2004 Customer Satisfaction Survey (PDF, 566 KB) - TEA - Home ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

There is a huge problem here that only keeps getting worse. It’s time for you to accept responsibility for the downfall in education, and start changing TAKS or NCLB, or at least drop them because they are STUPID ideas. Children who are in 3rd grade who learn on a kindergarten level should not be expected to pass the TAKS, whether or not they have a normal IQ. Learning lower that IQ means you have a learning disability, but hey, why don’t we frustrate these kids and make them suffer and feel dumb because they fail TAKS when the other students pass. All because we put them in a regular education classroom and said, “Here, your IQ is 100, but you learn 3 years below average, take this test and fail!” Isn’t that the point of special education? And where are the funds for that? The Texas special education system sucks! Forgive the bluntness, but sometimes the truth hurts, but need to be heard! Fuel tax exemption for transporting charter school students to and from our rural school. Access to small school adjustment funds (Tier II). We need more money. Un-funded mandates. Health insurance supplement that was decreased. NHA accounts starting in 09- 04 get rid of them. This ranking is impossible because the most important thing we do is educate kids. This REQUIRES teaching excellence, funding, etc. I do not agree with AYP. The answer would be to run schools not like government agencies that are inefficient but to pay teachers by merit. Teachers receive raises because they KEPT their jobs and topped out teachers with the "magic" and drive to turn our kids lights on receive NOTHING. No wonder educational quality is hard to improve. It would not work in a business and does not work here! How can we be responsible stewards of taxpayer money and pay employees this way? Also, how can we encourage kids to excel academically when all they hear and see is athletic achievement? We are training them to put this first! Just read a paper or watch the news and you see it. We have got to reward students and teachers who excel in EDUCATION. Seems to me education falls way behind football, basketball, track. What do school official attend? SPORTS! Funding for small schools does not provide EQUAL education. With the technology available today, and already in many schools, all schools should be able to offer any class that suits a student’s needs, without hiring an additional teacher. This does require more funding! School funding formulae, insistence recently on teacher/principal incentives will be destructive to teamwork and collaboration. This isn’t a policy issue but something I want to say. I don’t feel schools or teachers should be awarded extra funds based on student scores. What about students who are doing well now but next yrs students may have lower economic backgrounds and may not do as well as previous students. All students and teachers are people. We all strive for the same goals. Why award some and punish others? Also, I manage to stay stressed with the increase in reporting and budgeting expenditures that are allowable and keeping up with all the required procedures. Our goal is to educate students. Why does the system continue to become more and more complex? Why not have simpler requirements. In the last 16 years, I’ve worked with the school and never had a student take their own life. This year we had 2 students blow their heads off with a gun. One 16, the other 10 yrs of age. Why is this happening? Too much stress! It is difficult to find someone who can help you with your problems. Directories on who to talk to and how to get in touch with them are very lacking. When you finally do find someone who can answer your problem they are usually knowledgeable and very helpful but trying to wade through the system to find that person is time wasting, confusing and to date very inefficient. <strong>Survey</strong> Research Center, University Of North Texas 103
Principals: Gifted and Talented Exit-Level Project for the Talented and Gifted students. Special Ed. Needs/Concerns Special Education. Special education (SDAA) should be an accurate measure of grade level and should be broken into move levels (exp 1dot1 for beginning first; 1dot5 for midfirst, etc). Special Education student success. Special Education intervention and identification process. Federal Sp Ed guidelines are not always feasible within the constraints of TYC. Special Education Regulations. Programs that meet students need who do not qualify for Special Education. Special Education. Special Education, student placement and access to programs. Alternative Education programs, problems, concerns for DAEP. Special Education, and those student with to low of an IQ to qualify. Special Education Law. Special Education Issues and updates (Reauthorization of IDEA and state mandates based solely on parent input). Change the Bilingual Program where our Spanish students are taught English 80% and Spanish 20% of the time in one day. The 90% in Spanish rules as it is now, is the cause, why we have such a high Hispanic Drop Out. Special Education. Meeting the needs of the slow, learner/at, risk student. Special Education , AYP. Teaching and helping the mentally ill student in the regular public school setting. Special education accountability issues. Some are unrealistic (especially with multi, involved students. Also, the testing process, time involved, and increased options, have mushroomed in recent years. Too much! At-Risk Student Interventions. Eligibility for Special Education students. There are not enough mental health resources for our students. Our local drug and alcohol treatment center just closed, and our options for community support are very limited in this rural area. Our population is middle school and high school students with severe behavioral issues, so these deficits impact us greatly. Progress in academics is difficult to make until mental health and behavioral issues are stabilized. Success of Special Needs students. Special Education (discipline, record keeping, accountability, working with parents, etc). Class Sizes/ Student to Teacher Ratio Maintaining staffing patterns at a low student to teacher ratio. Secondary classroom size. Overcrowded classrooms. Keeping class size ratio 22, 1. Class size limits. NCLB NCLB and the children that are left behind because of it. SDAA and the number of students who will <strong>Survey</strong> Research Center, University Of North Texas 104
Page 1 and 2:
2004 Survey of Customer Satisfactio
Page 3 and 4:
VII. TEA WEBSITE ..................
Page 5 and 6:
LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Customer Pop
Page 7 and 8:
Table 54 Visited TEA Website for Da
Page 9 and 10:
II. METHODOLOGY Instrument TEA desi
Page 11 and 12:
There appears to have been some dif
Page 13 and 14:
ESC Region 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
Page 15 and 16:
ESC Region 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
Page 17 and 18:
ESC Region 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
Page 19 and 20:
• ESC Region 01 02 03 04 05 06 07
Page 21 and 22:
Table 8 Method of Contacting TEA Fo
Page 23 and 24:
Table 9 Method of Contacting TEA Fo
Page 25 and 26:
Table 10 Method of Contacting TEA F
Page 27 and 28:
Table 11 Method of Contacting TEA F
Page 29 and 30:
Table 13 Methods Used to Contact TE
Page 31 and 32:
Accountability and Data Quality Tab
Page 33 and 34:
School Finance and Fiscal Analysis
Page 35 and 36:
Operations and Fiscal Management Ta
Page 37 and 38:
Table 21 Methods Used to Contact TE
Page 39 and 40:
Table 23 TEA Provides Reliable and
Page 41 and 42:
Table 25 TEA is Responsive to E-mai
Page 43 and 44:
Process Table 27 Contacts are Usual
Page 45 and 46:
Table 29 My Complaint Would be Addr
Page 47 and 48:
Principals • The combined percent
Page 49 and 50:
Table 32 Overall Satisfaction with
Page 51 and 52:
Table 34 Overall Satisfaction with
Page 53 and 54:
Table 36 Effectiveness of Electroni
Page 55 and 56:
Table 38 TEA Program Guidance/Curri
Page 57 and 58:
Table 40 TEA Grant Information is R
Page 59 and 60: Overall Satisfaction with Informati
Page 61 and 62: Table 43 Overall Satisfaction with
Page 65 and 66: VI. TEA STRATEGIC PLANNING Table 47
Page 67 and 68: VII. TEA WEBSITE Table 48 Visited T
Page 69 and 70: Table 50 Visited TEA Website for As
Page 71 and 72: Table 52 Visited TEA Website for Te
Page 73 and 74: Table 54 Visited TEA Website for Da
Page 75 and 76: Table 56 Visited TEA Website for Ed
Page 77 and 78: Table 58 Visited TEA Website for Sc
Page 79 and 80: Component Ratings Table 60 Easy to
Page 81 and 82: Table 62 Website Contains Clear Inf
Page 83 and 84: VIII. OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH TEA
Page 85 and 86: Table 66 Satisfaction with Standard
Page 87 and 88: Interventions and Special Investiga
Page 89 and 90: Strategy and Grants Management Tabl
Page 91 and 92: Commissioner Table 72 Satisfaction
Page 93 and 94: Agency Table 74 Overall Satisfactio
Page 99 and 100: IX. CONCLUSIONS The findings from t
Page 101 and 102: APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT Surve
Page 103 and 104: Infrastructure, Information Systems
Page 105 and 106: F. Overall Satisfaction I am satisf
Page 107 and 108: APPENDIX B: POLICY ISSUES Survey Re
Page 109: TEA Website As a grant accountant f
Page 113 and 114: Too much testing. Observation Proto
Page 115 and 116: an equity issue in Texas and this i
Page 117 and 118: certification for this has been dis
Page 119 and 120: Special Education Testing State Man
Page 121 and 122: More funding for Alternative School
Page 123 and 124: nothing to entice new educators in
Page 125 and 126: Teacher Pay/ Benefits 747 5 Health
Page 127 and 128: Cutbacks to health insurance for te
Page 129 and 130: Insisting that all students be in g
Page 131 and 132: they can better serve the needs of
Page 133 and 134: I think we have to modify too much
Page 135 and 136: as the SAT/ACT and additional AP te
Page 137 and 138: and I feel that quality teaching ha
Page 139 and 140: ural and inner city schools without
Page 141 and 142: Teacher Pay/ Benefits Teacher Healt
Page 143 and 144: We need a TEA contact for librarian
Page 145 and 146: Accountability With the present acc
Page 147 and 148: Parental Involvement/ Responsibilit
Page 149 and 150: use them in the classroom! Not an e
Page 151 and 152: acceptance, we get students to the
Page 153 and 154: our district just robs us somewhere
Page 155 and 156: APPENDIX C: ADDITIONAL COMMENTS Sur
Page 157 and 158: number of people Please put back th
Page 159 and 160: demanding quality and accountabilit
Page 161 and 162:
our needs. The feedback I gave you
Page 163 and 164:
TEA - Unknowledgeable / Not Helpful
Page 165 and 166:
Develop and implement accountabilit
Page 167 and 168:
I was very disappointed that I neve
Page 169 and 170:
solutions. I think Region 10 and TE
Page 171 and 172:
It just seems that I have to wade t
Page 173 and 174:
Info - More Accurate / Clear info,
Page 175 and 176:
Testing Requirements The TAKS testi
Page 177 and 178:
TEA - Not Effective / Unrealistic G
Page 179 and 180:
have never happened if this monitor
Page 181 and 182:
TEA must keep itself separate from
Page 183:
esponsibilities, salaries, procedur
show all

2004 Customer Satisfaction Survey (PDF, 566 KB) - TEA - Home ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?