Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner Mike Morath came under questioning from board members during his regular update to the State Board of Education (SBOE) Wednesday. Morath defended controversial instructional materials developed under his authority and accused the media of inaccurately reporting on the Bible-based lessons initially approved by the State Board of Education (SBOE) earlier this week. 

Additional Day School Year (ADSY) programs 

The commissioner began his update with a presentation on math scores. According to STAAR test data, 50% of Texas students were designated “on grade level” in math in 2019. The percentage dropped to 35% in 2021 following the COVID-19 pandemic and rebounded to 43% in 2023. This number dropped slightly to 41% in 2024.  

The “on grade level” designation is the agency’s preferred way of communicating about student outcomes; however, it’s important to note that it refers to a group of students who have achieved well above the passing score. The group of students who have passed STAAR is substantially larger.  Additionally, the STAAR has been redesigned and, separately, cut scores have been changed since 2020, making comparisons between 2019 STAAR scores and more recent scores largely irrelevant. 

According to the agency, 21% of students did not earn passing grades on STAAR math tests in 2019. That proportion rose to 37% in 2021 and dropped to 27% as districts recovered from the pandemic. The number rose slightly to 31% in 2024. 

Morath presented this data to set up a discussion of the benefits of Additional Day School Year (ADSY) programs. According to the commissioner, there are currently three ADSY options: 

• A voluntary summer learning program that adds up to 30 days of summer learning to a traditional 180-day school calendar; 
• An intersessional calendar that consists of 180 days spread over the full year, with intermittent breaks for targeted support with a subset of students; and 
• A full-year redesign with a revamped calendar of seven six-week periods with daily schedule changes to increase teacher planning time and student play. 

The commissioner said districts that did not use ADSY programs saw the proportion of students that achieved a “meets grade level” designation increase 2% in math and decrease 3% in reading from 2022 to 2023. Morath shared that districts that utilized ADSY saw “meets grade level” designations increase 5% in math and decrease 1% in reading over the same period. Schools that went through a 12- to 14-month planning process with the assistance of TEA (ADSY PEP) saw “meets grade level” designations increase 10% in math and 3% in reading. 

The state has set aside $26.4 million for ADSY programs, which are currently utilized by 91 local education agencies (LEA) comprising 388 campuses. Of that $26.4 million, $17.7 million is set aside for ADSY PEP, which is used by 60 LEAs across 191 campuses. According to the agency, ADSY can provide, on average, additional funding of $750 per student for 30 additional days of learning. 

Bluebonnet Learning materials 

Following the commissioner’s presentation, SBOE members asked questions on a variety of topics, including the controversial instructional materials developed by TEA under House Bill (HB) 1605 and tentatively approved by the SBOE earlier this week. 

SBOE member Rebecca Bell-Metereau (D–San Marcos) asked the commissioner about the establishment clause of the U.S. Constitution as it relates to Bible references and parables inserted into the Bluebonnet Learning Open Educational Resources (OER) developed by TEA. 

“Do you believe that we should insert Christian doctrine into our curriculum?” Bell-Metereau asked.  

“I am unaware that this is an actual conflict in instructional materials,” responded Morath, who accused the media of inaccurate reporting. “I have heard this news argument, and it is not based in fact.” 

Bell-Metereau pointed out the significant number of Bible references in the Bluebonnet OER compared with other materials and their prevalence over references to other religions. 

Evelyn Brooks (R–Frisco) asked the commissioner who was responsible for writing the Bluebonnet materials, relaying concerns raised by constituents over the opaque authorship. The commissioner answered that HB 1605 requires that materials be developed by the agency, which has contracted a third party to write the actual text. The commissioner promised to provide Brooks with a list of all the people involved with Bluebonnet.  

Marisa Perez-Diaz (D–San Antonio) questioned the commissioner about the current conflict of interest that exists wherein the TEA is both a vendor of instructional materials and a reviewer.  

The commissioner replied that the agency has contracted third-party reviewers to create the quality rubrics and said the contracts and requests for proposals (RFP) are public record. 

Will Hickman (R–Houston) pointed out that instructional materials are ultimately considered high quality and suitable if they are approved by eight of the 15 members of the SBOE. Hickman expressed concern over the multiple rubrics and writers and asked when it would be appropriate for the SBOE to approve the high-quality instructional materials (IMRA) approval process. 

SBOE Chairman Aaron Kinsey (R–Midland) interjected that the board has already conducted the first of two after-action reviews of the process, with the second scheduled for January. Kinsey said the first review provided feedback that the suitability and quality rubrics were unclear and noted the next review will provide another opportunity for feedback.  

Pam Little (R–Fairview) reiterated the confusion over IMRA reviewers and said SBOE members were not allowed to talk with reviewers or see notes during the review process. Little emphasized the need for SBOE members to have access to those who have invested significant time with the materials up for review. Morath responded that SBOE members have extensive notes from the reviews and suggested there may be confusion over reviewers versus people who helped write the content. 

Additional questions from SBOE members: 

• L.J. Francis (R–Corpus Christi) raised concerns over young children being taught and assessed on devices versus paper. Recent legislation required districts to transition from administering the STAAR test on paper to computers. Morath said districts have extensive local control over how they deploy learning environments. However, Francis noted that as long as students are required to take the test on a computer, it is likely they will be taught on a computer. The commissioner responded that students aren’t assessed on STAAR until third grade but conceded Francis’ point. 
• Francis also asked whether Morath had evaluated the effectiveness of four-day school weeks. The commissioner responded that four-day weeks are harmful to students and alleged that school districts that have adopted four-day weeks have only done so in order to appease staff. 
• Audrey Young (R–Apple Springs) asked how the agency is tracking special education student growth over the school year. Young mentioned the availability of optional beginning-of-year (BOY) assessments and asked where is the state moving on BOY, middle-of-year (MOY) and end-of-year (EOY) administration of the STAAR test. Morath answered that HB 3906 had directed TEA to pilot a through-year assessment, something partially akin to a BOY, MOY, and EOY sequence. The commissioner said the through-year assessment proposal currently does not include a BOY because of mixed opinions in the field regarding its usefulness.  
• Julie Pickren (R–Pearland) raised the issue of students requiring remedial math courses after matriculating to the university level. Pickren asked whether there is a commission or board where K-12 and higher education are discussing the expectations for students entering college. The commissioner answered by hypothesizing a strong relationship between parental support and math proficiency, noting the SBOE has final authority over instructional material quality rubrics and could require that instructional materials include substantive home supports. Morath also accused math teachers of resisting changes to math instruction that would improve proficiency. 
• Pat Hardy (R–Fort Worth) suggested that mandatory reading academies have been successful and suggested a stipend and requirement to complete math academies. Morath responded that math academies are currently available and include a stipend that is prioritized for high-poverty campuses and available until state funds are depleted. Agency staff indicated the stipend is $350. 
• Staci Childs (D–Houston) asked the commissioner for an update on the progress of Houston ISD and the timeline for the agency to return its state-appointed school board to one elected by the community. Morath claimed Houston ISD had seen the largest year-over-year achievement gain in the history of Texas and perhaps the country. At the same time, the commissioner said the district has not satisfied any of the criteria for returning it to local control. The commissioner outlined the following criteria: 1) no more students on multi-year failing campuses; 2) compliance with all the required components of special education; and 3) board operations consistent with a high-performing governance environment. For TEA, this typically means adopting their preferred vendor program, Lone Star Governance. 
• Finally, Hardy asked Morath to comment on the illegal teacher certification mill uncovered in Houston. The commissioner reiterated his position that the news is inaccurate and that the Harris County district attorney will pursue criminal cases while the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) will adjudicate certifications. The commissioner said the TEA has begun what is expected to be a lengthy process of notifying districts of who is implicated.