Additional Information

Candidate Survey Responses

RESPONSES TO THE 2026 ATPE CANDIDATE SURVEY:

If elected, what do you believe your primary role and responsibility as a State Board of Education (SBOE) member should be, particularly in comparison to or in coordination with the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Legislature?

If elected, my primary responsibility as a member of the State Board of Education is to serve as a guardian of sound educational policy, ensuring that all Texas students receive a high-quality, inclusive, and academically rigorous education while respecting the distinct roles of the Texas Education Agency and the legislature.

The SBOE’s role is not to manage schools or implement day-to-day operations. That responsibility lies with the local school districts and the Texas Education Agency. Instead, the board's responsibility is to set strong standards, adopt a reasonable curriculum framework, approve instructional material, and provide thoughtful oversight, all grounded on evidence, educators' expertise, and what is developmentally appropriate for all students.

In coordination with TEA, SBOE should ensure that adopted standards and materials are clear, workable, and aligned with classroom realities, so teachers are supported rather than burdened. Educators should be trusted as professionals. SBOE decisions should reflect input from subject-matter experts and from those who teach students every day.

In relation to the legislature, the SBOE must respect legislative authority while also serving as an independent, student-focused voice. That means advocating for policies that support educators in protecting instructional integrity and keeping political ideology out of the classroom. When legislative actions affect curriculum or classroom practice, SBOE members have a responsibility to ask hard questions, elevate educators' perspectives, and focus on student outcomes.

Ultimately, I believe the SBOE works best when it stays in its lane, collaborates thoroughly with lawmakers, and remains centered on students, teachers, and communities, not politics. That is the approach I will bring to the board. I will reinforce that the State Board of Education focuses on education, not ideology.

In your opinion, what is the most pressing issue facing public education in Texas?

The most pressing issue facing public education in Texas is the growing disconnect between political decision-making and the real needs of students and educators in the classroom.

Across Texas, schools are being asked to do more with fewer resources. At the same time, educators face increasing pressures, shrinking support, and policy decisions that are too often driven by ideology rather than evidence. This has contributed directly to teacher burnout and retention challenges, reduced access to student support, and less stable learning environments for students.

At the same time, many students are coming to school with greater academic, mental health, and social-emotional needs. When schools lack funding, staffing, and flexibility to respond to those needs -particularly for students who are historically underserved - achievement gaps widen, and communities feel the strain.

We can address this by putting students first, trusting educators as professionals, investing in safe and supportive schools, and ensuring curriculum decisions are inclusive, accurate, and developmentally appropriate, all of which are my top priorities. Public education works best when teachers are supported, families are respected, and decisions are made with students, not politics, at the center.

Texas has the talent, commitment, and community support to strengthen our public schools. The challenge is aligning policy with the realities of our classroom, and it's here that strong leadership needs to step up.

If elected, what degree of input will you seek from educators, ATPE, and other educator organizations in policy decisions made by the SBOE? How would you seek that input?

Educator and stakeholder input must be central- not optional- to SBOE decision making. If elected, I will actively seek input from educators, ATPE staff/members, and other professional organizations before major policy, curriculum, and instructional materials decisions are made.

Educators are the experts in how policy works in real classrooms, and their voices should be engaged early, not after decisions have already been made. I seek this input through regular communication with educators and organizations, district visits and listening sessions, and careful consideration of public testimony and written comments.

The State Board of Education makes its best decisions when educators are trusted as professionals and treated as partners. This is why I will make sure to reach out and communicate. I am committed to ensuring educators' voices are heard, respected, and reflected in the board's work.

How much weight should the SBOE give to educator input when developing curriculum standards (known as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or “TEKS”) and approving instructional materials?

Educators' input should carry significant and meaningful weight in the development of TEKS and the approval of instructional materials, as they are the individuals who teach and are responsible for implementing the TEKS. Teachers and instructional leaders understand what is developmentally appropriate, academically sound, and workable in the real classroom.

While the SBOE has a responsibility to balance multiple perspectives, curriculum standards and materials are strongest when grounded in educator expertise, evidence-based practice, and student needs, not political ideology. Input from educators should inform both the content and the practice of standards and materials.

When educators are trusted, and their feedback is reflected in final decisions, the result is a higher-quality curriculum, stronger classroom implementation, and better outcomes for Texas students.

How should the SBOE approach curriculum and instructional materials decisions amid increased legislative emphasis on “parental rights”? What does meaningful parent engagement look like at the state level?

Parents are vital partners in their children’s education, and their input should be welcomed and taken seriously by the SBOE. SBOE should ensure a transparent accessibility process so parents understand curriculum standards and instructional material and have meaningful opportunities to provide feedback.

At the same time, curriculum decisions must remain grounded in educational expertise, academic standards, and the needs of all students. Meaningful parent engagement informs the process, but it should not replace educators' professional judgment or politicize classroom instruction.

Under HB 1605, the SBOE now reviews and approves TEA-developed instructional materials, including state-funded “Open Education Resource” options. How should the board balance local control and state oversight to ensure materials are high-quality and aligned to standards, as well as reflect Texas values without politicization? 

Under HB 1605, the SBOE’s role should be to provide thoughtful oversight of developed instructional materials, not control of TEA. The board must ensure that state-approved materials are high-quality, standards-aligned, accurate, and developmentally appropriate, while preserving districts’ ability to choose what best meets their local needs.

Balancing local control and state oversight means setting clear, academically sound expectations for material without maintaining a single approach for every classroom. State review resources should serve as optional tools, not prescriptions, and should be evaluated with meaningful input from educators who understand classroom realities.

“Texas values” should be reflected through academic integrity, respect for diverse communities, and a commitment to preparing students for civic participation and the workforce, not through political or ideological agendas. When materials are reviewed through a transparent, educator-informed process, the SBOE can help ensure quality and consistency while honoring local decision-making and keeping politics out of the classroom.

Texas is transitioning to new assessment and accountability systems under House Bill 8. The bill transfers board authority related to the testing and accountability system from the SBOE to TEA. What should the role of the SBOE be regarding the statewide testing and accountability system?

With authority for the testing and accountability system now residing with TEA under HB 8, the SBOE's role should be one of strong oversight, transparency, and advocacy for students and educators. While the Board no longer sets the system, it still has the responsibility to closely monitor how assessment policies impact classrooms, instructional time, and student well-being.

As an SBOE member, I will use my position to ask critical questions, elevate educator feedback, and push for clarity and accountability in the design and implementation of assessments. Testing should support meaningful learning - not excessive testing or punitive outcomes- and educators' input must be part of evaluating whether the system is working as intended.

I would also advocate for fair accountability measures that are developmentally appropriate and focused on student growth, not just compliance. Through thoughtful oversight and collaboration, the SBOE can help ensure Texas’s assessment system aligns with instructional standards and respects educator expertise. It serves as a tool to improve student outcomes rather than a barrier to learning.

Should the SBOE retain its authority to veto or approve new charter applications? Should the board’s veto authority be expanded to include charter expansion requests? How can the board ensure transparency and community input in this process?

Yes, the SBOE should retain its authority to approve or veto new charter school applications, and the Board should also have a role in reviewing significant charter expansion requests. Given the rapid growth and frequent turnover in the charter sector, thoughtful oversight is necessary to protect students, communities, and public tax dollars.

Charter schools are part of Texas’s public education system. Still, because they are governed by appointed boards rather than elected trustees, they must operate with strong transparency and appropriate accountability. We cannot have two separate sets of rules, one for neighborhood public schools and another for charter schools, when both are publicly funded and serve Texas students.

The SBOE can help ensure accountability by requiring transparent financial reporting, performance transparency, and meaningful opportunities for community input before approving new charters or expansions. This balanced approach supports choice while ensuring fairness, responsibility, and sustainability across the public education system.          
        
As an SBOE Member, I will fight for this by consistently asking hard questions, voting for transparency and fiscal responsibility, and ensuring charter approvals and expansions are held to the same clear standards as neighborhood public schools.

How should the SBOE ensure that curriculum standards and instructional materials meet the needs of students receiving special education services, English learners, and other diverse student populations?

The SBOE has a responsibility to ensure that curriculum standards and instructional material are accessible, inclusive, and effective for all learners, including students receiving special education services, English learners, and other diverse student populations.

The issue is deeply personal to me. I was a special education student with dyslexia, and I had a teacher who fought for me and believed in my potential. That experience is what led me to become an educator, and I later earned a minor in special education. I know firsthand how powerful inclusive, well-designed education instruction can be - and how harmful it is when systems fail to account for diverse learning needs.

The SBOE should prioritize evidence-based, developmentally appropriate materials that are designed with accessibility in mind from the start, not as an afterthought. This includes alignment with special education best practices, support for English learners, and flexibility that allows educators to meet students where they are.

Equally important, the board must listen to special education teachers, bilingual educators, families, and advocate organizations during the review process. When educator expertise and student needs guide curriculum decisions, we create learning environments where every student has the opportunity to succeed. As an SBOE member, I will leave by insisting that accountability inclusion and educator input are central to every curriculum and instruction material decision.

What steps should the SBOE take to make its processes, such as TEKS review committees, charter hearings, and instructional materials approvals, more transparent and accessible to educators and the public?

The State Board of Education should take proactive steps to make its work more transparent, accessible, and understandable to educators and the public. This includes providing clear timelines, plain language explanations, and easily accessible materials for processes such as TEKS review committees, charter hearings, and instructional material approvals.

Transparency also means expanding opportunities for meaningful public engagement, including earlier notice of hearings, virtual participation options, and clear guidance on how educators, parents, and community members can provide input.

As an SBOE member, I will enforce this by advocating for transparent public reporting, asking for transparency when information is unclear or incomplete, and using my platform to ensure educators' and community feedback are acknowledged and considered before final decisions are made. When the public understands how decisions are made and how their voices matter, trust in the process grows.

Do you believe the SBOE should continue to have the authority to review and potentially veto any rulemaking actions taken by the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC)? Why or why not?

Yes, the State Board of Education should retain its authority to review and, when necessary, veto SBEC rulemaking. This oversight helps ensure certification policies are fair, transparent, and supportive of educator professionalism and retention.

As an SBOE member, I will implement this by clearly reviewing proposed rules, seeking input from educators and professional organizations, and using my vote and voice to address unintended consequences before regulations are finalized. This added accountability helps protect educators and strengthen the public education workforce.

Additional Comments from Candidate on Survey

COMMENTS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THE 2026 CANDIDATE SURVEY:

I was an ATPE member for many years, and I truly valued my membership. At one point in my career, I needed ATPE’s support during a tough time in my life.

I was diagnosed with cancer, and my doctor recommended a temporary modified work schedule so I could continue working while undergoing treatment. Despite my role as a communications, community relations, and education foundation director—and my willingness to work flexible hours—my supervisor initially denied the request.

As an ATPE member, I had access to their legal services. An ATPE attorney helped guide me through the process and wrote a letter outlining my rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. As a result, my request was approved, allowing me to continue working while receiving treatment.

I was deeply grateful for ATPE’s support during that time. That experience reinforced for me the importance of strong professional representation for educators. ATPE will forever have me as an advocate, and I continue to encourage educators to join and protect themselves through membership.