TEA can now release 2023 A-F accountability ratings
AUSTIN (KXAN) – On Thursday, a judge with Texas' 15th Court of Appeals ruled that the Texas Education Agency (TEA) can now release its 2023 A-F school accountability ratings.
'A through F is a bill I championed when I was in the senate, I championed when I was the chair of public education and have championed as Lt. Governor,' said Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. 'Before A through F, in districts and schools, parents did not know what the result of their school was in terms of how it graded out.'
The A-F ratings are based on multiple factors including graduation rates, the number of college, career, military-ready students and State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) results.
In 2023, the state announced the system would change, making it more difficult for schools to reach certain benchmarks to get good ratings.
Under the newest methods of the A-F accountability rating, many high schools would need higher graduation rates and more students to be considered college, military and career-ready, or CCMR, to maintain their campus scores.
The previous scales would have given a campus an A if 60% of its students were college, career and military-ready. However, under the new metrics or 'cut points,' a campus would need 88% of its students to be college, career and military-ready to get an A score.
More than 100 school districts pushed back and joined a lawsuit against the TEA, hoping to stop the release of the 2023 performance ratings.
Texas judge orders state not to release A-F school ratings after districts sue
The districts argued that they did not have enough notice before introducing the new standards.
'This is one of the best tools to create competition and excellence and it is very interesting, even though there have been these lawsuits stopping the ratings from becoming public, superintendents and principals who had A and B schools and districts were very proud to leak them,' Patrick said.
KXAN reached out to Rep. James Talarico who weighed in on Thursday's announcement.
'Greg Abbott has spent the last few years trying to discredit our neighborhood public schools so he can defund them with a private school voucher scam,' Talarico said. 'I'm deeply concerned our accountability system is being weaponized to undermine public education.'
There is another lawsuit involving the 2024 ratings, which is still waiting a decision from the same appeals court.
KXAN reached out to the TEA for comment.
'This ruling is an important victory and restores a transparent lens into 2023 district and campus performance,' said TEA spokesperson Jake Kobersky. 'Yet, there is still a second lawsuit that denies parents and the public access to 2024 accountability ratings. TEA remains hopeful that the best interests of students, families and communities will prevail in this second suit and will share additional information on the issuance of 2023 A-F ratings soon.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
19 hours ago
- Yahoo
Some Texas lawmakers demand in-state tuition protections for undocumented students
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A group of Texas lawmakers called on higher education leaders in the state to protect undocumented students' access to in-state tuition, after the state agreed to end the practice earlier this week. On Wednesday, the Justice Department sued the state over the 2001 Texas Dream Act, which allowed those students to receive in-state tuition if they met certain qualifications. The lawsuit alleged this act violated federal law, and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton quickly responded that his office would not contest the suit—causing the law to be repealed through a default judgment. RELATED | Justice Department sues Texas over in-state tuition for undocumented students In a letter sent on Friday, more than a dozen Democratic state representatives called on the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board to create a 'provisional classification' that could allow students who previously qualified under the law to enroll this fall 'at the rate they reasonably expected.' The letter later said, in part, 'It is especially cruel and short-sighted to apply this policy change retroactively just weeks before the start of the 2025-2026 academic year. These students made plans, accepted offers, and committed to their futures in good faith.' The lawmakers urged the board to use its rulemaking authority to create this classification — for example, 'first-generation resident tuition' — at least temporarily. They called for the board to release guidance to institutions that would 'preserve tuition equity for students during the transition period.' The lawmakers also noted the move would not override statute but would provide 'a critical bridge' until the Legislature could address the matter during the next legislative session in two years. Earlier this year, during the most recent legislative session, lawmakers considered bills to repeal the Dream Act and heard hours of testimony on it, but it was left pending and failed to pass. In 2001, the Dream Act had bipartisan support and was signed into law by Republican former Governor Rick Perry. RELATED | Texas' undocumented college students no longer qualify for in-state tuition In its lawsuit, the DOJ argues that a 1996 federal law, known as the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA), preempts the Dream Act. Attorney General Pam Bondi called it a 'blatant violation' of the federal law. 'Under federal law, schools cannot provide benefits to illegal aliens that they do not provide to U.S. citizens,' Bondi said. 'The Justice Department will relentlessly fight to vindicate federal law and ensure that U.S. citizens are not treated like second-class citizens anywhere in the country.' Legal experts talked to KXAN this week about whether the move by the Trump administration and Paxton's quick agreement allowed for any way for opponents of the change to challenge the decision. Josh Blackman, associate professor of law at South Texas College of Law, said the decision appears effectively final. Barbara Hines, an immigration law professor who helped craft the initial Texas Dream Act, did not share Blackman's assessment that it was the end of the road for the law. She said that in previous lawsuits related to the Dream Act or Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, other parties have been allowed to intervene. RELATED | Law professors react: Texas will no longer provide in-state tuition to undocumented students According to the Texas Higher Education Commissioner, around 19,000 students will be affected by the change. The lawmakers' letter argued that the state stands to lose talent, which could affect the workforce and the economy. It said, 'This is not just a moral failure, it's a strategic and economic blunder that will be felt for generations to come.' Economic factors proved to be a driving force behind the Dream Act's passage in 2001. According to a 2015 report by The Texas Tribune, former Governor Perry said at the time, '[Texas] had a choice to make economically: Are you going to put these people in a position of having to rely upon government to take care of themselves, or are you going to let them be educated and be contributing members of society, obviously working towards their citizenship.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
Don't give Dan Patrick his THC ban. Here's a better way for Texas on cannabis
Sometimes, the Texas Legislature creates a mess that only it can fix. And unfortunately, the clean-up is often a mess of its own. So it is with a bill that would ban products that contain THC, the psychoactive ingredient in cannabis. It's an attempt to right a loophole in the 2019 state law that allowed a Texas hemp industry to develop. But the medicine is simply too strong. Gov. Greg Abbott should veto the bill and give the Legislature the chance to try again with precise, thoughtful regulation. How did we get here, with lawmakers wanting to dismantle something they essentially created a few years ago? In 2019, Texas needed a law to comply with new federal statutes on hemp, the non-intoxicating version of the cannabis plant. Legislators charged ahead, missing the distinctions among the chemicals that can provide a high. They also failed to ask enough questions about testing, including whether police labs had the capacity to determine the level of THC in a product and thus the difference between hemp (legal) and marijuana (still illegal). Still, a business opportunity was born, and Texas, as our leaders like to say, is open for business. Responsible retail shops boomed, but so did unscrupulous producers who offered wares that enticed children and didn't distinguish between a professional who would demand ID or a convenience store where somnolent clerks wouldn't even notice who was buying gummies and the like. Enter Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick. Before some lawmakers could even settle in their offices, he declared that a complete ban on products containing THC was the only option. He suggested that he would not negotiate and that if he didn't get his way, he would melt down the whole legislative session. He never said exactly how, but Patrick, who controls all the levers in the Texas Senate, could have held back one of Abbott's priorities, such as school vouchers, or even prevent passage of the state budget, which would leave no option but a special session. Patrick was never willing to entertain the obvious solution: more precise regulation with more robust enforcement. Texas could allow for the sale of low-level THC products without embracing a full-blown marijuana culture. The experience of legalization in other states has been fraught with problems. There's increasing concern that today's much stronger, much more available marijuana is incapacitating too many people — as well as creating alarm about possible unknown long-term health consequences. Licensed dealers can sell well-tested products in packaging that's unappealing to children. The state could bar corner gas stations or other generalized stores and businesses within walking distance of schools from dealing in THC products. It could create an agency to regulate them, funded through a tax on the products, or create such a function within an existing state entity. In other words, it could treat the substance similar to the way it treats alcohol. We all know that even with a regime of rules and enforcement, teenagers sometimes drink. A few, tragically, even die as a result. Few people would say that's sufficient reason to ban beer and wine. Heck, they are venerated Texas industries. Patrick gave away the game when, late in the session, he declared that cannabis producers and retailers 'want to kill your kids, and they don't give a damn.' It's the kind of pompous, self-righteous rhetoric that Patrick frequently uses to substitute for actual debate. And if someone else made similar remarks about, say, the gun industry, Patrick would be the first to get in front of a Fox News camera and decry it. The lieutenant governor declared it 'stupid' to even raise the comparison to alcohol — though, to be fair, few are more familiar with stupid rhetoric than Patrick. Patrick did eventually agree to expanding the availability of medical marijuana under the state's Compassionate Use Program. If Abbott signs that bill — and he should — conditions such as traumatic brain injuries and chronic pain would be among those added to the list that qualifies a Texan to purchase THC products. The state would add more dispensaries, too. In other words, through specific, careful regulation, Texas is steadily finding ways to get needed relief to those who can find it nowhere else. Someone alert Patrick: It can be done! We love to hear from Texans with opinions on the news — and to publish those views in the Opinion section. • Letters should be no more than 150 words. • Writers should submit letters only once every 30 days. • Include your name, address (including city of residence), phone number and email address, so we can contact you if we have questions. You can submit a letter to the editor two ways: • Email letters@ (preferred). • Fill out this online form. Please note: Letters will be edited for style and clarity. Publication is not guaranteed. The best letters are focused on one topic.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Roughly 1,100 applications submitted by former federal workers amid Austin hiring campaign
AUSTIN (KXAN) — President Donald Trump's promise to cut federal workforce is starting to show in the latest jobs report from the U.S. Department of Labor, which indicated 22,000 fewer federal government jobs in the last month alone. In response to the president's letting go of some federal workforce, the city of Austin re-launched a recruitment effort its used in the past called the Get Hired campaign — this time aimed at those federal workers. 'We value public servants': Austin targeting federal staff let go by Trump administration The city said between March 21 and May 23, the duration of that campaign, the city received roughly 1,100 applications from former federal employees. Of those folks, 30 now work for the city, according to the city's human resource director, Susan Sinz. 'It is good to see that with that previous federal experience, how much we benefit from that….they understand customer service, I think they understand citizen engagement and they really understand how to be a servant leader and in our community that's what we're looking for,' Sinz said. On average, the city has 100 vacancies at any given time, though that includes everything — lifeguards, librarians, police officers — and those vacancies fluctuate greatly based on season. The city employs roughly 17,000 people, Sinz noted. Though that program targeting federal employees wrapped up late last month, Sinz hopes those folks will continue to keep their sights set on our city. 'We are excited to have them explore employment here at the city of Austin and really wish them a super long career here,' she said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
