EPCE Stakeholder Meeting - June 13, 2025

001a second to settle in. It's our first time being together since the end of the academic year. So, I hope everyone has found some time to rest and recharge. Um I know many of you all have been working hard throughout the legislative session. So, hopefully you found some time for um yourselves. But um we'll give folks a minute to settle in and then we'll get started. Yeah. Okay. Um so, uh welcome to the educator preparation, certification and enforcement stakeholder meeting. Um this is I believe our third official, uh newly rebranded EPS stakeholder meeting. So excited to see uh faces here. I know we've had we've continued to have had additional folks um join this meeting space over time and so um by way of introduction I'm Jessica McGlaclin. I'm our associate commissioner over educator preparation

002certification in enforcement um and excited to be here with you today with my team. Um if we can move to the next slide. Thanks. Uh just a few uh norms to start us off. Um if folks wouldn't mind doing a quick introduction of themselves in the chat. It's always good to see who's in the room. Um first norm is to please mute yourself um when you are not speaking. Um and to leave your camera on if possible. It's great to be able to see uh folks in the space. Um it's also helpful for us if you're and for others if you're able to rename yourself um with your organization. Um and then I really want to encourage active uh participation. Um throughout the today we have a lot of opportunity to pause and discuss. So

003we're going to have a another padlet like we used last goound. Really want to make sure we're we're gathering as much input and feedback from the field as possible. Um so look forward to your active participation. Um if we go to the next slide, I just wanted to again naming that there are are a number of folks that are new to this um stakeholder space. Um and frankly might be new to the work of the state board for educator certification or in particular. Uh we just wanted to take a little bit of time over these next few meetings just to regground in kind of the purpose of um the ESPC and their work um and some of their processes overall. So first grounding in the ESPC's mission statement and core principles that are focused on

004improving student achievement and ensuring the safety and welfare of our Texas children by holding the highest level of educator preparation, performance, continuing education, and standards of conduct. And you can see the ASPEC's core principles down below. Um the ASPC meets um multiple times a year. Um their next meeting is slated for the end of July, so July 24th and 25th. Um in the summer, uh the ESPC traditionally does a work session opportunity to kind of really set their vision for the upcoming academic year and then holds their traditional meeting on the Friday. Um so we do anticipate a work session and meeting during this July session. Um if we go to the next slide just a little bit of grounding in the ESP's preparation certification and enforcement process. The ESPC has a a broad range

005of oversight regarding kind of the entire life cycle of an educator. everything from admission into an educator preparation program through continuing professional education and certificate renewal. So, we have a a a diverse set of stakeholders here on this call. Um, knowing that the ESPC engages with um stakeholders on in educator preparation, stakeholders who work in district HR systems, stakeholders who work in talent pathway systems, etc. ensuring that um all the stakeholders have an opportunity to provide meaningful input um on the uh process. Um if we go to the next slide, thank you. Just as a reminder, the aspects rulemaking process um they follow a kind of a formal structured cadence in which um the aspect begins by engaging in discussion related to to uh key pieces of policy. Those pieces of policy might uh and

006those discussions might be driven by input from stakeholders. Uh many pieces of policy that the aspects considered have come from this stakeholder space in the past. Um they might also come preview of some slides ahead um from legislative action. Um the aspect might be charged by the legislature with taking specific action and then they begin to discuss what it looks like to put the rules in place to operationalize um those requirements. Um from there uh there's a formal rule making process through proposal and then adoption. That's where the board votes on um the text of the rules themselves. And then after that formal process with the ASPC, the rules go to the state board of education um for their review. And the state board of education um has the statutory authority to veto the aspect

007rules uh with the twothirds. Um, so overall I show this to because frankly the rulem uh uh process is I think new to many but also to say that this is not a fast process from start to finish. Um on a on the speedier side we're looking at about 9 months. Um but we think that there's a lot of value and benefit in that. Um that you know quality we need to move at the speed of quality and quality in many cases takes time. Um and the benefit of this type of process is that there's many opportunities for us to intentionally pause and seek input from stakeholders in the field. Um if we go to the next slide, um just reinforcing we heard from you all as we uh sought to stand up this EPS

008stakeholder group. um that really the goal here was uh to be able to gather and provide input and feedback and actively collaborate across a a varied set of stakeholders on topics related to the broader set of work that the ASPEC oversees. So not just educator preparation but also certification enforcement and the broader slate of educator support systems. um really ensuring we're able to pull in experts, pull in stakeholders from across the field in order to provide meaningful recommendations to the ASPC and support practices of um our TEA team that supports the ESP's work. Um if we go to the next slide, um we again are on our third uh meeting of this reformulated EPS stakeholder group. We really appreciated the feedback that this group has provided to us after each of our meetings so far.

009We will close today's um session with another feedback survey from y'all. Again, really trying in that spirit of continuous improvement to make sure that that these spaces are meaningful and that folks feel like they're they're able to really lean in around the topics that they care about. Um and if you go to the next slide, um just a few norms and expectations both on the EPS stakeholder side and the TEA staff side um for us to continue to regground and and again these came from um a survey that we sent out last summer asking uh this group uh what type of norm should we bring uh to this space together. Um, and then in the next slide, want to give a preview of today's agenda. There's a lot on it. Um, and we got a

010a few meaty topics at hand. Um, we wanted to start by uh acknowledging that we just came out of a legislative session. Um and so we are uh days out of the legislative session and uh frankly uh we're still in the period in which the the governor is in the process of reviewing and considering signature on bills. Um but we have some near-term updates for you. Um and then we've got sort of a broad slate of topics at hand including discussing our teacher mentorship training uh talking about the most recent ASPC meeting um and some highlights from that. um an overview of some recent work around the core subjects, exams, and the TTEP performance assessment, updates on our special education personnel assignments and the car redesign work, um and some updates we're considering around chapter

011231, uh before we give an opportunity for a quick preview of what we uh what's on deck for June SBOE and July aspect. Um, and then we will take time at the end for any additional questions, but um, y'all, uh, feel free to put questions in the chat. Um, there's going to be time where we're going to ask for folks to, you know, come off mute and and discuss topics. And then we also have a Padlet that we'll be um, at certain points pointing folks to for input. Um, if we go to the next slide, I did my uh, segue correct. Um we will be at certain points today uh uh directing you to navigate to a Padlet for input. So uh we will be dropping the link to that Padlet in the chat. Um

012Padlets are Thanks Jess. So just just put the link to the Padlet in the chat. Um if you look at this slide, you'll see kind of there. This is from our last meeting, but examples of topics that we'll be seeking your input on um across the top. will direct you in the course of today's discussion when we would like you to go to the Padlet. Um, and you simply just press the plus button below the vertical column that you're wanting to respond to um to add a comment or respond to a question. Um, there's also uh should be a column for general questions as well. Um, and I'll say that questions that aren't addressed today, we will certainly uh follow up and additional communication. You can also do nifty things like reply to other people's

013comments, put a heart next to someone else's comment. So encourage folks to use this Padlet as an u given that we are a relatively large group today um as a way to also uh capture your thoughts and thinking. Um with that then um wanted to transition to the first topic at hand which is the 89th Texas Legislative Session. Um, so as I think many of you all know, uh, the legislature, um, we recently, just, uh, last week, two weeks a last week, oh my gosh, feels like a lifetime ago and and like not a day has passed. Uh, last week was, um, the end of the legislative session. Um, and so we have some early um, updates on a work that impacts the ESPC uh, that came out of this most recent legislative session. So

014if we go to the next slide, wanted to highlight a few pieces of legislation that um in our team's analysis would be related to the work of the state board for educator certification. Um so I think the first bill and likely probably the the bill of biggest note is House Bill 2. Um so this is the omnibus school finance bill um that was uh passed and has been uh signed by the governor into law. Um this bill includes a lot of stuff. Um it has uh seven articles to it. Um but I think for the purposes of the ESPEC um and the work of educator preparation, certification and enforcement um there are a few areas of particular note. Um and those are in article two and article three of the bill. Um article two of

015the bill is specifically focused on policies related to educator preparation and certification. Um a few highlights here um to summarize some of the the key things that can be found in this article. It includes limiting uncertified teachers in foundational subjects um beginning with K5 reading and math teachers in the 26 27 academic year and all other grade levels in 2728 with the ability of a district to be able to extend that timeline out to the 29 20 30 academic year. Um, it couples that with some supports, including a $1,000 grant per uncertified teacher who um is certified by 2627 that would flow to school districts to support. Um, and then uh the bill establishes a set of new highquality pre-ervice preparation pathways. And I use new I think with like a little bit of caveat

016given that many of these are are work that you all have been uh engaged in for many years now. So it codifies in statute a residency, a traditional preparation and a uh alternative preparation pathway and specifically differentiates between um what we've currently considered alternative certification pathways in a new pre-ervice alternative uh preparation model. Um and then coupled with these new uh pre-ervice preparation pathways is a um significant infusion of dollars into the educator preparation space. Um and this is through um what is what is coined the preparing and retaining educators through partnership or prep. Um love a nifty acronym. um the prep aotment. Um and this prep aotment um is really grounded in if we kind of look at some of the recommendations from the teacher vacancy task force, we can see a lot of

017alignment um between recommendations from that body and um what is ultimately codified in this aotment really focused on um supports for recruitment of individuals into the profession through new state funding for teacher recruitment via grow your own pathways. um focus on the the quality preparation to candidates through new state funding for preparation. So paying for the cost of training candidates before they begin teaching i.e. um providing funding to candidates, school districts and preparation programs um for those for those uh partnerships that implement residency traditional or the pre-ervice alternative model. And then lastly, ensuring that once we have teachers in the door that they're they are provided highquality mentorship and support. And so here there's also increased state funding for new teacher mentorship. As many of you know, we've had the mentor program aotment for many

018years. This uh really takes and expands the scope of that work significantly. Um and then uh I would say kind of a a final note around HB2. It also does uh specify some parameters in which uh school districts must pay novice teachers. um that went through the residency traditional or pres-ervice pathways more than uh novice teachers who went through all other pathways. Um but they have flexibility on how they do that. Um so that's just article two. Um article three of HB2 um has been coined um educator bill of rights. I think there's there's a lot of stuff in in article three, but I think things of note to the work of the ESPC um specifically relates to a provision that waves certification fees um for bilingual and special education teachers that includes a first

019test attempt um for the content pedigogy certification exam and the certification application fee. Um, it also specifies um some parameters for um the uh BTLPT, which good news, we're already moving in that direction with the redesign of the bilingual Spanish certification exam. And then includes um the a broad bucket of what's called teacher quality assistance grants um to support strategic compensation, staffing, scheduling, etc. um focused on um that includes reference to uh teacher leadership and mentorship um and teacher apprenticeships. Um I would say um so those are some of the highlights of HB2. There's a ton of other uh important and connected work there. Um but just things again pulling out pieces that uh connect to the um to the work of the aspect. I'm going to pause for a second and actually look at

020the chat before I go on to these other pieces of legislation. And I will say I know I am giving the 30,000 foot view of um of this legislation. And just to name there there will be many many communication documents, guidance tools, etc. that will be coming out um in the coming weeks and months. Um but wanted to at least orient folks uh to kind of the highle content that is within this. So I think Katie to your question around when will guidance be released um that is an excellent question and one that we are working on um hoping to have a timeline of when guidance will be released to the field here shortly. So uh know that we're getting a lot of questions. We will have a centralized email inbox to receive questions. Um

021and then later in today's session, we'll be sharing some input, some information around some input sessions that we'll be hosting because I think part of what we hope to do is uh collaborate with the field on some of the finer grain points of um these uh systems. Um and then uh Rainey just said it's a preparing and retaining educators through partnership is what PREP stands for. Oh, and thank you Sherry. Uh you already had that answer in there for me. Um, so again, 30,000 foot view, many, many more communication tools to come. Um, but wanted to make sure folks at least had awareness of, um, the exciting components that are within this big bill. Um, in addition to HB2, um, Senate Bill, uh, 571, uh, includes, uh, kind of some some real strengthening of educator

022misconduct, uh, uh, parameters, including closing some of the loopholes related to um, currently uncertified educators and really strengthening some of the reporting requirements. um overall as well as establishing a temporary suspension authority for the ESPC uh for uh those educators who might present imminent harm to students. Um again, a lot of work to be done with the ESP to define parameters around um the this legislation. Um two other kind of quick hits to call your attention to. HP 2243 establishes a new um commission on teacher job satisfaction and retention. Um this would be made up of educators and uh legislators um who would really dig deep into I think uh kind of like part two of the teacher vacancy task force uh dive a little bit deeper into um some of the the parameters around

023uh uh ensuring we're removing uh all unnecessary burdens from teachers etc. um and really trying to understand ways that we can further support teacher job satisfaction and retention. And then lastly, HB178 um creates a temporary certificate for outofstate educators um trying to engage in that continuous improvement process of streamlining um a transition to Texas for those who are coming from out of state. Um I did so just to name up front um HB2 has been signed by the governor into law. um the the remaining three bills have passed both chambers but are still with the governor um for his contemplation. So that is my uh upfront caveat there. Um and then I see uh Don I see your question around what do we mean by pre-ervice alternative certification model. Um again we will share additional

024guidance here in the in the coming weeks but I would direct you to the lang um it's within article two of the bill. I would go and look at the the parameters that are outlined within there. I think that's a good starting point. All right. Um, with that, if we could transition to the next slide. I think I've already named these things, but I a few other things to name. The ESPback during their work session on uh July 24th will be spending the entirety of the day digging into uh this legislation, specifically HB2 and SB571. Um really here to build shared understanding of what's included there. Um discuss some of the the kind of critical decision points that are um ahead of the board. And our goal would be coming out of that work session

025to then bring um that information to stakeholder input sessions throughout the entirety of the summer, some of them starting as early as the next few weeks here. And then our plan would be that our August 8th EPS stakeholder meeting, we'd be all really collectively rolling up our sleeves and diving into some of the finer grain details of um components of this legislation in particular HB2 and this prep aotment um moving towards go there. And then um uh I think if some of y'all were around uh when HB3 passed in 2019, there was a whole bunch of communication documents and tools that were established by the agency. Um and so we do anticipate a dedicated website, dedicated email address, and kind of a slate of communication tools um that will be developed and administered um over

026the coming weeks and months. I will say a near-term communication tool that you can anticipate um here before the end of the month would be communication around um the process for the certification fee waiverss. Um that is kind of an immediate next step that we think is pretty urgent to be able to communicate to the field. Um uh Stephen, I see your question in the chat. Again, uh we will have more information around the the specific funding here in the coming weeks, but uh the prep aotment um is specified as um an entitlement under chapter 48. Um so, uh if that's a good place to start, then if we with that, um happy to continue to capture questions in the chat, but I do know we've got a pretty packed agenda today. um and know

027that there will be lots of communication on this here in the future. Um so with that, I am going to um pivot and pass it over to I believe Ally to talk about some work that's connected to this. Thanks Jess. Good morning everyone. Great to see you. Um thanks for having me here. I wanted to uh bring some updates on the Texas mentorship training to this group. uh several months ago we shared in a couple meetings uh some of this work but I would love to start off um with kind of an overview of what this is. So, um, if we could move forward to slides. Next one. Thanks. A couple of focus questions. I'll give you all just a moment to read through those focus questions in the previous slide. You go back to

028Sorry. There we go. I think we all just have a moment to read these questions for our time together today. Right. So, I think someone might be able to drop our Padlet into um the chat and I will have some pause points throughout. I did want to name that. We'll probably spend time um hopefully for some folks to chime in on the first question and then the second and third questions I'll ask for your feedback either on the Padlet and or in our follow-up survey. The idea is we kind of scratch the surface with questions two and three and then bring it back um as needed for a further discussion in our August FC meeting. On the next slide, we have a little overview on where the Texas mentorship training came from. So back uh

029for those of you that recall the teacher vacancy task force um had some set of recommendations around compensation, training and support and working conditions and specifically there are a set of recommendations around expanding teacher mentorship and leadership. On the next slide I'll give you a moment to read through recommendations A through C that the teacher vacancy task force had. You can go to the next slide. That would be great. Give me just a second to read this. So the development of the Texas mentorship training is um in directly related to recommendation A which is developing those suites of training. Um also last legislative session there was not an increase for the mentor program aotment but as just mentioned there is scaling of mentorship supports through HB2 um that was just uh passed this legislative session

030and then obviously mentorship is a form of teacher leadership. Um the next slide will recap um some of what Jess had mentioned. So some particular places in HB2 um you'll see mentorship uh is under 21907 which is a new section of the Texas AD um education code and then uh chapter 48 is the entitlement to fund these programs and again we'll have more information on funding for each of these programs um out to the field soon. The next slide, uh, a couple, um, just wanted to start with the vision and goals for the Texas mentorship training. We really are focused on ensuring that all beginning teachers in Texas receive the guidance and support needed to thrive, leading to increased teacher effectiveness, retention, and a lasting impact on student outcomes. On the next slide, we have

031a little visual of um, how this Texas mentorship training is set up. Um so at the top of the pyramid you'll see pre and early service teachers that are supported by a group of current classroom teachers that serve as mentors, cooperating teach uh cooperating teachers for traditional candidates and host teachers for residents. And then supporting those individuals, we've got EP staff and district and campus leaders. So those blue um boxes relate to different pathways of the Texas mentorship training. So, we've got three total pathways. One for mentors, cooperating teachers, and host teachers. Another for EP staff, including field supervisors, and then another um pathway for district and campus leaders. And those that district and campus leaders is more of like technical assistance and design sessions about setting up a mentoring program. On the next slide,

032those of you that uh were with me a while back, you can click through the animations. Um, sorry this we've got candidates and residents on the left side of the screen and then uh kind of on the right side we've got interns. If you click one more time note to self to take these animations off potentially uh beginning teachers that are uh inservice teachers and if you click down um we've got cooperating teachers, host teachers and mentors supporting them. Sometimes you might have one individual in serving in multiple roles. You could have a cooperating teacher who is also a mentor to a firstear teacher down the hall that may be certified, maybe uncertified. Uh, you know, year-to-year could have been a candidate that went through uh different preparation programs. You click once more. Um, this

033visual just shows that then we've got EP and field supervisors supporting these individuals, collaborating with them, and district and campus leaders. So, part of the vision of the Texas mentorship training is to align and cohhere the supports for these frontline mentoring educators and the pre-ervice um and early uh pres-ervice and early service teachers that they support. Uh on the next slide, we just have a quick um definition of who those pathway one mentoring educators are. I know that folks call these uh roles lots of different things out in the field and it's hard sometimes when you've got a term that you're used to using uh to transition to a new one. But on the left side, we've got four terms that come from our Texas policy. They are sometimes called different things in districts or

034campuses, but I'll give you a second just to read over who these folks are for our pathway one training. All right, moving along. Just wanted to call out a couple um policy connections and um foundations for this training. So on the next slide, we'll see a couple callouts to policy. Um so this training is really rooted in the requirements in chapter 228 for those mentoring educators and field supervisors and also the administrative code 153 which is the mentor program aotment will also operate under the new requirements in HB2. Um and we think that this training program could be leveraged by district and EP partnerships um to meet some of the requirements outlined in HB2. I did want to call out here and I'll bring this up at the end. If you're interested in attending a

035rulemaking feedback session, um we've got some coming up on the 23rd and 24th and you'll have the opportunity to indicate interest in your postmeating survey. And I see at least one person on here that has uh provided input previously on some of our inservice mentoring goals. Thanks for that. On the next slide, just a we can run through these relatively quickly um because I know we don't have a ton of time. Uh just wanted to call out in additionally in addition the foundations for this um program are really rooted in our new um classroom teacher pedigogy standards and look to align to um high quality instructional materials implementation high leverage instructional leadership practices given that these mentors and teacher leaders this is often like um skill building and prep to expand their reach either as

036a teacher leader that stays in the classroom or some that might move on to other roles. um effective teacher prep and strategic staffing initiatives. All right, next uh I I'll just be quiet on these next few slides. These are competencies kind of competency domains for our mentoring educators and then for our district and campus leaders. Just to give you a flavor of what the training entails, on the next slide, you'll see pathway three, which is our EP staff and field supervisor training. We don't have the competencies developed yet. We will start working on that later in the summer. We kind of staggered the development of this training. And so, this is an area that I would love your feedback on the next uh in a couple slides. We'll we'll pause there. What we do know

037for this pathway 3 um ed prep and field supervisor training that we are going to start with competencies right and like backwards design first is like what are we uh what skills are we looking to develop what knowledge and we will root this in the EPF effective preparation framework and the requirements outlined in chapter 228 of our um administrative code on the next slide here's an example also of um how we will leverage what we've already developed so we antic anticipate leveraging some of those pathway one competencies for mentoring educators given that they're out um observing, they're co-eing, they're providing feedback, they're working with teachers on how to set up a strong learning environment. Um those are things that field supervisors um should be able to do as well. So we'll use that as a

038kind of a jumping off point and then layer on pieces such as candidate evaluation and really double down on like the coaching and feedback aspects as well. So that's kind of a snapshot of where we think we'll head with this. But I did want to take a few moments here on the next slide and just ask this group and you can come off a mute or put this in the Padlet. What needs would you all like to see addressed through updated field supervisor training? Yes, thank you for that clarification, Sher. Yes, this will be an uh a kind of a revamp and update of the current field supervisor training for school year 2627. So, if you kind of had a wish list of like, hey, in the in the current field supervisor training, I love

039XYZ, like let's keep that. that's an important need in the field, let us know. Or like I have a wish list of something I I think my field supervisors would really benefit from or in my experience as a field supervisor, I wish I had more of XYZ. Thanks, Calvin. I see a note about um evidence impact coaching practices. others. I know it's a it's a big group. Okay. H internalization processes of HQM. Yeah, that's something we've been intentionally um designing around for pathway one and something we hope to carry into this pathway. I appreciate this. I I know the tendency sometimes to want to put things in chat in a in a big group like this, but uh I see co-eing and co-planning. Yes, we know that will be um that that resonates for sure.

040Great, Sherry. Thanks for that call out in that um connection to the approval uh process to CAR. Um and I I think that was a missed opportunity to to call that out on the slide, but definitely alignment there across the the approval um the the review process. Great. Well, feel free to um add some other comments in the chat or in the Padlet. Um we will also ask this question if you kind of like we'll go through a bit more content. that might spark some ideas. We'll ask this on the follow-up survey. Um, so definitely be feel free to share there as well. Okay, thanks Susan. Yeah, like understanding the experience of the candidates and the cert requirements. I appreciate that. All right. Um, on our next slide, um, the following, the last two questions

041I have for you all, we'll just do asynchronously. So, again, feel free to put them in the chat or in the padlet and they'll also be in the follow-up survey. But given time, um, I'll just keep us moving. Pathway one, this mentoring educator training includes a full day summer kickoff and some shorter trainings throughout the year. Again, this is for cooperating and host teachers and then mentor teachers. So, this is just a quick visual of what that looks like. Pathway two for district and campus leaders that are overseeing a mentoring program. Again, this is like trying to bring together the like mentorship that happens in the pre-ervice space, the early service space given oftentimes it is the same teacher serving in multiple roles to support pre-ervice and early service teachers. So, in the next slide,

042we have a visual of kind of this scope and sequence, if you will, of the technical assistance that would be provided to these district and campus leaders. So um in the spring that that blue um kind of box is vision setting and performance management setup. So if the district working with the district side by side to look at the vision for the mentoring program if there are goals already established are there goals that they want to tweak. If there aren't explicit goals are there goals the district want to set. So these are design sessions where um the trainers are going in kind of side by side and working through facilitated work time for those pieces. Next is um strategic planning for mentoring. So I think the text is really if you go back sorry said

043next but I meant kind of like the next box on the previous slide. Uh strategic planning for mentoring is uh engaging in work around mentor selection. So we know in chapter 228 there are specific requirements around the qualifications for these individuals and then thinking about um what that selection process will look like. you know, is it a is there are there practices of um going through uh recruitment and selection or is it kind of assigning people into those roles? So, trying to figure out where the district is and where they might want to move to with some of those practices and then setting up time for that mentoring to happen. like thinking about those mentors that are in their internship experience. Like where's their time in the school day that's protected for these teachers to

044meet that's not like oh meet during your lunch period or find time after school or like you got your planning period like yeah a planning period is time but that's a lot for like an intern right or your first year teacher. So trying to support them in setting that up. And then the last two kind of steps here are program expansion and support structures and then reviewing and kind of like integrating into ongoing support. So this next question um that I would ask ask for you to pathway two sorry I just saw a question in the chat will pathway 2 be required training that is a really great question. This um training will be a requirement for folks that are engaging the way that we are envisioning it now in the prep aotment for mentorship.

045The reason being that there are statutory requirements for district uh for campus district and campus leaders that support or work with beginning teachers to receive training. So what we are trying to do is provide this service to the field to fulfill that statutory requirement to then access the funds. And again, we um decided to design this not as face-to-face like sit and get training, but design sessions to be able to differentiate based on where the districts are because we know there's so many districts that have really robust uh mentoring programs in place. And the support would be around how do we take what you have, tweak it or refine it um and and and keep working towards those goals that we have set. So the next question for um the pellet or the follow-up survey

046on the next slide is what role could or should EP staff play in pathway to mentoring program design sessions? So there are pieces there that will be working alongside districts to help clarify, you know, selection criteria for both the pre-ervice uh mentoring educators and the inservice mentoring educators to kind of bridge that kind of baton pass. Um so I would be curious to hear what you all think about that. Again, feel free to drop that in the Padlet or your post session um survey. Just got a a few more slides um really to tee up the last question that I have for you all and then I'll pass it off to our next topic. On the next slide, um just a quick timeline of where we are. Our initial thinking was that ESDs would ultimately

047redeliver all pathways of the Texas mentorship training. Um so a snapshot of kind of three years of development, testing, and launch. In this um past school year, US Prep, as our partner, has been developing and piloting the training. In this upcoming school year, they're going to continue piloting pathway one and two training and then develop that third pathway, which is the EP field supervisor training. And then in 2627, ESCUs would redeliver the pathways to the field. So, we've got um ESC staff already at um they're just starting the summer at each of our regional service centers. um to support the implementation of this program. The next slide shows our delivery train starting with US prep. You can kind of think of it as like US prep at the top with a tea partnership. Um working

048on designing this training training ESC mentoring fellows and that second gray box. I'll give you just one second to read the key on the left side. There's lots of arrows, lots of boxes here. Um so the ESSE mentoring fellows would deliver that training and provide ongoing support and coaching to the three pathways um that would then provide that support to pre-ervice and early service teachers. Um I will say one piece that we're contemplating is this third this third um pathway the EP staff including field supervisors you see a little dotted line down to cooperating and host teachers were wondering like what the interest is benefits potential challenges of EP staff engaging in a toot to redeliver this training to those pathway one mentoring educators. So that is the third question. I think it's a big

049one. I would love to discuss it with this group. My thinking was I wanted to bring this initial question to the group today, get some written feedback and then come back later in the summer in our August EPI meeting um and dive a little bit deeper into this question. So our second to last slide, y'all are like when are we wrapping up? There's like 15 other topics to get to. Feedback survey. What are the benefits of providing a training of trainer option for EP staff via pathway 3 to redeliver pathway one training to mentoring educators and then what challenges and maybe solutions would exist um on the last slide so you can provide some input some initial input on the Padlet um or the survey and know that we will come back to this later

050in the summer. I just wanted to call out a couple of um structures we're going to continue to gather stakeholder feedback. One is through these FC meetings um in August. The second is through just in time input. An example of that is this rulemaking feedback session on HB2's prep a lotment including mentorship and we anticipate having more of those where we can do like a deeper dive because we've got so many topics in these FC meetings which is great. Um and then we have a stakeholder advisory committee. I know some of the people on this call are on that advisory committee that met throughout last year and will continue to meet into next year. Um okay. So um in terms of anticipated cost for the training offered by ESC's, we're continuing to work on that

051and part of our work um in the next coming months is in the coming months is working with ESC's to develop business models um to make this service available out to the field. Um Holly HB2 asking if it limits the number of participants for prep mentor partnership programs. Um yes, there are some caps on the number of beginning teachers. So those first and second year teachers that uh could be funded. That's 40. Um but then there are also some districts could also use some funding in other areas of the prep aotment to support this work. Um Katie, I would love to I see your question about would this replace what we at EPS have to provide for training. Um, I think we can come back to this potentially in August as we talk a little

052bit more about I see several questions here about costs and like funding that you'll get from the state and then costs for EPS and other stakeholders. So, we can dig into that a little bit later, but I'm looking at time and I don't want to take more time from the rest of the group. So, I can follow up with these questions um either one off or um in our August meeting. Thank you all so much. Thank you, Ally. Appreciate it. Um, so a chance to kind of dig into some uh future facing work with the outcome of legislative session and work underway with our teacher mentorship work, but um there also was an aspect meeting since we were all asked together um the aspect met um in April. Um and if we go to the

053next slide, there were a number of actions that they took uh collectively. They um moved to adopt a rule review and a review of their and um some slight updates to their administrative rules and then uh took the opportunity to approve an additional set of programs to offer the teacher residency preparation route um and approved two new EPS. um and then uh voted a proposal on um updates to the chapter 235 special education and bilingual education um certification standards. So um for context that as many of you know the board has been working for a number of years um to uh develop and codify a combined bilingual special education certification and associated educator standards um and has taken the opportunity to take what's currently subchapter F and subchapter G of um their educator standards which

054were um special education and bilingual education respectively and combine them into one new subchapter F um so that there's clear coherence across the standalone special education and bilingual education standards and this new um cohered bilingual special education set standards. Um so they voted on these at proposal at their last meeting and we anticipate them coming back um to these standards at adoption um in July. And then lastly, they had an opportunity to discuss updates to um uh Texas test development and our performance assessment de development as well as our accountability rules which uh team members are going to give you all an update on here next. Um then with that I will turn it over to Jeremy. Thanks Jessica. Good morning everyone. Uh, I'm not going to be long here, but I just wanted to

055provide an update on where where we're at in chapter 229, which is the accountability system for educator prep. Uh, April discussion and kind of the next steps here. Uh, on the next slide here, so we provide just uh kind of the high level where we're at in the process. So, as a reminder, last fall beginning in September we uh the ESPC adopted chapter 229. In November, the SBOE provided final approval of the rules and we sent notifications to EPS of their recommended statuses. In February, the ESPC approved all the ratings. Again in February we had a data working group meeting that started the process towards discussion in April. In April we had a discussion with the ESPC on proposed updates for the 2425 uh reporting year and in July we anticipate bringing a proposal item

056from that discussion. on the next slide. Uh so just to kind of give you like what's driving us to do changes each year. Uh this year there were five things that drove us to uh do a variety of things in our discussion item in April. Uh that includes board the board provides us guidance and questions at at any time we bring chapter 229 uh to the board. uh we had stakeholder input uh specifically that data working group but we also hear from uh you guys regularly throughout the year and we take that information in to to help inform our process. Uh we continually pay attention to chapter ch rule changes in other chapters and apply that to chapter 229 when it's appropriate. We gain wisdom by just calculating ASAP or performing the ASAP evaluation each

057year. And finally, we do review all the rules to make sure there's clarity in them each year. On the next slide, so we had six categories that we discussed with the board in April. They included a proposed change to the small group process. Uh a the a process for implementing the student growth standard. Uh updates to the closure procedures that are tied to chapter 229, a shift in the chapter that commendations are found, a shift in how not rated status is applied, and finally just normal manual and rule language enhancements. And then finally, just some additional information. If you would uh if any of those topics caught your eye, I would encourage you to go to the April aspect item and review that to see what we were up to. Uh we also are bringing

058a proposal in July for chapter 229. Um and uh that's all I got here. So uh happy to field any questions uh if there are any but otherwise we can keep moving. Thanks Jeremy. Um again if folks have uh questions feel free to drop them in the Padlet or in the chat. Um but appreciate you and your team's continued engagement on this. Um, if we transition to the next section, we've got an update on test development. So, I'm going to turn it over to Kay and Demarco. All righty. Greetings everyone. Can you hear me? Jessica, can you give me a thumbs up? Okay, great. I hope everyone's doing well. My name is Kay Jernigan. Nice to meet you. This is my first time at an EPC meeting presenting. Uh, I serve as a test development

059specialist on the educator standards and testing team and I lead the development for the new core EC6 bilingual education Spanish and English as a second language exams. Um, so right now second we're going to go over a brief uh testing update here. So just to keep in mind, give me one second. All right, here we are. So, um, of course, you know, we consider our students an educator candidates. So, ESPC has worked to identify opportunities to streamline exam content and made it a priority to incorporate stakeholder feedback into the exam development process. So, over the next few years, several exams will be redesigned with these aims in mind. So, starting this fall, the revised special education specialist EC12 and deafb blind EC12 exams will launch. The following year in September 2026, the bilingual education Spanish

060supplemental EC12 exam will launch. Um, in 2027, phase one of the new EC, I'm sorry, core EC6 exam and the new Texas test of educator proficiency known as TTEP will launch pending ESPEC action. And lastly, in September 2028, the second phase of the new core EC6 exam, the revised English as a second language and the bilingual special education exams will launch. Um, I don't know what happened to my golden rectangles, but we're going to pretend they're there. So, as you can see, we're working hard to improve the preparation exams for our educators, but today we're going to focus on the upcoming redesign core EC6 exam, formerly core subjects EC6 and the test, I'm sorry, the Texas test of educator proficiency, which will be known as TTEP. You can go to the next slide. Oh, there

061they are. Voila. Okay. So, uh just to give you a little background on the current core subjects EC6 exam. So, core subjects EC6 candidates must pass pedagogy, science of teaching, reading, and the core subjects exam that includes a five subtest model of ELR, math, science, social studies, and a subtest that covers of course fine arts, health, and physical education to earn certification. Passing all five of the subtests is required for candidates to be recommended for core subjects EC6 certificate. And lastly, candidates are allotted a five retake uh I'm sorry are allotted five retake attempts. So just you can go to the next slide. All righty. So scheduled to launch in 2027 and 28 is a new EC core EC6 exam. So this exam was updated to offer candidates more flexibility and the opportunities to earn

062certificates in high needs areas. So candidates have two options. They can elect to take a four subtest exam which would include the base content areas of ELAR, math, science, and social studies or they can take a five subtest exam that includes the four core subjects I just named plus one of the following specialty subtests. So that would still include fine arts, health, and PE. also include special education, ESL and bilingual Spanish proficiency. You can go to the next slide. All righty. So in 2027, phase one of the new core EC6 exam will launch offering candidates three certificate pathways. So candidates must pass of course pedagogy, the science of teaching reading and choose either the four subtest or five subtest exam option. and they're displayed on the screen. So, candidates who select the four subtest model

063would take subtests that cover the core content of math, eer science, and social studies. So, once they pass all of the required subtests and met all other certification requirements, they will be eligible for recommendation for the base core EC6 certificate which is listed at the top of the pathways. And then the second option is for candidates who elect the five subtest exam model. So that will still include our four core content areas of math, eer science, and social studies, but it will also include a fifth specialty subtest that would include either fine arts, health, PE or special education, sorry, special education. So once they've passed all the requirement and other sub uh certification requirements, they would be eligible to recommendation for the corresponding core EC6 certificate. So if they elected to take SPED, then they

064would get a core special education certificate. Again, they're at the top of the pathways. All right, we can go to the next slide. All righty. So scheduled to launch in 2028 is phase two of the new core EC6 exams. So the exams will offer candidates two additional certificate pathways. So phase two will also require candidates to choose either the four subtest or five subtest exam option. So candidates who select the five subtest model would take subtests that cover of course math e science and social studies and then the fifth specialty content or of either ESL or bilingual Spanish proficiency. So once they've passed all of the subtests and met the other requirements, they would be eligible for recommendation for again the corresponding certificate. So if they chose core with ES ESL then they their certificate

065will be core ESL with STR. All righty. I do see some comments in the chat. I will answer them once we get to the end of my section if that's okay. All righty. So now that we've discussed our certification pathways, this is how we envision the experience for candidates who want to attain EC6 certification beginning in 2027. So initially candidates along with their EP program would decide if they want to earn a base core EC6 certificate or a specialty core EC6 certificate. So if they elect the base core certificate then EP program would admit the candidate under the core with STR EC6 certificate area and then the candidate would attempt all four subtests. If you can do one click that would be great. Um of course candidates can schedule these subtests individually which is a

066change from the current core subjects exam. If the candidate passes all four of the subtests on the first attempt, then they would be eligible for certificate recommendation. If the candidate does not pass all the subtests on the first attempt, then they would retake the failed subtest similarly to the current retake policy that we have in place. Now, uh, one more click, please. Thank you. Then candidates will be able to attempt any of the specialty subtests after they've earned an initial core certification. So that means that can be the base score or if they earned an ESL exam then they would still be able to attempt any of the other sort of certificate areas. You can click one more time just to let you know they're going to be like three clicks but not now. Okay.

067Um so if candidates were to elect to take the five subtest model and attempt a specialty area then they of course would have to be admitted under one of the four specialty certificate areas. for example, special education in this case. So, they would attempt all five of the exams plus special education. I'm sorry, subtest. And of course, they can register for them individually. You can do one more click. Just one. Thank you. If the candidate passes all five of the No, go back one. Okay, here we go. If the candidate passes all five of the subtests on the first attempt, then they would be eligible for the certificate recommendation. If they do not pass all five subtests on the first attempt, then they would retake them. And again, similar to what we do now with

068the five retake rule, they would have those options. Now, a click, please. Okay. So, here's a caveat or consideration that we're considering. If the candidate elects to take the specialty uh course certificate pathway, then they of course would attempt all five of the exams. However, if they failed any of the um subtest for spe the specialty subtest, then they could also apply or uh with their programs approval be apply for a base core certificate. So then they would not have to take that fifth specialty subtest to actually attain core certification. They would just revert back to the base core exam certificate. All righty we can go forward. Okay. So given the feedback sorry in order to facilitate our vision for the projected new core EC6 certification and testing there are some considerations that we are

069factoring into the revision and development process. So these considerations revolve around candidates testing experience time and cost and emphasize the ESPC's goal of providing flexibility wherever possible. So we will require programs to admit candidates under one of the five core EC6 certificate pathways and approve testing for the area admitted. So again I know I mentioned it before but side by side you can see the comparison. So again we have the base certificate with core with STR EC6 the core fine arts health and PE with STR EC6 core special education with STR EC6 core ESL with STR EC6 core bilingual education Spanish with STR EC6 and as you can see the certificate name has changed which is why it's no longer core subjects EC6 because of the flexibility uh we also would establish a base exam

070that would allow candidate flexibility ility that means they can choose between the base exam or a specialty core certificate and exam model. So this flexibility will also allow candidates who fail the fifth subtest as I mentioned the option of being recommended for a core with strc certificate and then candidates would be able to attempt any of the fifth subtest after receiving the initial core EC6 certification. So essentially once you've received any or earned the core certificate no matter what it is any of the five then you would be able to search by exam the other specialty areas if the candidate desire to do so. And lastly the other consideration and major change is that candidates no longer have to sit for the entire exam at once. They can register for the subtest individually. All righty

071we can move to the next slide. So, we just mentioned a couple of considerations. However, given the feedback we've received recently from programs around the new core EC6 exam and certificate pathways, uh there are more considerations that we're in the process of addressing. So, in regards to testing, we want to ensure that the five attempt rule aligns with the flexible model for the new core EC6 exam. We also want to in regards to accountability ensure that accountability measures allow for the flexible nature of the exam without creating additional barriers for programs. And lastly, in regards to ESPC rules, we want to ensure that the base core exam would be used for multiple certificates and established rules for EP accountability measures. All righty. So given the implementation of HB2, we recognize the importance of ensuring the

072field is aware of updates and changes. Uh we share this information to stakeholders via our website, the EP newsletter, exam one pages, and framework webinars. And I know um I want to acknowledge that lastly, we do know that we're in the early stages of exam development. So there may be some non-closure as we still are seeking input from stakeholders and working through phases of development. So as we get more information and clarity we'll share with stakeholders. So with that in mind, are there resources or avenues of communication we should consider? Um are there any other feedback or questions that you have? If so, you can add them to the um test development section of the Padlet. And I don't know if there were any questions in the chat that stuck out, but I think DeMarco

073answered them. And if not, I will go back in the chat now because I'm going to hand it over to DeMarco. So, thank you. Thanks, Kay. Um, so there were a few questions in the chat. Y'all really appreciate the questions. As Kay shared, we are in the early development stages and really we're looking at this presentation today as a feedback opportunity. So, we'll take your questions. Um, really think hard around some of the policy considerations related to this new exam. But again, as K shared, the goal is candidate flexibility as as much as we can, taking into consideration time and cost. We've heard that loud and clear from the field and we want to make sure that we get it right with this uh redesigned core exam. Okay, next slide. Um, so I will take

074a brief moment to provide an update related to the Texas Test of Educator Proficiency, otherwise known as TTEP. Next slide. A little bit of background on this assessment. Uh I would say about a year ago in April of 2024, the ESPC directed TEA staff to pursue the development of the Texas specific teacher performance assessment really with EPS leading the charge on this assessment. And then in September of 2024, TEA provided an update related to the strategy to in a sense secure an EP team that would work to develop this assessment. At the previous ESPEC meeting in April, we provided an additional update to the ESPC with next steps related to that grant opportunity for uh EP programs and we also shared at that time we were in the middle of uh interviews for the grant

075opportunity. I am excited to share on the ne next slide that we have actually identified and selected the EP the TTEP EP development team. So the folks you see on the screen will work diligently over the next two years to develop all components of the TTP including implementation resources. Uh we are really excited for these folks. They had outstanding applications and they are a great group of people. I do think I saw a few of you on the call today, but just congratulations and just appreciate all the time and effort um that you put into the application process and that you will put in over the next two years. So with that y'all on the next slide, I do want to just surface. Uh Sherry, you were a little bit ahead of me, but I

076appreciate you thinking about what will be the stakeholder engagement opportunities for this assessment. As is standard for all of our assessments, there are multiple opportunities for stakeholders to engage with exam development and TEP will be no different. I thought it might be helpful to talk through the graphic here. Thinking about stakeholder engagement for TTP, the TTEP EP content development team will be at the core of the sort of stakeholder engagement. Again, their responsibility will be to design all components of the exam and the implementation resources. They also have responsibilities related to responding to stakeholder feedback, participating in professional learning communities and engaging in learning calls and focus groups. So again, they will have their work cut out for them over the next two years. From there, we'll have opportunities to uh work with subject matter

077experts who could be folks from EPS and also ELEA's districts uh who really have subject again subject matter expertise and will provide a specific lens to the development of the exam. And then from there, we plan to have additional stakeholder engagement opportunities uh thinking about stakeholders providing feedback at critical milestones and decision points throughout the assessment. Recognizing that the ESPC and the SBOE uh both really shared that it's important for us to have a Texas specific performance assessment with Texas educators leading that charge. And so our stakeholder engagement plan is is really going down that pathway. On the next slide, I want to share and I shared this opportunity at the last FC stakeholder meeting, but excuse me, in the very near future, we do have an opportunity to organize a TTP stakeholder advisory committee.

078Uh, this group will provide feedback at critical decision points and milestones. Again, thinking about who is sitting at the table in addition to our EP development team. This group will be comprised of EP faculty, staff, and LEA district teachers and leaders. And we anticipate that the application for this stakeholder advisory committee will launch no earlier than August of 2025. We are currently in the drafting stages of that application, but as soon as we are able to share it out with the field, we will we will share that information with you all as well. Some of you might uh actually be sitting on that team. But again, this is just one opportunity of many that we plan to have over the next two years. As I shared in the chat with Sherry's question, once we finalize

079more details related to the development timeline for this assessment, I'll also update the group here on on just what will happen over the next two years. But we're still in the very early planning stages of the assessment. However, we can anticipate a launch in September of 2027. And I do believe that might be it for me, unless I have a secret slide that I forgot about. Okay, handing it over to Kelly. Good morning, y'all. Happy Friday. It's good to see you all. I also have just some quick updates around the ESPC's recent adoption of the new chapter 231 subchapter F special education personnel assignment rules. On the next slide is an overview of the updates that were made in subchapter F. So, uh, the bulk of the board's discussion was around the assignment of special

080education teacher in 231.701 and those content competency requirements. Um, as well as the development of the Texas content competency worksheet, which we're calling the Texas worksheet. Um, throughout this process, there were also updates made in the section for teachers of deaf and heart of hearing. Some language cleanup here just to update terminology and then align language across other subchapters. So that update was made and then finally the aspect did adopt the new 231.710 which is a new subsection for the assignment of teachers of students who are deafb blind. So that deb blind exam and align certificate launch in September of this year and so those updates were made in this most recent round of rulemaking as well. On the next slide. Oh, yep. We developed the Texas worksheet. There it is. Um, on the next

081slide, um, y'all have seen this slide before, I believe, but we replaced this older rule text in 231. um that said that if a teacher was providing content instruction in a special education classroom setting, those folks needed to hold the content or they could utilize the house framework as a a flexible option to demonstrate their content proficiency. And so that older rule text um has been done away with the updated rule text which should pop up I think if we click one or two times. There it is. Um this new rule became effective on May 18th. Um and just provided some clarity to the field around which teachers needed to demonstrate content proficiency and then the options that teachers had for demonstrating the content proficiency based on their assignment. So the rule text continues to

082specify I think if we click maybe four times we can just get them all up. I should have taken these animations out. Um the role text continues to specify that special education teachers need to hold a valid special education certificate and then um also clarified that special education teachers of record are the teachers that need to demonstrate that content proficiency by holding the aligned content certification for their assignment or utilizing the new Texas worksheet which replaces house. The rule text also um gets specific about the requirements within the Texas worksheet for those folks who have already demonstrated their content proficiency on house, directs them to the appropriate section of the worksheet, and then also directs new teachers to the Texas worksheet to the sections where they would need to meet requirements. Um so hopefully, I

083know we kind of have a varied group this morning for LEA folks who are thinking about hiring and staffing for the upcoming school year. Hopefully this is helpful. And then also knowing that this rule text um does allow for a kind of a broader group of special educators to utilize the Texas worksheet, including interns. Um hopefully the uh implementation resources that we'll go over in the next few slides are are helpful for folks. If we move forward one slide, we have an overview. Oh, we have a side by side of the old house worksheet and the new house worksheet. So, as you all are aware that older house framework had teachers at the elementary and secondary level. Um, they could demonstrate their content proficiency by holding a generalist certificate or meeting a certain point threshold

084through a combination of these different like content aligned experiences. So, previous teaching experience, college coursework, and PD. The new Texas content competency worksheet is set up very similarly. So, elementary special education teachers of record, those teachers in classrooms EC um through five folks um that fall into that bucket need to meet requirements in section C by meeting that 24 point threshold uh representing all four core content areas. So, similar to house, math, science, and social studies need to be represented there. And then at the secondary level, teachers grades 6 through 12, those folks need to meet requirements in section D of the worksheet. And then secondary teachers do need to meet an 18point threshold in each of the core content areas where they're assigned as teacher of record. Y'all will also notice there is just

085that note on the bottom. The Texas worksheet is the flexible option for teachers who don't hold the content certification. So if you have teachers assigned as special education teachers of record who hold their content, they won't be interacting with the Texas worksheet. So for instance, if you have special education teachers of record um at an elementary level and they hold their core subjects EC6, they don't need to utilize the worksheet. This is for those teachers who who don't hold that content certification. The next slide, I think, is the overview of the Texas worksheet. And um you can see there we have sort of sections for everyone and then the activities that teachers are generating points from. So very similar to house college credit hours, previous teaching experience, highquality professional development that's aligned to the content

086area carries a point value on the worksheet. And then the ESPC did adopt those additional activities with the asterisk um as part of the Texas worksheet that were not previously included in house. So teachers who have gone through a residency, have previous pair of professional experience, etc. Those all carry a point value on the new Texas worksheet as well. And then I think if we click twice, did want to call out a couple of sections of the worksheet um in particular. So section B, this is for folks who have already demonstrated their content proficiency on the house framework. as long as they meet the administrator attestation in section B, there's no disruption to those folks ability to serve in their placement. So that's all housed in section B. And then additional flexibilities for firstear teachers

087and secondary teachers of multiple content areas live within section E of the worksheet as well. On the next slide. So the educator certification page has been updated with a new landing page for special education personnel assignment guidance. So as these rules became effective in May and we are rolling out implementation resources for the field. They're all posted here. Um, so you can see that there is a sort of wraparound text related to the rule text and then an accordion section below which will continue to be updated over the summer as additional implementation resources are available. On the next slide, the first two implementation resources are already posted. So, we have an asynchronous rule update webinar that is available for folks to view as well as an FAQ document. The webinar provides an overview of the

088rule text and walks folks through the Texas worksheet. And then that FAQ document has questions answered related to the rule text itself, the requirements within different sections of the Texas worksheet, and then also does have a section for EP considerations, particularly around um assigning intern candidates to appropriate placement. So that all lives within the the FAQ document as well. On the next slide, oh there you go. on the next slide. Did just want to take a moment to shout out the members of our 231 implementation supports working group. Um these folks have many of these folks have been with us since we had many different versions of the Texas worksheet. We've been working on this for the better part of 18 months and then some new folks that have reviewed the FAQ, provided input, helped

089us better understand what implementation resources um are helpful for folks as these rules become effective. So did want to take a moment and share our thanks and gratitude here. And then as folks on the next slide are reviewing the rule text, reviewing the uh FAQ, viewing the webinars, did just want to name the two additional implementation supports that will be posted to that personnel assignment guidance page. Um sometime today there should be the second asynchronous webinar that's posted. This is specific to the Texas worksheet and we'll actually walk folks through how to complete the worksheet for a number of different scenarios. So, what does it look like to complete the worksheet for a first year teacher, for a secondary teacher, for an intern? Um, so that should be available soon and will be posted to

090that personnel assignment guidance page. And then we are collecting um additional questions for the FAQ. So any questions that we receive through the FAQ submission form, that's the QR code right there on the right. Any questions that come in through July 21st will be addressed in an updated FAQ 2.0. That will be posted to that personnel assignment guidance page no later than July 25th. So if you have questions, if you have wonderings related to the rule text, the Texas worksheet, please do submit those through that QR code to that Microsoft form. we can make sure to get your questions answered and addressed in that FAQ document. That is all for me and I if there's no questions or I'll take a look at the chat but I'll go ahead and turn things over to William.

091Hello. Um so I am going to share screen myself uh just because of some um animations. Me do that real quick. Uh, Kelly DeMarco K, y'all are on my screen. Can you hear me? Okay, great. Um, all right. So, um, hello everyone. My name is William C. I'm the director of, uh, educator preparation continuous improvement, uh, helping lead the redesign of the continuing approval review in partnership with our ed prep management team at TEA and, uh, TPI US, our contracted vendor. Um, and so here to give you some all some updates on our first pilot and some opportunities to get a sneak preview of uh what's going on for our 2526 pilot uh including the redesigned uh continuing approval review rubric that we will be using in 2526 for our pilot programs. So very exciting.

092If you're thinking like uh you know what, it's a long meeting. I'm going to sign off early. Uh don't do it. we got some uh good updates for you all. So, as uh I am presenting and sharing information, I may have a little bit of trouble uh checking the chat, although I will try and um Melissa Yodar is also on here. Melissa, you can help me monitor it. Uh but please use the Padlet um as well. and any questions that you have coming up about the redesigned continuing approval review process, the redesign rubric, any connections that you're making, things you're excited about, things that you're wondering about. Um, and any questions you have uh about the upcoming stakeholder engagement opportunities, uh, please let us know. All right, so you all are very familiar with the

093effective preparation framework and probably familiar with this slide. Uh so just wanted to uh ground us in that because this is really where we begin. Um in 2003 with the la 2023 with the launch of the effective preparation framework. Um so as you all know this is an aspirational vision for educator preparation by the field for the field really capturing the best practices uh in Texas and across uh across educator preparation that lead to great results for our aspiring teachers and therefore for our Texas students. Um split into five levers as you can see there. And the reason that we talk about the EPF as we begin discussing the car redesign is it really uh comes out of a number of uh other initiatives and big things that are happening with the SPEC um in

094uh creating the optimal teacher candidate preparation experience. And the EPF comes in here talking about car redesign because it was important that the EPF not just be words on a page, not just be uh a a great website that you can go to if you're curious, um but something that is actually implemented across the state. So the redesign of the continuing approval review in order to provide quality substantive feedback to programs um that could lead to continuous improvement. uh the EPF really helped ground that uh redesign of the continuing approval review. All things that many of you, especially if you've been involved in these stakeholder groups before, um are likely pretty aware of. Here we have a revamped uh slide of the vision, the eventual vision, the draft vision. saying that a lot because I

095I know that that some of this will seem um you know may seem new. It may seem like big changes. So that's why we're continuing to put this in front of stakeholders uh to see what questions are coming up, see what thoughts uh uh happen. But uh essentially what this slide is doing, it's showing the interconnectedness of continuous improvement from accountability through the continuing uh redesign, continuing approval review and through alignment to the EPF. So as you all know, EPS receive their accreditation status yearly. Um and currently they are scheduled for a continuing approval review at least every five years. Um, some of that would stay essentially the same and some of that could shift in our draft vision. So potentially EPS that uh required interventions may receive um uh the continuing approval review uh

096at different times than just when they are coming up for their five-year review. Um and that continuing approval review would uh be a quality review and it's currently in our pilot stage. um uh and going to be conducted by TPIUS, our contracted vendor um who has worked with us extensively to create a Texas-based quality review process. Now, how does that actually lead to continuous improvement? Well, in our vision, after the quality review, in which the EP received prioritized action steps, they would have the opportunity to partner with a technical assistance provider uh to develop an action plan, improve and focus areas, implement that action plan in our theory of action that would then go back to uh visible, measurable improvement uh either in their accreditation status or if already accredited um in their ASAP index

097scores. So you can see a few details um in our vision around the optin for TA provider. a caveat that we are still developing that process to vet uh third-party providers, but this is probably the first time when um thoughts may be popping up for you um to enter into the Padlet questions that may be coming up around this vision for the redesign of the continuing approval review. So, I'll give you just a second if you want to switch to the Padlet. Drop any questions or reactions there. All right. So while uh you are finishing up that Padlet thought that Padlet question, I also wanted to take some time to celebrate uh and just name who our programs that just completed their quality review as part of our 2425 pilot are. Um so several in

098this room um five total programs. We worked to get a balance um of programs that were up uh in 2425. We worked to get a balance from that list of both ACPs and four-year colleges and universities. And you can also see uh we worked for a balance when it came to size uh the type of ACP. And we are just so grateful if you're in this room uh for you. If you're watching this recording, thank you in the future. um and even if not sending you those those grateful vibes because you are going to see that we learned um a ton from these programs. So we completed our pilot um our pilot year one you'll see that based on our learnings it was really important for us to have a a second year was always

099a plan we didn't uh shift that but um a second year of the pilot because we learned a ton from our first pilot uh that we were going to implement for our second. So the key priorities just to ground us for um since the beginning for this 24-25 pilot and continuing are going to be these three things integrating quality into the continuing approval review. So for example whereas um in the standard traditional review to check compliance with uh TAC and statute around required coursework um our team may review syllabi degree plans just to ensure that all those uh topics are covered. Um, in a quality review, a review team would come in, review those syllabi, review those degree plans, but also potentially um observe the course, speak to the instructor, talk to students um districts

100in which students are placed to identify strengths and gaps um in order to really get full context on the impact of that course on candidates. Stakeholder engagement is our second priority. um really wanted to make sure that similar to the EPF, we were uh getting plenty of feedback from our Texas stakeholders on how this was working and pilot participants um obviously are a big part of that. And then finally, uh our last priority was the recruitment and training of Texas reviewers. So, um we have uh and our um working on our second draft of a Texas specific rubric. We also wanted to make sure that our reviewers uh came from Texas ELEAS and EPS. So, um in 2425, you'll see that many Texas reviewers went out into the field and will continue in 2526. So,

101I wanted to ground our update on uh our pilot one learnings in those three things. Stakeholder engagement, integrating quality, and uh our Texas rubric and reviewers. So for stakeholder engagement um our survey it was important that our huge stakeholder of our five pilot programs really felt like they not just got the advantage of having a quality review but really felt like it gave them an inside look and an ability to give feedback on the process. Um and so what we found through our surveys was that our EP leadership especially and the main contact for the review so the person who wasn't just um uh uh you know uh uh finding out about the review or participating in the review as it was happening but were part of the um planning process for the review with

102TPI um uh definitely felt that way. they agreed that they had meaningful ways to provide input and feedback throughout the process. Um and um that was actually one of our strongest responses when it came to integration of quality. We were looking and really one of our priority um questions and metrics is do participants actually feel that they get and are able to identify priority improvement areas that are aligned to the EPF. So in four out of our five programs, we were excited to see that that was the case. You can see some of that sample feedback that we were uh really excited to see for integration of quality for Texas reviewers. Uh we trained a great cohort of reviewers in fall of 2024 and over half of those folks that were trained, even given the

103limited amount of reviews we did for this pilot, half of those folks have already been able to go out on a review. Some of them are actually even on this call. Um and we are planning to train about 30 new reviewers in August. Um, and 12 of those, uh, hoping with RSVPs will actually be current LEA employees. So, we're really working to integrate that LEA EP partnership and perspective into the review. We also in these three priority areas learned a ton. I don't know why it says number one, number one, number one. Probably should say one, two, three, but apologize for that. Uh so we're going to go through some of those things that we learned from our uh first pilot. So potentially one of our biggest takeaways and if you were part of this

104pilot hopefully this resonates uh with you but one of our biggest takeaways is that this pilot quality review feels quite different not just from the traditional continuing approval review but can also really feel different than a lot that EPS have engaged in when it comes to receiving feedback um at all. So, one thing we've learned is that we need to do a really good job and be really thoughtful about how we are framing and preparing our EPS for this shift. Do we need to provide even more buffer time? Yes, we found that we definitely did, especially when we looked at the experience of our early pilots and we're working to build that in. But in addition to time, is there additional framing we need to do? Sometimes um faculty uh large groups of faculty were

105in the room, sometimes it was just a really small group. And we found that when faculty were in the room, faculties whose courses had been observed and reviewed that could hit and land differently than um than you know really small groups made up of maybe a couple of folks from EP leadership. So we really are thinking about the framing and how we can prepare folks for this review in a way uh that leads to maximum um uh impact when it comes to integration of quality. We also learned that in this shift from compliance to quality, there's some clarifications that were going to be needed, not just for streamlining so folks don't feel like they uh are doing two totally separate um uh reviews, but also to separate also to like um make the separation clearer

106for for what it is. So how can we separate in some ways the compliance portions which sometimes can just be yes you've done this no you have not from the quality while also ensuring like I said we aren't doubling up the work on EPS so this is something that we are looking to do um reducing in some ways the amount of paperwork and um submissions that uh programs are making for compliance in order to help us really uh keep that focus on quality. And then finally for our Texas review rubric and reviewers, um we got this feedback not just from our new Texas reviewers but from seasoned TPI reviewers and from programs that although the rubric um was very clearly aligned to the EPF and there were some some things that were super helpful about

107it. We got some feedback that it really needed additional consolidation and clarity which is what um uh the meat of this is this presentation is about. We want to give you a preview of what that rubric looks like and we're going to go uh a little bit deeper into the shifts. If you have any takeaways from our pilot learnings or any questions, feel free to drop them in the padlet. But in interest of time going to jump ahead. All right. So we are currently in a stakeholder engagement session and um a lot of other things but we are taking advantage of this time to to keep you all informed on the rubric structure. And then if you really perk up as you are looking through this rubric and you realize you want to be a

108part of a uh opportunity to take a deeper dive into it, then in July coming up we will have a stakeholder working group. So this is sort of a higher level preview of some of the changes we've made to the rubric. Some of the language refining and clarity will be done in this working group. Uh so just keep that in mind. All right. So, as we are thinking about the shifts that we may uh made to the rubric, I do want to ground a little bit in what the research is telling us are the most important things when it comes to strong teacher preparation. Because as much as we would love to and some programs may even want uh to have everything reviewed and everything prioritized, we know that if we prioritize everything, we may

109end up prioritizing nothing. So when it comes down to it, we are grounding ourselves in three pillars that really have the biggest impact on the candidate experience. the content that they get and the training that they get in their coursework, the practice that they do in classrooms, and then the support that they receive through coaching, feedback, and mentorship. So as we considered how we would ground in those three things that really helped us consolidate the r the um rubric which we knew was necessary based on our feedback feedback from reviewers, feedback from programs, we knew that although we had those five um uh had five review areas which you can see on the left that aligned very neatly with the EPF. that mirror the EPF um in a lot of ways. If you know the

110EPF levers, you can probably make connections between those five review areas on the left and the effective preparations framework. We know we needed to align, but we felt we could actually align, keep the three pillars on the right front of mind and um really help prioritize what we looked at in the review. So looking at those three pillars, what we saw was that those three pillars really connected very closely to the last three review areas in the first iteration of our rubric, which are also levers three through five of the EPF if you're curious. And so what we did is those really became the core components of this new draft of our rubric with the understanding that the initial two review areas from the first draft of the rubric, program performance management and recruitment and

111selection still were going to be strong enablers of those core components. So, the moment you've been waiting for. Here is a draft structure of our new quality review rubric. Review area one is quality of candidate training. You can see that has the most indicators underneath five. Review area two is quality of practice and reviewer area three is the quality of candidate support. Now, I mentioned five indicators as if that was a lot. Um, but compared to rubric 1.0, which had about 40 plus indicators, we were very excited um in this new version to bring that 40 down to 12. So, I'll give you all just a chance to scan through this. I think Melissa's doing um uh responding somewhat in the chat. So any burning questions that are coming up, feel free to put them

112in the chat. Wonderings, overall curiosities can go in the padlet. So, for the last part of this deep dive, I'm going to let you all in on a little bit of a closer look at each of these indicators. So, for each of these slides, it's really just going to be some independent processing time to allow you to take a look at the essential question driving each of the indicators under these three review areas. Before that, just really quickly, just wanted to show we are still very aligned to the EPF. Each of our indicators has multiple EPF essential actions aligned to it. All right, so here's review area one, the quality of candidate training. Take a minute to read through the essential questions driving this review area. going fast and furious, which maybe encourages some of

113you all to join the working group for a closer look. Let's review area two, the quality of practice. How do we ensure that that coursework actually lives out in the practice candidates are doing? You can see how performance management and recruitment still live in these indicators as well. And then finally, quality of support when our candidates are in the field and even before then, how are we supporting and coaching throughout that process? Just a quick word in connection to um Alli's um presentation. We uh have worked to come up with an all-encompassing term in the rubric so that we don't say cooperating mentor host over and over again. And that all-encompassing term currently is clinical support teachers. Um, if you end up having any feedback or wanting to refine that, um, we would love to

114hear about it in that working group. The cooperating host mentor. I mean, that comes out pretty quickly. Give you a second more for this last review area. Can't wait to see the chat. But also know Melissa's Melissa's got it and I'm I've got two minutes left. Folks who will be joining us for our July um rubric review session. I'm telling everyone that you should join us. Great. All right. I'm going to skip through that closer look. Um, but that is exactly what Melissa just said. Um, we will have a working group that are going to help us review a draft of the new rubric to help us uh refine uh language, ensure clarity. Um, so there actually was in the last survey you were able to put your name there. Um, so if you did

115that and you want to take it back, I guess you could do it in this survey, but we assume that most folks who are interested way back in March will still be interested. So, we'll utilize that list. Um, but also you will have a chance to let us know if you would like to participate in that um working group next uh in this survey. We know that July is a crazy time um both with vacations and also prep for the upcoming academic year. So, um we will try to get that date out uh date or dates as soon as possible. And just real quick, just so you all know, looking ahead, um we do not have uh the official um uh pilot list finalized, although we have gotten confirmation from a variety of EPS. Um

116and here's what we are looking for. Um we are looking for programs beyond just who we who is up for review in the 2526 school year. um we want to make sure that we're actually including programs that um do have a lowered accreditation status so we can really test out that theory of action on quality improvement there and we're going to keep looking for uh a balance of colleges, universities and ACPs um and ensure that we are also looking at um the at ACPs that have that more online only uh focus as well. All right, came in just in time. Um, I will pass it over to Trenton. Thanks, William. And if you don't mind, continue to share in advance the slides. I would be very grateful. And good last part of the morning to

117everyone. My name is Trenton Law, director of educator credentiing for those educators certified in another state or another country seeking to transfer their lensure to Texas. I'll take just a few minutes to give you a high-level preview of revisions to chapter 231 that I will present in a discussion item at the upcoming ESP meeting on July 25th. The focus will be on subchapters A through E and G. The revisions in these subchapters will ensure that the educator assignment rules remain clear, current, and align with certification standards. Chapter 231 provides guidance on educator certification and assignments across pre kindergarten through grade 12 settings organized into seven subchapters that you see here. Subchapter A outlines general criteria for assignments. Subchapters B through E cover grade specific assignments and subchapter G includes par profofessionals, administrators and other support

118roles. Subchapter F addresses special education related services. However, it will not be included in this discussion item since my colleagues in educator standards and testing recently made extensive updates to the subchapter. Next slide, please. During my time with you, in the next few minutes, I'll aim to share a glimpse of the proposed revisions for ESP consideration and request your feedback on clarity, usability, and effectiveness of the rule chapter. Uh lastly, I will provide my direct contact information for any feedback that you may have later on following the ASPback meeting discussion in July. Next slide, please. So, the proposed revisions include technical edits such as correcting certificate titles and alphabetizing and reumbering certificates in several sections to improve the clarity and consistency throughout the chapter. We're also expanding the list of certificates in various sections that

119are appropriate appropriate for certain assignments. If all goes as expected, we plan to propose a repeal and replace of subchapter E. Uh this replacement would include the consolidation and renaming of certain divisions would incorporate new courses approved by the state board of education matching them to the appropriate ESPback issued educator certificate and add new course subjects with the science of teaching and reading and bilingual education certificates were appropriate. Next slide please. So I would love to get your feedback to help us refine and improve the rule chapter. These questions will appear in the survey that you will receive following this meeting as questions 16 through 18. And I want to thank you in advance for your feedback. Next slide. After the discussion item is presented to the ASB on July 25th, if you have any

120additional feedback, please don't hesitate to reach out to me directly. Thank you. And I will hand it back over to Jessica. Thanks, Trenton. I appreciate it. Um, so to close us out here today, y'all, I'm excited. We're uh we're right on time. I'm so impressed. We had so many things on this agenda. I didn't know if we were going to make it, but uh fantastic job. Um just to close us out today, as a reminder, um the SBO SPOE meets in two weeks time. Um during their meeting the committee on school initiatives will uh review the recent rules adopted by the ESPC um which for this goound includes um chapter 250 the ESPEC's administrative rules um which made some slight updates to the uh uh petition for rulemaking processes. Um and then in addition to

121uh their contemplation of that item um I will also provide kind of a standing update on ESPback processes and uh discussions. Um as I mentioned at the top of this call our July ESPEC meeting is a two-day meeting, one day of work session and one day of meeting. Um during the work session as I named earlier we will spend the day uh really working to unpack um the components of House Bill 2 and Senate Bill 571 that intersect with the aspects work. Um so that will certainly be prime time viewing or attending I would imagine and then we again as I named will plan to bring back um discussion from that meeting to this stakeholder group in early August um to discuss next steps. And then during the board's formal meeting on uh July 25th,

122um I think a few items of note again as we are working to finalize the agenda um would include bringing uh chapter 229 the accountability rules to proposal um and the chapter 235F bilingual and special education standards uh to adoption. Um we also uh would anticipate a few discussion items um coming out of uh the legislative session and also providing updates to the board on our test development processes. Um with that I think that's the the highle overview of our upcoming meetings this summer. Again I know as the teams continue to reinforce we really appreciate folks asking questions in the chat throughout the meeting today. I know there are times where we weren't able to give uh answers with specificities, but I but I can tell you how helpful it is to see your questions.

123They really help guide the development of our FAQ documents and really can inform the way that we frame um our stakeholder engagement discussions going forward. Um so really appreciate it at this time. If there's any additional questions that folks have for sake of time, I would really encourage folks to put them in the Padlet. um or um there's also space in the survey that we are going to put in the chat here in just a second um for you all to provide input. Again, we are really trying to ensure that this is a space that folks find meaningful and useful, that they get the information that that you need uh to communicate with your um colleagues and that you feel like you've got an opportunity for meaningful input in this in um the work of

124the aspect. So, um, if you wouldn't mind taking a few minutes, uh, Jessica Gonzalez just put a survey link in the chat. Um, if you wouldn't mind giving us some feedback on today's, uh, stakeholder meeting. What went well? What could we do better? We're really aiming to engage in continuous improvement. Um, so again, thank you. do hope everyone gets some rest over this uh summertime and we look forward to seeing you in all of the various stakeholder uh sessions we just mentioned um throughout the day this afternoon. But thank you all. Appreciate it and have a fantastic rest of your day.