Austin ISD has done its best to safeguard the district against takeover by the Texas Education Agency. Back in March, AISD proposed what’s called an 1882 partnership to the TEA, which, if accepted, carries benefits that would have prohibited the state agency from taking over the district for the next two years.
Per Senate Bill 1882, a school district can access additional state funding and a two-year pause on accountability consequences and state intervention if they partner with a charter school or nonprofit to manage and improve the ratings of their underperforming schools.
But on May 28, that 1882 partnership application – and its benefits – was rejected by the TEA, potentially setting the stage for the state agency to take over Austin’s school district. Dobie, Webb, and Burnet middle schools have received four consecutive failing accountability scores from the TEA since the 2018-2019 school year, which are largely based on State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) scores.
If any of the three middle schools receive a fifth unacceptable accountability score, TEA must either close down the school or take over the district, replacing its superintendent and school board with state-appointed individuals. Accountability scores are scheduled to be released by the TEA this August.
In March, trustees approved a three-year partnership with a nonprofit organization, the Texas Council for International Studies, to operate the three middle schools starting next school year. TEA rejected the partnership with TCIS on grounds that the nonprofit has an “uneven” track record for “significantly improving the academic performance of campuses.”
Of the 16 campuses operated by TCIS across the state since the 2019-2020 school year, only seven actually improved their rating under the nonprofit’s management, the TEA cited. The district has previously pointed to improved campus ratings in San Antonio and Longview ISDs to support TCIS’s effectiveness.
While the state agency declined to grant the 1882 partnership benefits, the TEA cannot terminate the already-existing partnership between AISD and TCIS.
While “disappoint[ed]” by the TEA’s rejection of the partnership, AISD Superintendent Matias Segura is still standing by the district’s decision to partner with TCIS. “We remain entirely confident in TCIS’s proven ability to lift student outcomes,” Segura wrote in a letter to families.
In the letter to families, Segura calls the application rejection a mere “procedural step,” writing that the district plans to submit additional evidence to the TEA that TCIS has the “experience and capacity” to raise student performance and the schools’ ratings.
Ken Zarifis, president of the union Education Austin, taught English at Burnet for 12 years and emphasized that an F score is not an accurate reflection of the efforts of its teachers and students. “I know how hard people work at Burnet middle school,” Zarifis said. “It’s disappointing to see the state come in and take that energy out.”
Zarifis also noted that the STAAR test – only offered in English for middle and high schoolers – isn’t designed to help students learning the language succeed. English language learners make up 77.8% of Burnet’s student population. “You don’t automatically, in a year’s time, master so much of the language that you can do these tests,” Zarifis said. “The state doesn’t understand that.”
In a statement published to social media, the Central Texas Legislative Delegation more concretely acknowledged the reality that AISD could lose local control without protection from accountability consequences, naming the proposal rejection a “precarious moment where state takeover is a real risk.”
“Our local leaders are the ones actually on the ground doing the hard work to ensure student success,” the lawmakers added. “We still believe they are best suited to foster the academic achievement of our children, and we stand with them.”
AISD Board President Lynn Boswell could not be reached for comment at the time of publication. AISD also declined to respond to the Chronicle’s questions regarding the additional evidence that will be submitted, alternative 1882 partnerships, and the time frame for a potential second decision from TEA.
This article appears in June 5 • 2026.
