Connect with us

Texas

Texas school districts say upgrades to the state’s student data reporting system could hurt their funding

Published

on

Texas school districts say upgrades to the state’s student data reporting system could hurt their funding


Sign up for The Brief, The Texas Tribune’s daily newsletter that keeps readers up to speed on the most essential Texas news.


Upgrades to the system Texas uses to collect student, staff and financial data from school districts are causing serious concerns among school administrators and data specialists across the state who say the changes have led to thousands of unresolved errors that could potentially cause them to lose out on state funding.

Each of Texas’ more than 1,200 school districts is required to regularly submit data to the state, including information on attendance, enrollment, students who receive special education, children experiencing homelessness and the number of kids who have completed a college preparatory course. State officials use the information to determine whether schools are meeting performance standards and how much funding they receive each year.

Three years ago, the Texas Education Agency announced major changes to the reporting system. The goal was to make it easier for school districts and the state to share data and reduce the amount of manual labor required from school officials. Districts were supportive of the proposed changes.

Advertisement

Almost a dozen other states are using the same standard on which Texas based its system upgrade, said Eric Jansson, vice president of technology for Ed-Fi Alliance, the organization that created the standard. Texas is the largest state to implement the changes.

More than 300 districts participated in the pilot program during the last school year, according to the TEA. All school districts began using the new system this school year.

Before the upgrade, school districts would submit data directly to the TEA after working with a software vendor that would ensure the education agency didn’t have any problems interpreting the information.

Under the new arrangement, the software vendors are now responsible for transmitting the data to the state, a change that school officials say leaves them without a chance to fact-check the information before it goes out.

They also say a litany of errors and inaccuracies surfaced during the pilot program. In some instances, hundreds of student records — from enrollment figures to the number of students in certain programs — did not show up correctly.

Advertisement

A TEA spokesperson said the agency is confident districts will have ample time to resolve any errors between now and the first reporting deadline on Dec. 12. The agency also noted that districts have until Jan. 16 to resubmit any data needing corrections.

But districts say they have no idea how to solve some errors. Their concerns, shared in interviews with The Texas Tribune, have not been previously reported.

In an August letter to TEA Commissioner Mike Morath, Lewisville Independent School District Superintendent Lori Rapp requested that the agency delay the full transition to the new reporting system until all districts are able to submit “100% of all data elements” successfully.

Rapp said thousands of errors surfaced after the district’s software vendor submitted data to the new system during the pilot. Her staff spent “tons of hours” trying to figure out why the miscalculations had occurred, she said in an interview.

While Rapp’s staff had made some progress working with the new system since the pilot started, “[w]e have not been able to fully send, promote, and validate our data to the point where a successful submission could have been made,” Rapp’s letter said.

Advertisement

After receiving the note, the TEA organized a virtual meeting with Lewisville ISD officials to discuss their concerns. Rapp said the state did not seem concerned about whether school districts were prepared to make the transition.

“Maybe because there’s no ramifications to them and the stakes aren’t as high, they don’t have a concern,” Rapp said. “But for districts, the stakes are extremely high, and it’s a gross oversight on their part if they are failing to recognize that.”

While the TEA says it has resolved more than a thousand tickets submitted by school officials reporting problems with the new system, officials from nearly a half-dozen districts told the Tribune the state has not explained what’s causing some of the errors or told them if they have been resolved.

School administrators and data specialists who participated in the pilot say the implications of adopting a system that still doesn’t have a clear process to correct mistakes are massive. An inaccurate assessment of the students enrolled in Texas public schools could mean school districts receive less funding from the state. Schools are funded based on students’ average daily attendance, and they receive additional dollars if they have children with specific needs, like students with disabilities or kids learning English as a second language.

Funding has been a major point of contention between Texas schools and state officials in recent years. Many districts entered the school year having to spend more money than they have, largely because of the state’s rising costs of living and a half-decade of no increases to the base-level funding they receive from the state. Public school leaders remain upset that last year’s legislative sessions ended with no significant raises despite the state having a record $32 billion surplus.

Advertisement

Texas’ school accountability system also relies on the data school districts submit to the state. Some parents rely on those performance metrics to make decisions on where to enroll their children. Poor performance can also lead to state intervention — like it happened when the state ousted Houston ISD’s locally elected school board and superintendent last year.

Full accountability ratings have not been released in five years due to litigation over changes to how districts are evaluated. Many have publicly released their unofficial ratings to share their progress with their communities.

School districts say they can’t afford to have mistakes in their student data.

“I think everybody understands the situation that public education is in right now,” said Frisco ISD Superintendent Mike Waldrip. “And there is no confidence by anyone that I’ve spoken with that that data is accurate or will be accurate when it comes time to submit it to the state.”

School districts that have piloted the new system say they understand errors are part of the process. They just wanted more time to troubleshoot them before it went live.

Advertisement

“We need more answers around not only supporting the system to be successful, but while we are making sure that it’s successful, how are we going to continue to assure that we’re not suffering consequences for a delay or inaccuracies in the data?” said Mark White, assistant superintendent of accountability for the Tomball Independent School District. “And none of those assurances have been received by districts.”

A TEA spokesperson said the agency did not see a need to expand the trial period because the pilot showed the channels through which it receives data from software vendors worked.

The TEA said it plans to continue working with districts to help resolve any errors well before the first reporting deadline. The agency said districts should reach out if they are still experiencing problems.

Tammy Eagans, who oversees the student data reporting process for Leon ISD, said the agency was helpful throughout the pilot year whenever the school district had problems submitting information. She added that the task of switching to the new system may not pose the same problems for her small district of fewer than 800 students as it might for larger districts with thousands of children.

Still, she said she is “not 100% confident” that the system as it’s being rolled out works as intended. Extending the pilot “would not have been a bad idea,” Eagans said. But she is also hopeful that the education agency will be understanding of districts’ concerns and not blame them for errors out of their control.

Advertisement

The upcoming reporting deadline “just kind of puts a little extra pressure on us,” said Eagans, adding that she’s “a little nervous, a little apprehensive, but hoping that it goes smoother than I think it will.”

Other school officials say the pilot was unsuccessful, and if adopting the new system requires more time, the state should be willing to cooperate. The looming fall reporting deadline is “the most important” submission of the school year, said Tomball ISD Superintendent Martha Salazar-Zamora.

“If the data is inaccurate, then we live with that inaccuracy throughout the entire year,” she said. “So it has a lot of relevance on many levels.”

Mary Mitchem, a former TEA employee, said she started worrying about the system’s readiness shortly after she was hired in June to make sure the system met the needs of its users. Mitchem said she left the agency last month after a dispute over a leave of absence request.

Within days of being hired, she said it appeared that no one had done the work to ensure the data coming from software vendors accurately translated into the education agency’s system. Having worked on other major data projects throughout her career, she said she was also surprised that, two months before the pilot was set to conclude, no one had audited or tested the system.

Advertisement

“You’re converting a state accounting system, and you have to make sure it balances — you have to,” said Mitchem.

Mitchem sounded the alarm up the chain of command, but a supervisor told her that anything beyond making sure the data was flowing into the new system was the responsibility of the software vendors and school districts.

“It just blew my mind,” Mitchem said.

In early August, she sent an email to Morath saying, “You will be in litigation if you don’t help fix it, and it will be with the largest districts in the state of Texas.”


The Texas Tribune’s signature event of the year, The Texas Tribune Festival, brings Texans closer to politics, policy and the day’s news from Texas and beyond. On Sept. 7, we wrapped our 2024 Festival — three unforgettable days packed with 100+ sessions and events.

Advertisement

Browse on-demand recordings and catch up on the biggest headlines from Festival events on the Tribune’s Festival news page.



Source link

Texas

Cold front moves through North Texas this weekend with freezing temperatures possible by Monday

Published

on

Cold front moves through North Texas this weekend with freezing temperatures possible by Monday



Get the jackets ready, North Texas, because following a warm November week, a strong cold front moves in Saturday into Sunday, and drops our temperatures by around 20° as we round out the weekend.

Advertisement

This is a dry front for us in North Texas, but it will bring moisture to parts of the Ohio River Valley, the Great Lakes, and the East Coast. Parts of the Ohio River Valley and Great Lakes regions will even be looking at a shot for snow.

download.png

No moisture here, but that deep trough for the eastern half of the country will impact our temperatures significantly, shifting our winds out of the north, and ushering in some of the coldest air we have seen since March.

Highs fall from the lower 80s on Saturday, back to the upper 50s and lower 60s by Sunday afternoon. 

The really cold shot of air arrives Monday morning. With clear skies, northerly winds, and radiational cooling, expect temperatures to fall back into the 30s for much of North Texas Monday morning. 

Advertisement

download.png

Parts of the metroplex may see temperatures drop near freezing, which would mark the end of the growing season for those areas. 

It will be our areas along the Red River, and our western spots that are looking at a more certain chance for freezing temperatures on Monday morning.

Have the jackets ready, and make sure the kids are bundled up as we kick off the new school week.



Source link

Continue Reading

Texas

Opening loss to Duke shows Sean Miller’s new Texas team is a work in progress

Published

on

Opening loss to Duke shows Sean Miller’s new Texas team is a work in progress


Percentages: FG .322, FT .739.

3-Point Goals: 5-17, .294 (Pope 3-4, Swain 2-5, Duru 0-1, Traore 0-1, Wilcher 0-1, Codie 0-2, Weaver 0-3).

Team Rebounds: 3. Team Turnovers: None.

Blocked Shots: 2 (Codie, Vokietaitis).

Advertisement

Turnovers: 16 (Vokietaitis 5, Traore 4, Mark 2, Duru, Pope, Swain, Weaver, Wilcher).

Steals: 4 (Traore 2, Swain, Wilcher).

Technical Fouls: None.

Percentages: FG .423, FT .733.

3-Point Goals: 9-23, .391 (Evans 4-8, Sarr 2-3, Foster 1-1, Harris 1-2, Khamenia 1-2, Brown 0-1, Ngongba 0-2, Cam.Boozer 0-4).

Advertisement

Team Rebounds: 5. Team Turnovers: None.

Blocked Shots: 2 (Cam.Boozer, Ngongba).

Turnovers: 10 (Brown 3, Cam.Boozer 3, Evans, Harris, Khamenia, Ngongba).

Steals: 8 (Cam.Boozer 3, Sarr 2, Brown, Harris, Ngongba).

Technical Fouls: None.

Advertisement
Texas 33 27 60
Duke 32 43 75

A_12,435 (19,077).



Source link

Continue Reading

Texas

Meet the 24-year-old GM helping North Texas take aim at the College Football Playoff

Published

on

Meet the 24-year-old GM helping North Texas take aim at the College Football Playoff


Editor’s note: This article is part of our GM Spotlight series, introducing readers to general managers who occupy a relatively new and increasingly important job for college football teams.

When North Texas hired Raj Murti in April at 23, he became one of the youngest general managers in college football.

Murti’s rise through the industry has happened quickly. He knew early in his high school career at Martin High in Arlington, Texas, that a future playing football was a long shot. So he became a student assistant under Bob Wager, a highly successful Texas high school football coach. Murti ran the film crew, helped with equipment, played scout team quarterback and assisted with recruiting contacts when college coaches visited Martin. When he graduated, Wager connected him with Ryan Dorchester, who was then the GM at Houston under Dana Holgorsen.

“(Wager) told Dor, ‘I’ve got a guy for you. I don’t know what you need, but make him do something and he’ll make a role for himself,’” Murti said.

Advertisement

Murti, now 24, took that opportunity and ran with it, spending five years on the recruiting and personnel staff at Houston (including two as an undergraduate student). From there, Murti spent a year at TCU as a recruiting coordinator and assistant player personnel director on Sonny Dykes’ staff before landing at North Texas, where the Mean Green are 8-1 and have the best chance to earn the Group of 5’s College Football Playoff berth, according to The Athletic’s projections.

Under coach Eric Morris, North Texas has been one of the surprise stories of the season, with a former walk-on quarterback, Drew Mestemaker, becoming a star (including a 608-yard game). The Mean Green have won despite having a roster budget near the bottom of the American Conference.

The Athletic recently spoke with Murti about his journey through college football personnel, the challenges of winning at a low-budget G5 program in the era of name, image and likeness and revenue sharing, and how to plan for the transfer portal.

So how did the North Texas GM opportunity arise? 

It’s funny, I asked coach Morris the same question, like “Why am I here?” (laughs). When I was a program assistant at Houston, part of the job was driving Dana (Holgorsen). In 2023, the THSCA (Texas High School Coaches Association) convention was in Houston. Dana took me to lunch with him, and coach Morris comes in and sits down. They’re hugging and catching up, they obviously go all the way back to their Texas Tech days. About five, six minutes into the conversation, coach Morris looks at Dana and points at me and says, “Uh, who’s the kid?” And Dana tells him about me. Then coach Morris looks at me and says, “You must be pretty f—ing good if you’re sitting here with him right now.”

Advertisement

I saw (Morris) again the next year when I was at TCU and we hosted a big mega (recruiting) camp. We caught up and ate lunch together for two days at the camp. I never had his phone number or anything like that. We’d see each other sparingly. But he said when this job came open and he was going to make it a GM role, he called Dana and Sonny (Dykes). He asked them, “Is Raj ready for this?” And Dana was like “F— yeah.” And Sonny said: “No-brainer.”

He called me and we talked about philosophies, what I do, what’s my thought process. We were on the phone for about an hour and a half. A few days later, I go interview for 5 1/2 hours, (meet with the staff), talked about everything. … They called me the following Monday, which felt like an eternity … and offered me the job.

You’ve worked in personnel departments, but this is your first time running one. What’s that learning curve been like?

It’s been a whirlwind. I got here on April 1, the portal opened on April 15. I had to put together a revenue-sharing plan and evaluate a whole roster in two weeks. It’s everything from deciding who we need to move on from, what positions we need, and then the portal opens and it’s evaluation. I had to tie dollar amounts to the players, which is something I had never done before.

We didn’t finish all of our portal commitments until the end of May, then it’s (recruiting) camp season. Then I had to hire a director of player personnel. There was no chance for self-reflection or how can I get better at this or that, because it’s like, you better figure this s— out because it’s happening and the train is right around the corner, so buckle up.

Advertisement

How long did it take to evaluate the roster before the portal opened and finish putting together the 2025 roster?

Luckily, they were still in spring practice, so I got to do some of it live. I watched the whole roster (on tape) within three days. I didn’t sleep much. And I met with each coach on our coaching staff, individually, about their whole room and every single player in it. I listened to them on everything from what their players do outside of football and who he is to “Hey, he’s a really good inside zone blocker.” So I relied on a lot of their feedback. And I think anyone who doesn’t rely on position coaches’ feedback when building a roster is crazy, because they’re the ones who have to coach them.

We didn’t finish the roster until the end of May. We had to do a lot of portal work. … We were getting in bidding wars and (other) schools were overpaying for kids that I didn’t really value that highly. We bring a kid on a trip, and the day after, we’re about to send him his scholarship paperwork, and he’s like, “Hey, School X down the road said they’re going to offer us $50,000 more.” And I’m like, “Jesus, they don’t even have that much money!”

Drew Mestemaker ranks third in the FBS with 2,702 passing yards. (Raymond Carlin III / Imagn Images)

Your quarterback, Drew Mestemaker, has been one of the revelations of this season. When did you know he was legit?

Advertisement

By the end of spring ball. He was pretty freaky. When I got there, coach Morris told me, “We’ve got two guys (Mestemaker and former Miami and Albany transfer Reese Poffenbarger). I want you to watch for a little while and tell me which one you like.”

I was like, “Coach, I don’t know if it’s because this kid has been in the system for a year, but (Mestemaker) is really f—ing good.” And Drew was continuously getting better.

Your roster budget is less than $2 million, which is near the bottom of the conference, yet you’re 8-1. How do you build a winning roster on a small budget?

You don’t overpay. You keep your priorities and your values. … You don’t get big-eyed in the heat of the moment, keep your composure and understand that this is part of it. If another school wants to overspend for somebody, you’ve got to have a number that you’re like, “I’m not going higher than this.” As long as you have some kind of thought process and your thought process aligns with your evaluation process, which then aligns with your valuation process and how much to pay them.

I’m going to sit down and watch the tape. Our DPP and assistant DPP are going to watch the tape. The coaches are going to watch the tape. And once we all see it the same way, we look at our roster and say, “OK, where does this kid fit?” And it’s such a hard thing to project, because you’re trying to project where a high school kid or a junior college (prospect) or a transfer fits before you can even negotiate what next year’s contracts are with your current team. … So you have to be aligned in the staff from the personnel department to the position coach to the coordinator to the head coach, so we know where a kid fits and there’s a dollar range for that spot on the roster and we’re all on the same page and we’re not gonna overpay to try to get him.

Advertisement

So when do you start making offers to your current roster for next year’s team?

Probably December, before the portal opens. I want these kids to have all the information before the portal opens. “Hey, here’s where we’ve got you at (compensation-wise). If somebody’s going to pay you more money, I get it. But this is what we can do.”

For players like Mestemaker or (freshman running back) Caleb Hawkins, who will likely be attractive portal targets for Power 4 programs, do you have to speed up that process because there may be other teams sniffing around?

No, I don’t think so, because those programs are going to be in a different tax bracket. So either they’re going to stay here for the best offer we can give them and want to be here or not. I hope they stay, but I’m not going to be in a situation where another program is going to dictate what we do.

The early signing period for high school recruits is about a month away (Dec. 3-5), and the transfer portal opens in two months (Jan. 2-16). What’s your planning process for all of that?

Advertisement

We’re a big (high school) senior evaluation team, so we’ll have a lot of official visits for high school and junior college kids, because we’re still trying to finish up our 2026 class. We wait until all the P4s get their commits in the summer, and we know what our pool is after that, then we go swimming. After our bye week (this week), we’ll go into pre-portal evaluations.

What are the biggest priorities and challenges that you face as you approach that time?

Trying to figure out what it takes to retain your team. Because there’s a point where it’s just like, OK, we can spend this to retain him, but is he even worth this, or for this money, can we go get someone else? Or could we get two good players for that money?

It’s important not to be unrealistic. I know what a $16 million roster looks like (at the Power 4 level) and how those rosters are broken down. If a P4 school comes in and tells a player, “Hey, we’re going to give you $250,000,” and if the best we can do is $75,000, is that what it’s going to take for him to stay here? Or are we better off saying, “I need a yes or no now, because if not, we can go get two good players with this.” You gotta be realistic about where you’re at and what you’re capable of. And if you’re not capable of it, don’t overspend and put yourself in a hole because this is still football.

If you put all your money and eggs into one basket and a kid goes down in fall camp or spring ball or second play of the game in Week 1, f—, I’d rather have a deep room than a top-heavy room.

Advertisement

What do you think of having one portal window in the winter rather than having two, including the spring window?

Love it. I think they made it go too long. I thought Jan. 2-11 was perfect. Now that it’s extended to Jan. 16, you’re going to have so many enrollment issues. … How do you get them into school in time? I think you’re going to have so many players that don’t go anywhere in the spring and sit out. They’re just going to be floating around in the portal until someone comes and picks them up.

But I like knowing that whenever February comes around, we’re gonna have our team and that’s our team for the season. I don’t have to worry about the fact that I signed a kid to a contract, but in May I’m going to have to (increase it) because (a Power 4 team) loses somebody they’re gonna come try to poach our guys.

The GM Spotlight series is part of a partnership with T. Rowe Price. The Athletic maintains full editorial independence. Partners have no control over or input into the reporting or editing process and do not review stories before publication.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending