What did - and didn't - pass in the June special session

While much of our attention (and time and effort) in the special session was spent on SB 8, other key education-related issues were also considered by the legislature.

 

Other bills from the special session

 

SB 1 was the primary “must pass” bill of the special session, as it contained fiscal provisions needed to balance the budget passed during the regular session. It also included the school finance reform language needed to accommodate the reduced per-pupil funding level for school districts. In other education-related provisions:

  • The law that reimburses students for the cost of advanced placement or international baccalaureate exams was revised to apply only to students who demonstrate financial need.
  • The law that provides tuition exemptions for education aides seeking teacher certification will now apply only to those seeking certification in critical shortage subject areas.
  • The commissioner must provide a report to the governor, lieutenant governor, speaker and education committee chairs by Jan. 1, 2013, that evaluates and provides recommendations regarding the salary schedule.
  • The speaker and lieutenant governor will create a joint interim committee to conduct a comprehensive study of the school finance system, to be completed by Jan. 15, 2013.

SB 2 was another important fiscal bill; it included language implementing the deferral of one month’s payments to school districts that is necessary to balance the budget. The House had added a provision that would have allowed the use of up to $2.2 billion in Rainy Day Funds for public education, if the fund increased beyond current levels, but this language was not included in the final version of the bill.

 

SB 6 implemented a new method of distributing textbook funds:

  • The bill creates the “instructional materials allotment” (IMA) that can be used to purchase instructional materials (including software, online services and other technology). The allotment can also be used to pay for training employees in the appropriate use of instructional materials.
  • The SBOE will no longer adopt “conforming” and “nonconforming” lists but will provide a list of all materials that cover at least half of the TEKS elements for the subject.
  • The SBOE can remove items from the commissioner’s list of instructional materials within 90 days of the date the commissioner issues the list.
  • Economics is moved from the enrichment to the foundation curriculum as a component of social studies.
  •  The commissioner may establish a technology lending grant program of up to $10 million biennially to loan students equipment necessary to access and use electronic instructional materials.

Bills that didn’t pass in the special session

 

HB 18 in its original form would have significantly changed the class-size laws, allowing for increased class sizes of up to 25 students and removing the provisions in current law requiring direct notification of parents regarding class sizes. The bill was eventually amended to simply allow the commissioner to grant class-size waivers if state per-pupil funding to districts was reduced. The bill passed the House but was never granted a hearing in the Senate.

 

HBs 17, 19, 20, 21, 30 and 31 all addressed teacher benefits and legal protections, with proposals ranging from complete elimination of the state minimum salary schedule (contained in HB 31) to variations on the issues that were eventually addressed in SB 8. None of these bills passed out of the House.

 

HB 33 would have created a statewide private school voucher program, but never passed out of committee.

 

HB 500 was originally filed during the regular session but failed to pass; it was revived in the special session when it was amended onto SB 6 on the House floor, but was eliminated in the final version of the bill. The proposal would have eliminated the requirement that, beginning with 9th graders in the 2011-2012 school year, students in the recommended high school program must achieve a certain cumulative score on 12 end-of-course exams in order to graduate (it eliminated similar requirements for students in the minimum and advanced high school programs as well). Instead it would have required students to pass one specified EOC exam in each of the four core subject areas. It also included a provision that prohibited TEA from using a projection measure as a representation of actual annual improvement in student achievement.

Tags: