Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accountability Hearings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Board advances accountability‑hearings rule on first reading amid questions about scope and cost
Summary
The Tennessee State Board of Education approved the new accountability‑hearings rule on first reading, a legislatively directed process to summon local education agencies with persistently low‑performing schools for public review. Board members raised concerns about the expected number of hearings, cost apportionment, and the rule’s practicality.
The Tennessee State Board of Education on Feb. 21 approved on first reading a new rule establishing a formal accountability‑hearings process for local education agencies and charter schools that operate persistently low‑performing schools.
General counsel Rachel Soupey told the board the rule implements statutory authority to call hearings for schools receiving D or F letter grades and gives the board three follow‑up options after a hearing: recommend no action, recommend a corrective action plan, or recommend an audit and investigation. The rule was developed through stakeholder outreach dating to 2022 and drew input from national groups, state associations, authorizers and districts, and the Tennessee Department of Education.
Board members pressed staff on several operational details. Ryan Holt asked whether the rule required two consecutive F grades for the same school; staff agreed to clarify the language between first and final reading to make clear the intent is the same school receiving consecutive F ratings. Board staff told members that, if applied to recent data, about 28 hearings would be required in the first year and that each hearing is expected to last 60–90 minutes. That projection prompted concern from several members, including Jordan Mollenauer, who described the volume as impractical and urged that the legislature consider alternative approaches.
Members also asked for specifics on how hearing costs would be apportioned. Soupey said the statute allows the Department of Education to propose an apportionment of costs between the department and the LEA or charter school; any proposed apportionment would come to the board for approval. Staff committed to bring a clarifying policy on apportionment and implementation details at the board’s May meeting.
Several members urged that the hearings’ purpose be clearly framed as improvement‑oriented rather than punitive. Soupey and other staff agreed to add clarifying language and to refine procedural text (including references to the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act) so that hearing committees and board members receive training in procedures that will be followed at hearings. The rule will return for final reading after the drafts are refined and the apportionment policy is developed.
Provenance evidence (transcript excerpts): "Good morning. Rachel Soupey, general counsel. TCA 49 312 authorizes the State Board of Education to call for a hearing in LEA that operates a public school or a public charter school that receives a d or an f letter grade to report on the school's performance and how spending decisions may have affected its performance goals..." (transcript)
"If we were to take the rule as it's written currently and apply it to the last 2 years' worth of letter grade data, we would have about 28 hearings... we expect that the number diminishes in the years to follow." (transcript)
Ending: The board approved the accountability‑hearings rule on first reading and asked staff to return with clarified language on consecutive ratings, an apportionment policy for costs, and wording to emphasize improvement and training for hearing committees. The rule will return for final reading after those clarifications are completed.
