The “Required” Summer School Notice

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 70 Comments

2023 Note: The revisions of HB 4545 eliminated the GPC process.  This article is outdated.  Note, however, that this year Grades 3-8 are not receiving STAAR results until August.  Some schools are attempting to “require” summer school based on predictive results.  This is not allowed.  Only actual failure to meet standards can result in “required” summer school (you can still opt out).  If you took an EOC, failure to meet standards will be available in late May, and you will need to opt out.  If you took a Grade 3-8 STAAR, simply reply to the school with this statement: “HB 4545 Accelerated Instruction can only be mandated on actual STAAR results that show the student did not approach grade level standards.  It cannot be mandated based on predictions, other assessments or any other assumption of the District.  We will discuss Accelerated Instruction when the actual passing standards and actual results are disclosed.”

As the first results of the STAAR assessment come in and the days left in the school year slip away, more and more parentsof kids who failed or did not take the first assessment are receiving notices that their kids are “required” to go to summer school.  Round Rock ISD is even sending notices that the district has registered the student for summer school.  They may tell you that if they don’t attend, they will be in violation of the compulsory attendance laws.  They may tell you that unless you attend summer school you can’t be promoted by the GPC. As parents of 5th and 8th graders there is one simple and important fact you need to know:

Schools cannot unilaterally require your child to attend summer school as a result of their STAAR results.

The notices these schools are sending are a blend of truth and fiction, and it is important to understand what part is true and when you need to be concerned about it.  Let’s start with the part that has some truth to it.  The compulsory attendance statute does state that (d)  “Unless specifically exempted by Section 25.086, a student enrolled in a school district must attend:

* * *

(3)  an accelerated instruction program to which the student is assigned under Section 28.0211;

and Section 28.0211 (a-1) states that “[a]ccelerated instruction may require participation of the student before or after normal school hours and may include participation at times of the year outside normal school operations.”

This would seem to indicate that a school really can require your kid to go to summer school if they fail STAAR.  However, for parents of 5th and 8th graders, the key is this.  After the second administration of STAAR, if a child has still not passed, the accelerated instruction must be determined by the Grade Placement Committee that you are a part of.  This is clear in the statute where it states:

“After a student fails to perform satisfactorily on an assessment instrument a second time, a grade placement committee shall be established to prescribe the accelerated instruction the district shall provide to the student before the student is administered the assessment instrument the third time.”

And the parent is a member of this committee!  In other words, the school may not unilaterally send your kid to summer school for not passing STAAR.  A quick caution, there is no GPC process for grades 3, 4, 6 or 7.  If you get a summer school notice in those grades you will need to either protest and reach a new agreement with the school, exercise your 26.010 opt out rights, or withdraw your child from the school for the summer.

It is apparent based on parental reports that most schools are skipping the GPC meeting after the second administration and sending out summer school notices. So what should the strategy be for parents who are receiving these notices.  The first option would be to request your GPC meeting as soon as the second STAAR assessment is taken and come up with an agreeable Accelerated Instruction plan.  Since there is no required time, length, form or content of accelerated instruction, I recommend that parents propose a short home based or online program.  The more research you have done into what a plan like this would look like, the better chance you have of succeeding.  The school just needs to document their file for the state.  The more you help them do that, the better chance they agree.  The second option would be to simply ignore it.  Any accelerated instruction plan following the second assessment that is created by the school and not by the GPC is legally void.  Make sure that you are looking carefully for notices and do not miss the meeting if your school schedules one.  If you ignore the notice of the GPC meeting, the school can proceed without you.

Finally, please note that when the GPC meets to consider promotion, they are again required to prescribe accelerated instruction.  Further, for 5th and 8th graders note that “A student who fails to perform satisfactorily on an assessment instrument specified under Subsection (a) and who is promoted to the next grade level must complete accelerated instruction required under Subsection (a-1) before placement in the next grade level. A student who fails to complete required accelerated instruction may not be promoted.”  For this reason, it is dangerous to refuse the accelerated instruction that follows the first failed attempt.  It is very important that the parents and the school agree on what that accelerated instruction should be.  Make sure that when you refuse, the schools agreement is specifically phrased as an agreement on accelerated instruction – not just an exemption or excuse.  Again, accelerated instruction can be as simple as a single online lesson or one in school tutorial.  Whatever it is, make sure it is documented and agreed.

The Summer School “Threat”

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 9 Comments

For 5th and 8th grade students who have received or are about to receive their results, parents commonly hear “if they don’t pass/If they opt out they have to go to summer school.” Please understand, that no school has the authority to tell you that you are going to summer school. By law, accelerated instruction is not decided by the school, the district, the superintendent, or the state. Accelerated instruction is decided by a meeting of the Grade Placement Committee held after the results of the second administration are received. Any “order” or “instruction” issued by anybody other than the Grade Placement Committee is legally invalid.

How will you know if this is a decision of the GPC? Because the parent is a member! Unless you are informed of the meeting, the school cannot hold a GPC meeting. (If you are notified, but don’t attend, the GPC can meet without you.) If there is a GPC meeting, go to it, and demand accelerated instruction that is not summer school. Ask for online learning. Ask for a one day “tutorial”. Ask for a home study/remediation plan. The SSI manual is clear that accelerated instruction has no legally necessary form, length or content. It must be individualized. Show them that in the SSI manual and make them choose the right plan for your child. These are your rights. If the summer school order comes any other way, ignore it. It is not valid.

The GPC Process – TEA Flowcharts

Written by admin on . Posted in Section 504 | Special Education, STAAR | EOC Testing. 1 Comment

For parents of 5th and 8th graders who have opted out or failed STAAR, these flow charts show the process for determination of Accelerated Instruction and Promotion/Retention.

General Education Students (p. 8 of SSI Manual)

gpc process - gened

Special Education

For special education students, the ARD committee acts as the GPC. (p. 27 of SSI manual)

gpc for sped

No, You Don’t Have to Pass STAAR in 5th or 8th Grade

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 17 Comments

OK, so a mom from Kissam Elementary is being told that passing STAAR is required to go to 6th grade.  Let’s examine how we know this is not true.

First, search for the Academic Performance Report for your school from 2014-2015.  It is located here:

Academic Performance Report

The cover looks like this:

cover

Now let’s look at the STAAR passage rate for 5th grade Reading, the only one that counted for SSI last year:

apr1

We can see that the failure rate for 5th grade reading last year was 23%.  Now if STAAR passage is required for promotion, then the retention rate in 5th grade would be 23%.  Basically 1 out of ever 4 kids would have to repeat 5th grade.  So let’s see what the Academic Performance report says about retention in the 5th grade:

retention

We see that rather than a 23% retention rate, the actual rate was 0%.  (For full disclosure, 15% of special ed kids were retained, but that number gives total retention of about 1.3%, nowhere near the 23% that would be required is STAAR passage was necessary for promotion.

As you can see, every kid who appealed their retention to the GPC was promoted.

gpc

This is one example of many.  The idea that passing STAAR is required for promotion is utter nonsense.  Know the facts and arm yourself!

Breaking . . . Lost STAAR Exams

Written by admin on . Posted in Other. Leave a Comment

Reports from Houston are that assessment booklets and coded scantrons for over 20 HISD schools, KIPP and Spring ISD have been lost.  Campus administrators are being required to pick up replacements and uncoded scantrons tonight.  Students will be required to fill their scantrons with all necessary identifying information in the morning, increasing the possibility of reporting error.  This will greatly delay the start of administration tomorrow.  In addition, the loss of the coded instruments represents a great test security issue.

Comment from the TEA has been requested.

Update:  The TEA has refused to comment on the reported loss of assessment and scantron books.

tea wont respond

Texas Children Deserve Better

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 3 Comments


by Jennifer Rumsey
March 24, 2016

special to txedrights.net

It’s that time again. Time for STAAR testing in Texas. STAAR is the legislatively mandated series of high-stakes tests for public school children in Texas, and it is the most recent and most difficult of several testing program iterations that began in the 1980’s. I have been a Texas public school teacher since 1999. I have experienced TAAS, TAAS prep, TAAS workbooks, TAAS-aligned textbooks, TAAS packets, and even a TAAS pep rally.

Once students’ statewide overall scores became pretty high, the legislature made the costly move (paid to Pearson) to TAKS. The public schools adjusted: we adopted TAKS-aligned textbooks (published by Pearson), bought TAKS workbooks, held TAKS bootcamps and tutorials. During this time, the lawmakers instilled the Student Success Initiative (SSI), claiming that 5th and 8th grade students would “benefit” by being required to pass the TAKS reading and math tests. If students don’t pass, don’t worry…they “get” two more tries to pass the tests. But if they fail it repeatedly, these children can be retained in grade. Nevermind that research shows that students who are retained are more likely to suffer from low self-esteem and to dropout of high school.

And then there was STAAR, the most ambitious testing program yet. The Texas legislature decided to gut public education funding that year, 2011. The cuts amounted to a loss of$5.4 billion, while they voted to create STAAR and pay Pearson $500,000,000.00. At first adoption, high school students were required to pass 15 End of Course exams to graduate. Now, thanks to grassroots efforts to change excessive testing requirements, high school students only take 5 graduation exams. However, their future life success remains impacted by rules that they must pass these exams to graduate, even with their Carnegie credits earned.

Tuesday my freshmen students must take the 5 hour English I End of Course Exam. I will be one of the lucky test administrators. During one of my test administration trainings, I found out that I am now required to write down the name of each student who leaves the testing room to use the bathroom, the time the student leaves, and the time that they return. This information, along with a seating chart, will be turned in to the Texas Education Agency. I am not sure why. Is it an additional measure of control over the students? Is it an additional measure of control over myself and other education professionals? Is it a deliberate attempt at de-professionalization of educators? When I mentioned to my students that I had to keep track of their times in and out from the restroom, they were puzzled and irritated. One savvy freshman girl asked, “Do they want to know the stall I used also?”

What I do know for sure is that these tests have become far too important. They are treated as top secret, national security-level documents. Why is the material in a standardized test treated as more confidential than the information in the former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails? I have already signed my oath, and in my test administrator’s manual I am threatened with the loss of my hard-earned professional certification if I share information relating to what is on the test. I am cautioned to in no way purposely view the tests. Ironically, I am allowed to read the writing prompt to a student who requests it… My students are asked to sign an honor statement as well about not sharing the test material. During the five-hour testing block, I must “actively monitor” the students in my room, making sure they don’t cheat, don’t forget to bubble their answer document, don’t sleep. In the past, I have been warned that I am in not allowed to sit down during this all-important monitoring session. I may not read or write anything. I may only monitor, monitor, monitor, resting only on a “perch” of a stool for a short while before getting back up and walking the silent room filled with stressed students whose self-worth depends on their bubbled answers.

Tuesday is a big day for my little family. If my daughter doesn’t pass the math STAAR test, she will face the possible future of retention in fifth grade. My 10-year-old daughter is one of the unlucky guinea pig fifth graders in the state of Texas. My sweetie is a captive of the Student Success Initiative and one of the unlucky children impacted by a State Board of Education decision from 2015 that “pushed down” developmentally inappropriate math TEKS objectives. Some of the newly required 5th grade material was, until 2015, not taught until the children were in the 7th grade. What does this “pushing down” of objectives do? It requires more material to be taught during the school year, stealing valuable time that math teachers need to teach the foundational material for that year. It makes math harder and more rushed for the children. It is wrong. The TEA suspended the math passing requirements for 5th graders last year. But not so this year. Nope. My child and her peers must pass this test or face retention in grade. And wait, the news just gets better. The outgoing Commissioner of Education announced near his departure that, “STAAR performance standards have been scheduled to move to the more rigorous phase-in 2 passing standard this school year. Each time the performance standard is increased, a student must achieve a higher score in order to pass a STAAR exam” (http://tea.texas.gov/About_TEA/News_and_Multimedia/Press_Releases/2015/Commissioner_Williams_announces_STAAR_performance_standards_for_2015-2016_and_beyond/).
Thus, my daughter and all her little 10 and 11 year old friends are being held accountable for inappropriate math standards and will be judged at a higher performance standard at the same time. Something is not right here. Something is very, very wrong. My child is not a subject to be experimented on.

While my child is held to harder performance standards, the TEA has failed to comply with laws passed this legislative session. The 2015 legislature passed HB 743, and Governor Abbott signed it into law. This law requires that the TEA redesign STAAR assessments in grades 3-5 so that 85% of children testing can complete them in two hours. Currently, the assessments are four hours in length, far too long. The TEA has not shortened the tests for this year, ignoring the law. Why is my 10 year old held to higher performance standards on developmentally inappropriate math objectives, threatened with grade retention if she fails, but the TEA is getting away with ignoring the law? In my view, this refusal to follow the law invalidates all test scores for all children in grades 3-5 this year.

Research shows that standardized tests are not a true measure of what a child knows. I can tell you that they are not any kind of measure of a child’s worth. The children in the state of Texas deserve better than to be over-tested and experimented on. I am an expert in the field of education. I am a professional. I am a teacher. I know when my students are learning. I love seeing the light in their eyes when they have mastered a difficult concept, the excitement on their faces when they ask if they can continue reading a novel that they truly enjoy, the beauty in their smiles when I praise their successes. As far as being accountable, all teachers are accountable. We always have been. We are accountable to the children in our care, the children who become ours for a year, the ones we listen to when they are sad, the ones we feed when they are hungry, the ones we teach. It is time for the lawmakers and the TEA to be held accountable. Texas children are not subjects for your high-stakes experiments. They deserve better.

Houston ISD acknowledges 26.010 Opt Out Rights

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. 7 Comments

Fox 26 reporter Andrea Watkins has made real headway in getting school districts on the record about a parent’s right to Opt Out.  In her initial report, Katy ISD Director of Assessment, Alison Matney (who has made inaccurate posts on this website) acknowledged that while there is no process to opt out, parents can just keep their kids home.  Today, however, Watkins’ latest report contained a real bombshell.  In response to questions about the Houston AFT’s endorsement of the Opt Out movement, the Houston ISD issued a statement acknowledging that while state assessments are mandatory, parents can remove their children from objectionable instruction under Tex. Ed. Code sec. 26.010.

26010 admission

Earlier this year, we reported on the admission of the state’s top school law firm that parents could “technically” opt out.  Houston ISD’s acknowledgement of parental rights to refuse assessment under sec. 26.010 marks, to our knowledge, the first explicit recognition of what TPERN has long urged is the plain meaning of the statute.  TPERN salutes Andrea Watkins for her hard hitting investigation and Houston ISD for their recognition of parental rights in the face of strong pressure from the Texas Education Agency to intimidate and coerce parents into assessment.

Update:  This is the official Houston ISD Opt Out form.  It is legal, people!  Demand your local schools respect your rights!12798821_10153991431898684_3910673097468946811_n

Houston ISD Continues to Mislead Parents

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. Leave a Comment

Activist parents in Houston ISD rightly celebrated when the HISD Board of Trustees became the first district (to our knowledge) to write Opt Out procedures into their board policies.  Further, the parents succeeded in convincing the board to suspend, at least for this year, the HISD specific policy which made STAAR passage a promotion standard for all pre-secondary grades 3-8.

However, apparently word of this hasn’t filtered through the district.  In a recent blog post, one Houston dad takes a look at continuing misleading and intimidating information coming from HISD schools.

HISD Intimidation or Incompetence?

Premier TX School Law Firm: Parents Can Opt Out (and Schools Can Excuse the Absence)

Written by admin on . Posted in STAAR | EOC Testing. Leave a Comment

For readers of TPERN articles, you will recognize the name Walsh, Anderson.  Walsh, Anderson (now known as Walsh Gallego) is one of the largest (and arguably the most prestigious) education law firms in Texas.  They represent school districts across the state through multiple offices, speak at almost every school conference, and regularly provide guidance to school districts on difficult legal issues.  During the summer of 2014, after schools dealt with the first big wave of opt outs, Walsh, Anderson put together an “Opt Out Course for Schools.” which included a legal paper that contained various legal arguments against opting out.  Those same arguments now appear almost word for word in many letters districts send to intimidate parents.  They include the thoroughly discredited claim that the Attorney General has ruled that an assessment and a test are the same thing (it hasn’t).  When we posted the Walsh, Anderson handout that a school sent us, Walsh, Anderson made a copyright claim and demanded we take it down, even though schools post it all over the internet.  Notwithstanding the work Walsh, Anderson has done to arm schools with legal arguments to intimidate parents, we have always found them to be reasonable in working with parents to craft solutions that enable parents to make good educational decisions for their kids and allow the schools to meet their requirements under the state law.  And this is what good lawyers do: they help their clients find a way to do what they want to do.

Which raises the question: when a school decides to actively oppose Opt Out parents, is this something they do because the law requires them to, or is it a policy choice the school is making?  Because, quite often, schools will say the law requires them to take these stances.  That, of course, is nonsense.  We’ve always asserted that if a school district wishes to respect parental rights in the Opt Out process, a good lawyer can arm them with many tools to do exactly that while also protecting the school against allegations that it has not followed the TEA rules.  And knowing that the people at Walsh, Anderson are good and creative lawyers, our logical conclusion is that opposing parents is a local policy decision — not a result of the legal obligations of schools.

This conclusion was confirmed when we discovered an October 2014 “advice column” written by two Walsh, Anderson lawyers for the Texas Association of Secondary School Principals.  So that you understand this is coming from school lawyers and not TPERN, here is the intro biography to the column:

bios walsh

A principal wrote to the lawyers asking whether the school was required to report Opt Out absences as unexcused absences.  The Walsh, Anderson shareholder who responded not only gave the principal a route to excuse the absences, she also decided to explain opting out to other readers who may not have experienced it yet:

walsh excerpt

There you have it, in one simple sentence.  Putting everything else aside, the school lawyers know what TPERN and Opt Out parents state-wide have been saying for years: parents “technically” can opt out of STAAR.  But to take it a step further, schools can choose to excuse those absences!  Principals have wide discretion to decide what is an excused absence and what is not.  If a principal chooses to respect the rights of parents, he may mark STAAR opt out days as excused absences.

This column puts a school’s decision to fight opt out parents in a stark light.  Parents can opt out.  Schools can excuse the absences.  The decision to fight, intimidate and threaten does not come from the TEA.  It does not come from the school’s lawyers.  It is a local, policy decision.  A school’s hands are not tied.  They have a lot of discretion on how they treat parents.  It’s time to demand from your local school administration and trustees that schools respect parental decision-making.  In the meantime, if you get any blow-back from schools telling you that parents can’t opt out, just print out the column and give it to them with the note that according to Texas’s top school lawyers, you can.

 

 

© 2022 Texas Parents' Educational Rights Network