Your Voice

BY MARK WIGGINS ATPE Lobbyist

“

We do not have government by the majority. We have government by the majority who participate.” Who would have thought these words— often, and perhaps incorrectly, attributed to Thomas Jefferson—would bear so meaningfully upon our current state of politics here in Texas? The Texas of today wields an outsize influence on American politics, yet even after 200 years of change, the statement still rings true. Simply look at the results of the past two election cycles in Texas.

The Old Problem

The 2016 elections proceeded much the same as many before, without much focus on education, so it came as no surprise when the subsequent 2017 legislative session saw the same tired attacks on educators. Lawmakers passed a budget that continued a decade-long decline in the state’s share of overall funding for public education.

Outside of presidential election years, relatively few people show up to vote in Texas elections—a circumstance that has historically allowed small groups of highly motivated people to have a significant impact on state policy. More than 700,000 Texans work for a school or school district—not many people’s definition of a “small” group. And though educators are definitely a “highly motivated” group in most every regard, traditionally they have not shown up to the polls in great numbers. With so few educators exercising their right to vote, and as long as the majority of voting Texans have little interest in public education, why would legislators have any incentive to pay attention to schools and educators?

Following the challenges of the 2017 legislative session, some public education supporters began to circulate a new hypothesis based on simple math: If enough educators turned out in the next round of elections, could they make a difference in key races and ultimately alter state-level public education policy?

After years of being ignored and abused, educators tested this theory in 2018 by banding together with parents, school board trustees, and other public education supporters to maximize their influence. They made public education their priority issue and spearheaded get-out-the-vote initiatives across the state in both the primary and general elections. (For more on this story, see page 20.)

The result: Voters booted a slew of anti-public education lawmakers out of office—and gave those who narrowly survived reelection a scare they won’t soon forget. With pro-public education legislators in the driver’s seat and newly energized education voters paying close attention, the 2019 legislative session focused on increasing school funding and teacher pay. This marked a massive shift in the way public education had been prioritized in the Texas Capitol, yet it was still accomplished by a relatively small amount of people.

Texas is home to about 29 million people today. Nearly 20 million Texans were of voting age during the March 2018 primary elections, and about 15 million of those were registered voters. However, only 1.5 million actually voted in the Republican primary, and 1.1 million others voted in the Democratic primary, which means the crucial 2018 primary elections were decided by just 9% of Texans.

Because Texas is heavily gerrymandered, most elections to the Texas House of Representatives and Texas Senate are decided in the March primaries. That means the membership of the Texas Legislature—and by extension the Legislature’s agenda—was determined in large part by just one in 10 Texans. One in 10!

Those who participated in the 2018 elections sent a clear message: Legislators had to stop attacking educators and get serious about funding public education. Legislators responded by passing House Bill (HB) 3, an $11.6 billion bill that added $6.5 billion to the public education system and ordered districts to spend a portion of that new money on increasing educator compensation.

Now We Have a Different Problem

Under HB 3, the Legislature required school districts to spend 30% of any increase in their state funding on increased educator compensation. Of

that amount, 75% must be spent to increase compensation for full-time classroom teachers, nurses, counselors, and librarians, prioritizing differentiated compensation for teachers with more than five years of experience. The remaining 25% of a district’s funding increase may be spent at its discretion on increased compensation for any full-time employees who are not administrators. Districts are required to report their compliance with these requirements to the Legislature by December 1, 2020.

This might sound cut and dry, but in legislative terms, it’s actually vague. For example, what is “compensation”? Most people would think it’s take-home pay, but it could also include employee benefits such as retirement and health care contributions. Furthermore, individual districts received widely varying increases in funding under HB 3, and each district is allowed to decide how to spend that money on educator compensation. As a result, whether an educator received a raise and how substantial it may have been has varied widely. HB 3 also required districts to “prioritize” veteran teachers, but what exactly does that mean? It all adds up to confusion about just how much change, if any, individual educators should expect to see in their paychecks.

That’s a headache. But legislators must address a more fundamental problem with HB 3 when they return for the next legislative session. The increases to educator compensation required by HB 3, like the $6.5 billion school funding increase from which they stem, are built on sand.

HB 3 was passed without a crucial component to ensure its longevity: a funding mechanism. The bill spends $11.6 billion of general revenue untethered to any dedicated source that would protect it from changes in budget demands in future years. Legislators committed $11.6 billion to fund HB 3 for the 2020-21 budget cycle. Growth in the state’s population and school enrollment are expected to increase the cost of the same HB 3 provisions in future years. It’s estimated the price tag for maintaining HB 3 in light of this growth will be $13.4 billion for the 2022-23 budget cycle, and legislators will arrive at the Texas Capitol in January 2021 confronted with the question of whether to continue to fund this increasingly expensive commitment. And There's Another Wrinkle

We mentioned earlier that Texas is heavily gerrymandered. Each voting district is almost guaranteed to elect the candidate of one party over the other based on the political makeup of its residents. Legislators redraw voting maps and district boundaries every 10 years following each U.S. census. This process—called “redistricting”—has become an extremely partisan affair in Texas. 2021 will be a redistricting year, which means many legislators’ focus will be almost exclusively on protecting their seats by securing a “safe” voting district for themselves and their respective parties for the next 10 years. This often leads to unsavory alliances and backroom deals legislators would prefer not see the light of day.

Under these circumstances, public education will occupy an exceedingly precarious position. In the 2021 legislative session, a vote on school funding or educator pay could conceivably end up being traded for a more favorable electoral map. It would not be the first time good legislation was quietly exterminated as part of a grand bargain to further the ambitions and party loyalties of those in charge of drawing the maps.

The sole defense for educators and their allies next session will be the presence of legislators whose commitment to public education is without question. Electing more legislators who will prioritize support for education is the best way to inoculate our public school community against the inevitable horse trading of a redistricting session. The 2020 elections represent our only opportunity to fortify our defenses.

Taken as a whole, the effects of the next round of elections on student resources and educator pay could be profound. Whether schools receive more, less, or the same amount of funding depends entirely upon whom voters elect this year— and that depends on who shows up to vote in both the primaries and general election of 2020, as well as any runoffs.

In a state where few people tend to vote, it doesn’t take much to turn the tide. That, of course, works both ways. Educators demonstrated in 2018 they are fully capable of determining the course of an election, yet our opponents could just as easily erase those gains if educators take their foot off the gas.

It’s hard to imagine what the founding fathers would think about the current state of the American experiment, but they would probably have something to say about our overall rate of voter participation. That brings us back to the beginning. Like it or not, we are governed not by the majority but by the majority who participate. EDUCATORS DEMONSTRATED IN 2018 THEY ARE FULLY CAPABLE OF DETERMINING THE COURSE OF AN ELECTION, YET OUR OPPONENTS COULD JUST AS EASILY ERASE THOSE GAINS IF EDUCATORS TAKE THEIR FOOT OFF THE GAS.

By Sarah Gray

For Laura Yeager, it was her longstanding passion for the importance of voting combined with understanding the policies affecting her children. For Dinah Miller, it was watching a voucher bill narrowly fail passage alongside four other PTA moms, and together realizing that phone calls and visiting lawmakers weren’t enough, that it would take new talent in the Texas Legislature to keep voucher bills from becoming law. For the Rev. Charles Johnson, it was the conviction that public education is a gift from God for all children. What, exactly, was it about public education that propelled these concerned citizens to become grassroots advocacy leaders?

Their individual catalysts aside, the heart of the answer centers on the idea that public education serves as the backbone for Texas communities, and when educators and their supporters show up at the ballot box, public education comes out on top. But the climb to the top has included numerous obstacles, and more challenges lie ahead.

The 2018 midterm elections showed promise in terms of voter turnout and as an indication of how much Texans value public education. But the improved results of November 2018 didn’t happen overnight. They were a result of the tireless efforts of many pro-public education groups, including ATPE and its experienced lobby team, working together to get out the vote among the public education community.

If you spend much time at the Texas Capitol, you’ll start to see the same people—especially if you share similar goals. This is the situation in which ATPE and other pro-public education groups such as Texas Educators Vote, Texas Parent PAC, and Pastors for Texas Children found themselves when they realized how much they could achieve by collaborating. A visit to their Facebook or Twitter pages shows just how often these groups cross-post each other’s content and share information to the masses.

Long considered a trusted voice in Texas public education policy, ATPE has worked with many of these organizations since their inceptions. With its extensive statewide member base and non-endorsement policy, ATPE is uniquely positioned to help public education allies harness voter power. “I think all of these groups were doing their own thing individually, and then over time, we just figured out, ‘Hey, we can partner and get more done,’” explains Jennifer Mitchell, ATPE Governmental Relations director. “As the largest educators’ association, we have access to the most active educators and are able to funnel information between them.”

ATPE is the largest educator organization among Texas Educators Vote’s official coalition of 21 partners. Laura Yeager launched Texas Educators Vote (TEV) in 2015 with a focus on how and why to vote. Because Yeager focuses strictly on voting, neither TEV nor its growing list of partners endorse candidates or political parties. TEV’s sole mission is “creating a culture of voting and modeling civic behavior,” Yeager explains.

“I would see cars with bumper stickers saying they’re [the driver] voting for someone, left- or right-leaning, but then [educators would] go into the classroom and ask why aren’t they [politicians] funding our schools, why are the sinks falling apart, why are we testing kids out the wazoo, and why did they give me this rating, but they didn’t realize it had anything to do with how they were voting,” Yeager says. “The big issue for me was to move out of last place in voter turnout and for people to really connect their vote with what happens in their schools and take ownership of it.”

Yeager has broken down the model for civic engagement into three steps: register, research, and vote. To accomplish TEV’s mission, Yeager leans heavily on resources such as ATPE’s public education advocacy website, TeachtheVote.org, which is available to any Texan, and ATPE’s lobby team.

“I love Teach the Vote,” Yeager says, citing it as one of two resources she points supporters to. “It’s a fantastic resource and something unique we can lead people to make their own decisions.”

TEV got another boost of support in 2017 when the League of Women Voters of Texas became a partner, allowing more election tools to reach the public education community, such as the League’s nonpartisan Voters Guide and VOTE411.org. “The schools and the educators are the cornerstone of every community, so they should be the leaders in getting out the Coming Together

vote,” says Grace Chimene, president of the League of Women Voters of Texas. “The public schools should be where people learn about voting and civics, and they should encourage staff, educators, and students to participate in voting. That’s why we choose to get involved in this [TEV’s coalition].”

Public education supporters want to make informed choices; they also want to see good options on the ballot. Enter Texas Parent PAC, which was formed when five PTA moms watched a private school voucher bill be defeated by only one vote. After they saw how close Texas came to having vouchers, the women formed a political action committee (PAC) to elect new faces to the Texas House. Texas Parent PAC is not beholden to any political party and takes care only to get involved in races where there is a clear choice between a candidate who is solid on public education issues and one who is not. The group also spreads the word that many Texas elections are decided by the outcome of the primary rather than the general election.

“It was a big process to teach people how important the primaries are,” explains Dinah Miller, Texas Parent PAC co-founder and co-chair. “Many districts are gerrymandered to favor one party or the other, and the decisions of who wins is made at the primary. When we first formed, there were very few competitive general elections.”

Texas Parent PAC has eight guiding principles pro-public education legislators and candidates must adhere to (see txparentpac.com/principles.html); conducts candidate interviews; and raises money for its endorsed candidates. Knowing how vital voter turnout is to its success, Texas Parent PAC also coordinates with other pro-public education groups on get-out-the-vote (GOTV) initiatives.

“You could say it [the 2018 momentum] was a perfect storm of all different kinds of grassroots people coming together for public education—parents, teachers, pastors, and even businesspeople,” Miller says. “Public education is in our [state] constitution. We’re the real ones standing up for authentic Texas values.”

“

Collaboration, partnership, cooperation, and solidarity,” begins the Rev. Charles Johnson, founder and executive director of Pastors for Texas Children. “No group can do it alone—however large and influential they may be. We are so much more effective when we are in solidarity with each other. This is a spiritual principle, but it works in an advocacy arena, too.”

Johnson started Pastors for Texas Children after watching the Legislature cut public school funding in 2011. The organization “mobilizes ministers and faith leaders for public education, ministry, and advocacy,” according to Johnson, and anyone “motivated by faith to support public education” is welcome. Approximately 2,400 faith leaders from all denominations have joined the group’s network. Pastors for Texas Difference Makers

Primary Elections W First day of early voting: February 18 W Last day of early voting: February 28 W Primary Election Day: March 3

Local Elections W Voter registration deadline: April 2 W First day of early voting: April 20 W Last day of early voting: April 28 W Uniform election date for local elections: May 2

Primary Runoff Elections W Voter registration deadline: April 27 W First day of early voting: May 18 W Last day of early voting: May 22 W Primary runoff election date: May 26

General Election W Voter registration deadline: October 5 W First day of early voting: October 19 W Last day of early voting: October 30 W General Election Day: November 3

Children forges relationships with education leaders and local churches and encourages faith leaders to form relationships with their Texas House and Senate members, further establishing the church as another resource for the school districts. “We have played a role in forging a much more collaborative spirit and engagement among all these community groups and education groups,” Johnson explains. “And it’s just impossible for the government to ignore us.”

The sense of community engagement blossoming among pro-public education groups has started to show results. Working with TEV partners, Yeager prepares a variety of resources with increasing reach in the education community—blogs, weekly voter updates, and social media all play a key role. Voter turnout in Texas for the 2018 midterms increased by 18%, and a number of pro-public education candidates were elected. As of January 2020, Texas Parent PAC had helped elect 84 new members to the Texas Legislature and defeated 31 incumbents since its inception.

Texas Parent PAC results show how much confluence there is between educator and parent interests. “Accountability/testing and teacher pay are issues where parents and teachers found common ground,” explains ATPE Senior Lobbyist Monty Exter. “Commonalities on these issues had been building and bubbling up. TEV was the spearheading group, but other organizations met their stride and fed into that momentum and helped create the links between all of those constituencies of administrators, teachers, parents, and businesses to create that sort of mass get-together that moved forward.”

The most talked-about bill coming out of the 86th Legislature was House Bill (HB) 3, the school finance and public education reform bill—and a bill that might not have passed without the grassroots efforts of pro-public education groups. Texas Parent PAC’s Miller calls HB 3 a “good start,” but something that must be sustainably funded no matter the economy—a feeling Pastors for Texas Children’s Johnson echoes.

“We need to sustainably fund HB 3, and then we need another infusion of money into our public schools for several consecutive sessions in a row,” Johnson explains. “And we can do it.” TEV’s Yeager agrees. “The fact that educators voted [in the 2018 primary] made Dan Patrick say he wanted to give them a $10,000 raise,” Yeager points out. “Suddenly they [lawmakers] were all tripping over what they could do for teachers. If they [educators] can keep growing the voter turnout and build the next generation of voters, who knows what good things can happen?”

Success often puts a target on your back. Pro-public education candidate wins in the 2018 primaries buoyed the enthusiasm of educators. ATPE, TEV, and similar organizations pressed on with GOTV and voter education efforts, while grassroots movements such as the Texans for Public Education Facebook group, organized by individual Texas educators, urged educators to support a slate of pro-public education candidates in the general election, regardless of party affiliations. As the momentum leading up to the 2018 general election gained steam, those less friendly to public education used scare tactics to discourage educators from voting.

A wealthy dark money group known for funding extremist candidates and officeholders—those who work to starve public schools of funding and promote private school vouchers— launched a “whistleblower” campaign. After its lawyer sent intimidating letters to individual teachers across the state, the group hoped to expose widespread, improper electioneering by school employees—evidence of which never materialized. The Texas Attorney General, at the request of a conservative lawmaker, sent ominous letters to school districts warning them to “cease and desist” certain efforts to drive up voter turnout among their staff and even students.

“For those who would prefer that educators stay home on Election Day, encouraging teachers to wear an ‘I voted’ sticker Challenges & Looking Ahead

VOTER RESOURCES W ATPE’s TeachtheVote.org has the latest Texas education news and candidate profiles so you can research the education positions of elected officials and candidates.

W Vote411.org lets you build a personalized ballot before you head to the polls and so much more.

W The League of Women Voters of Texas Voter’s Guide at my.lwv.org/texas/ voting-elections/voters-guide allows you to compare candidates and other ballot measures.

These resources are nonpartisan and public-facing. For more information on the organizations mentioned in this piece, visit texaseducatorsvote.com, txparentpac.com, pastorsfortexaschildren.com, and my.lwv.org/texas.

DID YOU KNOW? W Texas has open primaries. Any eligible registered Texas voter can vote in either of the two primaries. W Local elections often include school board races and bonds, and have little, if anything, to do with the primary elections. W You can vote in a primary runoff election even if you didn’t vote in the primary itself. If you did vote in the primary, you must vote in the same political party’s primary for the runoff. W For each race on the November general election ballot, voters can choose any candidate—Republican, Democratic, independent, or affiliated with a third party— regardless of whether or how they voted in the primary. W Starting with the 2020 general election, “straight ticket” voting is no longer an option for the general election. Voters who previously chose the simplicity of a straight ticket—voting for all candidates on the ballot representing the same party—must now make individual choices in each race.

at school or talking about elections on one’s personal Twitter account was tantamount to an act of aggression,” ATPE’s Mitchell recalls. “Their fear of a million active and retired educators, not to mention parents and other community supporters, becoming energized and showing up together at the polls was palpable.”

The November 2018 election brought more gains, with pro-public education candidates toppling others who were not as supportive of public schools, reshaping the focus of the Texas Legislature as a result. The legislative session began with “fixing school finance” as its top priority. HB 3 naturally took the spotlight, but ATPE’s lobby team also helped defeat legislation that not only would have affected an educator’s right to free speech but also would have made it nearly impossible to teach students about civics and elections, even when required by the Texas curriculum standards. Without question, the 2018 elections spurred those bills. Pro-public education groups anticipate these voter intimidation attempts to continue as questions linger about the next Legislature’s willingness to continue funding and build on the improvements made by HB 3. Answers to those questions hinge on the outcome of the 2020 elections.

Says ATPE’s Exter: “We often tell our members, ‘Vote for your profession.’ It’s so important because public education is one of few professions that is almost exclusively determined by elected officials’ policymaking. Elected officials decide almost everything about your job as a public educator and the impact the system is going to have on your students. Your best way to influence and interact with that is by voting for people who are going to be in your corner.”

If public education advocates want to see more success, the way there is clear: Vote.

Texas Parent PAC’s Miller offers a stern warning: “Our freedoms, the quality of our life, and [the ability] for everyone to have equal opportunity are what public education provides, and if we don’t stand up for this institution, we’re going to lose it to the profiteers, the privatizers, and the monetizers.”

Our kids deserve the educator vote, according to TEV’s Yeager.

“Every day educators devote their lives and work to make a better world for kids, and the one additional thing they can do that will really bring better opportunities for kids is to be a voter,” she says. “I really appreciate the sacrifices of educators—it’s a real public service. To multiply that would be to be consistent voters and think about the kids when voting.”

Voter turnout for the 2018 Texas midterm elections increased by 18% compared to previous midterms, according to the United States Elections Project. But Texas, known for having low voter turnout historically, still has a long way to go to improve its record. Here’s a breakdown of some key statistics.

W 48 out of 50 states and D.C. in 2012 W 50 out of 50 states and D.C. in 2014 W 48 out of 50 states and D.C. in 2016 W 41 out of 50 states and D.C. in 2018

41 50 TEXAS RANKS

OUT OF

STATES IN VOTER TURNOUT 41 50

48 % 35 % Hispanic 12 % Black 5 % Asian 1 % Other Non-Hispanic white

W 4.6 million Texans voted in the 2014 midterms W 9 million Texans voted in 2016’s presidential election W 8.3 million Texans voted in the 2018 midterms W 4 counties out of 254 saw a lower turnout in 2018 than in the last midterm in 2014

W 4.8 million-plus Texans voted early in the 2018 midterms W Generally, more than 50% of those who vote do so before Election Day W Nearly 74% of voters voted early in 2016 W 54% of voters voted early in 2014 W 63% of voters voted early in 2012

County Turnout Harris . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51% Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . 54% Tarrant . . . . . . . . . . . 56% Bexar . . . . . . . . . . . . 50% Travis . . . . . . . . . . . . 61% Collin . . . . . . . . . . . . 61% Denton . . . . . . . . . . . 59% El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . 43% Fort Bend . . . . . . . . . . 59% Hidalgo . . . . . . . . . . . 42%

which is 7% of registered voters and 5% of the voting-age population

which is 10% of registered voters and 8% of the voting-age population

Texans make up the voting-age population, of which 79% are registered to vote 19,900,980 In the 2018 general election:

Percentages displayed denote the percentage of each age group who voted.

WORDS BY MICHAEL SPURLIN

PHOTOS BY JOHN KILPPER

Kaylie Clare-Sherman teaches first grade in Dime Box ISD and has seen positive results after the district switched to a four-day week.

Nobody really enjoys Mondays. It can be hard to wake up and start moving after sleeping in over the weekend. People can be grumpier. Educators not only have to overcome their own dislike of Mondays but also find a way to motivate students who might not be excited about another week of school. But Mondays are just a fact of life. Or are they? One small school district in Central Texas has found a way to make them a thing of the past.

At the beginning of the 2019-20 school year, Dime Box ISD implemented a four-day school week where Mondays are now optional. Students are only required to be on campus Tuesday through Friday. On Monday, the district campus is open for what it calls a “flex day.” Parents can send their children to school if they have no childcare options, and students who need extra academic help can work with teachers and tutors to catch up.

Switching to a four-day week may sound radical, but it’s actually not a new concept. According to research from the Center for Reinventing Public Education, 550 school districts in 25 states have a four-day week. However, it’s significantly rarer in Texas. Dime Box Superintendent Nicholas West had heard about these types of schedules before, and the idea intrigued him. It could allow both students and staff more time to spend with their families. Yet the main reason more schools don’t adopt this schedule is due to childcare concerns when parents are still working five days a week—a concern West shared when he first considered proposing this type of schedule.

“What do you do about the off day, when all the parents have to work?” West recalls asking himself. “I knew that this would be dead on arrival if we didn’t have a solution to that. There is no way I would ever support this if we could not answer that question.”

West did not have an answer until he met Superintendent Gabriel Zamora of Olfen ISD, the first district in Texas to switch to a four-day week, at an education conference.

Zamora was motivated to switch to the four-day week in order to help his rural West Texas district grow its enrollment and compete with larger districts across the state.

“I wanted to inspire growth,” Zamora says. “The first year we made the change, we were such a tiny district. I think we had about 60 students. Now we have over 130. We are ahead of schedule of where we want to be. We have more students applying than we have space for.”

Zamora attributes this growth to the improved quality of life created by the shorter week. Students and their families now have more time to spend together. Zamora also credits this with his district’s ability to compete for top educators with larger, more well-funded districts.

“The staff we have been able to put together despite being a rural district that underpays compared to the state is in large part because of the quality of life that we have been able to offer,” Zamora says.

Before Olfen implemented the four-day week, Zamora faced the predictable questions about what to do with students on that fifth day.

“We heard over and over again, ‘What are we going to do

Candi Becker, special education coordinator and English II teacher in Dime Box ISD, has noticed both teachers and students seem more relaxed with the four-day week.

with our children on that fifth day?’” Zamora recounts. “I was brainstorming and thought, ‘What if we go to school that day, but it is not a school day, and it’s not mandatory?’ That’s how I came up with the idea for the flex day.”

After Zamora described how the flex days operated, West knew that was the solution he needed to implement a fourday week in Dime Box ISD.

“When he explained how the flex days work, I realized that would solve the issue of the childcare,” West says. Still, West was concerned about taking Friday off. “People always take [off ] Friday, but the problem with that is there is a lot of school business that takes place on Friday. You have basketball games, you have football games, you have all these events that are taking place on Friday. If you are here in the evening for those events, does anybody really get the day off?”

For that reason, and not a hatred of Mondays, West proposed making Monday the flex day for Dime Box ISD.

INITIAL APPREHENSION

Although the initial reaction by the faculty, staff, and community was one of shock and apprehension, once West and district officials explained how the flex day would work, the plan was approved by the school board. Beginning in fall 2019, Dime Box ISD officially moved to a four-day week. Still, before the first day there were a lot of unknowns about the plan, and West was nervous.

“That was probably my longest drive to work,” West remembers.

Students would have the option to go to campus, and nobody knew how many students would show up. If all of the district’s 170 students attended school on the flex day, the plan might not work. Teachers, including first grade teacher Kaylie ClareSherman, shared that apprehension.

“My initial reaction was, ‘How is this going to work?’” ClareSherman says. “I was so confused and had so many thoughts

running through my head. I really thought Mondays would just be a normal day of the week. I felt like I knew the parents, and I knew they would send their kids on Mondays. I knew that no matter what, every single kid in my classroom would be here, and I would still be teaching five days a week.”

In actuality, only about 35% of the students showed up that first day. Since then, the numbers have settled a little lower at a consistent 25% to 30% of students. Predictably, the majority of those students are from the younger grades, with the older middle and high school students rarely attending on flex days. Those who attend school are grouped together for the day with students a grade above or below. Teachers are allowed to choose eight of the flex days to take off. The remaining days, they oversee the smaller number of students. The structure of the day also allowed teachers working the flex days more time for planning.

ADAPTING TO THE SCHEDULE

Many of the educators also wondered how the change would affect the rest of the week.

“I was concerned about whether or not all of our teachers would be able to teach the full curriculum with fewer days available,” says Candi Becker, special education coordinator and English II teacher. “Teachers definitely had to rethink their lesson plans a little, but they mostly had to focus on what the most important things are that we wanted our students to learn.”

For some teachers, the way they had taught in the past was no longer possible.

“In the lower grades, a lot of the curriculum that is provided is structured for five days a week,” Clare-Sherman adds. “Everything is laid out Monday through Friday, with Monday being the beginning of the week to introduce the content and then Friday testing over the content that was learned continued on page 41

Earning your degree from Grand Canyon University represents a positive next step in achieving your career goals. Founded in 1949, GCU offers more than 150 online programs for bachelor’s, master’s and doctoral degree programs in some of the fastest-growing career fields.

ATPE has a special arrangement with GCU that allows eligible participants to earn a degree, certificate or take a single course with special benefits.

BENEFITS FOR EDUCATIONAL ALLIANCE PARTICIPANTS:

• 10% scholarship off tuition • Complete your coursework 100% online around your schedule • Support from a local university representative who facilitates all university resources from enrollment through graduation • Estimate the total cost of your degree with our Net Price Calculator

SEE HOW YOUR COURSEWORK AND PREVIOUS CREDITS APPLY

Contact your local university representative for a complimentary credit evaluation. Within 24 hours, we will evaluate your coursework and provide a personalized graduation plan – including a preliminary schedule and your anticipated graduation date.

For more information, please visit gcu.edu/TXEducators or call 855-428-1772