Good morning. Thank you, Member Little. Thank you, Member Brooks. Good morning. Good morning. We're gonna go it is 10:00 on the dot, and we're gonna go ahead and and get started, with the Committee on Instructions special called meeting. And I wanna thank you too for getting up bright and early, and and and joining us. This makes a quorum with the three of us, so we're gonna go ahead and get started. And we're gonna jump right in on, item number three. So I'd like to ask Doctor. Trejo to please address
the committee. Okay. I'm getting behind you, chair. Good morning, committee members. Thank you for your time this morning. Item three is related to rule text associated with 74.27, which is your innovative course rule. Madam chair, we would like to request to bring this item back to you in June so that the committee on instruction can have an opportunity to consider this rule text and then, bring it to the full board, in June for final, second reading and final adoption.
That's our request at this time. And based on the original posting of that, do we have time to get that done? It's weird talking to you behind me. It is odd. No. Yeah. You're fine. You're fine. Stay there. I'll talk to you. So what we have learned at this, this item was actually, published with the registry on at towards the February, which does give us time to meet the six months required window, for final adoption. If we take this to the June meeting, we feel like it would be best to, to hear this item in June with the full committee on instruction and to also
allow the full board an opportunity to, to hear the item as well. Okay. Well, thank you so much. So, do we we need to have a motion for that, or are we good? We do need to have a motion. Member Little, do you mind? I'm looking for it. I I don't think that there's one written. We're just gonna make a motion to move the item. Yeah. To to to the opponent. To postpone it. Madam chair, I move that we, postpone this item to our June meeting. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. Can we talk about it? This will this will give us the opportunity to work on
what we had talked about what you would like to talk about in June. So this this forwards it to to that time. Okay. So I should wait till then? So what is is that what you're recommending? Yes. It'll give you it'll give us time in June to actually take up the whole item. Okay. It it's a benefit. Okay. Alright. I have a motion and a second. Any opposition to postponing this item? Hearing none, the that motion passes. Thank you. Thank you, madam chair. Yes. Item one, adoption of review of 19 TAC chapter 89 adaptations for special populations.
I'll have to get copies to them. Thank you. Good morning. So I'm Laura Briones, in office of special populations and student supports, musical chairs. We are presenting for adoption, the review of chapter 89, which has subchapters a, c, and d. There was a public comment period. We lost. Okay. She's back. Welcome back, Evelyn. Good morning, member Revelis. Good morning. How are you all? Good. Thanks for joining us. I didn't do so. Press that over. We are we are on item number one.
So there was a public comment, period window for this for these, the rules in the subchapter. We did receive a few public comments. I believe they've been forwarded to you. If you they have not, we'll make sure to get those to you, since we have virtual people. And for clarification, we are just approving that we are going to look at that we need to take a look in the future at this rule. Correct? Which then will possibly open the rule for consideration of changes or additions Correct. Or subtractions.
Yeah. So there's so there's no changes to any rules right now. This is just a review of the rules. If there are proposed changes in the future, then we would go through the rule making process. Okay. Alright. Does are there any questions, Evelyn? Member Brooks? She's frozen. Member Brooks, go ahead. The the comments, are are those what what day was that sent to us? Was is it recent, or was that during the meeting a few weeks ago? Those I believe yeah. I believe it was I saw Okay. It was that it was during that meeting it was sent to us. Yes.
That's the connection. Yeah. So they I believe they were sent, prior to the last meeting, but I will make sure to get those to you if they haven't already been sent Okay. Or updated. Okay. Thank you. You could have. Forgive me. It was a Good chance. A lot going a few weeks ago. Thank you. I think there were, member folks. There were, like, three or four comments in which they also received a response. But I'll ask staff to forward it to you again. Would you mind just kind of briefly go going over just a few of those comments, if you don't mind? Just briefly.
Sure. One parent expressed support for reviewing, the rule, which this motion and adoption of the motion will allow us to then open the rule and take a look at it. One administrator commented on seeking clarification regarding the identification of this, gifted and talented at the secondary level. And, two parents commented that there's inconsistent gifted and talented services and enforcement of chapter 89, across the state, which is it's it is local control,
and they have the opportunity to develop their programs locally. And then, and then we had four parents, and one comment that requested some amendments to 89.5, which is the rule that we will once we adopt this motion, we will then be able to take a look at and make some changes and hear what those recommendations are. Thank you, madam chair. Yes, ma'am. Thank you. Madam chair, do you need a motion? I do. I move that we adopt the review of 19 TAC chapter 89, adaptations for special populations,
subchapter a, gifted talented education, and subchapter c, Texas certificate of high school equivalency. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any additional discussion or questions? Hearing none, any opposition? Hearing none, the motion passes. Thank you. Item two, discussion of proposed repeal of 19, TAC chapter 89, adaptations for special populations. Subchapter d, special education services and settings. 89.62, support of students enrolled in the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired,
and the Texas School for the Deaf. Guys again, so this is just a discussion item for the repeal of subchapter d, because house bill two and senate bill five sixty eight repeal the SBOE authority for, that subchapter. So it's just a discussion for that, and then it'll move through the rule making process at the future, SBOE meetings. Thank you. Members, do you have any questions? Member Brooks? I do. Just, I have a couple of questions. And and please forgive me, madam chair. I I I wish I knew all the staff members' names there at TEA. Forgive me.
Sitting behind you is is that Laura? I I spoke with the Laura on Yes. Laura. Thank you for for calling me. I greatly appreciate that, our talk. So I just I I just want a little clarification on this. This now is is so the discussion today is this part d, subchapter d, will no longer be under, the statutory authority of of the SVOE. Is that kind of the only change here, or is there further information? Yes. No. So, house bill two, incentive bill five sixty eight repealed the SPOE authority for the subchapter.
So it's going to move over to commissioner. So it's gonna have to go through the rule making process, but under the commissioner rules moving forward. Okay. Well, thank you for that discussion. Appreciate your help. Any other questions? K. Thank you. Thank you. Alright. Item four, approval of updates and substitutions to approved instructional materials. Good morning. This is our standing item for publishers who have been approved either through EMRA or proclamations to submit requests to update content in their instructional materials. We do have requests from quite a few publishers this go round,
and most of them center around changes needed to comply with accessibility requirements. And, as you know, the rules for Emmer are different, and every change that someone wants to make, they have to get permission prior to doing so. So even these that are are technical in nature have to come before this committee to receive permission. I do wanna flag that we received an additional request from Perfection Learning, who in this go round is asking to update their measuring up to the ticks for grades three through five.
They need to move the content from one platform to another because that new environment is accessible. And they're requesting to go ahead and make that same move for the measuring up to the TEKS math grade two and six through eight, which were submitted to IMRA '26. We did receive one public comment, which I've asked the office to forward to you all. It was actually related to the rules around updates and substitutions rather than any of the specific requests we received. And it was from an educator who expressed the desire for the the committee to
consider changing the rules so that if the ELPS are updated, that the publishers with approved materials are required to also update their materials for the ELPS. Members, any questions for staff from the presentation? May I have a motion? I do, madam chair. I move that we approve the corrections presented by Amplify Education Inc in their Amplify Desmos math Texas grade kindergarten through five full subject mathematics materials. Edmentum Inc.
In their exact path mathematics grade k through five supplemental mathematics materials, Heinemann in their k through two Texas Saxon Reading Foundation teachers resource package English phonics materials, HMH Education Company in their HMH InterReading Texas version two grades k through five, full subject English language arts and reading materials, HMH Ariba La Lecture, Texas version two grades K through five full subject Spanish language materials,
and HMH math 180 Texas grades three through eight, and HMH math 180 Flex Texas three through eight supplemental mathematics materials. I love to read in Spanish LLC, in their Spanish phonics materials, Estoylisto, Desarello, Heblase, Fundamentals de Scrutia Kinder and Papukito Apacow Fundamentals of Lectures Grade one, Aloma Education in their three through eight grade math and algebra one supplemental materials, and their sixth grade RLA,
full subject English language arts and reading materials. Mind Education in their ST Math Texas grades K through five supplemental mathematics materials, Perfection Learning Corporation in their measuring up to the TEKS mathematics grade three student teacher package, measuring up to the TEKS mathematics, grade four student teacher package, measuring up to the TEKS mathematics, grade five student teacher package, supplemental mathematics. Progress Learning LLC in their Progress Learning grade hang on just a second.
Progress Learning LLC in their Progress Learning third grade through eighth grade mathematics, progress learning algebra one EOC, progress learning algebra two, progress learning geometry supplemental mathematics materials, and scholastic in their ready for reading grades k through three English phonics materials with the requirement that all approved changes be reflected in the digital formats of the materials within thirty days of approval by the SBOE and that identical updates to print formats
be incorporated into the publisher's manufacturer's next press run. Second. A motion and second to that motion include the additional pieces? It did not. Maybe if we could add and allow perfection learning to make corresponding changes to their MR 26. Can you email that to a begin, please? Yes. Member Little, we we have an adjustment to the motion that you made, and Amy Phillips is gonna shoot you an email real quick to add that amendment, with that additional product in there.
Okay. Could she just read it and I say so moved? She could. Then Let's do it. Okay. And allow progress I mean, perfection learning to make corresponding changes to their IMRa cycle twenty twenty six submission. So moved. And second. Madam Chair? K. Second. You got it? I got it. Alright. We had to make sure Kaye was keeping up I'm sure. With all of that. Okay. Discussion. Member Brooks. Yeah. So I would love to to make a motion to to move to divide this motion to separate a couple of the publishers?
We have a motion. With no second, the motion fails. We're back to the original. Okay, so Madam Chair, or may I discuss? Before we go to the vote, may I? Yes, ma'am. Can we have a discussion? You have discussion? So my concern is discussion. Can you all hear me okay? Yes. I'm a little unstable. But, I I wanted to separate this because there's, with Amplify, there's there's errors there, which students have already seen in in in the lower grades.
And that that is concerning to me of all the other corrections to make on this list. These were technical issues like, updates and and, aligning, you know, the digital programs. Nothing to where the problems were just incorrect. And it's not an isolated issue with the this publishing company. So that's why I wanted to move it. And I also would like, next time staff to have more time to to look at a, a a company as opposed to to the day of,
you know, professionally. And forgive me if it was sent to me. I I didn't get that that, email to to be able to have the opportunity to look over perfection learning. That is my ask moving forward is is not to last minute have, the day of, an action item like this to to for an update. I know Emirates fast and furious till we get caught up right with publishing companies. So there definitely has to be grace in in this process, but I would I just would appreciate a little bit more time.
And and last question, that comment that they that was left, that expressed, if we would consider the Alps aligning with the the, already approved materials. What's your takeaway on that, miss Phillips, for for that comment here? Because that's a a very good and reasonable question to present to the board. Before she answers your last question, I I would like to ask miss Phillips, when was the original email sent that provided us with all of this,
of the changes that were requested by the publishers? March 6. March. March. So we we have had time to do that. And a and a Anytime member, Brooke, she could have also then reached out and asked her to place it at the top of your email, box. So, it is it's our responsibility as board members to ensure that we do our homework in a timely manner and not the responsibility of staff to ensure that you're, you are doing your homework in a timely manner. So,
I take, I'm taking consideration of the comment that you made in that it's on us to be able to filter through our emails and to be able to read the content and to do our part without constantly relying on staff to make sure that we're staying on top of our job. Sure. Madam chair, may I respond? You you may respond. I sure. I I agree with you on that, but but I believe that I'm I'm pointing out perfection learning. That's not on the list that was given us perfection learning. That's not on the list that was given us to us back in March.
I think this was is new. I'm not sure when the agency received it. But the other 10 publishing companies, that that was available, those changes. But I'm just referring to perfection learning. I'm not sure when when that was sent out because it that was separate from the list inside of our agenda. It it is it is directly related to what was previously sent to us in that they're only requesting the accessibility platform change, not any change in their actual content.
So, we delay that particular item, but that means students who rely on the accessibility features such as speech to text, text to speech, or highlighting or any of those other, features that are available to them, they will not have access to those. So it it's a function, not an actual change to the product. Understood. But those were also mentioned in here. The the companies, a lot of other publishers did make those changes, and they did say accessibility. They they specify that in these changes too. So Yes.
Some of those were were in these as well. So I don't know. You know, so yeah. I I get that, but it it just wasn't mentioned, I guess, is is my point, which is the moot point. I I I hear you. But, miss Phillips, though, would mind just answering that question with about the Alps comments? What I can share is that this board has not historically required already approved publishers, whether it be through proclamation or IMRA, to retroactively
align their materials when the ELPS have been revised. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. We've had a motion in the second. Are there any any further discussion? Any opposition to the motion? Hearing none, the motion passes. Member Rivelles? No, I was saying hi to someone here, sorry. Everybody wait back. Okay. Item five, proposed repeal of 19 TAC chapter 74, curriculum requirements sub chapter a, required curriculum 74.4, English language proficiency standard,
second reading and final adoption. Madam chair, do you need a motion? Is there any presentation on this or anybody we need to speak to? We can just to lay out the item. Good morning, command instruction. This is a standard item. You have current Alps that are scheduled to be replaced with new Alps on August 1. This is just an item to set up the repeal of what will become the old Alps on that date, August 1. So it is simply repealing the old ELPS as new ELPS are scheduled to be implemented next school year.
Okay. Any any questions for staff? To the chair. I just wanna make sure that I heard correctly. So this is simply a, a procedural vote that will set aside the current, ELBs and to make space for the new ones that are coming up. Correct? Correct. Okay. Any other questions? Thank you for that clarification, member Revelus. Member Little? Madam chair, I move that we approve for second reading and final adoption the proposed repeal of 19 TAC chapter 74 curricular curricular requirements, subchapter a, required curriculum,
section seven four point four, English language proficiency standards, and make an affirmative finding that the immediate that immediate adoption of the proposed above is necessary and shall have an effective date of 08/01/2026. We have a motion. Second. And a second. Any further discussion? Any opposition to the motion? Hearing none, the motion passes. Item six, proposed amendment to 19 TAC chapter 74, curriculum requirements subchapter B,
graduation requirements 74.14, performance acknowledgements, second reading, and final adoption. Madam chair, as laid out, these are proposed amendments to your rules for the performance acknowledgments in seventy four point fourteen. The performance acknowledgements are distinctions that students can earn, for their performance, in a in a couple of areas inclusive of performance on certain assessments. This is second reading and final adoption. You did receive two public comments. Those were resent to committee members this morning, but the comments in summary were just in support of of the amendments.
There are four essential, changes to the rule, in this proposal. First is just an alignment of language so that the, performance acknowledgment laid out for SAT has consistent language with ACT. We're really the converse of that. ACT is consistent with your language for SAT. That was, an adjustment that was necessary and pointed out to staff that we brought before you to ensure that there's clarity in how those scaled scores should apply. The second, at first reading, the committee on instruction approved and the state board of education approved, preliminary for first reading, an amendment that would add PSAT 10,
to the list of assessments. PSAT is already an assessment for which a student can earn a performance acknowledgment, but PSAT was not identified. It's really the same test, but has more flexibility, can be offered at different times in the year. So the amendment would add that assessment as well as scale score. And then also, as a part of the original amendment, we're adding the classic learning test, CLT with a scale score. And then finally, I feel like I'm missing one. Ah, an adjustment that was approved for first reading that would adjust the scale score for SAT to better align with the scale score
identified for ACT. So currently, the rule identifies 29 for ACT. Your current rule has thirteen fifty for SAT, but in accordance with what are called concordance tables that ACT and college board work on together, thirteen forty is a more appropriate score, to align with that 29 for ACT. So those are the four changes that are before you. This is second reading and final adoption. Again, you did receive public comment, but just two and they were in support of the amendments. Any questions for staff? May I have a motion? Madam chair, I move that we approve for second reading and final adoption the proposed amendment to
19 TAC chapter 74, curricular requirements, subchapter b, graduation requirements, section seven four point one four, performance acknowledgments, and make an affirmative finding that the immediate adoption of the above is necessary and shall have an effective date of August I make that second? Can I make that second? Okay. I'd second that motion. Any further discussion? Any opposition to the motion? No. Yeah. Yes. That's been recorded. Okay. And any, and so for those who are for the motion,
please raise your hand. And it is two one one. The motion passes. Thank you. Are there any further items? None at this time. Thank you so much, team. I appreciate your efforts this early early early in the morning, And Thank you. Y'all have Thank you. Have a great rest of your week. Thank you. Thank you, guys. Bye. Bye bye. Bye bye. Thank you.