Hello, and welcome to the Texas Tribune Tripcast for Tuesday, September ninth, twenty twenty five. I am Matthew Watkins, editor in chief of the Textas Tribune, and I'm all alone in trib cast headquarters today as Eleanor is on vacation and my two guests are both joining me remotely from
work travel as well. But because Eleanor is on vacation, that means I got sole discretion and deciding what we're talking about this week, and that means a topic of conversation that is frequent and common in the Watkins household, the Star Test and its future, its demise, and its replacement.
After two failed efforts in the regular legislative session in the first special session, lawmakers last week approved a bill that would eliminate the Star Test and replace it with something new starting in the twenty seven to twenty eight school year. And we're going to break that down today with two experts on the topic. First off, an education reporter for the Texas Tribune. Stay Ha day joining us from Indiana? Is that right?
Stayha, I'm in Chicago right now, so hanging in that.
Room, all right, Very good, very good, Well, welcome Staha, and we also have bridgid warlead, Chief State Impact Officer for the Commit Partnership, which is a Dallas County nonprofit seeking to improve educational and economic outcomes within Dallas County. Bridget is joining us from a hotel in New Orleans.
I am I am happy to be here all.
Right, thank you for joining us. So, the Star Test, like I said, has been a hot topic for parents, teachers, educators, and many other people over the past few months. A lot of conversation and debate that got us to the place we are right here right now. Steha, I want you to kind of start by talking about the present. The Star Test, which will remain in effect for a couple of school years right now, was very controversial leading
to the changes that we saw. But tell us a little bit about like the testing arrangement that we have right now in Texas schools.
So this is a huge pain point for family, Like across the state of Texas, it's been the current standardized test. It's one test at the end of the year, it runs for it's for hours and hours, and kids once they finished taking the test, they have to sit at their desk and not move. It's just like stay silent. And it's also I think because it's at the end of the year and students know that not just them are going to be graded on it, but teachers and their schools are going to be graded on it. It's
really really stressful for them. So it's been a topic that has I think come up on the campaign trail for lawmakers because they are hearing about the stress that it puts on students. They hear from their own kids this idea that students don't even want to go to school on the days that testing is taking place because
of the pressure. So there's this general consensus across the board, across the state, across lawmakers that something needs to be done about this test that is really really putting an unnecessary amount of stress on students.
I mean, the idea here, right to take a step back, is to measure how successful schools are at educating their you know, students and preparing them for life beyond high school and things like that. And I guess there's also an element bridget two to kind of measure you know, whether the individual students have enough you know, have gained enough knowledge to complete their schooling or advance in their schooling.
And things like that. I mean, what does Bridget is it sets up a lot of high stakes, right, and a lot of nervousness. I have a third grader and a seventh grader, my two kids very different attitudes. On the one hand, I have my daughter, the you know, perfectionist, wants to ace the test, very stressed, very concerned. I have to sit her down and be like, look, it's okay, like you're going to do fine on this test. They're really what the what really matters? This is for the school.
This is not going to affect your kind of individual success as a student. And then I have my son who could care less about this test, you know, and our teachers like, hey, can you like bribe this kid to really focus and try hard? And you know, and so we have to sit him down and say like, hey, actually this test matters, and if you do well on it, we'll get you a lego set or something like that.
And so, I mean, that's that's the stakes, right. Bridget, tell us a little bit about kind of in your community in the area you felt face, kind of how people feel about, you know, whether the star was doing a good job of accomplishing the goals that it was set out for sure, So there's.
A lot in that question, so I'm going to work to unpack it.
Also, legos are powerful, and that's something we should all take away. So assessments are incredibly important because they help us measure whether students are learning in the classroom. And I think one thing that is missed a lot when people talk about the high stakes nature of our assessments is that Texas is actually pretty unique in our accountability system that the result what we measure is the better of absolute performance and growth, that is not those two
things being one or the other the better. That is not common in most state assessments. So when we're giving students state assessments, what we're really measuring at the end of the day is did the student come in at least a year further along than they did when they walked in, making sure that the instruction that happened in that classroom didn't put them further behind. And that is something that when I talk to people, everyone generally is
very supportive of. We want to make sure our students are continuing to progress further. So I think part of this is also just reframing what assessment and accountability is truly measuring. The other thing that I will say is I think this whole debate has been a bit of a call to action for the adults that are around our students around assessments. When I was a student, we had state assessments and the only thing I remember is.
We got pancakes that day.
My mom made us like a bigger breakfast that day than we normally did. I was a teacher. I was an elementary school teacher, and my kids didn't. I never talked to my students about the assessment having a connection to the rating of our school or my evaluation. We talked about it as a way for them to demonstrate everything that they had learned that year. So I think there's a reframing also around the narrative of what this
opportunity is for students. But then the third thing that I think is important is that this debate caused us to step back and think what components of our assessment system are really necessary? Do we need kids sitting for hours in an assessment to determine whether or not they have learned what they were taught?
No, we don't, And.
We see those changes in here. We also see changes to the assessment that are now going to give much better actionable data to parents and to teachers at checkpoints throughout the year. So it's not here's a test we give you at the end of the year, and by the way, the results aren't going to be available to you until after the student has started the summer break.
Excellent, Okay, So a lot to unpack there, and I'm very interested in a lot of those different topics. But Saiha, just briefly, I mean, talk a little bit more about the the What was it specifically about this test that people were unhappy with?
You have so you have one test at the end of the year, and so that is that is the nature. That's like, you have students they are learning all year through and then at the end of the day, at the end of the year, they're taking one test. It runs from it's designed to take about three hours, but it can go up to seven hours. Folks are unhappy because they are saying that the questions are too rigorous
and don't actually meet state standards. That's a criticism that comes up, and I think the environment that these students are in that there it's just like this amount of stress that they're putting on their put under is just it's not needed that there's a way to do this
that so that they're not under that much stress. And I think there's another there's another piece of it to where Bridget, I think you were getting at this idea right, like that you need standardized testing in order to be able to measure how students are doing in the classroom, to measure whether schools are doing a good job educating students. But the tests that are in place, that are currently those scores will be factored into how schools are assessed.
But are those tests doing a good job measuring student success? School success are how are the tests formatted so that they are doing the best job helping students to in the learning process.
So let's talk about HbA. Then this was the bill that passed in the special session and it changed how these tests will work. Break down for me, I'll go to stay on this first and and then go to you Bridget for your your analysis. Here, break down to me what is different or what will be different once these new versions of these tests are put in place.
Right, so you had currently we have one end of the year test. What that will be replaced with is three shorter tests taken throughout the year, so first at the beginning of the year, then at the middle of the year, and then at the end of the year.
The first two tests in theory, schools should be able to swap that out with tests that they're already giving students, so tests that are familiar in the classroom, like map testing that it's nationally recognized tests that students are taking all over the country And so the idea with being able to swap those beginning and the middle of the year tests is that it'll actually reduce testing since they're not actually going to This is the idea, right like
the idea is that they're not going to have to take an additional test because these are tests they can just sub in. But it's not really clear yet exams are going to be able to be accepted for that swap in, and then that last end of the year test will still be one that the TEA has a big hand in creating those questions that across the board, every district has to take the same tests. All these three tests should be shorter. They're designed to be shorter
than that one three hour test. But I think there's a lot of questions right now about there's an intention for this to decrease testing. There's a lot of questions right now about what this actually increased testing. But in addition to that, there's a lot of things of the bill. In addition to that, there's a lot of discussion about how the grading will look like and what the results
will look like. So the first two tests all three tests, but really the first two tests will be known as what is like nationally, it's what they're called norm reference tests, and so that grading and the results will look like percentile ranks. So students' performance is going to be compared against the peer, so they may be in the fiftieth percentile and there's sevent percentile. So all three tests you'll
get results that look like that. The end of the year test will look really similar to what the Star test looks like right now, in that the TEA sets these benchmarks, right like you need to get x x points in order to be meeting state benchmarks, and so they set certain scores that students to reach to say, Okay, I basically passed or I didn't pass, and that will assess you know, whether how what how many students in the state are like meeting state goals or learning those
like state meeting state standards, and then it's a it's a whole, it's a it's a lot of pieces, and then there's a piece of like we can expect test scores to come back much faster. So in the past we've had to wait weeks for parents to get their test back, and so that has been an issue because schools out and then you've got your test scores, but you can no longer reach the teacher, right, and so
you can no longer talk about it. It's the idea is now it's only supposed to take about two days, and so the idea is, you know, you have these three tests throughout the year. You should be able to use these test results and information from the test results to actually change what is being learned in the classroom. And also you're getting that information back quicker, so you can make those adjustments quicker.
Yeah. Two other just interesting things that I saw in the bill. Right, this idea of practice tests. Right, one of the big complaints I think among teachers and educators, right is they have to spend so much time preparing for the Star test that they're not able to focus on actual teaching. Right, This would include correct me if I'm wrong, a ban on kind of running students through
practice tests. One expert cited in a story you wrote, Steja says, that would buy back, you know, fifteen to thirty hours of lost instructional time by replacing that, and then also just the number of tests things your tests on you know, being paired back a little bit english to being one in particular, we no longer need to take that test anymore.
Okay, So I make a point about the practice test.
Yeah, absolutely, it's important.
So it does prohibit practice tests, but it also now by creating the beginning of the year and middle of the year shorter assessments, it gives kids an opportunity.
To practice for the end of the year.
Because there is a benefit to practice tests.
I mean, we all.
Took practice tests for SAT and ACT.
You got to get used to the way the questions are formatted.
And so while we're now removing the kind of okay, everybody, we're going to take a whole practice assessment, we are giving students access to shorter assessments at the beginning in the middle of the year that look like the assessment they're going to take at the end of the year. It is true that in practice beginning of the year and middle of the year benchmarks are happening right now, but they're a different testing vendor because the state doesn't create inter.
Re benchmark right now.
Now, they will see similar test questions, similar format beginning, middle and end of the year. So practice is still there, but these long sit in and take practice.
Tests are gone.
You know, it's interesting to watch this because we hear these concerns, some of some of them are very much legitimate about the frustrations with the test. But Bridget, I mean, one of the things that's going on here too is you need to measure whether schools are doing what's asked of them, and in any situation, you know, it's it's hard to come up with a fair and rigorous way of doing that without a test. I'm struggle to think
of how that might look like otherwise. And if you're going to have some kind of test that's going to measure whether you can advance in a grade, whether what you know, what letter grade your school is going to get from the tea, and and you know, in extreme cases, whether if you are failing that test for enough years in a row, whether the TA might have the ability or the power or the interest to take over the government of your school district. When you have those kinds
of expectations, there's going to be pressure. And so I mean, one of the things that I've wondered about is I've watched this sort of play out, is like, is it really possible to design a test that teachers and parents and other people who are going to feel that pressure are going to be okay with, are going to be happy with? Do you think that is possible? Do you think it's important to do it? Anyways? And I guess maybe the last question is do you think this will get us closer to that goal?
So I do think it's necessary, And I will harken back to what I said at the beginning that I think everyone thinks that the evaluation is just based on the ultimate score that the student gets. It is also growth. So again, we all want kids to come out of each at least one year ahead of where they were, or they're going to fall further behind. So I think we have to have an assessment to measure whether that
is happening. And when we reframe it in that way, it does take off a little more of the pressure, especially for our schools and our teachers that are regularly teaching students who come into their classrooms or their campus buildings.
Behind the other thing.
That I will say is that the assessment you said fair and rigorous, I think the other one is valid and reliable. So we have to create an assessment because there are things tied to the assessment that we truly believe the results are valid and reliable. And so that leads to some of the environment in which the testing is happening, and I think that that is absolutely necessary. I think you asked whether this assessment will do that. I think it will get us closer than we previously
have been, which is good new. I also think this assessment will help our teachers and our.
Parents help their students.
So the language you see throughout this bill is instructurally and of course I butcher it as I say it instructionally supportive assessment. The goal is that when students take the test, parents and teachers are now getting a report that says, this is how your kid did compared to other kids in Texas, also compared to the cut scores of the certain achievement levels. And then here are some actionable strategies you can use to help your kid master
what they haven't figured out yet. So this is supposed to be used to inform instruction. So the ultimate goal is to have students again progressing at least a year so that they don't fall further behind, and I think this test gets us closer to doing that.
Now, do you have you heard from teachers, I mean teachers, school administrators and things like that. Do you think they agree with that assessment that this is a step in the right direction, that it's getting us closer.
Yeah, I mean I've talked to talk to teachers and administors all over the state, and we're sort of getting a mixed bag. Like I think on one hand, books are saying like, we want these tests to be useful, right, and so then it's like if you have tests that measure progress over the year, then that will actually come in they can actually use that in the classroom and it's shorter, and they like that. I think they hear
the idea of three tests over one test. I think that for some teachers that ring some alarm bells, like is that just going to be going to be more testing? Is that going to just create you know, the pressure that you're feeling at the end of the year, now
is that just going to be tripled? So I think there's just some anxiety right now, and it's like there's a lot to be seen, Like we don't know yet what those beginning and middle middle of the year tests will look like, what whether they'll actually be able to swap it out for tests that they're already taking, and what those tests could look like there. So there's so much unknown about those first two tests. So I think in that uncertainty, we're hearing some like some worries.
Okay, very good, very good. Yeah, it just I mean I have watched this with a lot of interest because I see it play out, you know, in the news and in our coverage. I also see it play out in my own personal life. But I also just remember the history, right, so, you know, this is what the fifth or so version of a standardized test that that Texas has done. You know, it started off with the Texas Assessment of Basic Skills. Then you had the teams test, the Toss test, which is the test I took when
I was a kid. Then they switched that to the Text test, Then you had the Star Test. You know, there has been a lot of sort of bites at this Apple attempts to try to try to get this to where they need to be bridgid, what do you think, what do we know differently now than we knew back then That might suggest that this might be a different situation here.
So I will start by saying I arrived in Texas in October of twenty nineteen, so I only know the star and then this assessment. I grew up in Virginia, which has the worst testing acronym standards of learning SOL, and it's been SOL since I was there and continued.
So that's one.
State that is stuck by its name because it's almost humorous at this point. So I can't talk too far back about how things have changed from one to the other. I do think though, this is less of a change in the purpose of the assessment and what the assessment is assessing, and it is directly trying to target the
feedback that has come from parents and teachers. I don't know if the other assessments in the past have done that, but the shortening of the test, the assessments giving back given back earlier, and trying to create a more introductionally supportive that has all been in response to feedback that I know legislators are getting constantly.
Okay, so you had an interesting story kind of in the beginning of the special session, honing in on a school that has really struggled in the previous or the current version of the of the testing of the Star test, that being Adobe Middle School in Austin, right, which has has received a failing grade for multiple years, could be starting to kind of look at that situation where it could be required by the state to either be shut down or reworked or make AISD vulnerable to you know,
being essentially taken over by the state. Can you talk a little bit about just what you learned from going to that school and how they felt about this you know testing setup.
Right right?
I think so the school is Adobe Middle School in Austin, uzety, and I think that school and what they're navigating really does a good job illustrating the stakes of having really like an effective accountability system. So here in Texas, it's if you get five F ratings in our accountability system in a row, then you are at a risk of like the most severe state sanctions. And so that is that what you're saying, like at the state coming in
taking over a democratically elected board. They could instead also require school to shut down. But Adobe at this point is at four FS, so they are teetering. They are very close at to you know, risking the most severe
state sanctions. But what was going on Adobe is so they are in the school is really like really predominantly immigrant community, really just economically disadvantaged, high rate of economically disadvanta students and so and also it's just the immigrant community comes in because and it's a strong refugee community as well, so a lot of the students that are coming in don't speak English very well, and so for them,
like English is their second or third language. And so there was a lot of frustration with the Star test for them because on top of you know, the concerns that we're hearing across the board, across school districts all over the state that it's long, it's stressful, and it's
just unnecessary. They're saying that on top of all those things, we have students who don't they're forced to take the test, they have to take the test in a language that's not their first language, and so everything is just becomes added and exacerbated, and so they didn't feel like the Star test did the best job assessing whether the school
was successful at educating theirs. So there was this interesting disconnect where it felt like the state was coming in and saying the school was not doing a good job educating the community or supporting the community, but then the community was saying, no, actually, we do feel really supported by the school in all these like intangible ways that
testing doesn't measure. And so I think like that that disconnect I think comes up when we think about an accountability system and how do we measure whether schools are effective. And of course here in Texas, testing is the biggest factor, and how students perform on these tests are the biggest factor. But I think there's also been a call in recent years to think about metrics that aren't just testing. Right, It's like our students participating participating in workforce readiness programs,
How are students doing in kindergarten? What does do how are students like mental health and mental wellness? And so that also actually came up in this HbA because while we're not going to see the accountability system and how things are calculated change from non testing factors, there is a clause in the bill that is asking the state to start tracking these like non testing metrics. So that did seem like an nod to those sort of concerns.
Brigina, I wonder what you think about that. I looked up the data on Adobe before we came in here Toa's data on this. It says that fifty one percent of the students they are chronically absent, seventy two percent have limited English proficiency, eighty seven percent are economically disadvantaged.
When you're talking about what is asked of that school beyond kind of the standard, you know, what was asked of safe for instance, the upper middle class school that I went to, it feels like the task, the challenge at hand, and all those things are so different that it would be hard to measure each of those to
schools in a different way. What do you think about on the other hand, I mean, the goal of the schools is to prepare students, to help them, you know, get caught up and you know, be ready for whatever is going to come next in their life. What do you think of the feedback that SNA heard from a community like that as we think through these challenges.
Sure, I didn't think I was going to tell more my personal story on here, but I will give a snippet because I think it helps frame this. I grew
up in a very upper middle class area. I went to college and decided to enter teach for America because I thought every kid needed to have a school that was as good as the school that I went to that was I'm pretty sure I said it in my interview, but what I learned after teaching in a eco high Eco disc school in Louisiana was actually that the school I was at needed way more resources than the.
School that I had been at.
They needed better teachers than the school that I had been at, And so it is a complex topic. It's a difficult topic to talk about, but I think assessments and these assessment results and the consequences that we've been talking about, like state takeover, actually shine a flashlight on areas where we need to be putting more resources, we need to be putting our best teachers, and that is
actually now happening at Adobe. They are going forward with resource campuses, which is one of the it was included in HB two from the last session, where they are now meeting a threshold where at least half of their teachers in the core subjects are going to be TIA designated, meaning they're in the top third of the best teachers in all of the state. So those results are actually driving some pretty bold action that are going to be life changing for the students that are on that campus.
They are now getting access to the best teachers in Austin ID or teachers that have come from outside of Austin ISD. The one other point that I want to make because I agree with everything snehas said, but I think it wouldn't be I wouldn't be representing commits if I didn't bring a little bit of data.
And what our.
Results have shown is that let's stick with just students who are meeting that economically disadvantaged designation. On an aff rated campus, nineteen percent of those students are meeting grade level. On an A rated campus, fifty four percent of students
with economically disadvantaged designation are meeting grade level. So we have campuses, school leaders, and teachers across the state who are showing what is possible when you really rally around a community, you put resources into the school, you put your best teach, And that is the story that I like to tell when I go look at accountability results. I go find those campuses immediately because it's just a reminder of what's possible.
Yeah, I mean, I think that's a really interesting point because if you are a parent, you probably only know the experience in one school, and it's hard to know about what's working elsewhere and what's going on. The Charles Butt Foundation really suppul last year saying really around like ninety percent of parents are happy with their children's education in Texas, which, you know, that's a positive number and
that's a good thing to see. On the other hand, less than half of students are graduating from high school in Texas college ready in both reading and math. The average SAT score in Texas is under one thousand. You know, less than a quarter of students are in Texas are taking any AP courses. I mean, there's unquestionably room to grow. I mean, I think some of the question here is who gets decide who gets to decide what is acceptable, who gets to decide what is working? And should you
base that on data? Should you base that on parent sentiment or what? I mean? This seems to be bridgid the question that the state is sort of grappling through by talking through this test, and.
There's been a lot of conversations about including parent and student surveys. There's been conversations about other indicators to put into the accountability system. Surveys come up a lot, surveys, I think tell a very interesting story. We just get back to this valid and reliable measure. We want to make sure that parents can speak freely on these surveys, and we want to make sure every survey is counted, and just to do that takes a lot of work.
It actually takes a lot of cost. So it's something that we should continue to explore because I think the parent experience the student experience tells a lot about a campus. But we can't step back from having academic results be the primary driver because at the end of the day, I mean, what I was taught when I became a teacher was the direct correlation between teaching and learning. You can teach or you can think you've taught, but if
the kids didn't learn it, you didn't teach it. And that is something that we just need to continue to remind people of the public good that our public schools are and we have to hold them to that bar.
So stay out what happenshead.
No, I was just going to say, I think the thing about like test performance is like it really is an indicator of options that students have after they leave high school, right, Like we know that like how students do in English as early as third grade has like a long term predictor of how they'll do in high
school and then beyond. And then there's this like when students are under performing in math that raises serious concerns about you know, are we building students who can enter a future workforce and get those like high paying jobs that can lead them to live the lives that they
want to leave. So it's I think there's a balance here and what should have weight and what shouldn't, But there is a piece of testing that that really is important and thinking about, you know, the success of students later on.
Yeah, you know, I wonder Bridget if you could help me sort of put this in context a little bit more broadly with the broader education policy in Texas right now.
I mean, it does seem to me like the state legislature, state leaders, the tea, all those different kinds of groups are really trying to do, you know, some pretty dramatic things in order to you know, improve the outcomes of students in this state, whether it's related to teacher pay, whether it's related to testing, whether it's related to this you know, Bluebonnet curriculum, which has gotten a lot of pushback from folks due to you know, how much religion
may be included in that. But but there does seem to be like a broader strategy here right now to say among state leaders that the status quo is not working and that there need to be more interventions. There needs to be maybe even more pressure on some of these school districts to improve on the metrics that they're they're taking. You do you agree with that assessment?
Yeah.
I think high impacting which we saw in the last two sessions are previous two of the last three sessions. I don't even know how many sessions right now is another example of that. I think there is a real Texas is not proud of where our academic results are
coming out. I was at the Louisiana Department of Education for nine years before I came to Texas and saw all of those headlines coming out about the results going up in Louisiana, and I was around Texans saying we can do that we can do that same thing and asking me how, And the answer is by looking at or following the research, following the data on what are the strategies that work, what are the strategies that turn
around academic outcomes? And they are high impact tutoring. They are putting the best teachers in front of the kids that need it the most. There are states that have shown us how to do this, and the Texas legislature has been paying attention and has been putting some serious momentum behind those strategies. And I'm optimistic that we already we saw on the most recent star results, the most
recent accountability results, we are seeing a change. Our urban school systems actually improved three times the rate that the state improved sour Our school systems that have students that need the most support are actually showing some pretty overwhelming growth.
On the flip side of that, say, has there there may be a bit of a loss of local control, right, I mean you were you were seeing in some cases districts, you know, leaders express frustration because they feel like their closest on the ground level and are maybe you know, losing a little bit of their ability to make decisions at the local level.
I think the elephant in the room, right is Houston iced and right like that we had that is our biggest school district taxes and the state came in and took over and appointed superintendent and with the latest test scores, I mean that superintend Mike Miles, I mean he really touted that there were no SS at any campus, that he was really able to get test scores up. But
there were caught there. It was a sort of like now forgetting the word, but like there were trade offs to that, right, Like we saw plenty of students like leave and droves, there are questions about enrollment, there was a cutback on social services, and certainly there was a loss of local control. And so then it is you know, we did see test scores improve in Houston, but to what end? And so I think there there I see it.
I see two pieces to it, which is like, you know, on one hand, you can use test performance to identify where schools need additional resources and make investments, kind of like what Bridget was saying. But there's also a piece where you know, there is real, real sanctions that are attached to these tests, these test scores.
Bridgiet I wonder if you could just describe quickly, what do you feel like the core tenants of that state strategy are. I mean, you know, I think rewarding the best teachers might be one. Are what are the kind of are there underlining ideals that are at the heart of the strategy we're seeing play out.
I think we're touching on a lot of it. I think it is it is targeted.
Funding.
What we learned a lot in the eighty ninth is that the legislature was not interested in providing increases to the basic allotment. They were not interested in providing schools unrestricted funding. They really wanted to know that extra funding going into school systems was tied to specific strategies that are working. So I think if there's one underlying tenant right now, it's let's find out what's working and let's
invest in that which is fit. I mean that that is pulling back from kind of this belief that school systems should be empowered to create their own strategies. So I think there's two sides to that argument. For sure, I think if I were crafting a policy, there's also a world in which that control is earned. And if we see school systems that are continuously proud graduating students who aren't ready for college, who aren't ready for the
jobs of the twenty first century. Then in those cases there needs to be some more It needs to be more closely watched with some more support, which is or consequences though those school systems that are growing, that are seeing improvement could potentially earn a little bit more empowerment. I am now riffing off of my own personal beliefs instead of the legislature, which is your question, so I'll
reail it back in. But I think it really is kind of that that targeted support is where the legislature and Texas officials are most interested and kind of putting the resources that exist.
What is a reasonable goal for an outcome? You know, in that strategy or approach. I mean, you know, Texas is has a strong economy. It's a wealthy state. It also has a lot of poor people, and it has a lot of immigrants, and it has a lot of children who's for whom English is not their first language. I mean, there are a lot of challenges that the state faces in trying to achieve these goals, like what should the achievable goal be? As they as they think through this, well, I.
Will tell you commit school, which is that by twenty forty half of the young adults in Dallas County twenty five to thirty four will have earned a living wage. And that is a very big goal. When we launched that goal, we were at around thirty percent of those individuals earning a living wage, and our goal is to get to half. I think that is going to take a lot of work, it is going to take a lot of partnerships, it's going to take a lot of resources.
But I one hundred percent think that it is achievable. And you say, you know, we have so many jobs that are available now that are going to be available in Texas, and I.
Have let it be known.
On this I talked about Virginia, I talked about Louisiana, so people know I am not a native Texan. I've outed myself, but I'm a Texas Texan by choice. I'm married into Texas, and I want to make sure that those jobs can be held by Texans and that we don't continue to have to import our talent.
In order to keep the Texas economy running well.
Even though you are in Louisiana, right, now we still accept you as a Texan, my choice that it is the Texas way right, Well, I'll take all covers. Yes, thank you Bridget, thank you Snaja both for this conversation. I'm excited to see how this will play out. And thank you to our producers, Rob and Chris. That is all we have for today. We will talk to you next week.