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?

My primary role as a State Board of Education member will be threefold: 1) Ensuring the best educational outcomes for the students of Texas by upholding curriculum standards and adapting to new technology, like AI; 2) Preparing our youth for college, career, and military through dedicated vocational, STEM, and critical thinking-informed curriculum; and 3) Advocating for the unique needs of schools, students, and parents in District 8.

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

Upholding the essential Constitutional value of separation of church and state: I believe that religion has no place in our public schools and will fight to remove the Ten Commandments and any religiously-influenced curriculum, while also advocating for the rights of students to individually practice their religion. Moreover, I support a robust, science-informed curriculum, comprehensive sex education, all-gender restrooms, and the ability of LGBTQIA+ students to use their chosen name and pronouns, regardless of parental approval (or notification). I am also fiercely opposed to book bans.

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?

I firmly believe that my work as a SBOE member is not in a silo. I can only represent the needs of constituents in my district by keeping all stakeholders informed AND part of my team. I have the great fortunate of working for the largest community college district in the state, so I have first-hand knowledge of how to gather consensus and achieve goals from a multitude of stakeholders. I also really believe in one-on-one connect- Find me at your local school board meeting or reach out to me on social media. I always love to chat.

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 are our subject-matter experts and we need to utilize their expertise. I wouldn't sit here a attempt to develop new student learning outcomes for a 9th grade biology class, because biology is not my area of expertise. What would I do? Bring in the biology teachers! Teachers should be at the center of developing curriculum standards and approving instructional materials.

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?

In my mind, there is an important difference between parental engagement (which I regard as a positive thing) and parental "rights," a term that is often used to trample on the individual rights of students, particularly vulnerable students like those in the LGBTQ+ community. As a member of this community myself, I cannot fathom having my expression, use of pronouns, or chosen name curtailed by a parent trying to ignore reality. We now have significant empirical evidence that shows so-called parental "rights" in limiting the actions of LGBTQ+ students leads to increased mental health issues, stigma, and even suicide. What are we doing?

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? 

I believe that common-use materials need to be approved at the state-level by subject-matter experts. Legislators are generally not subject matter experts. Parents and local school board members have valuable input, but also most of them are not subject matter experts. I think this should primarily be a state-level function, with insight from the local level.

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?

I had the great fortune of working as a grader for ETS for the Texas STAAR exam from 2015-2018. This experience taught me that we need greater oversight in our standardized testing AND that we need to develop more holistic approaches to student evaulation.

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 veto or approve new charter applications. I believe that the expansion of charter schools should be limited as they have historically been held to lower accountability standards, but should remain an option for providing a highly-specialized curriculum, such as foreign language immersion.

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?

This is an area that needs to be reassessed every few years and should align to best practices in educational research. We know that our understanding of special education needs is changing and likewise, we have incredible new technology that can help us adapt to some of those changes. Following the research trail is also important when it comes to English learners and other diverse student populations, because we know that these are fast-growing student demographics in the State of Texas. I firmly believe in empirical research and believe that it should be used to guide our best practices.

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?

I believe that all of this should be public information and should be readily available to educators and the public on the SBOE website.

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- It is squarely the responsibility of the SBOE to ensure that our teachers are prepared to be in the classrooms and that we are holding teacher candidates to the highest standards. Alternative certification programs, while useful, should be the exception, not the rule, in teacher certification. Similarly, I believe that all schools under the purview of the SBOE, including charter schools, need to have certified teachers in the classroom.

Additional Comments from Candidate on Survey

COMMENTS SUBMITTED IN RESPONSE TO THE 2026 CANDIDATE SURVEY:

Thank you! I would be happy to answer any additional questions you may have.