6 days ago
Unproven school board governance training in Texas is all hat and no cattle
Under the guise of improving academic outcomes, the Texas Education Agency has required some public school districts across Texas to adopt Lone Star Governance, a program that includes coaching and training for school board members. Texans who care about efficient government and local control should be concerned with the state's interference and how money is being diverted away from schools to well-connected consultants for an unproven and costly enterprise that is all hat and no cattle.
According to the TEA, Lone Star Governance is a continuous improvement model, 'founded on research' and focused on 'improving student outcomes.' TEA has required the board of trustees in several districts — including Austin ISD, Fort Worth ISD and Houston ISD — to adopt Lone Star Governance to address various issues, from special education-related failures to persistent low performance on state standardized assessments.
However, as education researchers, we are concerned that TEA is requiring public school districts spend public funds on an approach with no evidence of effectiveness.
A TEA-created flyer claims that districts implementing Lone Star Governance saw, on average, a 10-point increase in accountability scores between 2018 and 2019, compared to 3 points for districts not using that model. The flyer does not indicate which districts were part of this calculation. However, according to information we obtained from TEA through a public records request, starting in the 2017-18 school year, 13 districts were formally engaged in Lone Star Governance.
We were wary of drawing conclusions about Lone Star Governance from such a small group of districts over one year. So we tracked accountability score changes between 2018 and 2023 for all districts that had been involved in Lone Star Governance in 2018 and 2019. In this time, overall district accountability ratings for Lone Star Governance districts declined 12.4 points, a much steeper decline than those districts not using that model (7.4-point decline).
The gap in average accountability ratings actually widened between districts using Lone Star Governance and those that didn't. In 2018, the average accountability rating in Lone Star Governance districts was only two points below other districts (84 vs. 86 points). By 2023, this gap widened to seven points (74 vs. 81 points).
Several districts that were required to adopt Lone Star Governance five years ago are now facing potential state intervention because of a lack of progress on improving student outcomes.
TEA required the program in Houston ISD, where trainees have characterized Lone Star Governance as 'a fear-based system of control' where 'any sort of independent thought is not tolerated.' Houston ISD's accountability rating has declined since its forced adoption of Lone Star Governance. Fort Worth ISD adopted Lone Star Governance in 2018, but, similarly, the district's state accountability ratings have declined.
TEA has forced Austin ISD to adopt Lone Star Governance twice — first in 2016 and again in 2024. Yet, Austin ISD has not experienced substantial improvement in its state accountability ratings. The need for repeated training calls into question the effectiveness of Lone Star Governance and begs the question: Who is benefiting from this costly, unproven training?
In 2024, Austin ISD was required to pay $60,000 to a national organization called the Council of Great City School (CGCS) for Lone Star Governance training and coaching. The person who leads CGCS's governance efforts — including facilitating Lone Star Governance workshops across the state — is AJ Crabill, a former TEA deputy commissioner who was appointed in 2016 by TEA Commissioner Mike Morath.
Texas is unique in that the state has unilateral authority to require districts to spend funds on this unproven school board training. However, several districts across the United States have also adopted Crabill's governance training — nationally known as Student Outcomes Focused Governance. The effectiveness of this training in these districts is now under scrutiny, too. For example, Seattle Public Schools has spent approximately $300,000 on Student Outcomes Focused Governance and has seen little academic progress.
Texans care about the efficient use of taxpayer dollars, especially when it comes to educating our state's children. Requiring already-cash-strapped districts spend public tax dollars on unproven training with zero evidence of effectiveness is the opposite of efficient. Instead, state interventions should prioritize proven strategies, such as evidence-based professional development for teachers and investments into mental health supports for students.
Rachel S. White is an associate professor, and David DeMatthews is a professor of education, in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy at the University of Texas.
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: Required 'Lone Star' training isn't helping school districts | Opinion
