Texas Education Agency (TEA) Commissioner Mike Morath told the State Board of Education (SBOE) Wednesday that new instructional materials designed by the agency and provided to school districts as a result of House Bill (HB) 1605 are not intended to remove the ability of teachers to plan their own lessons. 

SBOE member LJ Francis (R–Corpus Christi) asked the commissioner whether the state under HB 1605 is encouraging teachers to continue lesson planning and not just read scripted lessons. 

“Teachers are brain surgeons,” said Morath, who emphasized the importance of teachers using their training to adapt lessons to the unique needs of their own individual classrooms. The commissioner insisted the state is not doing anything to discourage that kind of activity. 

Francis pressed the commissioner over why the agency, through the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC), is pursuing shifting the focus of teacher evaluations toward lesson “internalization.” 

Morath said that HB 1605 is envisioned as a “time shift for teachers” meant to reduce the time spent building lessons from scratch. In response to Francis’ pointing out how that position has created confusion among teachers worried about losing classroom autonomy, Morath accused some people of deliberately stoking confusion. 

“Teachers do need to differentiate for the kids that they’re serving,” Morath said, adding that doing so is an expectation and should be enforced. 

Although ATPE certainly agrees it is imperative that educators can and do design the lessons they teach around the actual students in their classrooms, regardless of the base curriculum they are using, and while we appreciate the commissioner’s take that HB 1605 does not change this equation, we are much less convinced that either the language of the actual statute or the proposed SBEC rule realistically will lead to this result. 

The exchange came during the commissioner’s regular update to the SBOE Wednesday morning in Austin. The commissioner provided a review of school accountability and grievance processes and took questions from members on a variety of topics. 

Morath defended the validity of the STAAR test as a tool for measuring campus and district performance. TEA’s data shows the distribution of STAAR campus scale scores remained relatively flat between the 2022-23 and 2023-24 school years, with roughly three-quarters of campuses receiving passing scores. 

In reviewing the process for handling complaints and investigations, Morath said state law requires each school district to have a local grievance process for staff and the general public. Most have adopted model policies promulgated by the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB).  

A person typically files an initial complaint with a campus principal. A person may appeal the principal’s decision to the district superintendent and then the school board. If the outcome is still unsatisfactory, a person may appeal to the commissioner of education. A person may separately file a complaint directly with TEA. 

The commissioner said his office is constrained by state law regarding what types of decisions it can overturn; specifically, the commissioner said he cannot overturn districts on most matters involving student discipline. More broadly, the commissioner said his office must defer to districts when the core issue is a matter of judgment rather than a matter of law. 

The commissioner said the number of complaints received by the agency has doubled in the past four years, with 1,265 complaints received in 2019 and 2,595 received in 2023. Not all complaints result in disciplinary action, and 238 of the complaints filed in 2023 were administratively closed at the agency’s discretion.  

There are roughly 800,000 full-time equivalent staff employed across the state. In the first half of 2024, the commissioner said 680 complaints resulted in applicants or staff being placed on the “do not hire” registry. 

Member Pam Little (R–Fairview) asked how the grievance appeals process works in regard to library books. The commissioner responded that questions about books are likely matters of judgment in which the agency would defer to the local school board’s decision. 

Responding to a question from SBOE member Staci Childs (D–Houston) about grievances over bus routes, the commissioner suggested the matter would also likely be one of a district’s judgement rather than application of the law. An agency attorney said that district grievance policies vary but that most require a decision between 30 and 60 days. 

SBOE member Evelyn Brooks (R–Frisco) asked the commissioner what teachers can do about not receiving their paychecks on time without jeopardizing their jobs. The commissioner said teachers can file a grievance and may want to find another employer if they are worried about retaliation. 

SBOE member Julie Pickren (R–Pearland) argued the agency should have the authority to enforce harmful material because is defined in the Texas Penal Code. The commissioner said that he had spoken with the Office of Texas Attorney General on the topic. 

Pickren also asked the commissioner how the agency handles grievances filed against local school board members, citing a local case involving library books. 

“You can grieve anything,” Morath said, offering the caveat that not everything will be grieved to the satisfaction of the person filing the grievance. The commissioner said the agency has no ability to enforce a local school board’s internal policies and that the judgment in such cases would likely come at the ballot box.