The Texas House on Tuesday passed House Bill 8, a major rewrite of the state’s school assessment and accountability system, after extended debate and adoption of multiple amendments.

House Bill 8 replaces the single, end-of-year STAAR administration with a three-part model — beginning-of-year, middle-of-year and end-of-year assessments — and changes how growth and accountability are measured. The bill passed on final passage by a roll-call vote of 78 yeas and 58 nays.

Supporters said the measure aims to reduce “high-stakes” pressure of a single test day, speed teachers’ access to results and give parents and educators more timely, actionable data. Rep. Tim Buckley, the bill’s author and chair of the Public Education Committee, said HB 8 “reforms our Texas assessment program and strengthens the state's accountability system while creating greater transparency, oversight and ultimately predictability for our public schools.”

Opponents warned the bill increases the number of state-mandated testing days and extends maximum testing time for some grade levels. Rep. Christina Hinojosa and others pressed Buckley on details including how many days and hours of testing would be required at each grade, and whether school districts could continue to use privately sold benchmark tests such as MAP or i-Ready.

Key provisions and schedule

- Assessment structure: HB 8 requires three linked assessments each year (BOY, MOY and EOY). The end-of-year exam remains a standards-based criterion-referenced test aligned to TEKS; the beginning- and middle-year instruments are norm-referenced options that districts may choose to use from an approved list or the state-produced version.

- Implementation timetable: The bill phases in the system with major elements effective in the 2027–28 school year; the legislature will receive a TEA report on implementation status in February 2027 and a test reliability/validity report by Dec. 1, 2028. TEA must publish the accountability manual by July 15 before ratings are issued.

- Growth and ratings: For the first time the bill establishes a within-year growth measure (BOY to EOY) in addition to year-over-year growth and codifies timelines and advisory structures for changes to cut scores and accountability indicators.

- Test length, security and accommodations: The bill specifies target completion windows (measured as the time within which 85% of students without extended accommodations are expected to finish) and preserves the ability for students with accommodations to take longer; it does not impose a hard cap that would prevent additional time for accommodated students.

- Scoring and rescoring: Lawmakers debated how open‑ended writing responses are scored. HB 8 preserves an automatic-rescore process for writing samples where an automatic rescore would result in at least a one‑point increase and — following an amendment adopted on the floor — ensures an automatic rescore for samples that would raise the student to the next performance level. Districts may request manual rescoring; under current practice a district pays a fee only if a rescoring request does not yield an improved score (fee cited in hearings: $50 per submission). The adopted amendment also requires the state to provide rescoring in certain circumstances without district charge.

- TEA role and vendor options: The bill tightens legislative oversight of TEA and establishes an Accountability Advisory Committee that includes legislative appointees and representatives appointed by regional education service centers. A floor amendment preserved districts’ ability to use approved private vendors for BOY/MOY instruments (e.g., MAP or i-Ready) and maintained a state-produced option; HB 8 does not, by itself, require districts to switch providers, although authors and members discussed future funding decisions that could affect district choices.

- Special populations and technical fixes: The adopted perfecting amendment clarifies treatment of new campuses on growth measures, exempts certain severely disabled campuses from BOY/MOY testing, allows more time for districts to challenge A–F rules (extending 6 to 9 months in one change), and adds procedures for correcting CCMR (college, career, and military readiness) data.

Why it matters

HB 8 changes how student progress is measured, how quickly parents and teachers receive data and how the state calculates campus and district A–F ratings. Supporters say the change reduces test anxiety and improves instructional feedback; critics argue it upgrades state authority over testing days and test construction and could increase the number of state‑mandated testing hours for some students.

What lawmakers directed next

The House directed TEA to provide the February 2027 implementation report and set other reporting deadlines included in the bill. Buckley and other members said they expect follow-up budget conversations in the next legislative session to address costs for districts that choose state-produced assessments.

Speakers quoted in this article are identified from the House floor debate and are attributed to their roles in the transcript of the August 26, 2025 House floor session.

Ending

With HB 8 now passed by the House, the measure will move through the legislative process (and conference) where specifics about funding and final implementation may be further refined.