ERC approves multiple data requests and 14 research proposals; board requires data-form and FERPA clarifications

The Education Research Center (ERC) board met June 12 and approved multiple supplemental-data requests, extension requests and 14 research proposals, voting to condition approvals on clarifications to remote-access forms, supplemental-data specifications and FERPA purpose statements.

Why it matters: the approvals grant researchers access to ERC-held student and institutional records used to evaluate Texas education policies and programs — including school turnaround efforts, HB 4545 tutoring mandates, dual‑credit and career‑technical education pathways, early‑childhood interventions, and studies tied to workforce outcomes. Board members repeatedly required clearer data dictionaries, limits on matching procedures and explicit FERPA exemption language before final release.

Most important actions and board direction

- The board approved a consent calendar of routine extensions and data requests and then took up specific supplemental data and new research projects. Several approvals were conditional: researchers were instructed to (1) revise remote-access forms to correctly list requested files, (2) supply required data dictionaries for supplemental files, and (3) tighten FERPA purpose statements to specify the exception being used (for example, “evaluation” or “studies and research”).

- On a technical data request (UTV170 / marriage records merge), staff and researchers debated whether the requested marriage-pair linkage could be performed without exposing identifiable information. ERC staff said current procedures require exact SSN, full name and date of birth for agency-to-agency matching; researchers offered alternative merges using Texas Birth Index records or a TA-created indicator showing whether a native-born student is married to an immigrant student. The board asked for a written supplemental-data procedure and data dictionary before reconsideration; the initial submission was declined and the board directed staff to work with the research team on a resubmission.

- GoodReason Houston (proposal CUH‑109) presented a school-turnaround study focused on Houston and comparable districts to evaluate effects and sustainability of turnaround reforms. The researchers removed a supplemental-data request from their remote-access form at the board’s request; the board approved the project with that revision. Courtney Durbin, manager of research and data for GoodReason Houston, told the board the study will examine student outcomes (STAAR / TELPAS), attendance, discipline and course-taking, and will consider Texas-specific policies such as SB 1882 and HB 1842.

- Researchers presenting on HB 4545 (remote access request U H 110) said they will evaluate the tutoring/individualized instruction mandate enacted in 2021, focusing on student- and teacher-level effects including retention and classroom impacts. Board members requested the proposal clarify that the project seeks an evaluation (FERPA exemption language) and the study was approved after the researcher agreed to revise the statement.

- Several projects requested and the board approved the addition or removal of specific datasets from remote-access forms: multiple proposals removed ACT and SAT from their requests because those files are not available in the ERC; other proposals were asked to add disciplinary data or P-class roster/teacher link files to enable specific analyses (for example, research on dual‑credit signaling and teacher-level effects).

- Lone Star College (CUH‑113) received approval to trace dual-credit cohorts into workforce outcomes; the researchers explained two possible ingestion paths for a college‑academy cohort (direct ISD-to-TEA transfer vs. college submission) and the board approved with a revision to the FERPA purpose statement.

- The board approved projects on emergent bilingual programs, dual-credit and CTE (several proposals), early‑childhood impacts (Educational First Steps), homeschool outcomes (Texas Homeschool Coalition), and studies of financial incentives under HB 8 (outcomes-based funding). For many of these approvals, the board required specific edits: adding the OC1/Special Data indicators where needed, supplying data dictionaries, or clarifying which FERPA exemption applies.

Votes at a glance (selected approvals; all were approved with the amendments listed): - Data / extension items on the consent calendar — approved as presented (consent agenda items and extension list corrected during roll call). - Data UHO97 (supplemental data) — motion to approve (passed); no substantive changes recorded. - Data UTV170 (marriage‑pair merge) — initial submission declined; motion to decline as submitted passed. Board directed staff to work with researchers to resubmit with required procedures and data dictionary. - Remote access CUH‑109 (GoodReason Houston, school turnaround) — approved with removal of supplemental‑data request (Courtney Durbin agreed). - UH‑110 (evaluation of HB 4545 individualized instruction / tutoring) — approved with amendment: revise FERPA purpose statement to specify “evaluation.” - UTD‑231 / UTD‑229 and other dual‑credit/CTE proposals (multiple items) — approved with amendments: remove ACT/SAT file requests where not available, add P‑class/P‑teacher/P‑roster as needed, and supply supplemental data dictionaries. - CUH‑113 (Lone Star College dual‑credit cohort study) — approved with FERPA revision and clarification on how ISD and college-provided datasets will be handled. - UTD‑202, UTD‑228, UTA‑267 and other workforce/CTE/financial‑incentives proposals — approved with requested edits to remote-access forms and data lists. - Proposal on reproductive‑health impacts (abortion clinic closures / Dobbs-related analysis) — approved with the board asking for a clarified FERPA purpose statement and confirmation of availability of pregnancy‑related services indicators.

Discussion highlights and board concerns

- Data matching and identifiability: ERC staff repeatedly emphasized that under the center’s new procedures, agency-to-agency matches generally require high-confidence identifiers (exact SSN, full name, date of birth). Where projects proposed fuzzy matching by name and birth year or other less-identifying merges, staff requested either (a) a TA (technical administrator) perform the merge and supply de‑identified indicators, or (b) use an intermediary file (for example, Texas Birth Index) already merged under ERC procedures.

- Data dictionaries and remote‑access forms: the board consistently required researchers to supply detailed data dictionaries for any supplemental items and to correct remote‑access forms so the ERC can confirm which files are actually available. Several projects were approved contingent on those changes.

- FERPA exemptions and purpose language: the board asked many applicants to specify the exact FERPA exemption they rely on (examples discussed: evaluation, studies and research, or program‑administration exceptions) and to tailor their purpose statements accordingly.

- File availability: board members and staff noted which datasets are not available in the ERC (for example, ACT and SAT files are not provided by TEA in the ERC). Several research teams removed those requests from their forms on the record.

What’s next / closing notes

Board members closed the meeting after confirming motions and asking applicants to submit revised remote-access forms, data dictionaries and clarified FERPA purpose statements where requested. Where initial requests were declined (notably the marriage-pair supplemental merge), staff and the researcher teams were directed to work together and return with a revised submission for board consideration.

Quotes (verbatim and attributed)

- "We do not need supplemental data, so we can remove that," Courtney Durbin, manager of research and data for GoodReason Houston, said when asked to edit the remote-access form for her turnaround study.

- "We would be comfortable doing that too," Patrick Gill, director of research and data strategy (GoodReason Houston), said when describing alternatives for creating de‑identified indicators for marriage‑pair research when direct merges were too identifying.

Ending

The board adjourned after completing votes and asking for the revised materials; approved projects will proceed through ERC data‑access processes once the requested clarifications and supplemental documentation are received and accepted by staff.