Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy on our About page and give us feedback.

The Texas Education Agency reassigned the failing histories of six recently closed Austin schools to campuses receiving the majority of the shuttered schools’ students, creating new potential paths to state intervention and edging the district even closer to state takeover.

In an August letter to Austin ISD, TEA leaders criticized the hasty closure of Paredes Middle School weeks before the school year’s start and denounced its impact on families and academic outcomes. The letter notified the district Paredes was one of six schools whose failing rating history would be assigned to the school that received the majority of its students: Bailey Middle School, despite getting a B rating, would inherit four consecutive F ratings, effective immediately.

The move adds another complication to Austin ISD’s efforts to avoid a state takeover. Despite an overall B rating for the district, two Austin ISD middle schools received a fifth failing accountability rating from the state this year, triggering a state law that mandates the state’s education commissioner to either close the schools or replace the elected board with an appointed board of managers. If those ratings are confirmed, the state could close the schools or announce a takeover of Austin ISD later this school year. 

If the district manages to preserve local control this year, through an appeal or other means, it could be at risk again as early as next year. Because of TEA’s decision, Austin ISD is now facing a new reality in which nine, not three, schools have four unacceptable ratings. In addition to Dobie Middle School and Pecan Springs and Linder elementaries, which have a chain of four failing ratings due to their own academic histories, Guerrero Thompson Elementary, Galindo Elementary, Kealing Middle School, Blackshear Elementary, Rodriguez Elementary and Bailey Middle School began the school year with inherited F ratings in addition to the ratings they earned before taking on displaced students.

TEA weighs in on Paredes closure

Although TEA acknowledged Austin ISD’s closure of Paredes was permissible under state policy, the agency admonished the district for making the decision so close to the start of the 2026-27 school year.  

In an August letter addressed to Superintendent Matias Segura and Board President Lynn Boswell, TEA said “the district’s late-July announcement of the campus closure imposed an avoidable hardship on students and families.” 

While other campus closures were communicated through “a deliberate and transparent process,” the Paredes closure “appeared abrupt and reactive,” the TEA letter continued, instead of “effective district planning” or best practice for supporting students and families. To prevent future last-minute requests, the agency has now revised its policies to require all closure requests be submitted by May 31.

The letter also informed Austin ISD leaders that Bailey Middle School, which would receive the majority of students from Paredes, would inherit the ratings history of the closed school. That means a failing rating this school year could trigger state intervention at Bailey, despite the campus having earned a B rating for the 2025-26 school year. The same applies to five other receiving schools. 

University of Texas at Austin College of Education Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Professor Pedro Reyes said he did not understand the logic of transferring the accountability chains to the receiving schools, saying it  places an unfair and unexpected burden on campuses.

“We ought to be looking for solutions together,” he said, “not for passing on the blame or the stigma.”

Reyes said finding solutions takes time, intentional effort and freedom to do things differently. When school operations are turned over to an external organization like a charter school, the new operator is given freedom to make changes in curriculum, hiring and programming and given time to do it, he said. He is unsure why the same does not apply to a receiving school.

TEA’s rules for campus closures

According to the TEA letter, all campuses have a county district campus number, which is tied to the school’s accountability history. A campus closure request usually means closing that number. Austin ISD requested 16 campus closures for the 2026-27 school year.

Under state policy, TEA has three options when weighing a closure request: close the campus number, deny the closure or reassign the number to another campus. Education Commissioner Mike Morath can reassign the campus number of a school closed due to an academically unacceptable rating to the campus receiving the majority of the closed school’s students if Morath determines it is necessary to preserve the integrity of the accountability system. The receiving school then becomes subject to applicable sanctions or interventions. 

Austin ISD was not the only district where Morath chose to transfer unacceptable accountability rating chains from a closing school to a receiving one this year, according to information provided by TEA. The agency also transferred failing accountability histories to receiving campuses in Corpus Christi, Duncanville, Judson and San Antonio ISDs. 

All of the closed schools affected in other districts were also on state-mandated turnaround plans at the time of the closure review, so receiving campuses inherited their improvement plans, according to TEA. The districts cited enrollment decline, budgetary constraints and academic shortfalls among reasons for closing the schools.

TEA approved closing the campus numbers of 10 Austin ISD schools: Becker Elementary, Bedichek Middle School, Graduation Preparatory Academy, Graduation Prep Academy Navarro, International High School, Phoenix Academy, Ridgetop Elementary, Sunset Valley Elementary, Travis County Day School and Winn Montessori. 

However, the education agency denied closing the campus numbers of Barrington Elementary, Dawson Elementary, Martin Middle School, Oak Springs Elementary and Widen Elementary in addition to Paredes Middle School. Instead, the agency reassigned those numbers to the schools receiving the majority of the students, respectively: Guerrero Thompson Elementary, Galindo Elementary, Kealing Middle School, Blackshear Elementary, Rodriguez Elementary and Bailey Middle School. 

Districts under pressure

In addition to taking on a history of failing grades, receiving campuses are also responsible for implementing the TEA-approved turnaround plans previously in place at the closed schools.

If any of the six receiving campuses assigned four consecutive failing grades earns an A, B or C rating for the 2026-27 school year, the chain of unacceptable accountability ratings resets to zero. If any earn a D rating, the chain of consecutive unacceptable ratings remains the same for the 2027-28 school year. However, if any receiving campus receives an F rating, it would trigger state intervention. 

University of Houston Education Research Center Research Scientist Toni Templeton said it is notable that Morath chose to transfer the campus numbers in Austin, pointing out he had the authority to do so, but was not obligated.

The commissioner “chose to do this, and it was not his only option,” Templeton said.

Templeton said as districts like Austin continue to see post-pandemic enrollment declines and the state continues to ramp up takeover interventions, districts that close schools to avoid state intervention or due to declining student populations are in uncharted territory. 

“School districts are acting in ways that seem out of the ordinary because the set of situations imposed upon them is out of the ordinary,” Templeton said.