THECB ERC advisory board approves three research projects using ERC data

The Higher Education Coordinating Board (THECB) Education Research Center (ERC) advisory board approved minutes and consent items and granted access for three research proposals during a special Zoom meeting recorded for later posting.

The board voted to approve the minutes from the June 12, 2025, advisory board meeting and to accept the consent calendar, which included extension items 2069 and 3078. It also approved an additional data-extension request described on the agenda as Data 1 (extension 180; neighborhood and student outcomes). Each motion carried on voice votes with no recorded oppositions.

The advisory board also approved three ERC research proposals with remote access requests. The first, presented by researcher Tucker Smith, is a study to define supply and demand for skills in Texas and to examine how educational credentials respond to changes in skill demand. "The ERC data is critical to this project because it will allow us to define skill development through degree and credential receipt and course selections and to examine individual level decisions to pursue development of particular skills," Smith said. He told the board the project would use aggregate products from Lightcast job-posting data and would keep Lightcast microdata separate from ERC microdata; any Lightcast aggregates would be brought into the ERC server only after approval.

The board asked about geographic linkage and identifiability; Smith said any linking to job-posting aggregates would occur at aggregated geographic and credential levels and that county-level geography was the anticipated level for some analyses. After questions, Holly moved to approve the project and Jackie seconded; the motion passed.

The second approved project, presented by Emily Diekman, a fourth-year Ph.D. student at the University of California Merced, proposed studying complaints filed with the federal Office for Civil Rights related to special education services. "I am interested in understanding what predicts these resolution agreements and studying how special education services and student outcomes change afterwards," Diekman said. She told the board the dataset she obtained via a public records request is at the district level, includes the complaint filing and resolution dates, categorical descriptions of complaint types and outcomes (for example, whether a case resulted in a resolution agreement), and that she does not have disability-specific information that would permit identification of individual students. The board requested a completed data dictionary using the boardtemplate; staff clarified that board approval does not constitute automatic approval of any supplemental data elements outside the approved request. Megan moved to approve the project and Angie seconded; the motion passed.

The third approved project, presented by Theresa Lansford, seeks to analyze the student-to-teacher pipeline in Texas and to identify factors associated with entry into and exit from the classroom. Lansford said the ERC allows a long-term cohort view needed to study formative experiences and workforce trajectories. "The ERC is unique in how robust and far reaching it is as you all well know," Lansford said. Rayanne moved to approve the project and Celeste seconded; the motion passed.

No members of the public registered to give testimony. The board briefly paused during the meeting to reissue a new Zoom link for participants; ERC staff were asked to distribute the updated link.

The approvals recorded at this meeting were taken by voice vote and the board did not record individual roll-call tallies in the transcript. The approvals include: (1) approval of the 06/12/2025 advisory board meeting minutes; (2) approval of the consent calendar (extensions 2069 and 3078); (3) approval of Data 1 (extension 180) for neighborhood and student outcomes; and (4) approval of three remote-access research proposals (remote access requests 114, 115, and 116) described above. The projects were presented with technical details about data linkage, identifiability safeguards, and FERPA-related study exemptions, and the board asked for a data dictionary on at least one project.

The board did not adopt new policies or issue directives beyond the approvals listed above. Staff noted that board approval does not automatically approve supplemental data elements; investigators were asked to provide any required data dictionaries or additional documentation for staff review.