����ֱ��

This correspondence outlines requirements of the ����ֱ�� Education Agency (TEA) from , 89th ����ֱ�� Legislature, Regular Session, 2025 and the required activities of school systems to comply with . 

requires TEA to “…prepare and provide to each school district a report identifying each law relating to school discipline that was amended or added by the 89th Legislature, Regular Session, 2025.” []. It further requires each district to provide the report to each student and parent or guardian. 

To comply with the statutory reporting requirement, TEA has prepared a document designed for families to explain the general requirements of student discipline and laws that were recently changed. TEA expects each district to provide a copy of the Overview of School Discipline for ����ֱ�� document to each student and parent to comply with their notice requirements under . A Spanish translation of the document will be published soon.

As a resource to school systems, TEA has also provided an explanation below of statutory changes related to discipline.  

Note: This family-facing document is required for school districts. Open-enrollment charter schools should communicate discipline expectations to parents of their enrolled students in alignment with legislation that applies to charter schools and their local Student Code of Conduct. 

Legislation Impacting Student Discipline

Note that the description below is not intended to provide a full summary of the listed legislation. It is important to read and understand the impacts of recently passed legislation by reviewing the bills in their entireties. 
 
: 
Campus Behavior Coordinator (CBC): Each campus must designate a single CBC. While additional staff may assist, the CBC is solely responsible for ensuring full compliance with all provisions of Chapter 37, Subchapter A of the ����ֱ�� Education Code (TEC). New CBC duties include monitoring all disciplinary referrals and reporting certain offenses and behaviors to the campus threat assessment team. 

Districts of Innovation: School districts cannot exempt themselves from any part of Chapter 37, TEC, in a district of innovation plan. 

Student Code of Conduct (SCOC): The SCOC must:

• Expressly provide that the CBC can place a student in a disciplinary alternative education program (DAEP) for a first-time offense for possession or use of an e-cigarette.
• Include a statement on whether the board has adopted a policy regarding parental involvement in school disciplinary placements, which could lead to the development of a parent and student behavioral agreement that could reduce the length of a DAEP placement or an expulsion.

Removal from Class by a Teacher: The bill expanded authority for a teacher to remove a student from their classroom under TEC, §37.002(b), which can be based on a single incident of misconduct. Other new provisions associated with removal from class by a teacher include: 

• Notification to parents when a student is removed from class under TEC, §37.002.
• A return-to-class plan must be created if a teacher has not consented in writing to the student’s return to class after a removal by the teacher.
• Students may appeal their removals from class under TEC, §37.002, to the campus placement review committee or to the campus threat assessment team (if policy provides for an appeal to that team).

In-School Suspension (ISS): The law does not provide limits on the length of placement in ISS; however, the CBC must review a student’s ISS placement at least once every ten school days to determine if continued placement is appropriate.

Out-of-School Suspension (OSS): The limited offenses that authorize out-of-school suspension for a student below grade 3 or who is experiencing homelessness have been revised to refer to conduct that threatens the immediate health and safety of other students and documented conduct that results in repeated or significant disruption in the classroom. Weapons and certain drug or alcohol offenses also remain on the list of limited offenses that would authorize OSS. If a student’s parent or person standing in parental relation submits a written request and documentation showing that the parent or person is unable to provide suitable supervision during school hours for the period of suspension, the principal or other appropriate administrator may, at their sole discretion, approve the reassignment to ISS. This option may be used only in extenuating circumstances and may not be used as a routine substitute for OSS.  

E-Cigarettes: Possession or use of an e-cigarette is now a discretionary removal to a DAEP; however, if a first-time offender is not placed in a DAEP, they must be placed in ISS for at least ten school days. 

Expulsion: Many offenses that previously required being on school property or at a school-sponsored activity have been revised so that location no longer applies to most mandatory expulsion grounds. 

:
When taking disciplinary action against a student for behavior that violates the SCOC and that may reasonably be determined to have been motivated by antisemitism, SB 326 requires a school district or open-enrollment charter school to use the definition of antisemitism provided by , including the referenced in that term, in determining whether the behavior was motivated by antisemitism. 

: 
As communicated in the To the Administrator Addressed (TAA) letter on July 31, 2025, HB 1481 requires each school district board of trustees and governing board of an open-enrollment charter school to adopt, implement, and ensure district or school compliance with a written policy prohibiting a student from using a personal communication device while on school property during the school day. The policy must establish disciplinary measures for violation of the prohibition. 

:
Both and include a virtual component related to school discipline. adds the possibility of a virtual expulsion program. requires a district or open-enrollment charter school to consider the appropriateness and feasibility of enrolling a student in a full-time hybrid or virtual program or campus before implementing a discretionary expulsion. 

: 
TEA is now required to establish crisis prevention and intervention training requirements for school personnel, including standards for determining which personnel should receive the training and the amount of training each should receive. Expect rule amendments to comply with these changes to TEC, §37.0021, later this school year.

HB 2 also includes very similar language related to authority for teachers to remove students from class as HB 6. The language differences between HB 2 and HB 6 in this regard are non-substantive and are primarily due to differences in the lettering of the subsections. 

:
To the extent a school’s recess or other physical activity time is used to meet the required number of moderate to vigorous physical activity minutes as part of the required physical education curriculum through grade 8, prohibits a school employee from restricting a student from participating in these activities for academic performance or behavior.

Additional Resources and Support

Per the requirements of , TEA has adopted a model return to class plan for when a student is removed from class and the teacher does not provide written consent for the student’s return after any disciplinary consequences. TEA has also adopted, per , a model behavioral agreement for use by a district in adopting a policy allowing for this agreement when a student is placed in a DAEP or is expelled and the parent requests one in order for the period of removal to potentially be reduced. School systems are encouraged but not required to use these resources. 

TEA has also provided a flowchart to illustrate teacher removals under TEC, §37.002(b) and (d). You can find all of these resources on the student discipline webpage. 

Questions may be submitted to studentdisciplinesupport@tea.texas.gov or 89th@tea.texas.gov.