and we are recording whenever you're ready. >> Okay, it is nine o'clock central time, 10 o'clock Eastern time. I call this meeting to order. Casey Griffin on our staff will call the role to establish a quorum. Mr. Griffin,
is Mr. Griffin on? Can someone else >> I don't see Casey alone now. >> I can pull up the I'll call from the meeting minutes if that's helpful. >> Okay, Miss Summers will call the RO.
>> Give me two seconds. >> Okay, Mr. Collins >> here. >> Mr. um Dr. Gentile. >> Victoria Harpool designate for Dr. Gentile. >> Mr. Jensen
>> here. >> Miss Cobb. >> Miss Cob. >> Miss Cobb. >> Dr. Maxwell. >> Here. Miss McInurf >> here. >> Mr. Mullenhower,
Mr. Mullenhower. Mr. Rollins. >> Wait, Mr. Rollins was with us. Mr. Rollins, are you there? >> You're muted, Mr. Rollins. >> It won't it wouldn't let me finally let me unmute it. I'm here. Thank you.
>> Wonderful. Thank you. Uh Chair Eie >> here. >> Chair Eie, you have seven members present. >> I declare that a quorum is present and we are duly convened. Um I would like to
ask each board member and each speaker to state their name and position uh when they uh request to speak. I will be looking at the raise your hand and I think Dr. Morrison's going to help me um
check that. But if for some reason we don't see your hand raised, feel free to speak up as necessary. At this time, I'd like to recognize any members if they have any remarks. If none, Dr. Morrison. >> Yes. Glad to see everyone and happy end
of summer. I'm sure um you're all coming from various loces to join us today. So, we appreciate everybody dialing in. Um and to our chair for leading us through the agenda. Thank you. I'll turn it back over to you. >> It has been a busy summer and as we go
into the beginning of the school year, I know it's continued to be busy. I'm looking forward to our next board meeting when each one of our board members can talk about some of the engagement activities they've been involved in throughout the summer. Again, I want to remind everyone that since we are meeting electronically, ask
members to identify themselves when they make motions or seconds. State the motion. Um, also ask presenters to avoid any unnecessary jargon. One of the main points of this public discussion is to ensure that any Tennessian watching is
able to see what we're doing. So with that uh we will begin with our first item uh that is the consent items. Uh we have two items adoption of the agenda and the TISA investment review committee appointments. Is there a
motion to accept the consent items as proposed? >> So move second. >> Motion by Max. Second. >> Second by Mr. Rollins. Uh, any discussion? No discussion on the consent items. And
I'll ask Miss Summers again to call the role, please. >> Mr. Cobins. >> Cobins. >> Dr. Harpool. >> Dr. Mr. Gentel is nonv voting. >> Oh, thank you. >> Mr. Jensen,
>> I miss Cobb. >> Dr. Maxwell. >> I >> Miss McInturf. >> I >> Mr. Mullenower. >> Mr. Rollins.
>> I >> cheer Eevee. I >> chair Eie. You have six members voting. I >> then our consent items do pass. I just remember that our board meeting reason
we're doing the roll call is our board meetings policy as well as TCA 844108 requires all votes taken during electronic meetings to be called by roll. Uh next item is a consent item on teacher lure actions. Uh, is there a
motion to accept the license discipline settlement approvals as presented? I will so move on that. Uh, is there a second? >> Second. >> Uh, state. Who seconded? >> Daryl Cobins.
>> Daryl, thank you, sir. You don't show up on my screen. Appreciate that. Um, I will just say that I spoke with Alex Anderson yesterday and I'm satisfied with uh the actions that we're taking here. So, any uh discussion
on this consent item? No discussion. Uh, Miss Summers, would you call the role again, please? >> Mr. Cobins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Jensen. I >> Miss Cobb
>> Dr. Maxwell >> I >> Miss McInurf >> I >> Mr. Mullenhower >> Mr. Rollins. >> I, >> Chair Eie, >> I.
>> Chair Eie, you have six members voting. I >> motion passes. Next, we'll move on to our items on final reading. Uh, first item is repealing the standards for school administrator child care program rules
05201201. Is there a motion to accept? So move Kelly Rollins. >> Second. Daryl Cobins. >> Kelly Rollins moves and Daryl Cobins seconds. Are there any questions or comments on the repeal?
>> No questions or comments. Miss Summers, please call the role. Hi. >> Sher Copkins. I. >> Mr. Jensen. Mr. Johnson >> I
>> Miss Cobb >> Dr. Maxwell >> I >> Miss McInurf >> I >> Mr. Mullenower >> Mr. Rollins. >> I, >> Chair Eie,
>> I. >> Chair Eie, you have six members voting. I >> The motion passes. Next item is standards for school administrator child care program rules 0520126.
Uh, Miss uh, Mr. Chris Whitehead. >> Thank you, sir. Chris Whitehead, Director of Early Learning Quality and Supports, Tennessee Department of Education. TCA491011 through 1109 required that the state board of education to promagate rules
for the school administered child care programs. School administered childare programs are child care programs run by public or private schools that provide child care to children ages six weeks to five years old as well as programs that provide before and after care programs to school age children in grades K
through 12. The standards for school administered child care have had minor revisions in the recent years but the most recent full version was in 2018. This item proposes a comprehensive update to the rules to better align with changes in statute and current best practices to address questions from
program directors and teachers. Changes on first reading included, but were not limited to reclassifying the rules as rules of the state board rather than under the rules of the commissioner to align with TCA49-1-302I2A. Updating requirements for adult to child ratios and group sizes for specific
populations. Updating requirements for physical activity, updating requirements for staff training, further revisions to streamline the rules, and move reporting and recordkeeping recommendations to Tennessee Department of Education and created guidance documents. The department has gathered both internal
and external stakeholder feedback on these revisions, including input from the department's childcare advisory council. SB staff held a rulemaking hearing on April 24th, 2026. Public comments were received after the hearing and were shared with board members for their review ahead of this meeting.
Between first and final reading, revisions were made to incorporate stakeholder feedback to clarify revisions made on first reading regarding school approval, employee lure, and program curriculum. Clarify requirements for program approval for revocation.
Clarify staff responsibilities with regard to child supervision and release procedures. Review the minimum age for staff employment to consider recent statutory changes, including changes introduced by chapter 679 and chapter 873 of the public acts of 2026. Address
grammatical errors and con ensure consistent formatting and style and ensure defined terms are consistently capitalized when used throughout the rules. TCA49-1-212 requires that the Tennessee Department of Education prepare a fiscal analysis
of any policy, rule, or regulation proposed to the state board of education. This item has no financial impact on an LEA. This item supports the state board strategic focus on teachers and leaders outlined in the master plan to ensure all children have access to highquality environments, adults, and
instruction. The Tennessee Department of Education recommends approval of this item on final reading. the SB staff concurs with his recommendations. I'll be happy to take any questions. >> We have uh a recommendation from the
Department of Education on this item. U standards for school administrator child care program rules 0520126. Is there a motion to accept? >> Motion to accept. Kathy Cobb
>> moves to accept. Is there a second? Chrissy McInurf second. >> Minurf seconds. Are there any questions or comments? >> I I had a couple. I know that we got u at least one set of comments uh
submitted as part of the public hearing and I thought some of the comments were pretty good and I was just curious how they were handled. like um one of them was that the school day begins at 7:45. Does an adult have to be on premises is 6:45 even though the students of any age
are not accepted to 7:15? So how how is that addressed? >> Yeah, thank you for that question. Um that particular one, it allows that other age groups are mixed when with the three to four year olds. So, for instance, within that hour before and the hour after, the three and four year
olds can be mixed in with the kindergarten and first grade students. Um, of course, minus the infants and toddlers. So, that's the way that this rule is, um, worded within what we currently have. >> And then the other one says, "Infants
will be touched every 15 minutes to check breathing and body temperature, and the information must be recorded." says, "If a teacher has four sleeping infants, they would be required to log a touch 16 times every hour. They're concerned that would create administrative burden and distraction
for teachers caring for infants. How was that addressed?" >> Yeah, thank you for that question. Um, I'll be happy to answer. This is really not a new change in the rules that we have. Um, SIDS is such a high risk at this age and this does not really take an exhaustive amount of time to really
ensure the safety during sleeping which is a high-risisk time. Um, and I could defer to Shandrea or general counsel on that for maybe more information but as far as the clarification I believe we clarified some of that within the revision that we created.
>> Very good. Any other questions or comments? If no questions or comments, I understand Mr. Griffin is back online. So, thank you, Miss Summers, for your support and help. Mr. Griffin, would you please call the role? >> Mr. Collins,
>> I. >> Mr. Jansen, >> I miss Cole. >> I miss C. >> Miss Maxwell. I >> Miss McInurf
>> I >> Mr. Mullenower >> Mr. Rollins >> I >> Mr. Chairman >> I >> Mr. Chairman I count seven eyes.
>> Thank you. That motion passes. Next item is textbook and instructional material waiverss request for Bristol City Schools and Knox County Schools. Miss Brianna Summers. >> Good morning, Chair Eie and members. My name is Brianna Summers. I'm the
director of policy and academics here at the Tennessee State Board of Education. Before you, I have two textbook and instructional material waiver requests. State law charges the state board of education to prescribe textbooks and instructional materials as recommended
by the textbook and instructional materials quality commission. However, state law also authorizes the state board of education to approve or deny waiver requests for materials that are not on the state approved list. This process is further outlined in our
textbook and instructional materials rule. As you know well, the state board of education leads math, science, social studies, and ELA standards every eight years. You heard back about the ELA standards a few months ago at our last
regular meeting. In 2023, Tennessee realized that it could be beneficial to move from a six-year review cycle to an eight-year review cycle for standards in terms of reducing instructional disruptions, saving um money for districts,
especially for disciplines that aren't, you know, evolving as quickly as some of our other disciplines like CTE and data science. This transition from a six-year to 8-year cycle had downstream impacts where some standards review cycles were caught in between that six-year cycle to
8year cycle, including our 2019 ELA standards review, the last time we did ELA. In collaboration with the department and the textbook commission, we worked with districts to navigate this situation. It was somewhat unprecedented. And before you, you have a waiver from Bristol City
Schools. They would like to use Great Minds Arts and Letters, language arts, and then they'd also like to supplement with Sounds First, Tennessee foundational skills curriculum supplement, and handwriting without tears for their grades K5 ELA
instructional materials. Knox County is applying for a waiver to use McGra Hill Soore for grades 912 ELA instructional materials. members. This is a similar waiver request to the one you received back in May from Morgan County Schools.
The item attached in your member resources includes the directly from the LEA their perspective on their unique or unusual needs as to why they would like to use these [clears throat] alternative materials as well as other factors that are listed in state law in our rule for
your consideration based on TDOE expert feedback on standards alignment. other rule criteria and reviewing multiple state law requirements. State board staff recommend approval of both of these waiverss on first and final reading and
to be effect until the new the next new ELA textbook implementation cycle, which would be the 2029 2030 school year. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. We have a recommendation for textbook and instructional materials waiver request for Bristol City Schools ELA
kids grades K through five and Knox County Schools ELA grades 9 through 12. This is a first and final reading. Is there a motion to accept >> Daryl Cob? >> Vice Chair Cobins moves and Mr. Rollins
I believe second. Is that right? Yes. >> Yes. Are there any questions for Miss Summers? >> Rihanna, I have a question. Uh, those supplemental materials, I assume they've been vetted by the state department of
ed. Uh, I just have a question. Was wit and wisdom one of the supplemental materials? >> Thank you for your question, Miss Cole. We do at the state board and at the department for any waiver request review any um overall materials as well as
supplemental materials particularly because there's the 100% alignment. Um wit and wisdom is currently what Bristol City Schools is using as their approved material. they are applying for a waiver
to use uh great minds to replace that as an updated version um with some differences in their waiver application. >> Thank you. >> Other questions? >> If no questions in Mr. Griffin, would
you please call the role for textbook and instructional MA materials waiver request for Bristol City and Knox County Schools on first and final reading? >> Mr. Cobins, >> I >> Mr. Jansen.
>> I >> Miss Cobb. >> I >> Miss Maxwell. >> I Miss McIntur. I >> Mr. Mullenower,
>> Mr. Rollins. >> I >> Mr. Chairman. >> I >> Mr. Chairman, I have seven eyes. [snorts] >> Passes. Next item is standard setting for science assessments. Dr. David
Leairard. >> Good morning, Chairman Eye. Uh, members of the board, state board staff. Uh, I'm David Leair. I'm the assistant commissioner for assessment, accountability, and research, and I'm pleased to present an item uh for science standard setting and the adoption of science performance level
cut scores. Uh in accordance with the Tennessee academic standards review cycle, the Tennessee Department of Education administers updated assessments for all TCAP Science assessments in 2526. To complete the reporting of test scores for these assessments, it's necessary
for the state board to adopt cut scores that will be used to assign students to performance levels. The cut scores recommended by the department are based on the recommendations of Tennessee educator committees that participated in a contentbased standard setting process.
Standard setting is a qualitative review of content standards with panels of educators who are content area experts. Each panel completes three rounds of ratings. Uh during the week of July 13th to the 17th, uh panels of Tennessee educators convened in Chattanooga to
review and recommend cut scores to designate performance levels on these new TCAP science assessments. The attached document provides the department recommended cut scores for these processes. I'm happy to elaborate on the results uh or the process as needed by the board. Uh the department
would simply like to recommend or simply like to express its incredible gratitude for the teachers that participated in this. We had 66 amazing science educators convened with us in Chattanooga. Uh it is incredibly important and intense work uh and the
department feels uh is enormously grateful for the quality of the process and ultimately the quality of the cut scores that we're recommending. Uh so with that said, the Department of Education recommends approval of this on of this item on first and final read and state board staff concurs with this
recommendation. I'm happy to take any additional questions. >> Thank you, Dr. Leard. We have a recommendation for approval of standard setting for science assessments. Is there a motion to accept >> on first and final? >> Mr. Jensen moves.
>> Is there a second? >> Chrissy McInurf second. And I do have a question too. Miss McInturf seconds. Miss McInurf, the floor is yours. >> So, I'm just I'm curious about timeline. We had quick scores May 21st. Um, why
did we wait until July 13th to have the teacher collaboration and those uh conversations? I know as as a principal, I'm really I've been waiting on those scores since uh June. I mean, you know, the middle of June when all the other ones came out.
>> No, it's a good question. I appreciate it. And there is a little bit of uh there are so many releases. I certainly understand where the question comes from. Um quiz scores were only available for essentially third grade ELA on May
20th. um that is a special process that we devised because of the implementation of the retention law requiring the retake assessment and so we rush the scoring of the third grade assessment faster than we can return the scores for
the remainder of the scores across the state. Um so that's one of the reasons why that comes out so early. Um it is also important to recognize that at the time at which that score is released and again we're rushing it to comply with the law um we still have not completed
the validation window that districts have. They generally get about 10 days um to essentially evaluate the tested performance of their students and confirm the accuracy that the right students received a score. It's not that the score itself would change during
that validation window, but the particular use case that we give districts an opportunity to address is let's say a child completed half a test before they became ill and that test should have been coded as medically excused. Um, if that code wasn't put in properly, that child would receive a
score based on half an assessment. Um, and so we give districts a validation window to clear up any issues like that before scores are finalized. Um so there's an additional validation window that occurs after that date that districts need to complete. So that
delays the official return of scores. Uh districts received uh for all of the tests that were administered in a timely fashion. Districts received their scores I think on about June 13th this year. Um so there's still an additional month between when official scores were
completed and when we were actually able to complete the standard setting process. um that was largely a scheduling issue um for a variety of different folks that caused that additional delay. So it was a combination of trying to figure out the appropriate time um where we could get
66 educators to show up uh and not conflict with the end of school year activities and a bit of data validation. So happy to elaborate further if that wasn't sufficient. >> That's great. Thank you. >> Other questions?
>> I have a question. U Mr. Lared I don't know if this is a testing company issue or what but for the last five six seven years our test scores have typically >> typically >> sometimes October sometimes November but
yet as a district we continue to tell our high school seniors that the test scores have an impact on whether or not you get your diploma and I'm just wondering why it takes so long for these scores to come back. Is it a testing
company issue? What is it? >> Are are you talking about the return of spring scores? >> TECAP scores. >> So the the PECAP scores in the spring districts do receive those under embargo um on or about usually early June. I
think it was either I can't remember if it was the 10th or the 13th this year. They are initially under embargo because we stand up essentially an a reporting application, right? we don't get the scores until June 10th. We need to load those into an application and make them
available. Um, we give districts a preview window with that application so that districts have an opportunity to review and become familiar with those results before they're made publicly available. Um, but once that application
is published, and it usually happens by the end of June or early July, those scores are publicly available. So, no one should have to wait till October to see spring test scores. And if if that was lost in communication in some way, shape, or form, I apologize for that.
Um, that should not be the case. Um, those are available as soon as we publicly turn on essentially the TCAP dashboard. Um, scores are no longer under embargo at that time. Um, but I I don't want to dismiss the concern about the return of scores. This is something
that the department has been working on um in a very concerted way over the last few years. We've gotten faster um and we'll be pleased to start discussing this fall some additional um solutions that we have in place that
will allow us to continue to get faster over the next couple years. So this is more or less a district issue if our scores continue to be embargoed and not shared fully until October, November. Is that what you're saying?
>> Well, and let me just clarify because I think there there may be a nuance here. Um there are essentially two different releases of scores for TECAP results. There's the the standard TCAP release that happens in the summer and then there's the accountability release that
happens [snorts] later in the year. Um, we realize this is this is confusing for folks, but there's actually a very strong rationale behind it. Um, people want the scores as fast as humanly possible. They want to know how kids are tested. The summer release of TCAP scores is based on any kid that took the
test anywhere in Tennessee. Those scores are publicly available. So, the score for a child is absolutely available in the summer. However, when we compute accountability for districts, so now we're this is the version of the score that's going to be used to hold that
district or school or district accountable. There's some additional rules that are applied. And the most consequential rule that gets applied is we call it the 50% rule, which means when we calculate accountability for a school, we only consider kids that were
enrolled in that school for at least 50% of the year. Right? hold people accountable for what they can control. If a child showed up two weeks before testing, the school had very little opportunity to impact that child and we shouldn't hold the school accountable for the score even if we're going to
publish that score in the summer. So, there's a later release of accountability data that does happen um in the fall and that's probably I would guess that may be what you're referring to and that data is under embargo until the report card is released. the
district will have it so they can see and verify and clean up the data, but they can't put that out until the report card is published with the accountability results and that doesn't happen until later in the fall. So, I I suspect that may be um where I'm getting
lost in in this conversation. >> Okay. It's just a little frustrating because, you know, the semester is this semester is almost over before we get a full picture of our scores. So >> yeah, >> just just a teacher frustration topic.
>> Completely understand. >> So let me go back to something you just said there that I understand if a student comes two weeks before that that school should not be held accountable. Is the school they came from held accountable for that?
>> Um if they were enrolled in that school for 50% of the year, yes, they would be. >> Okay. So as long as >> for half a year >> as long as this any student has been enrolled in a school for 50% they are accounted in the system and it's the
school that's Thank you. Uh I had a couple other questions and maybe last year you explained this. I've slept since then but has to do with the process of how you calculate these various scores and I know you talk about this anggo method. Um, so these 66
teachers get together and and yes, thank you so much for the time that they spend together and sometime maybe next year I'd like to sit in for a day and just watch that process work. That would be okay. But do they go through and look at
the test and say, "Okay, we think that, you know, 70% of the students ought to be able to get these number questions right or how how is that process set?" uh because I I don't think I'm probably the only person that has this question.
>> No, Chairman, thank you for the question. I I'm happy to to describe this process and I'll I'll try to keep it fairly high level, but please push me to elaborate um as needed. Um the important departure point for any scoring of the TCAPS test is to
understand that the definition of performance levels are set as a matter of policy. So that that's really where the teachers begin work. The definition of meeting expectations on a TECAP test is that a child has a comprehensive understanding of the standards and a thorough ability to apply it. Right?
That's what meeting expectations means. And again, that's that's set in policy. We call that a performance level descriptor or a PLLD. A child with an approaching understanding has an approaching understanding of the content and a partial ability to apply. So when
we bring teachers together, we norm them on those expectations of what those performance levels mean, of what the policy PLLDS are. We then work with them to refine what we call range performance level descriptors. They essentially take
those performance level convers. So if we take a science standard related to um the structure of particles um a range PLLD or a version of the performance level descriptor um grounded in a course material might say that a
child with a below understanding could and I quote use a model to identify the spacing and motion and arrangement of particles in a sample. Right? That's a child with a minimal understanding of the standard. But a child with a comprehensive and thorough understanding
of the standard could interpret data or models to explain or predict changes in motion and spacing and the arrangement when temperature changes. And that's all to say the teachers come together. They start with an understanding of what the performance levels mean and they do the
hard work to translate that into the content of their courses. They will then norm on an understanding of essentially three model students. The child who's minimally approaching, the child who's minimally meeting expectations, and the child who's
meetingly minimally exceeding expectation. They will then go through every item on the test and they'll essentially ask themselves, could the child who's minimally approaching get this item correct? Could the child who's minimally meeting expectations get this item
correct? And in that way they can aggregate a number of items that they would expect the child at the bottom of the band could reasonably be expected to answer correctly. And in that way they produce a recommended cut score.
Now just to complete the process um we have them do that once and we identify where maybe there's less disagreement amongst the members of the committee and we have them discuss. Then we have them do it again. We have them discuss. We actually have them do three rounds of that process and we do find their
thinking refineses. The conversation is critically important. Um but ultimately it's through three rounds of that process that we essentially take the median score amongst the groups of teachers that participated and that's ultimately the recommendation from the committee that comes to the department.
So happy to elaborate for >> Oh thank you that's very very helpful. I appreciate that. And uh good. Any other questions for Dr. Leairard? >> I I do. Chissy. >> Yes, Mr. Miner.
>> I do want to I appreciate you taking the time to have those 66 teachers come in and collaborate and have a voice. That that that is big and I think that's I've seen that more and more over the years. So, thank you to the department for doing that. social studies next summer. So, social
studies teachers, we will be we will need you. Please be ready next summer. Social studies is up next. >> Well, like I say, let me know when it is if possible. I I wouldn't mind sitting in a day and just watching that process because it it seems very involved, but
also seems very uh productive in what you do and how you do it and that's very helpful. >> The the invitation stands. Since you mentioned social studies, is putting TECAP social studies back in
place on the horizon anytime soon? >> Um, you mean additional grade levels beyond where the middle school grades >> for the elementary? >> That was uh I I'll say that we did hear that come up during one of the legislative assessment task forces. We
we heard that feedback. Um, I'll also just recognize the department continues to hear a lot of concerns about the amount of testing that we have in Tennessee. Um, and so we we do feel like it would we would need a lot of engagement and conversation about that because we do we do want to recognize
there's a strong push and a pull. Um, there's there's there's folks advocating for that, but there's a lot of folks that I think might express a lot of concern potentially about adding more tests. Um, so it's certainly something that the department has heard. My concern is it's history and if we don't
put significance and importance on our history of our country and our state and our nation, then significance is not going to be placed on it in the classroom if they know it's not going to be tested. Just comments I've heard.
Thank you, Miss Cub. Any other questions or comments? If none, we have a recommendation, a motion, and a second for standard setting for science assessments on first and final reading. Uh, Mr. Griffin,
please call the role. >> Mr. Collins, >> I, >> Mr. Jansen, >> I, >> Miss C. Hi >> Miss Maxwell. >> I
>> Miss Bagurf. >> Hi >> Mr. Mullenower. >> Hi. >> Mr. Rollins. >> I >> Mr. Chairman. >> I >> Mr. Chairman, you have eight eyes.
>> Motion passes. Thank you, Dr. Leair. Next item on the list is the 2026 2027 minimum salary schedule, Miss Maryanne Derski. >> Thank you, Chairman Eie, and good morning to uh you the state board members and staff. I'm Mary [snorts]
Anderski, CFO for the Department of Education, and I'm here this morning to present the state minimum salary schedule for fiscal year 2026 27. TCA 493105E allows the general assembly to restrict
a portion of the annual increase to the base funding for the sole purpose of providing salary increases to existing educators. The fiscal year 2026 27 budget includes $125 million in improvements to the
Tennessee Investment in Student Achievement Formula or TISA that have been restricted for this purpose. Because TISA is a funding plan and not a spending plan, each district will utilize the additional salary funds to
meet its unique compensation needs for existing educators. Districts are not required to provide acrosstheboard pay increases based solely on seniority or education attainment, but rather have the ability and flexibility to determine areas of
need and adjust compensation structures accordingly. Pursuant to Tennessee code annotated 493306A1, the commissioner of education is required to annually present and submit
to the state board of education for approval, a state salary schedule for licensed personnel. The salary schedule must include a base salary for licensed personnel with a [snorts] bachelor's degree >> and zero years of experience.
Licensed personnel with more training and experience must receive higher salaries than the established base salary. The minimum salary schedule for 2627 uh will include a base salary of $50,000
in comparison with the salary schedule for 2526 which was $47,000. In accordance with legislation passed during the 2023 session of the general assembly, the minimum salary for educators has increased to $50,000 for
this school year. 100% of the $125 million in improvement for salaries must be spent on improving existing educator salaries. The salary schedule and any adopted adjustments represent only the minimum salary that a
district must pay to individual teachers. Most school districts currently exceed the state minimum identified on the schedule and will continue to do so with the proposed schedule. [snorts] In 20 tw 2013, the state board
of education revised the structure of the state minimum salary schedule to provide additional compensation flexibility to school districts while maintaining a commitment to salary improvements, especially for teachers at or near the state minimum.
The proposed 2026 27 schedule continues to address these two policy goals. TCA 491212 requires that the department prepare a fiscal analysis of any policy, rule, or
regulation proposed to the state board of education. Based on final TISA allocations, it is estimated that 99 districts will be required to increase at least one level of their local salary schedule to comply
with the new state minimum salary schedule. For all these districts, their share of the $125 million over each of the past four years that was restricted for improving existing educator salaries under TISA provided
the necessary funding to meet the required expense. Approximately 9,632 educators will be impacted by the increase to the minimum salary schedule. The increase to the minimum of $50,000
represents a $3,000 increase over the current minimum salary of $47,000. I would like to note that on the attachment provided, uh there is one change that we will make. Uh we receive some information uh regarding Jefferson
County following our submission of this document to the state board. The um the revision reduces the cost of the increase to Jefferson County to 631,565 and affects 184 educators in that school
district. This revised uh attachment has been provided to the state board and will be provided to uh members and will be published on the website. Districts may use the balance of any restricted salary funds together with
other state and local funds to further improve educator salaries. The amount shown on the schedule attached are only the amounts needed to meet the new minimum salary schedule. This item supports the state board's strategic focus on teachers and leaders
outlined in the master plan by highlighting Tennessee's commitment to increasing educator salaries. The Department of Education recommends approval of this item on first and final reading. The State Board of Education
staff concurs with this recommendation. I am now happy to take any questions that you may have. We have a motion for 2026 20 I mean a motion we have a recommendation for 2026 2027 minimum salary schedule on first
and final reading with an adjustment to Jefferson County. Is there a motion to accept with that adjustment? >> So move. >> Miss Cobb moves. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Mullenower seconds. Are there any
questions for Miss Derski? Mr. Durski, I just have just some things for clarification to make sure I understand. So, each district, will they submit their plan to the state department as to how they're going to cover those salaries that are not up to
par yet? >> Yeah, thank you for the question. Yes, each district submits their salary schedule to us every year. Uh those are then published on the uh our website. those salary schedules will be reviewed uh to make sure that they do meet the
new minimums. The other piece that we do to monitor this is that uh we ask districts to complete a salary survey every year. Uh we have just sent out the salary survey on last year's uh salary increases and
we asked them to uh discuss or to show us how they use their share of the $125 million to improve their educators salaries. Okay. Uh my next question is in looking over the attachment, there are some school districts that are going to take
quite a hit in trying to bring their salary schedule up to par. Uh what happens if the funds are they just don't have enough money to cover those required uh improvements in salary? uh in the event that the new
instructional salary funds uh are not sufficient, they have the option to use other state and local funds. However, our analysis shows that over the past four years, there has been an uh addition of $125 million each year uh to
support this move uh of getting the base salary for bachelors and zero to $50,000. And those funds have been sufficient uh it per our analysis to cover uh the cost of that. Any additional increases could be used uh
could use state and other state and local funds or some of these other salary funds. >> Uh and one last question. I probably already know the answer to this, but you know those of us who are really old I don't I'm not going to say old seasoned teachers who've been around quite some
time. I know the salary schedule doesn't quite fit my uh description. Uh is that up to the districts, those of us who've been in the district longer than 30 plus years to compensate us somehow for a salary increase?
>> Yes, that that's a that's a very good question and yes, that is a local decision. the the state minimum is is really that it's it's the minimum salaries that teachers at bachelors and certain number of years experience and then those with advanced degrees and
certain years of experience must be paid. Districts have flexibility to uh to adjust salaries for other teachers however they see fit. That those are local decisions. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Other questions for Miss Derski? Again, I'm really glad and thank the state for continuing to raise this minimum uh over the last several years and I hope they don't stop at 50,000. I mean, I think we value our teachers. Uh
we should value our teachers. I know uh a big announcement was just made this past week about uh Tennessee being a nuclear campus state uh likely and you know maybe 50 billion dollars coming into the state uh over the next 10
years. I don't know how we're going to educate these people if we don't have good quality teachers. So uh please keep it up the state. Any other questions or comments? If none, uh, we have a motion, a second
for 2026 2027 minimum salary schedule. Uh, Mr. Griffin, please call the role. >> Mr. Common, >> I. >> Mr. Jansen, >> I. >> Miss Cobb, >> I
>> Miss Maxwell. >> I >> Miss McInturf. >> I >> Mr. Mullenower. >> Hi, >> Mr. Rollins. I, >> Mr. Chairman. >> I,
>> Mr. Chairman, you have eight eyes. >> Motion passes. Thank you. That completes uh all of the items that we had listed. >> Are there any further final comments before we uh adjourn the special called
meeting? Thank you for each of the board members for participating. Thank you for TDOE providing the information. Look forward to seeing everyone at our next uh event. Purposes of the special called meeting have been fulfilled. I declare the board
adjourned. Thank you. >> Thanks everyone.