will do that.
Speaker 3: I think it will get us closer than we previously
Speaker 3: have been, which is good new. I also think this
Speaker 3: assessment will help our teachers and our.
Speaker 4: Parents help their students.
Speaker 3: So the language you see throughout this bill is instructurally
Speaker 3: and of course I butcher it as I say it
Speaker 3: instructionally supportive assessment. The goal is that when students take
Speaker 3: the test, parents and teachers are now getting a report
Speaker 3: that says, this is how your kid did compared to
Speaker 3: other kids in Texas, also compared to the cut scores
Speaker 3: of the certain achievement levels. And then here are some
Speaker 3: actionable strategies you can use to help your kid master
Speaker 3: what they haven't figured out yet. So this is supposed
Speaker 3: to be used to inform instruction. So the ultimate goal
Speaker 3: is to have students again progressing at least a year
Speaker 3: so that they don't fall further behind, and I think
Speaker 3: this test gets us closer to doing that.
Speaker 1: Now, do you have you heard from teachers, I mean teachers,
Speaker 1: school administrators and things like that. Do you think they
Speaker 1: agree with that assessment that this is a step in
Speaker 1: the right direction, that it's getting us closer.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean I've talked to talk to teachers and
Speaker 2: administors all over the state, and we're sort of getting
Speaker 2: a mixed bag. Like I think on one hand, books
Speaker 2: are saying like, we want these tests to be useful, right,
Speaker 2: and so then it's like if you have tests that
Speaker 2: measure progress over the year, then that will actually come
Speaker 2: in they can actually use that in the classroom and
Speaker 2: it's shorter, and they like that. I think they hear
Speaker 2: the idea of three tests over one test. I think
Speaker 2: that for some teachers that ring some alarm bells, like
Speaker 2: is that just going to be going to be more testing?
Speaker 2: Is that going to just create you know, the pressure
Speaker 2: that you're feeling at the end of the year, now
Speaker 2: is that just going to be tripled? So I think
Speaker 2: there's just some anxiety right now, and it's like there's
Speaker 2: a lot to be seen, Like we don't know yet
Speaker 2: what those beginning and middle middle of the year tests
Speaker 2: will look like, what whether they'll actually be able to
Speaker 2: swap it out for tests that they're already taking, and
Speaker 2: what those tests could look like there. So there's so
Speaker 2: much unknown about those first two tests. So I think
Speaker 2: in that uncertainty, we're hearing some like some worries.
Speaker 1: Okay, very good, very good. Yeah, it just I mean
Speaker 1: I have watched this with a lot of interest because
Speaker 1: I see it play out, you know, in the news
Speaker 1: and in our coverage. I also see it play out
Speaker 1: in my own personal life. But I also just remember
Speaker 1: the history, right, so, you know, this is what the
Speaker 1: fifth or so version of a standardized test that that
Speaker 1: Texas has done. You know, it started off with the
Speaker 1: Texas Assessment of Basic Skills. Then you had the teams test,
Speaker 1: the Toss test, which is the test I took when
Speaker 1: I was a kid. Then they switched that to the
Speaker 1: Text test, Then you had the Star Test. You know,
Speaker 1: there has been a lot of sort of bites at
Speaker 1: this Apple attempts to try to try to get this
Speaker 1: to where they need to be bridgid, what do you think,
Speaker 1: what do we know differently now than we knew back
Speaker 1: then That might suggest that this might be a different
Speaker 1: situation here.
Speaker 3: So I will start by saying I arrived in Texas
Speaker 3: in October of twenty nineteen, so I only know the
Speaker 3: star and then this assessment. I grew up in Virginia,
Speaker 3: which has the worst testing acronym standards of learning SOL,
Speaker 3: and it's been SOL since I was there and continued.
Speaker 4: So that's one.
Speaker 3: State that is stuck by its name because it's almost
Speaker 3: humorous at this point. So I can't talk too far
Speaker 3: back about how things have changed from one to the other.
Speaker 3: I do think though, this is less of a change
Speaker 3: in the purpose of the assessment and what the assessment
Speaker 3: is assessing, and it is directly trying to target the
Speaker 3: feedback that has come from parents and teachers. I don't
Speaker 3: know if the other assessments in the past have done that,
Speaker 3: but the shortening of the test, the assessments giving back
Speaker 3: given back earlier, and trying to create a more introductionally
Speaker 3: supportive that has all been in response to feedback that
Speaker 3: I know legislators are getting constantly.
Speaker 1: Okay, so you had an interesting story kind of in
Speaker 1: the beginning of the special session, honing in on a
Speaker 1: school that has really struggled in the previous or the
Speaker 1: current version of the of the testing of the Star test,
Speaker 1: that being Adobe Middle School in Austin, right, which has
Speaker 1: has received a failing grade for multiple years, could be
Speaker 1: starting to kind of look at that situation where it
Speaker 1: could be required by the state to either be shut
Speaker 1: down or reworked or make AISD vulnerable to you know,
Speaker 1: being essentially taken over by the state. Can you talk
Speaker 1: a little bit about just what you learned from going
Speaker 1: to that school and how they felt about this you
Speaker 1: know testing setup.
Speaker 3: Right right?
Speaker 2: I think so the school is Adobe Middle School in Austin, uzety,
Speaker 2: and I think that school and what they're navigating really
Speaker 2: does a good job illustrating the stakes of having really
Speaker 2: like an effective accountability system. So here in Texas, it's
Speaker 2: if you get five F ratings in our accountability system
Speaker 2: in a row, then you are at a risk of
Speaker 2: like the most severe state sanctions. And so that is
Speaker 2: that what you're saying, like at the state coming in
Speaker 2: taking over a democratically elected board. They could instead also
Speaker 2: require school to shut down. But Adobe at this point
Speaker 2: is at four FS, so they are teetering. They are
Speaker 2: very close at to you know, risking the most severe
Speaker 2: state sanctions. But what was going on Adobe is so
Speaker 2: they are in the school is really like really predominantly
Speaker 2: immigrant community, really just economically disadvantaged, high rate of economically
Speaker 2: disadvanta students and so and also it's just the immigrant
Speaker 2: community comes in because and it's a strong refugee community
Speaker 2: as well, so a lot of the students that are
Speaker 2: coming in don't speak English very well, and so for them,
Speaker 2: like English is their second or third language. And so
Speaker 2: there was a lot of frustration with the Star test
Speaker 2: for them because on top of you know, the concerns
Speaker 2: that we're hearing across the board, across school districts all
Speaker 2: over the state that it's long, it's stressful, and it's
Speaker 2: just unnecessary. They're saying that on top of all those things,
Speaker 2: we have students who don't they're forced to take the test,
Speaker 2: they have to take the test in a language that's
Speaker 2: not their first language, and so everything is just becomes
Speaker 2: added and exacerbated, and so they didn't feel like the
Speaker 2: Star test did the best job assessing whether the school
Speaker 2: was successful at educating theirs. So there was this interesting
Speaker 2: disconnect where it felt like the state was coming in
Speaker 2: and saying the school was not doing a good job
Speaker 2: educating the community or supporting the community, but then the
Speaker 2: community was saying, no, actually, we do feel really supported
Speaker 2: by the school in all these like intangible ways that
Speaker 2: testing doesn't measure. And so I think like that that
Speaker 2: disconnect I think comes up when we think about an
Speaker 2: accountability system and how do we measure whether schools are effective.
Speaker 2: And of course here in Texas, testing is the biggest factor,
Speaker 2: and how students perform on these tests are the biggest factor.
Speaker 2: But I think there's also been a call in recent
Speaker 2: years to think about metrics that aren't just testing. Right,
Speaker 2: It's like our students participating participating in workforce readiness programs,
Speaker 2: How are students doing in kindergarten? What does do how
Speaker 2: are students like mental health and mental wellness? And so
Speaker 2: that also actually came up in this HbA because while
Speaker 2: we're not going to see the accountability system and how
Speaker 2: things are calculated change from non testing factors, there is
Speaker 2: a clause in the bill that is asking the state
Speaker 2: to start tracking these like non testing metrics. So that
Speaker 2: did seem like an nod to those sort of concerns.
Speaker 1: Brigina, I wonder what you think about that. I looked
Speaker 1: up the data on Adobe before we came in here
Speaker 1: Toa's data on this. It says that fifty one percent
Speaker 1: of the students they are chronically absent, seventy two percent
Speaker 1: have limited English proficiency, eighty seven percent are economically disadvantaged.
Speaker 1: When you're talking about what is asked of that school
Speaker 1: beyond kind of the standard, you know, what was asked
Speaker 1: of safe for instance, the upper middle class school that
Speaker 1: I went to, it feels like the task, the challenge
Speaker 1: at hand, and all those things are so different that
Speaker 1: it would be hard to measure each of those to
Speaker 1: schools in a different way. What do you think about
Speaker 1: on the other hand, I mean, the goal of the
Speaker 1: schools is to prepare students, to help them, you know,
Speaker 1: get caught up and you know, be ready for whatever
Speaker 1: is going to come next in their life. What do
Speaker 1: you think of the feedback that SNA heard from a
Speaker 1: community like that as we think through these challenges.
Speaker 3: Sure, I didn't think I was going to tell more
Speaker 3: my personal story on here, but I will give a
Speaker 3: snippet because I think it helps frame this. I grew
Speaker 3: up in a very upper middle class area. I went
Speaker 3: to college and decided to enter teach for America because
Speaker 3: I thought every kid needed to have a school that
Speaker 3: was as good as the school that I went to
Speaker 3: that was I'm pretty sure I said it in my interview,
Speaker 3: but what I learned after teaching in a eco high
Speaker 3: Eco disc school in Louisiana was actually that the school
Speaker 3: I was at needed way more resources than the.
Speaker 4: School that I had been at.
Speaker 3: They needed better teachers than the school that I had
Speaker 3: been at, And so it is a complex topic. It's
Speaker 3: a difficult topic to talk about, but I think assessments
Speaker 3: and these assessment results and the consequences that we've been
Speaker 3: talking about, like state takeover, actually shine a flashlight on
Speaker 3: areas where we need to be putting more resources, we
Speaker 3: need to be putting our best teachers, and that is
Speaker 3: actually now happening at Adobe. They are going forward with
Speaker 3: resource campuses, which is one of the it was included
Speaker 3: in HB two from the last session, where they are
Speaker 3: now meeting a threshold where at least half of their
Speaker 3: teachers in the core subjects are going to be TIA designated,
Speaker 3: meaning they're in the top third of the best teachers
Speaker 3: in all of the state. So those results are actually
Speaker 3: driving some pretty bold action that are going to be
Speaker 3: life changing for the students that are on that campus.
Speaker 3: They are now getting access to the best teachers in
Speaker 3: Austin ID or teachers that have come from outside of
Speaker 3: Austin ISD. The one other point that I want to
Speaker 3: make because I agree with everything snehas said, but I
Speaker 3: think it wouldn't be I wouldn't be representing commits if
Speaker 3: I didn't bring a little bit of data.
Speaker 1: And what our.
Speaker 3: Results have shown is that let's stick with just students
Speaker 3: who are meeting that economically disadvantaged designation. On an aff
Speaker 3: rated campus, nineteen percent of those students are meeting grade level.
Speaker 3: On an A rated campus, fifty four percent of students
Speaker 3: with economically disadvantaged designation are meeting grade level. So we
Speaker 3: have campuses, school leaders, and teachers across the state who
Speaker 3: are showing what is possible when you really rally around
Speaker 3: a community, you put resources into the school, you put
Speaker 3: your best teach, And that is the story that I
Speaker 3: like to tell when I go look at accountability results.
Speaker 3: I go find those campuses immediately because it's just a
Speaker 3: reminder of what's possible.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, I think that's a really interesting point
Speaker 1: because if you are a parent, you probably only know
Speaker 1: the experience in one school, and it's hard to know
Speaker 1: about what's working elsewhere and what's going on. The Charles
Speaker 1: Butt Foundation really suppul last year saying really around like
Speaker 1: ninety percent of parents are happy with their children's education
Speaker 1: in Texas, which, you know, that's a positive number and
Speaker 1: that's a good thing to see. On the other hand,
Speaker 1: less than half of students are graduating from high school
Speaker 1: in Texas college ready in both reading and math. The
Speaker 1: average SAT score in Texas is under one thousand. You know,
Speaker 1: less than a quarter of students are in Texas are
Speaker 1: taking any AP courses. I mean, there's unquestionably room to grow.
Speaker 1: I mean, I think some of the question here is
Speaker 1: who gets decide who gets to decide what is acceptable,
Speaker 1: who gets to decide what is working? And should you
Speaker 1: base that on data? Should you base that on parent
Speaker 1: sentiment or what? I mean? This seems to be bridgid
Speaker 1: the question that the state is sort of grappling through
Speaker 1: by talking through this test, and.
Speaker 3: There's been a lot of conversations about including parent and
Speaker 3: student surveys. There's been conversations about other indicators to put
Speaker 3: into the accountability system. Surveys come up a lot, surveys,
Speaker 3: I think tell a very interesting story. We just get
Speaker 3: back to this valid and reliable measure. We want to
Speaker 3: make sure that parents can speak freely on these surveys,
Speaker 3: and we want to make sure every survey is counted,
Speaker 3: and just to do that takes a lot of work.
Speaker 3: It actually takes a lot of cost. So it's something
Speaker 3: that we should continue to explore because I think the
Speaker 3: parent experience the student experience tells a lot about a campus.
Speaker 3: But we can't step back from having academic results be
Speaker 3: the primary driver because at the end of the day,
Speaker 3: I mean, what I was taught when I became a
Speaker 3: teacher was the direct correlation between teaching and learning. You
Speaker 3: can teach or you can think you've taught, but if
Speaker 3: the kids didn't learn it, you didn't teach it. And
Speaker 3: that is something that we just need to continue to
Speaker 3: remind people of the public good that our public schools
Speaker 3: are and we have to hold them to that bar.
Speaker 1: So stay out what happenshead.
Speaker 2: No, I was just going to say, I think the
Speaker 2: thing about like test performance is like it really is
Speaker 2: an indicator of options that students have after they leave
Speaker 2: high school, right, Like we know that like how students
Speaker 2: do in English as early as third grade has like
Speaker 2: a long term predictor of how they'll do in high
Speaker 2: school and then beyond. And then there's this like when
Speaker 2: students are under performing in math that raises serious concerns
Speaker 2: about you know, are we building students who can enter
Speaker 2: a future workforce and get those like high paying jobs
Speaker 2: that can lead them to live the lives that they
Speaker 2: want to leave. So it's I think there's a balance
Speaker 2: here and what should have weight and what shouldn't, But
Speaker 2: there is a piece of testing that that really is
Speaker 2: important and thinking about, you know, the success of students
Speaker 2: later on.
Speaker 1: Yeah, you know, I wonder Bridget if you could help
Speaker 1: me sort of put this in context a little bit
Speaker 1: more broadly with the broader education policy in Texas right now.
Speaker 1: I mean, it does seem to me like the state legislature,
Speaker 1: state leaders, the tea, all those different kinds of groups
Speaker 1: are really trying to do, you know, some pretty dramatic
Speaker 1: things in order to you know, improve the outcomes of
Speaker 1: students in this state, whether it's related to teacher pay,
Speaker 1: whether it's related to testing, whether it's related to this
Speaker 1: you know, Bluebonnet curriculum, which has gotten a lot of
Speaker 1: pushback from folks due to you know, how much religion
Speaker 1: may be included in that. But but there does seem
Speaker 1: to be like a broader strategy here right now to
Speaker 1: say among state leaders that the status quo is not
Speaker 1: working and that there need to be more interventions. There
Speaker 1: needs to be maybe even more pressure on some of
Speaker 1: these school districts to improve on the metrics that they're
Speaker 1: they're taking. You do you agree with that assessment?
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: I think high impacting which we saw in the last
Speaker 3: two sessions are previous two of the last three sessions.
Speaker 3: I don't even know how many sessions right now is
Speaker 3: another example of that. I think there is a real
Speaker 3: Texas is not proud of where our academic results are
Speaker 3: coming out. I was at the Louisiana Department of Education
Speaker 3: for nine years before I came to Texas and saw
Speaker 3: all of those headlines coming out about the results going
Speaker 3: up in Louisiana, and I was around Texans saying we
Speaker 3: can do that we can do that same thing and
Speaker 3: asking me how, And the answer is by looking at
Speaker 3: or following the research, following the data on what are
Speaker 3: the strategies that work, what are the strategies that turn
Speaker 3: around academic outcomes? And they are high impact tutoring. They
Speaker 3: are putting the best teachers in front of the kids
Speaker 3: that need it the most. There are states that have
Speaker 3: shown us how to do this, and the Texas legislature
Speaker 3: has been paying attention and has been putting some serious
Speaker 3: momentum behind those strategies. And I'm optimistic that we already
Speaker 3: we saw on the most recent star results, the most
Speaker 3: recent accountability results, we are seeing a change. Our urban
Speaker 3: school systems actually improved three times the rate that the
Speaker 3: state improved sour Our school systems that have students that
Speaker 3: need the most support are actually showing some pretty overwhelming growth.
Speaker 1: On the flip side of that, say, has there there
Speaker 1: may be a bit of a loss of local control, right,
Speaker 1: I mean you were you were seeing in some cases districts,
Speaker 1: you know, leaders express frustration because they feel like their
Speaker 1: closest on the ground level and are maybe you know,
Speaker 1: losing a little bit of their ability to make decisions
Speaker 1: at the local level.
Speaker 2: I think the elephant in the room, right is Houston
Speaker 2: iced and right like that we had that is our
Speaker 2: biggest school district taxes and the state came in and
Speaker 2: took over and appointed superintendent and with the latest test scores,
Speaker 2: I mean that superintend Mike Miles, I mean he really
Speaker 2: touted that there were no SS at any campus, that
Speaker 2: he was really able to get test scores up. But
Speaker 2: there were caught there. It was a sort of like
Speaker 2: now forgetting the word, but like there were trade offs
Speaker 2: to that, right, Like we saw plenty of students like
Speaker 2: leave and droves, there are questions about enrollment, there was
Speaker 2: a cutback on social services, and certainly there was a
Speaker 2: loss of local control. And so then it is you know,
Speaker 2: we did see test scores improve in Houston, but to
Speaker 2: what end? And so I think there there I see it.
Speaker 2: I see two pieces to it, which is like, you know,
Speaker 2: on one hand, you can use test performance to identify
Speaker 2: where schools need additional resources and make investments, kind of
Speaker 2: like what Bridget was saying. But there's also a piece
Speaker 2: where you know, there is real, real sanctions that are
Speaker 2: attached to these tests, these test scores.
Speaker 1: Bridgiet I wonder if you could just describe quickly, what
Speaker 1: do you feel like the core tenants of that state
Speaker 1: strategy are. I mean, you know, I think rewarding the
Speaker 1: best teachers might be one. Are what are the kind
Speaker 1: of are there underlining ideals that are at the heart
Speaker 1: of the strategy we're seeing play out.
Speaker 3: I think we're touching on a lot of it. I
Speaker 3: think it is it is targeted.
Speaker 4: Funding.
Speaker 3: What we learned a lot in the eighty ninth is
Speaker 3: that the legislature was not interested in providing increases to
Speaker 3: the basic allotment. They were not interested in providing schools
Speaker 3: unrestricted funding. They really wanted to know that extra funding
Speaker 3: going into school systems was tied to specific strategies that
Speaker 3: are working. So I think if there's one underlying tenant
Speaker 3: right now, it's let's find out what's working and let's
Speaker 3: invest in that which is fit. I mean that that
Speaker 3: is pulling back from kind of this belief that school
Speaker 3: systems should be empowered to create their own strategies. So
Speaker 3: I think there's two sides to that argument. For sure,
Speaker 3: I think if I were crafting a policy, there's also
Speaker 3: a world in which that control is earned. And if
Speaker 3: we see school systems that are continuously proud graduating students
Speaker 3: who aren't ready for college, who aren't ready for the
Speaker 3: jobs of the twenty first century. Then in those cases
Speaker 3: there needs to be some more It needs to be
Speaker 3: more closely watched with some more support, which is or
Speaker 3: consequences though those school systems that are growing, that are
Speaker 3: seeing improvement could potentially earn a little bit more empowerment.
Speaker 3: I am now riffing off of my own personal beliefs
Speaker 3: instead of the legislature, which is your question, so I'll
Speaker 3: reail it back in. But I think it really is
Speaker 3: kind of that that targeted support is where the legislature
Speaker 3: and Texas officials are most interested and kind of putting
Speaker 3: the resources that exist.
Speaker 1: What is a reasonable goal for an outcome? You know,
Speaker 1: in that strategy or approach. I mean, you know, Texas
Speaker 1: is has a strong economy. It's a wealthy state. It
Speaker 1: also has a lot of poor people, and it has
Speaker 1: a lot of immigrants, and it has a lot of
Speaker 1: children who's for whom English is not their first language.
Speaker 1: I mean, there are a lot of challenges that the
Speaker 1: state faces in trying to achieve these goals, like what
Speaker 1: should the achievable goal be? As they as they think
Speaker 1: through this, well, I.
Speaker 3: Will tell you commit school, which is that by twenty
Speaker 3: forty half of the young adults in Dallas County twenty
Speaker 3: five to thirty four will have earned a living wage.
Speaker 3: And that is a very big goal. When we launched
Speaker 3: that goal, we were at around thirty percent of those
Speaker 3: individuals earning a living wage, and our goal is to
Speaker 3: get to half. I think that is going to take
Speaker 3: a lot of work, it is going to take a
Speaker 3: lot of partnerships, it's going to take a lot of resources.
Speaker 3: But I one hundred percent think that it is achievable.
Speaker 3: And you say, you know, we have so many jobs
Speaker 3: that are available now that are going to be available
Speaker 3: in Texas, and I.
Speaker 4: Have let it be known.
Speaker 3: On this I talked about Virginia, I talked about Louisiana,
Speaker 3: so people know I am not a native Texan. I've
Speaker 3: outed myself, but I'm a Texas Texan by choice. I'm
Speaker 3: married into Texas, and I want to make sure that
Speaker 3: those jobs can be held by Texans and that we
Speaker 3: don't continue to have to import our talent.
Speaker 4: In order to keep the Texas economy running well.
Speaker 1: Even though you are in Louisiana, right, now we still
Speaker 1: accept you as a Texan, my choice that it is
Speaker 1: the Texas way right, Well, I'll take all covers. Yes,
Speaker 1: thank you Bridget, thank you Snaja both for this conversation.
Speaker 1: I'm excited to see how this will play out. And
Speaker 1: thank you to our producers, Rob and Chris. That is
Speaker 1: all we have for today. We will talk to you
Speaker 1: next week.