Modernizing High School Equivalency and Early College Access
Texas High School Equivalency and Early College Access
When a Texas student is ready to graduate, the law should let that student finish early and choose what comes next: a career, college, or both.
Executive Summary
What the bill does, why it matters, and what it is not
What the bill does. The Texas High School Equivalency and Early College Access bill lets any Texas resident age 13 or older who is ready to graduate take the state's high school equivalency exam. A student who passes earns the Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency, completes high school, and chooses what comes next: a career, college, or both. The goal is education freedom. Students who are ready should not be held in high school only to satisfy a calendar or district graduation requirements, and families should have another path besides four more years of seat time. Here is what the bill guarantees:
- Free preparation and testing. Preparation, testing, retesting, and the certificate itself are free. Prep is offered in person and online, and every district provides testing access every week.
- The same standard, without the barriers. The bill does not change what a student must know to pass. It removes the barriers around the exam: age limits, fees, and dependence on a single testing company.
- Choice of exam provider. School districts, charter schools, education service centers, and public colleges may choose any qualifying exam provider or build their own, as long as it meets the state's approval standards. No single company controls access.
- Every provider must test students 13 and older. An exam or provider that refuses cannot be approved.
- Parents are informed. Parents are notified whenever their student registers for a test. Notice is informational and does not require their consent.
- Earning the certificate is completing school, not dropping out. A student who earns the certificate has completed secondary education. Districts may not record that student as a dropout.
- Fair credit for districts.
- A district counts the student as a graduate in state ratings when the student completed the district's own exam prep course.
- A student who prepared another way is treated like a student who transferred to another school, so the district is neither credited nor penalized.
- Districts may not pressure students into district classes to collect the credit.
- Every door stays open. For students who choose college, public colleges and universities must treat the certificate the same as a diploma for admission and financial aid. Public institutions must also build online pathways so students anywhere in Texas can earn a certificate or degree remotely, including while working.
Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency. The state credential issued to a person who passes every subject of a state-approved high school equivalency exam. Today it is governed by Section 7.111 of the Texas Education Code, which this bill rewrites (Tex. Educ. Code § 7.111).
Why it matters.
- Texas already accepts the principle. Texas law already lets a student graduate early, at any age, once the student shows mastery in every subject (Tex. Educ. Code § 28.0253).
- A completed credential opens career doors. In 2024, workers age 25 and older with a high school diploma had median weekly earnings of $930 and an unemployment rate of 4.2%. Workers without one earned $738 and had a 6.2% unemployment rate (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS], 2025). In federal labor statistics, the high school graduate category includes people with a diploma or its equivalent (BLS, 2026a).
- Ready students who move ahead do better. They outperform same-age peers and keep pace with the older students they join (Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2016), without long-term harm to their well-being (Bernstein et al., 2021).
- For students who choose college, an early start helps. Students admitted to early college by lottery earned degrees at higher rates and sooner than students who were not (Song et al., 2024).
What it is not. This is not a dropout program, and it is not a college mandate. It serves students who are still in school, have done the work, and are ready to graduate. Research on adults who left school and later took a test does not describe these students.
Why This Bill
Texas already accepts early, mastery-based graduation; the equivalency route still carries old barriers
Texas already agrees that mastery, not seat time, should decide when a student is ready
Texas has already decided, in law, that a student who has mastered the material should not have to sit through years of school just to satisfy a calendar.
Texas First already allows early graduation at any age. Under the Texas First Early High School Completion Program, a district must let a student graduate and receive a diploma once the student demonstrates mastery and early readiness for college in every subject, "notwithstanding any other local or state requirements" (Tex. Educ. Code § 28.0253(e)).
- The statute sets no minimum age.
- The Legislature made issuing that diploma mandatory in 2023 (TEA, n.d.-c).
- The state already accepts high school equivalency results, at the 80th percentile, as one way to qualify for the Texas First Scholarship (THECB, n.d.).
State academies already let students leave high school early for a university campus. Students enrolled in the Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science and three similar state academies are exempt from compulsory attendance at their home high school (Tex. Educ. Code § 25.086(a)(8)–(11)).
Many high schoolers already do college work. In fall 2025, 276,064 high school students were taking dual credit college courses, which is 16.5% of all students enrolled in Texas higher education. In fall 1999 the number was 11,921 (THECB, 2026a).
Some leave high school for college already. In the 2023–24 school year, the state recorded 281 students who left high school to enroll full time in college. They are counted as students who left for another purpose, not as dropouts (TEA, 2025b).
“A school district or open-enrollment charter school shall allow a student to graduate and receive a high school diploma under the program if . . . the student demonstrates mastery of and early readiness for college . . . notwithstanding any other local or state requirements.”— Texas Education Code § 28.0253(e), Texas First Early High School Completion Program
What stands in the way today
The high school equivalency certificate is the most direct way for a student to show high school mastery and move on. The rules around it were written for a different purpose:
- Age limits. A person generally must be over 17 to test. Sixteen-year-olds may test only in narrow circumstances, such as Job Corps enrollment or a recommendation from a court-supervising agency (Tex. Educ. Code § 7.111(a-1)); (TEA, n.d.-a).
- One provider, with its own age limit. The GED test is currently the only exam listed by the state. Its provider states that no one under 16 can take the test (GED Testing Service, n.d.). The state's other exam, HiSET, ended in Texas in August 2024 (TEA, 2025a).
- Cost. Testing costs $145 for all four subjects in person, or $165 online (TEA, n.d.-b).
- Graduation-rate accounting. In the state's own graduation rate calculations, a student who earns the certificate counts as a non-graduate. That student is included in a district's student count but never as a graduate (TEA, 2025b). A district that helps a student finish early takes a hit for it.
How many Texans use this credential now
The route is already used widely, mostly by young Texans.
| Year | Completed all four subjects | Passed | Pass rate | Certificates issued |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 27,622 | 19,769 | 71.6% | 22,034 |
| 2020 | 12,936 | 9,907 | 76.6% | 11,281 |
| 2021 | 18,218 | 14,606 | 80.2% | 16,110 |
| 2022 | 20,919 | 15,954 | 76.3% | 17,696 |
| 2023 | 21,658 | 16,525 | 76.3% | 18,275 |
| 2024 | 23,017 | 17,485 | 76.0% | 19,271 |
| 2025 | 23,311 | 17,649 | 75.7% | 19,376 |
What the Bill Does, in Plain English
Eligibility, standards, providers, parents, completion, accountability, college access, and funding
Opens the exam to students who are ready, starting at age 13
- Who can test. Any Texas resident age 13 or older without a high school diploma may take an approved exam.
- No permission slips. Eligibility cannot depend on a school, court, or agency signing off, or on a student withdrawing from school.
- Retesting. A student may retake any subject not yet passed once a week.
- Passed subjects stay valid. Each passed subject counts for a full year while the student works on the rest.
- Fast certificate. Once every subject is passed, the state must issue the certificate within three business days, and if the state is late, the student's score records serve as proof of the credential.
Keeps today's standard
The bill does not raise or lower what a student must know to earn the certificate. The State Board of Education continues to set objective, published standards for approving exams and for passing scores. What changes is who may test, what it costs, and how many providers may offer the exam.
Opens the market to any qualifying exam provider
- Local choice. School districts, charter schools, education service centers, and public colleges and universities may choose any approved exam and provider, or develop their own.
- One standard for everyone. A locally developed exam must pass the same State Board of Education approval process as any other.
- No favored vendor. The state may not require a single or favored vendor.
- Every provider tests students 13 and up. An exam or provider that turns away eligible students is not approved, or loses its approval.
Keeps parents informed
When a student under 18 registers for a subject test, whoever registers the student must notify the parent or guardian of the subject, date, time, and location. The notice informs; it does not create a consent requirement, and a missed notice does not cancel a test or invalidate a score. Families and districts decide everything else together.
Treats completion as completion
- The certificate is completion. A student who earns the certificate has completed secondary education, and districts may not report that student as a dropout.
- Choices after earning it. The student's duty to attend school ends on the date the certificate takes effect. The student may stay enrolled voluntarily through the end of that school year.
- Disability rights continue. Federal rights for students with disabilities, including the right to a free appropriate public education, are preserved (34 C.F.R. § 300.102).
Gives districts fair credit
- Credit for district-prepared students. If a student earns the certificate while enrolled and successfully completed the district's own preparation course, the district counts that student as a graduate in state accountability ratings. Completion is defined by state rule.
- No penalty otherwise. If the student prepared another way, the student is treated the same as a student who withdrew to enroll in another school. The student is not counted as a graduate, a non-graduate, or a dropout, and the certificate cannot lower any district or campus rating.
- No pressure on students. Districts may not require or pressure students into district classes to capture the credit; preparation stays voluntary.
- Federal rate is separate. Federal law requires its own graduation-rate calculation for federal reports, and the bill keeps that separate (20 U.S.C. § 7801(25)).
Keeps every door open: career, college, or both
- Equal treatment for students who choose college. Public colleges and universities must treat the certificate the same as a diploma for admission, enrollment, scholarships, and financial aid. They may not add extra courses or hurdles because of the credential or the student's age. They may still apply the same neutral academic standards they apply to diploma holders, and they may require parental consent before a minor signs contracts or takes on costs.
- Federal aid already recognizes the credential. Federal student aid rules already treat a state certificate earned by passing a state-authorized exam as the equivalent of a high school diploma (34 C.F.R. § 600.2).
- Online pathways. Public institutions must phase in fully online pathways for every certificate and degree program between the 2027–28 and 2030–31 academic years. In-person requirements are allowed only for components that truly need them, such as clinical work or lab equipment. Remote advising, tutoring, disability services, and financial aid counseling are required.
Pays for it without charging students
- Paid through school funding. Public school costs are paid through the Foundation School Program, using an activity-based schedule. It pays for verified preparation, completed tests, and certificates, but not for simply opening an account.
- Not tied to pass rates. Payment cannot depend entirely on a student passing, so providers have no reason to discourage testing or retesting.
- Audits and reports. Claims are matched against score records, audited, and reported publicly every year.
How the Pathway Works for a Student
From optional free preparation to the certificate and the student’s next step
What the Research Shows About Moving Ahead
Academic, social-emotional, and long-term evidence on students who move ahead
The question behind this bill is whether students who are ready to move ahead benefit from doing so, whatever they choose to do next. The strongest available research says yes.
Academic gains. A review of a century of research found that accelerated students outperformed similar same-age students by a large margin (g = 0.70). They did about as well as the older students they joined (g = 0.09), which means they kept up after moving ahead (Steenbergen-Hu et al., 2016). A separate review of 38 studies found a positive academic effect (g = 0.180) (Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011).
Social and emotional effects. The common worry is that a young student who moves ahead will struggle socially.
- The same 2011 review found a slightly positive social-emotional effect (g = 0.076) (Steenbergen-Hu & Moon, 2011).
- A study that followed more than 1,600 talented students identified before age 13 for over 35 years found that the amount of acceleration had no link to adult psychological well-being. Participants' well-being was above national averages (Bernstein et al., 2021).
Long-term achievement. In a 40-year study, researchers compared 363 students who skipped a grade with 657 closely matched students who did not. The grade skippers were more likely to earn advanced degrees and earned them sooner (Park et al., 2013).
For students who choose college, an early start raises degree completion. The most direct evidence comes from early college high schools that admitted students by lottery, which creates a fair comparison between winners and non-winners.
| Outcome | Offered early college | Not offered | Difference (points) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Any degree, year 1 | 23.8% | 1.3% | +22.5 |
| Any degree, year 4 | 38.2% | 18.9% | +19.3 |
| Any degree, year 10 | 51.4% | 42.8% | +8.5 |
| Bachelor’s degree, year 4 | 20.9% | 11.9% | +9.0 |
| Bachelor’s degree, year 10 | 36.5% | 34.5% | +1.9 |
Early college students finished degrees sooner, and more of them finished a degree at all. The bachelor's gap narrows over time as other students catch up, which is consistent with early college students simply reaching the finish line years earlier (Song et al., 2024).
Texas dual credit students have done well, though these figures are descriptive. Among Texas students who entered college in fall 2016 with 31 or more dual credit hours, 42% earned an associate degree within two years and 63% earned a bachelor's degree within five years. For those with 1 to 11 dual credit hours, the figures were 4% and 46% (THECB, 2026b). These are averages, not controlled comparisons. A state-commissioned study of Texas dual credit cautioned that outcome differences partly reflect which students choose dual credit (Miller et al., 2018).
Students who are ready to move ahead generally gain from doing so. Limitation: much of the acceleration research studies high-ability students, so it best supports a pathway that ready students choose for themselves, which is how this bill is built.
Completing Early Is Not Dropping Out
Why research on adults who left school does not describe students who finish early
Critics of high school equivalency often point to research on the GED, the best-known equivalency exam. That research deserves a direct answer.
What that research studied
The best-known studies examine people who left school and later used the GED as a second-chance credential. Many of those people never went on to further education.
- Earnings and outcomes. A major review concluded that, on average, the GED had "minimal value" in the labor market for those recipients and that few went on to complete college (Heckman et al., 2010).
- Health. A national health study found GED holders' health was comparable to dropouts' and worse than diploma holders' (Zajacova & Everett, 2014).
- Mixed earnings effect. Another study found that earning the GED raised later earnings by 10% to 19% for young white dropouts near the passing line, with no significant gain for nonwhite dropouts (Tyler et al., 1998).
Why those results do not describe this bill's students
This bill serves a different group. Applying conclusions about people who left school without a credential to students who stay in school, do the work, and pass the exam is a category error. Those are different people, on different paths.
The bill creates only one way out, and it is a completed credential.
- Still in school. A student's attendance duty continues until the certificate is earned. No one stops attending school to "go take the test," and a student who has not passed every subject stays in school.
- Same standard. The student must pass the same state-approved exam, under the same standards, that Texans take today. Nothing is made easier.
- A completion, not an exit. The certificate is earned while enrolled and is recorded as completing secondary education. The student then decides whether to work, go to college, or both.
The dropout-incentive concern is about leaving without finishing. One frequently cited study found that easier GED access led some students to drop out (Heckman et al., 2012). In that setting, a student could leave school first and test later, or never test at all. Under this bill a student cannot leave school before completing, so the bill offers no route to leaving without a credential.
Two states took different paths. In 1988, Wisconsin raised its minimum age for the GED to 18½, citing concern about teenagers using the test as a shortcut (Quinn & Pawasarat, 2011). California went the other direction. Since 1974, students age 16, or those who have completed one year of 10th grade, have been able to pass a state proficiency exam that is "the legal equivalent to a high school diploma" and leave school with a parent's permission (California Department of Education [CDE], n.d.-a); (CDE, n.d.-b). This bill keeps students in school until they finish, informs parents at every test, and leaves the next step to the student and family.
A student who earns the certificate under this bill has done the work and proved it. That student has completed high school early.
Careers, College, or Both
A completed credential opens career doors; college remains an option, including online
College is not for everyone, and the bill does not assume it is. Many students are ready to start a trade, an apprenticeship, a family business, military service, or a job, and then build on it. The certificate gives them a completed high school credential to do that years sooner. In federal labor statistics, people with a high school diploma or its equivalent are counted as high school graduates (BLS, 2026a). The same federal data also note that education categories do not capture apprenticeships and other on-the-job training, which also shape earnings (BLS, 2026b).
A completed credential matters in the job market. In 2024, median weekly earnings were higher, and unemployment lower, at each step of education (BLS, 2025). These are national associations, not proof that a credential alone causes higher pay.
| Education level | Median weekly earnings | Unemployment rate |
|---|---|---|
| Less than a high school diploma | $738 | 6.2% |
| High school diploma | $930 | 4.2% |
| Some college, no degree | $1,020 | 3.8% |
| Associate degree | $1,099 | 2.8% |
| Bachelor's degree | $1,543 | 2.5% |
For students who choose college, Texas has a stated goal. The state's higher education plan aims for 60% of Texans ages 25 to 34 to hold a credential of value by 2030. In 2023, the figure was 54% for ages 25 to 34 and 52% for ages 35 to 64 (THECB, 2025). A student who enters college sooner, by choice, moves Texas toward that goal.
Online learning can work, with support. A U.S. Department of Education review of 45 studies found that purely online instruction performed about the same as face-to-face instruction on average. Blended instruction performed better (U.S. Department of Education, 2010). A study of more than 40,000 community college students found that younger students were among those who struggled most in online courses (Xu & Jaggars, 2014). That is why the bill requires remote advising, tutoring, faculty office hours, and disability services for online students on terms equal to in-person students.
Statewide online access is still limited. In 2019, 1,265 of the 8,937 programs in the state inventory were offered fully online (THECB, 2019). That is the most recent statewide count available. The bill would require a current inventory from every institution and a public online catalog.
Funding, Accountability, and Local Control
Local choice under one standard, payment for verified services, and fair district credit
Local choice, one standard. Under this bill:
- The state sets one approval standard and keeps a nonexclusive roster of approved providers.
- Each district, charter school, service center, college, and university chooses how to deliver services, using ordinary procurement and conflict-of-interest rules.
- No sole-source contracts are authorized.
Paying for what is delivered. Payments follow verified activity: preparation milestones, completed tests, accommodations, and certificates.
- Reporting and audits. Providers report monthly and districts verify services. The state matches claims to score records and recovers overpayments, and the state auditor may audit any claim.
- What it would cost. Today's testing fee is $145 per student for all four subjects in person (TEA, n.d.-b). The total cost depends on how many students take part, which no one can know in advance, so this article does not estimate it. The bill requires the state's education and higher education agencies to project volume and costs in each budget request.
Fair accountability.
- The problem today. The state counts certificate earners as non-graduates when it calculates graduation rates (TEA, 2025b).
- The fix. The bill gives graduate credit to a district when the student completed the district's own preparation course. When the student prepared another way, the bill treats the student like one who transferred to another school, with no credit and no penalty. It builds on a model Texas already uses to exclude certain students from graduation rates (Tex. Educ. Code § 39.053(g)).
- The federal rate. The federal graduation rate is defined by Congress and does not count equivalency credentials as diplomas (20 U.S.C. § 7801(25), (43)). The bill keeps that calculation separate for federal reports and changes only the state's own ratings, which the Legislature controls.
Answering Common Concerns
Direct answers to the questions families and legislators ask most
| Concern | Response |
|---|---|
| "Thirteen is too young." | Thirteen is the earliest age a student may test, not an expected age. Texas First already sets no minimum age (Tex. Educ. Code § 28.0253). Long-term research finds no harm to well-being from acceleration (Bernstein et al., 2021). Parents are notified before every test. |
| "The certificate is not as good as a diploma." | It is the state's recognized high school credential, earned under the same standards as today. Federal labor statistics count it with high school graduates (BLS, 2026a), and federal aid rules treat it as a diploma equivalent (34 C.F.R. § 600.2). The bill also requires public colleges to treat it like a diploma. |
| "This will encourage dropping out." | The student must stay in school until the certificate is earned, and earning it is completion. The concern in the research is students leaving school without finishing (Heckman et al., 2012). Under this bill, no one can leave before completing. |
| "Districts will be punished." | No. A district gets graduate credit when the student completed its preparation course. Otherwise the student is treated like a transfer to another school, so the certificate never counts against the district or campus. |
| "This is really about pushing kids into college." | No. College is one option among several. The bill lets a student who is ready graduate early and choose a career, college, or both. The college provisions make sure the door is open for those who want it. |
| "Districts will push students into their classes." | The bill prohibits requiring or pressuring students to enroll in district preparation, and preparation stays voluntary. |
| "Young students struggle online." | Some do (Xu & Jaggars, 2014). The bill requires remote advising, tutoring, and support services, and online enrollment is a choice, not a requirement. |
| "Students with disabilities will lose services." | Federal disability rights are expressly preserved (34 C.F.R. § 300.102). |
| "One testing company will profit." | The bill requires a nonexclusive, multi-provider system and forbids a single or favored vendor. Local entities may also build their own approved exam. |
| "Will a 13-year-old be on a college campus alone?" | Online pathways let students study from home. Colleges may require parental consent before a minor enrolls, signs agreements, or takes on costs. |
For Legislators and Committee Staff
Section-by-section summary and comparison with current law
| Bill section | Code section | What it does |
|---|---|---|
| 1.01 | Educ. Code § 7.111 | Rewrites the equivalency statute. Sets eligibility at age 13 with no consent or withdrawal conditions. Requires a nonexclusive, provider-neutral approval process; passing standards remain set by the State Board of Education. Authorizes local selection or development of exams (e-1). Requires every provider to accept examinees age 13 and up (e-2). Allows weekly retesting, sets one-year score validity, and requires parent notice of registration (g-1). Requires certificate issuance within three business days and makes the certificate effective by operation of law if issuance is late. Makes services free and sets complaint and court-review procedures. Replaces the current age-17 eligibility rule and the fee requirement. |
| 2.01 | Educ. Code §§ 29.111–29.119 (new Subch. C-2) | Requires free in-person and online preparation for grades 6–12 and weekly testing access in every district. Protects absences for testing, ends the attendance duty when the certificate takes effect, and allows voluntary continued enrollment. Preserves federal disability rights. Adds a completion code and a no-dropout rule, a nonexclusive provider roster with local selection, and access that does not depend on contract limits. |
| 2.02–2.03 | Educ. Code § 39.053(c)(1)(B)(ix), (g-5)–(g-8) | Graduate credit for certificate earners who completed the district's preparation course. Students who prepared another way are treated like transfers, so they are not counted as a graduate, a non-graduate, or a dropout, and their certificates cannot lower any rating. Prohibits coercion into district classes and keeps a separate federal computation. |
| 2.04 | Educ. Code § 29.087 | Repeals the existing High School Equivalency Program, which is limited to students 16 and older. |
| 3.01–3.03 | Educ. Code §§ 25.086, 25.087 | Exempts certificate holders from compulsory attendance at any age. Excuses absences for testing and counts those days toward attendance for funding. |
| 4.01–4.02 | Educ. Code §§ 48.302 (repealed), 48.318 (new) | Replaces the age-21-and-older test subsidy with a Foundation School Program allotment. Sets activity-based payments, monthly claims, verification, audits, data privacy, and an annual public report. |
| 5.01 | Educ. Code § 51.996 | Requires equal treatment of the certificate by public institutions for admission, aid, and graduation, with neutral academic criteria allowed and parental consent permitted for minors' contracts. Includes complaint, Coordinating Board appeal, and court remedies. |
| 6.01 | Educ. Code §§ 61.1001–61.1011 (new Subch. SS) | Requires fully online courses and program pathways except for proven physical-presence components. Requires remote student services, institutional inventories, a 2027–2031 phase-in, limited extensions, and a statewide online catalog. Requires equivalency testing access at public colleges, with payments and enforcement. |
| 7.01–7.09 | Transition | Sets rulemaking deadlines (March 1, 2028) and contract transition. Protects existing passing scores and sets an implementation schedule. Applies the accountability changes to certificates earned on or after September 1, 2027. Covers data systems, funding plans, conflict of law, and severability. Takes effect September 1, 2027. |
| Topic | Current law | Under the bill |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum testing age | Over 17; 16 only in limited circumstances (Tex. Educ. Code § 7.111(a-1)) | 13 |
| Cost to student | $145 in person / $165 online (TEA, n.d.-b) | Free |
| Exam providers | One listed exam, whose provider bars testing under 16 (GED Testing Service, n.d.) | Any approved provider or locally developed exam; all must test students age 13 and up |
| Passing standard | Set through state approval; currently 145 in each subject (TEA, n.d.-b) | Unchanged; set by the State Board of Education |
| Status in records | Counted as a non-graduate in state graduation rates (TEA, 2025b) | Completion; graduate credit if the student completed the district's course, otherwise treated like a transfer |
| Attendance exemption | Age 17 or older with a certificate (Tex. Educ. Code § 25.086(a)(5)) | Any certificate holder |
| Parents | No notice requirement | Notified of every test registration |
Proposed Legislation
Texas High School Equivalency and Early College Access — full bill text
The complete text of the bill appears below in the format used for filing in the Texas House. Use Expand Full Text to read it in place, or visit the bill’s standalone page for a table of contents and section-by-section navigation.
By: ____________________
H.B. No. ______
A BILL TO BE ENTITLED
AN ACT
relating to high school equivalency examinations and certificates, public school attendance and high school equivalency preparation and testing services, public school accountability for students who earn high school equivalency certificates, recognition of high school equivalency certificates by public institutions of higher education, online courses and degree and certificate programs at public institutions of higher education, and related funding and oversight.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
ARTICLE 1. HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY EXAMINATION AND CERTIFICATE
SECTION 1.01. Section 7.111, Education Code, is amended to read as follows:
Sec. 7.111. HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY EXAMINATION AND CERTIFICATE.
(a) The State Board of Education shall provide for the administration of one or more approved high school equivalency examinations and for the issuance by the agency of the Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency.
(b) In this section:
(1) "Agency" means the Texas Education Agency.
(2) "Approved examination" means a provider-neutral examination approved by the board to determine whether an examinee has demonstrated academic knowledge and skills equivalent to those expected of a high school graduate in this state.
(3) "Board" means the State Board of Education.
(4) "Business day" means a day other than a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday.
(5) "Certificate" means the Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency.
(6) "Examination provider" means a person with which the agency contracts, that the agency approves, or that a school district, open-enrollment charter school, education service center, or institution of higher education selects or establishes under Subsection (e-1) to develop, score, administer, or provide an approved examination.
(7) "Qualifying score" means the objectively determined minimum passing score established and published for a subject of an approved examination.
(8) "Subject examination" means the separately scored portion of an approved examination that measures one required subject or competency area.
(9) "Texas resident" means an individual who resides in this state, without regard to the duration of the individual's residence.
(c) A Texas resident is entitled to take an approved examination if the resident:
(1) is at least 13 years of age on the date of the examination;
(2) has not received a high school diploma; and
(3) satisfies reasonable identity and examination-security requirements adopted under this section.
(d) Eligibility under Subsection (c) may not be conditioned on:
(1) the consent of a parent, guardian, school district, open-enrollment charter school, court, public agency, or other person;
(2) withdrawal, nonenrollment, or termination of enrollment in a public, private, parochial, or home school or any other education program;
(3) a recommendation or order of a court or public agency;
(4) completion of a grade level, course, minimum number of instructional hours, preparation program, practice examination, or readiness assessment;
(5) the examinee's reason for taking the examination or intended education or employment path; or
(6) any condition not expressly authorized by this section.
(e) The board shall adopt objective, publicly available standards for approval and passage of an examination. The board shall maintain a nonexclusive approval process that:
(1) permits approval of more than one examination provider;
(2) uses published academic, security, accessibility, reliability, and data-interoperability criteria;
(3) does not confer an exclusive statutory preference on a privately owned examination or trademark; and
(4) permits the agency to develop, procure, or approve a replacement examination if necessary to preserve continuous statewide access.
(e-1) A school district, open-enrollment charter school, education service center, or institution of higher education may select any approved examination and any examination provider approved under this section, or may develop or administer its own examination. An examination developed by an entity described by this subsection may be used to qualify an examinee for the certificate only after the board approves the examination under the standards adopted under Subsection (e), which apply on the same terms to every examination regardless of who develops it. The state may not require a school district, open-enrollment charter school, education service center, or institution of higher education to use a single or favored examination or examination provider.
(e-2) Each examination provider, and each entity described by Subsection (e-1) that develops, administers, or provides an approved examination, shall accept for examination every person who is eligible under Subsection (c), including a person who is at least 13 years of age, and may not impose a minimum age above 13 years of age or a condition prohibited by Subsection (d). The board may not approve, and shall revoke the approval of, an examination or examination provider that does not comply with this subsection.
(f) The board by rule shall provide reasonable procedures for verifying identity, protecting examination security, preventing fraud, and providing accommodations required by state or federal law. A procedure adopted under this subsection may not have the purpose or effect of materially burdening a right established by this section.
(g) An eligible examinee may take an unpassed subject examination once during each consecutive seven-day period. An examination provider, testing center, or governmental entity may not:
(1) impose a numerical limit on attempts to pass an unpassed subject examination;
(2) require a waiting period longer than the period prescribed by this subsection; or
(3) refuse an otherwise available testing appointment because the examinee remains enrolled in an education program.
(g-1) If an examinee is younger than 18 years of age and the examinee's disabilities of minority have not been removed, the examination provider, testing center, school district, open-enrollment charter school, or other entity that registers the examinee for a subject examination shall provide written or electronic notice to the examinee's parent, guardian, or other person having lawful control of the examinee that the examinee is registered to take the subject examination, including the subject and the date, time, and location of the examination. The notice must be provided at the time of registration or as soon as practicable after registration and, if registration occurs at least one business day before the examination, before the examination begins. Notice under this subsection is informational only. This subsection does not authorize a consent requirement prohibited by Subsection (d)(1), and a failure to provide notice does not invalidate an examination, score, or certificate or delay or cancel a testing appointment.
(h) A qualifying score on a subject examination:
(1) remains valid until the first anniversary of the date on which the score was earned;
(2) may not be repeated while the score remains valid; and
(3) expires only if the examinee has not earned valid qualifying scores on all required subject examinations before that anniversary.
(i) An examinee qualifies for the certificate when the examinee concurrently holds a valid qualifying score on every required subject examination. Expiration of an underlying score after the certificate is earned does not affect the validity of the certificate.
(j) The agency shall maintain an electronic account through which an examinee may view:
(1) each score and the date on which the score was earned;
(2) the expiration date of each qualifying score;
(3) a diagnostic report identifying tested competencies and areas in which further preparation may be useful; and
(4) the examinee's certificate, transcript, and official verification after qualification.
(k) The agency shall provide notice to an examinee not later than the 90th, 60th, 30th, and seventh day before a qualifying score expires. A change in examination provider, examination design, agency contract, or agency rule may not shorten the validity period of a qualifying score.
(l) An examination provider shall transmit a complete and authenticated score record to the agency not later than the next business day after the provider scores the examination. The provider shall simultaneously make the score record available to the examinee.
(m) Issuance of the certificate is a ministerial duty. Not later than the third business day after the agency receives the final qualifying score required by Subsection (i), the agency shall issue electronically and without charge:
(1) the certificate;
(2) an official transcript of examination scores; and
(3) an official electronic verification of the certificate.
(n) The legal effective date of a certificate is the date the agency receives the final qualifying score required by Subsection (i). If the agency does not issue the certificate within the period required by Subsection (m), the authenticated score records showing that the examinee has satisfied Subsection (i), together with an automatically generated agency verification of receipt, constitute the certificate by operation of law until the agency performs its duty under Subsection (m). A person or governmental entity may not deny the credential's legal effect because the agency failed to issue the formal document on time.
(o) The agency, board, examination provider, or testing center may not delay or deny a certificate based on the examinee's:
(1) age, if the examinee was eligible under Subsection (c) when tested;
(2) continued enrollment in an education program;
(3) reason for taking the examination;
(4) intended withdrawal from or continuation in an education program; or
(5) intended college attendance or other postsecondary plan.
(p) An examinee must receive, without a means test or charge:
(1) preparation services and required preparation materials provided under Subchapter C-2, Chapter 29;
(2) each examination and retest authorized by this section;
(3) required accommodations;
(4) each score and diagnostic report;
(5) the initial electronic certificate, transcript, and ordinary electronic verification; and
(6) electronic replacement copies of the certificate and transcript.
(q) The agency may charge only the actual production and mailing cost of an optional physical replacement document requested after the initial certificate is issued. Inability or refusal to pay for an optional physical copy does not affect the validity or electronic availability of the certificate.
(r) An examinee may submit electronically to the agency a notice alleging an error or failure relating to score transmission, score validity, qualification, or certificate issuance. The agency shall:
(1) acknowledge the notice not later than the next business day; and
(2) correct the error or issue a written decision supported by the record not later than the second business day after acknowledgment.
(s) After expiration of the period prescribed by Subsection (r), the examinee, the examinee's parent or next friend, or an attorney acting for the examinee may bring an action for declaratory or injunctive relief in a district court in Travis County or the county in which the examinee resides. The court shall give the action priority over other civil matters that are not entitled to priority by law. An authenticated score record is prima facie evidence of the score shown.
(t) Sovereign and governmental immunity are waived and abolished to the extent of liability for prospective declaratory or injunctive relief, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees in an action under Subsection (s). A claimant is not required to exhaust another administrative remedy after complying with Subsection (r).
(u) The agency and board shall adopt rules necessary to administer this section. A rule, contract, provider term, local policy, or institutional policy that conflicts with this section is void to the extent of the conflict.
ARTICLE 2. PUBLIC SCHOOL PREPARATION, TESTING ACCESS, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
SECTION 2.01. Chapter 29, Education Code, is amended by adding Subchapter C-2 to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER C-2. HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY PREPARATION AND TESTING ACCESS
Sec. 29.111. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) "Approved provider" means a public or private entity approved under Section 29.118 to provide preparation, testing, or related services.
(2) "Fully online" means accessible by a student through the Internet without requiring the student to travel to a particular physical location.
(3) "Preparation services" means instruction, tutoring, instructional materials, practice opportunities, diagnostic services, and live academic assistance designed to prepare a student for an approved high school equivalency examination under Section 7.111.
(4) "Testing center" means a location approved by the agency at which an approved examination is administered under secure and accessible conditions.
Sec. 29.112. APPLICABILITY. This subchapter applies to:
(1) a school district or open-enrollment charter school that serves students in any grade from grade 6 through grade 12; and
(2) an education service center that provides a service under this subchapter.
Sec. 29.113. PREPARATION SERVICES REQUIRED.
(a) Each school district and open-enrollment charter school to which this subchapter applies shall provide or contract for preparation services that:
(1) cover every subject and competency tested by each approved examination reasonably available to students served by the district or school;
(2) are available both in person and fully online;
(3) include all required instructional materials and reasonable practice opportunities;
(4) include diagnostic feedback and access to live assistance from a qualified instructor or tutor;
(5) comply with applicable state and federal disability and accessibility requirements; and
(6) are offered without charge or means testing.
(b) Fully online preparation services must be available to any Texas resident who is enrolled in grade 6 or a higher grade or is otherwise eligible to take an examination under Section 7.111.
(c) A district or school may not require a person seeking preparation services to:
(1) withdraw from or, if the person is eligible to take the examination under Section 7.111, enroll in the district or school;
(2) state an intention to leave school; or
(3) agree to take the examination or leave an education program after receiving preparation.
(d) Participation in preparation services is voluntary and may not be made a condition of examination eligibility.
Sec. 29.114. WEEKLY TESTING ACCESS.
(a) Each school district shall ensure that an eligible resident of the district and each student attending a campus in the district has access within the district to:
(1) at least one approved testing center; and
(2) at least one opportunity to take each available subject examination during each consecutive seven-day period.
(b) An open-enrollment charter school shall ensure that each student attending the school has access to the testing opportunities required by Subsection (a) at a campus, administrative facility, or testing center reasonably accessible to the student.
(c) A district or school may satisfy this section by:
(1) operating a testing center;
(2) contracting with an approved provider;
(3) entering into a written joint arrangement with another district, school, education service center, or institution of higher education; or
(4) using another facility controlled by the district or school.
(d) A joint arrangement is permitted only if it guarantees weekly capacity, accessibility, and service without cost to the examinee. A district or school may not require a testing center in every building.
(e) A district or school shall use existing facilities and space to the extent reasonably practicable before acquiring or constructing additional space.
Sec. 29.115. PROTECTED ABSENCE AND RELEASE TIME.
(a) A student registered for a subject examination is entitled to the time reasonably necessary to travel to, take, and return from the examination.
(b) If the examination schedule or necessary travel makes attendance impracticable, the student is entitled to an excused absence for the entire school day.
(c) A district or school may require the student to complete missed work under the same rules applied to other excused absences but may not impose loss of course credit, disciplinary action, a truancy referral, loss of eligibility, or another penalty because of the absence.
Sec. 29.116. CONTINUED ENROLLMENT AFTER CERTIFICATE.
(a) A student's duty to attend school ends on the legal effective date of the student's certificate under Section 7.111.
(b) A certificate holder who was enrolled in a school district or open-enrollment charter school on the certificate's legal effective date may, but is not required to, remain enrolled through the end of the school year in which the certificate became effective if the holder satisfies the ordinary eligibility and conduct requirements that apply to other voluntarily enrolled students.
(c) Voluntary continued enrollment under this section does not renew or create a compulsory attendance duty. Enrollment after the school year described by Subsection (b) is governed by otherwise applicable law.
(d) Nothing in this section limits a right or service guaranteed to a student with a disability by federal law, including the right to a free appropriate public education if applicable under federal law.
Sec. 29.117. STUDENT RECORDS. (a) A student who earns a certificate under Section 7.111 has completed the student's secondary education. The agency shall establish a completion code for a student who earns a certificate under Section 7.111.
(b) A district or school may not report a student who earns a certificate under Section 7.111 as a dropout.
Sec. 29.118. APPROVED PROVIDERS AND LOCAL SELECTION.
(a) The agency shall maintain a nonexclusive roster of approved nonprofit and for-profit preparation and testing providers.
(b) Approval standards must be objective, published, competitively neutral, and reasonably related to instructional quality, examination security, accessibility, data reporting, financial integrity, and student protection.
(c) The agency shall:
(1) accept applications for approval at least twice each year;
(2) publish each approved provider's ownership, services, geographic coverage, and maximum approved rates;
(3) prohibit an undisclosed conflict of interest or preferential treatment for a provider; and
(4) provide notice and an opportunity for review before denying, suspending, or revoking approval.
(d) A district, charter school, or education service center may provide services directly or select one or more approved providers under the entity's ordinary procurement and conflict-of-interest requirements. This subchapter does not authorize a sole-source contract or an exemption from otherwise applicable competitive procurement law.
(e) A provider selected locally under this section may submit a claim for direct state payment only after the selecting entity verifies the services as required by Section 48.318.
Sec. 29.119. ACCESS MAY NOT DEPEND ON APPROPRIATION OR PROVIDER CONTRACT. A district or school remains responsible for providing the access required by this subchapter regardless of whether the district or school provides the service directly or through a contractor. A contract may not restrict a student's statutory right because a payment rate, contract allocation, or provider quota has been reached.
SECTION 2.02. Section 39.053(c)(1)(B)(ix), Education Code, is amended to read as follows:
(ix) high school graduation rates, computed in accordance with standards and definitions adopted in compliance with the Every Student Succeeds Act (20 U.S.C. Section 6301 et seq.) subject to the exclusions provided by Subsections (g), (g-1), (g-2), (g-3), (g-4), and (g-6) and the requirements of Subsection (g-5);
SECTION 2.03. Section 39.053, Education Code, is amended by adding Subsections (g-5), (g-6), (g-7), and (g-8) to read as follows:
(g-5) Notwithstanding Subsection (c)(1)(B)(ix) or another provision of this subchapter, in computing a high school graduation rate or dropout rate used to evaluate the performance of a school district or campus under this chapter, the commissioner shall count as a graduate of the district or campus a student who:
(1) earned a Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency under Section 7.111 while enrolled in the district or campus; and
(2) before earning the certificate, successfully completed a high school equivalency preparation course provided by the district or campus under Subchapter C-2, Chapter 29, directly or through an approved provider selected by the district or campus under Section 29.118, as determined under completion criteria adopted by commissioner rule.
(g-6) A student who earned a Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency under Section 7.111 while enrolled in a school district or campus but who does not satisfy Subsection (g-5)(2) shall be treated, for purposes of computing a high school graduation rate, dropout rate, or other indicator under this chapter, in the same manner as a student who withdrew from the district or campus to enroll in another school. The student may not be counted as a graduate, a nongraduate, or a dropout of the district or campus, and the student's certificate may not otherwise lower a rating, score, or indicator of the district or campus.
(g-7) A school district or campus may not require a student to enroll in or participate in high school equivalency preparation services, and may not condition a right, service, benefit, or testing opportunity on a student's enrollment in or participation in those services, for the purpose of receiving credit under Subsection (g-5) or for any other purpose. Participation in preparation services remains voluntary as provided by Section 29.113(d).
(g-8) Subsections (g-5), (g-6), and (g-7) apply to the computation of rates for state accountability purposes under this chapter. To the extent federal law requires a different computation for federal reporting purposes, the agency shall compute and report the rate required by federal law separately.
SECTION 2.04. Section 29.087, Education Code, is repealed.
ARTICLE 3. ATTENDANCE AND EXCUSED ABSENCES
SECTION 3.01. Section 25.086(a), Education Code, is amended by amending Subdivision (5) and adding Subdivision (5-a) to read as follows:
(5) is at least 17 years of age and:
(A) is attending a course of instruction to prepare for the high school equivalency examination, and:
(i) has the permission of the child's parent or guardian to attend the course;
(ii) is required by court order to attend the course;
(iii) has established a residence separate and apart from the child's parent, guardian, or other person having lawful control of the child; or
(iv) is homeless; or
(B) has received a high school diploma;
(5-a) has received a Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency under Section 7.111, effective beginning on the legal effective date of the certificate;
SECTION 3.02. Section 25.087, Education Code, is amended by adding Subsection (b-9) to read as follows:
(b-9) A school district shall excuse a student for the time reasonably necessary to travel to, take, and return from an approved high school equivalency examination under Section 7.111. The district shall excuse the student for the entire school day if the examination schedule or necessary travel makes attendance impracticable.
SECTION 3.03. Section 25.087(d), Education Code, is amended to read as follows:
(d) A student whose absence is excused under Subsection (b), (b-1), (b-2), (b-4), (b-5), (b-7), (b-8), (b-9), or (c) may not be penalized for that absence and shall be counted as if the student attended school for purposes of calculating the average daily attendance of students in the school district. A student whose absence is excused under Subsection (b), (b-1), (b-2), (b-4), (b-5), (b-7), (b-8), (b-9), or (c) shall be allowed a reasonable time to make up school work missed on those days. If the student satisfactorily completes the school work, the day of absence shall be counted as a day of compulsory attendance.
ARTICLE 4. PUBLIC SCHOOL FUNDING, CLAIMS, AND DATA
SECTION 4.01. Section 48.302, Education Code, is repealed.
SECTION 4.02. Subchapter G, Chapter 48, Education Code, is amended by adding Section 48.318 to read as follows:
Sec. 48.318. HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY SERVICES ALLOTMENT.
(a) The agency shall provide each school district, open-enrollment charter school, and education service center the amount necessary to pay the reasonable and verified cost of services required by Section 7.111 and Subchapter C-2, Chapter 29.
(b) The agency by rule shall establish a hybrid activity-based payment schedule that includes payment for:
(1) verified participation in preparation services after a minimum engagement threshold established by rule;
(2) verified completion of an instructional module or other approved preparation milestone;
(3) each completed subject examination or authorized retest, including proctoring and required accommodations;
(4) verified active participation in an approved online preparation platform;
(5) completion of all requirements for a certificate; and
(6) a narrowly limited capacity payment when a testing center must remain available to satisfy the weekly-access requirement but has low utilization.
(c) A payment schedule may establish reasonable maximum rates and anti-duplication limits but may not:
(1) provide payment merely for creating an account or registering without participation;
(2) condition all payment on an examinee's passage or certificate completion;
(3) create a financial incentive to deny testing or discourage retesting; or
(4) restrict a student's statutory access because a fiscal cap or provider quota has been reached.
(d) A district, school, or service center that provides services directly is entitled to payment. If an approved provider provides services under a locally selected contract, the agency may pay the provider directly or reimburse the selecting entity as specified in the contract and verified claim.
(e) Not later than the 10th day of each month, a provider seeking payment shall submit a certified report for services provided during the preceding month. The district, school, or service center whose facility or students were served shall verify the facility, schedule, registration, attendance or engagement, completed services, and other locally observable information before payment.
(f) A report under Subsection (e) must include, as applicable:
(1) provider and testing-center identifiers;
(2) a secure student identifier;
(3) the student's age band and county or district of residence;
(4) preparation modality, dates, duration, and verified engagement;
(5) the subject, attempt number, date, and completed-test status;
(6) the result, if lawfully reportable and necessary for validation or evaluation;
(7) an accommodation indicator that does not disclose a diagnosis;
(8) the amount claimed by payment category;
(9) a certification against duplicate billing; and
(10) supporting documentation required by agency rule.
(g) Before authorizing payment, the agency shall match each claim against available score records, provider records, and secure student identifiers. The agency shall conduct quarterly provisional reconciliation and an annual final settlement and may recover or offset an overpayment.
(h) A provider shall retain supporting records for at least seven years after the date of payment. The agency and the state auditor may audit a claim, provider, or selecting entity. A person who knowingly submits a false claim is ineligible for further payment, is liable for repayment with interest, and is subject to any other remedy provided by law.
(i) The agency shall provide an administrative review process for a disputed payment, recovery, suspension, or provider-approval decision.
(j) Student-level information may be used only for administration, payment, audit, authorized evaluation, and another purpose permitted by state or federal law. Public reporting must use aggregated, de-identified information.
(k) Not later than December 1 of each year, the agency shall publish a report showing by provider type, region, county, district, and age band, as statistically appropriate:
(1) preparation participation and modality;
(2) examinations, attempts, passage, and certificate completion;
(3) average certificate-issuance time;
(4) expenditures by payment category;
(5) testing-center availability and utilization; and
(6) other outcome measures adopted by rule.
(l) The allotment under this section is part of the Foundation School Program. The agency shall pay the allotment from money appropriated for the Foundation School Program and may use other money appropriated for the purposes of this section. The agency shall include in its legislative appropriations request the amount projected to be necessary to fully fund this section.
ARTICLE 5. RECOGNITION BY PUBLIC INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION
SECTION 5.01. Chapter 51, Education Code, is amended by adding Section 51.996 to read as follows:
Sec. 51.996. TEXAS CERTIFICATE OF HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY; EQUAL TREATMENT.
(a) In this section:
(1) "Certificate" means a Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency issued or effective by operation of law under Section 7.111.
(2) "Institution" means an institution of higher education, as defined by Section 61.003, that admits students to an academic or technical course or certificate or degree program.
(3) "Similarly situated student" means a student who is comparable with respect to the selected program, catalog year, transfer credit, placement results, demonstrated competencies, lawful prerequisites, licensure or accreditation requirements, and other academically relevant factors, without treating age or the form of the student's secondary-completion credential as a relevant difference.
(b) For each admission, enrollment, program, scholarship, financial-aid, classification, and graduation purpose under state law or institutional policy, a certificate satisfies a requirement that a person:
(1) possess a high school diploma;
(2) graduate from high school; or
(3) complete secondary education.
(c) An institution may not:
(1) require a certificate holder to obtain or present a conventional high school diploma in addition to the certificate;
(2) classify the certificate as a lesser secondary-completion credential;
(3) deny consideration solely because the applicant lacks a conventional high school transcript or class rank; or
(4) deny an otherwise qualified applicant consideration solely because the applicant is at least 13 but younger than 18 years of age.
(d) This section does not:
(1) guarantee admission;
(2) create a class rank or an entitlement to automatic admission based on class rank; or
(3) prohibit an institution from applying a lawful, neutral criterion relating to academic preparation, readiness, program prerequisites, application deadlines, capacity, competitive selection, safety, residency, tuition status, or another relevant factor if the criterion applies on the same terms to similarly situated diploma holders.
(e) An institution may require the consent of a parent or guardian before an unemancipated minor:
(1) enrolls in courses;
(2) incurs tuition, fees, or another financial obligation;
(3) enters a housing or payment agreement; or
(4) assumes another contractual obligation.
(f) An institution may not require parental or guardian consent merely for a minor to:
(1) submit an application;
(2) transmit a certificate, transcript, score, or other record;
(3) take an assessment required of applicants generally;
(4) receive an admission decision; or
(5) request admissions, program, tuition, or financial-aid information.
(g) An institution may not require an applicant or student who holds a certificate to complete a course, developmental course, orientation, seminar, assessment, placement activity, prerequisite, credit hour, noncredit activity, or other condition of admission to or completion of a certificate or degree program that the institution would not require of a similarly situated student who holds a high school diploma.
(h) An institution may not use the certificate, the holder's age, the absence of class rank, or the absence of a conventional high school transcript, by itself, as:
(1) evidence of academic deficiency;
(2) a basis for a separate catalog, degree plan, advising track, or graduation requirement; or
(3) a basis for increasing the credits, courses, time, cost, or other requirements necessary to complete a program.
(i) Subsections (g) and (h) do not prohibit a requirement that:
(1) applies without regard to secondary-credential type;
(2) is supported by the student's individualized assessment result, demonstrated competency, prior credit, or other neutral academic evidence; and
(3) would be imposed on a similarly situated student who holds a high school diploma.
(j) A certificate holder may file without charge a complaint with the institution alleging a violation of this section. The institution shall issue a written decision not later than the 10th business day after receiving the complaint.
(k) A complainant may appeal an adverse decision or failure to decide to the coordinating board. The coordinating board shall issue a written decision not later than the 20th business day after receiving the appeal and may order:
(1) consideration of an application without the prohibited criterion;
(2) removal of an added requirement;
(3) correction of a degree audit, catalog assignment, or student record;
(4) enrollment in the proper course or program, subject to lawful capacity limits;
(5) adjustment or refund of tuition and fees charged because of the violation;
(6) restoration of registration priority or another academic status lost because of the violation; and
(7) other prospective corrective relief necessary to enforce this section.
(l) After the period for an institutional decision under Subsection (j) expires, an applicant or student may bring an action for declaratory or injunctive relief in a district court in Travis County or the county in which the institution is located. Sovereign and governmental immunity are waived and abolished to the extent of liability for prospective declaratory or injunctive relief, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees.
(m) The coordinating board may adopt rules to administer this section. A rule or institutional policy may not narrow a right established by this section.
ARTICLE 6. ONLINE HIGHER EDUCATION ACCESS
SECTION 6.01. Chapter 61, Education Code, is amended by adding Subchapter SS to read as follows:
SUBCHAPTER SS. ONLINE COURSE AND PROGRAM ACCESS
Sec. 61.1001. DEFINITIONS. In this subchapter:
(1) "Fully online course" means a course for which all instruction, interaction, submission of work, examinations, orientation, and ordinarily required academic activity may be completed remotely through the Internet without travel to a particular physical location, except for an approved physical-presence component under Section 61.1004.
(2) "Fully online program pathway" means a published sequence through which a student may complete every course, credit, examination, orientation, advising requirement, and other academic condition for a certificate or degree remotely, except for an approved physical-presence component under Section 61.1004.
(3) "Institution" means an institution of higher education, as defined by Section 61.003, that offers an academic or technical course or certificate or degree program.
(4) "Physical-presence component" means a specifically identified portion of a course or program that objectively requires physical performance or in-person supervision and cannot reasonably be replaced by remote instruction, simulation, remote equipment, or an approved local placement.
Sec. 61.1002. ONLINE AVAILABILITY REQUIRED.
(a) Each institution shall offer as a fully online course every course for which no physical-presence component is approved under Section 61.1004.
(b) Each institution shall provide at least one fully online program pathway for each certificate and degree program the institution offers, except for the approved physical-presence components of the program.
(c) The institution shall structure course scheduling, prerequisites, and frequency so that a student may make timely progress and complete the online pathway within the period ordinarily available to an otherwise similarly situated in-person student.
(d) An institution may participate in a consortium, cross-registration arrangement, or shared-course agreement to satisfy this section if:
(1) the course applies to the student's program without loss of credit;
(2) the arrangement does not increase the student's tuition or mandatory fees;
(3) the course is reasonably available when needed for timely progress; and
(4) the institution remains responsible for compliance.
Sec. 61.1003. REMOTE STUDENT SERVICES. An institution shall make registration, academic advising, tutoring, faculty office hours, library resources, disability services, financial-aid counseling, payment services, technical support, career services, and complaint procedures remotely accessible to a student in a fully online course or pathway on terms reasonably equivalent to those available to an in-person student.
Sec. 61.1004. PHYSICAL-PRESENCE COMPONENT.
(a) An institution may require physical presence only for the portion of a course or program that the institution proves by clear and specific evidence:
(1) requires direct patient or client care, clinical education, student teaching, supervised professional practice, fieldwork, physical performance, studio or shop work, or use of specialized equipment;
(2) cannot reasonably be completed through remote instruction, a simulation of adequate educational quality, remotely operated equipment, or an approved placement near the student's residence; or
(3) is expressly required in person by state or federal law or by a recognized professional licensing or accrediting body.
(b) An exception must be limited to the necessary component and may not be applied automatically to an entire course, program, department, or institution.
(c) Before requiring travel to the institution, the institution shall determine whether the component can be completed through a qualified local placement, partner facility, or supervised arrangement reasonably accessible to the student.
(d) An institution shall publish for each exception:
(1) the course and component affected;
(2) the educational, legal, licensing, or accreditation basis;
(3) the evidence showing why a remote alternative is not reasonably sufficient;
(4) the expected location, duration, and cost to the student; and
(5) the date on which the institution will review the continued necessity of the exception.
Sec. 61.1005. INSTITUTIONAL INVENTORY AND IMPLEMENTATION PLAN.
(a) Each institution shall submit to the coordinating board an inventory of every course and certificate and degree program the institution offers. The inventory must identify:
(1) current modality;
(2) existing online availability;
(3) each claimed physical-presence component;
(4) the institution's evidence supporting each claimed component;
(5) the action, resources, and date necessary to provide required online access; and
(6) the institutional officer responsible for implementation.
(b) The coordinating board shall approve, conditionally approve, or return an implementation plan for correction. A plan may not waive a statutory deadline except as expressly authorized by Section 61.1007.
Sec. 61.1006. IMPLEMENTATION SCHEDULE.
(a) Not later than the 2027-2028 academic year, each institution shall:
(1) complete and publish the inventory required by Section 61.1005;
(2) identify all current online offerings and claimed physical-presence components; and
(3) make the remote student services required by Section 61.1003 available.
(b) Not later than the 2028-2029 academic year, each institution shall provide online availability for each feasible:
(1) core curriculum course;
(2) lower-division academic course;
(3) general academic certificate; and
(4) high-demand program pathway designated by the coordinating board.
(c) Not later than the 2029-2030 academic year, each institution shall provide a complete online pathway for the nonexcepted components of each certificate and degree program or operate under a corrective order issued by the coordinating board.
(d) Not later than the 2030-2031 academic year, each institution shall fully comply with this subchapter unless a time-limited extension is granted under Section 61.1007.
Sec. 61.1007. LIMITED EXTENSION.
(a) The coordinating board may grant one extension of not more than one academic year for a specifically identified course, component, or program if the institution proves that timely compliance is impracticable despite diligent efforts.
(b) An extension must state:
(1) the specific obstacle;
(2) the actions already taken;
(3) the funding and resources committed;
(4) enforceable interim milestones; and
(5) an expiration date.
(c) The coordinating board may not grant an indefinite, institution-wide, or renewable extension.
Sec. 61.1008. STATEWIDE ONLINE CATALOG. The coordinating board shall maintain a searchable public catalog that identifies:
(1) each fully online course and program pathway;
(2) cross-registration or shared-course availability;
(3) each approved physical-presence component and its stated basis;
(4) each institution's implementation milestones and compliance status; and
(5) information necessary for a student to apply, register, obtain support, and file a complaint.
Sec. 61.1009. COMPLAINTS AND ENFORCEMENT.
(a) A student may file without charge a complaint with an institution alleging a violation of this subchapter. The institution shall issue a written decision not later than the 10th business day after receiving the complaint.
(b) The student may appeal an adverse decision or failure to decide to the coordinating board. The coordinating board shall issue a decision not later than the 20th business day after receiving the appeal.
(c) The coordinating board may order an institution to:
(1) provide remote access or a reasonable local alternative;
(2) remove an unsupported physical-presence requirement;
(3) enroll the student in an appropriate course or arrange cross-registration without additional tuition or mandatory fees;
(4) adjust or refund tuition and fees caused by noncompliance;
(5) adopt and comply with a corrective action plan; and
(6) take other prospective action necessary to enforce this subchapter.
(d) For knowing, repeated, or uncorrected noncompliance, the coordinating board may withhold discretionary administrative or program funds over which the board has allocation authority. The board may not withhold student financial aid, formula funding attributable to students, or money whose withholding would materially impair a student's statutory access.
(e) After the institutional decision period expires, a student may bring an action for declaratory or injunctive relief in a district court in Travis County or the county in which the institution is located. Sovereign and governmental immunity are waived and abolished to the extent of liability for prospective declaratory or injunctive relief, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees.
Sec. 61.1010. HIGHER EDUCATION HIGH SCHOOL EQUIVALENCY SERVICES.
(a) Each institution shall ensure that a student attending the institution has practical access on the attended campus or through a no-cost written arrangement to:
(1) an approved high school equivalency testing center; and
(2) at least one opportunity during each consecutive seven-day period to take each available subject examination for which the student is eligible.
(b) An institution is not required to operate a testing center in every building and shall use existing facilities and space to the extent reasonably practicable.
(c) An institution may provide preparation services directly or through a locally selected approved provider. If the institution offers preparation services, the services must be available fully online and without charge to an eligible Texas resident.
(d) The coordinating board, in consultation with the Texas Education Agency, shall maintain a nonexclusive approved-provider roster for institution-specific services under this section. An institution may self-perform or select any approved provider through ordinary procurement and conflict-of-interest procedures. The state may not require use of a single or favored provider.
(e) The coordinating board shall establish a hybrid activity-based payment model substantially equivalent to the model required by Section 48.318. An approved provider may receive direct payment only after the institution verifies locally observable services and the coordinating board validates the claim against examination and participation records.
(f) The monthly report, validation, reconciliation, recovery, record-retention, audit, privacy, provider-review, and annual public-reporting requirements of Section 48.318 apply to a payment under this section, with the coordinating board performing the functions assigned to the Texas Education Agency and the institution performing the functions assigned to a school district.
(g) The coordinating board shall pay verified claims from money appropriated to the board for this purpose and shall include in its legislative appropriations request the amount projected to be necessary to fully fund this section. The comptroller shall perform ordinary warrant and accounting functions after the coordinating board certifies the amount due.
Sec. 61.1011. RULEMAKING AND ACCREDITATION.
(a) The coordinating board shall adopt rules necessary to administer this subchapter in a manner consistent with applicable federal law and recognized institutional and programmatic accreditation requirements.
(b) An accreditation requirement supports a physical-presence component only if the requirement actually requires physical presence. An institution may not rely on accreditation generally to exempt an entire course or program.
(c) A rule, contract, institutional policy, or provider term that conflicts with this subchapter is void to the extent of the conflict.
ARTICLE 7. COORDINATION, TRANSITION, AND IMPLEMENTATION
SECTION 7.01. RULES.
(a) The State Board of Education and the Texas Education Agency shall adopt rules and complete initial provider approvals necessary to implement Articles 1 through 4 of this Act not later than March 1, 2028.
(b) The Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board shall adopt rules necessary to implement Articles 5 and 6 of this Act not later than March 1, 2028.
(c) An agency may adopt emergency rules and use an expedited competitive procurement process authorized by other law to prevent an interruption in examination, preparation, testing, certificate, or online-access services. This subsection does not authorize a sole-source preference or an exemption from conflict-of-interest law.
SECTION 7.02. CONTRACT TRANSITION.
(a) The Texas Education Agency shall review each high school equivalency contract in effect on the effective date of this Act and amend, replace, or terminate the contract to the extent necessary to comply with this Act.
(b) A contract or examination-provider transition may not:
(1) invalidate or shorten the statutory validity period of a qualifying score earned before or during the transition;
(2) delay a certificate for an examinee who has satisfied the applicable requirements; or
(3) impose a charge or eligibility condition prohibited by this Act.
SECTION 7.03. EXISTING PASSING SCORES. A passing subject score earned before the effective date of this Act remains valid for the longer of:
(1) the period for which the score was valid under the law, rule, or provider policy in effect when earned; or
(2) one year after the date the score was earned.
SECTION 7.04. INITIAL SERVICE IMPLEMENTATION.
(a) Each school district and open-enrollment charter school shall provide the preparation services required by Section 29.113, Education Code, as added by this Act, beginning with the 2027-2028 school year.
(b) Each school district, open-enrollment charter school, and institution of higher education shall provide the weekly testing access required by Sections 29.114 and 61.1010, Education Code, as added by this Act, beginning September 1, 2027.
(c) The age, consent, enrollment-status, testing, retesting, score-validity, certificate-issuance, compulsory-attendance, and public-higher-education equal-treatment provisions of this Act apply beginning September 1, 2027. Before final rules are adopted, each responsible entity shall administer those provisions directly from the statutory standards. An entity may use temporary procedures that are consistent with those standards.
(d) Section 39.053, Education Code, as amended by this Act, applies only to the computation of a high school graduation rate or dropout rate with respect to a student who earns a Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency on or after September 1, 2027.
SECTION 7.05. DATA SYSTEMS. Not later than September 1, 2028, the Texas Education Agency and Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board shall establish the electronic accounts, secure data exchanges, claims systems, complaint procedures, and public reporting systems required by this Act. The agencies shall use existing systems when reasonably practicable.
SECTION 7.06. FUNDING PLAN. In preparing legislative appropriations requests for the state fiscal biennium beginning September 1, 2029, and each subsequent biennium, the Texas Education Agency and Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board shall separately identify:
(1) projected student and examination volume;
(2) preparation, testing, accommodation, certificate, data-system, and provider-payment costs;
(3) public-school costs payable through the Foundation School Program;
(4) higher-education costs payable from general revenue or another lawful higher-education appropriation; and
(5) administrative costs and projected savings or offsets.
SECTION 7.07. CONFLICT OF LAW. A rule, contract, local policy, institutional policy, examination-provider term, or preparation-provider term in effect on or after the effective date of this Act is void to the extent the rule, contract, policy, or term conflicts with a right or duty established by this Act.
SECTION 7.08. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Act or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect another provision or application of this Act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
SECTION 7.09. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Act takes effect September 1, 2027.
Inspect the Data
Explore the official data behind this article — one tab per dataset. Each tab includes the data table, a download button, and a short note on where the numbers come from.
| Year | Completed all four subjects | Passed | Pass rate | Certificates issued |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019 | 27,622 | 19,769 | 71.57% | 22,034 |
| 2020 | 12,936 | 9,907 | 76.58% | 11,281 |
| 2021 | 18,218 | 14,606 | 80.17% | 16,110 |
| 2022 | 20,919 | 15,954 | 76.27% | 17,696 |
| 2023 | 21,658 | 16,525 | 76.30% | 18,275 |
| 2024 | 23,017 | 17,485 | 75.96% | 19,271 |
| 2025 | 23,311 | 17,649 | 75.71% | 19,376 |
| Age group | Passers | Share of passers |
|---|---|---|
| 16–18 | 6,196 | 35.1% |
| 19–24 | 6,944 | 39.3% |
| 25–34 | 2,716 | 15.4% |
| 35–44 | 1,196 | 6.8% |
| 45 and older | 597 | 3.4% |
| Total | 17,649 | 100.0% |
| Outcome | Percent of 413,593 students |
|---|---|
| Graduated | 90.2% |
| Still in high school | 3.3% |
| Earned an equivalency certificate | 0.3% |
| Dropped out | 6.2% |
| Total | 100.0% |
| Fall | High school students in dual credit | Total higher education enrollment | Dual credit share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | 11,921 | 849,879 | 1.4% |
| 2000 | 17,784 | 876,430 | 2.0% |
| 2001 | 22,812 | 923,389 | 2.5% |
| 2002 | 28,454 | 1,100,732 | 2.6% |
| 2003 | 31,757 | 1,140,566 | 2.8% |
| 2004 | 38,082 | 1,171,405 | 3.3% |
| 2005 | 42,167 | 1,182,802 | 3.6% |
| 2006 | 57,554 | 1,199,814 | 4.8% |
| 2007 | 64,910 | 1,218,626 | 5.3% |
| 2008 | 79,074 | 1,262,180 | 6.3% |
| 2009 | 91,303 | 1,364,911 | 6.7% |
| 2010 | 90,364 | 1,445,157 | 6.3% |
| 2011 | 94,550 | 1,468,067 | 6.4% |
| 2012 | 99,452 | 1,456,161 | 6.8% |
| 2013 | 107,598 | 1,452,162 | 7.4% |
| 2014 | 112,361 | 1,464,489 | 7.7% |
| 2015 | 133,342 | 1,488,257 | 9.0% |
| 2016 | 152,569 | 1,521,216 | 10.0% |
| 2017 | 151,669 | 1,531,243 | 9.9% |
| 2018 | 185,255 | 1,570,539 | 11.8% |
| 2019 | 202,417 | 1,581,852 | 12.8% |
| 2020 | 183,726 | 1,509,756 | 12.2% |
| 2021 | 186,341 | 1,490,079 | 12.5% |
| 2022 | 198,940 | 1,494,238 | 13.3% |
| 2023 | 218,825 | 1,530,498 | 14.3% |
| 2024 | 249,328 | 1,602,334 | 15.6% |
| 2025 | 276,064 | 1,674,070 | 16.5% |
| Outcome | Offered early college | Not offered | Difference (points) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Any degree, year 1 | 23.8% | 1.3% | +22.5 |
| Any degree, year 4 | 38.2% | 18.9% | +19.3 |
| Any degree, year 6 | 46.6% | 35.2% | +11.3 |
| Any degree, year 8 | 50.2% | 40.6% | +9.6 |
| Any degree, year 10 | 51.4% | 42.8% | +8.5 |
| Associate degree, year 4 | 25.7% | 5.3% | +20.4 |
| Bachelor’s degree, year 4 | 20.9% | 11.9% | +9.0 |
| Bachelor’s degree, year 6 | 30.6% | 26.6% | +4.0 |
| Bachelor’s degree, year 10 | 36.5% | 34.5% | +1.9 |
| Education level | Median weekly earnings | Unemployment rate |
|---|---|---|
| Doctoral degree | $2,278 | 1.2% |
| Professional degree | $2,363 | 1.2% |
| Master’s degree | $1,840 | 2.2% |
| Bachelor’s degree | $1,543 | 2.5% |
| Associate degree | $1,099 | 2.8% |
| Some college, no degree | $1,020 | 3.8% |
| High school diploma | $930 | 4.2% |
| Less than a high school diploma | $738 | 6.2% |
| All workers | $1,221 | 3.3% |
References
Sources are organized by the sections of this article they principally inform. Every source is an official government record, statute, data set, or peer-reviewed or institutional study, linked so readers can check each figure themselves.
Texas Law and State Data — Executive Summary and Sections 1, 2, 5, 7, and 9
GED Testing Service. (n.d.). Texas policies. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.ged.com/policies/texas.html
This is the GED Testing Service's own policy page for Texas test-takers, setting out the testing rules that apply in this state, including the statement that no one under 16 can take the GED test. Because the page comes directly from the company that provides the only exam currently listed by the state, it is the most direct evidence of the age barrier that a younger Texas student would face today, regardless of what state law allows. The article relies on it to explain why the bill requires every approved provider, and every school district, college, or other entity that develops or gives an exam, to accept eligible students age 13 and older, and why the bill opens the market to more than one provider.
Tex. Educ. Code § 7.111. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/ED/pdf/ED.7.pdf
This is the official text of Section 7.111 of the Texas Education Code, the current high school equivalency statute, as published by the Texas Legislative Council. It allows a person to test only if the person is over 17, or 16 in narrow circumstances such as Job Corps enrollment or a recommendation from a supervising public agency, and it requires the state to charge a fee for the certificate and score report. The bill rewrites this section entirely, so the article cites it to let readers compare current law side by side with the bill's age-13 eligibility, free testing, provider-neutral approval, required acceptance of students age 13 and older, and parent-notice provisions, using primary legal authority rather than a secondhand summary.
Tex. Educ. Code §§ 25.085–25.086. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/ED/pdf/ED.25.pdf
These sections of the Texas Education Code, published by the Texas Legislative Council, set the state's compulsory school attendance requirement and list the students who are exempt from it. Section 25.086 already exempts students enrolled in the Texas Academy of Mathematics and Science and three similar state academies that place high school students on university campuses, and it exempts certificate holders only if they are at least 17 years old. The article uses these provisions to show that Texas already lets some students leave their home high school early for university-level work, and to explain exactly how the bill changes the attendance exemption so that any student who earns the certificate, at any eligible age, has completed the attendance requirement.
Tex. Educ. Code § 28.0253. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/ED/pdf/ED.28.pdf
This statute creates the Texas First Early High School Completion Program, which requires a school district to let a student graduate and receive a diploma once the student demonstrates mastery and early readiness for college in each subject, regardless of other local or state requirements. It sets no minimum age, which shows that Texas law already recognizes that a student who is ready should not have to wait for the calendar to graduate. The article relies on it as a Texas precedent for early, mastery-based graduation. The bill does not amend this program or change its standards; it opens a second early-graduation route through the high school equivalency certificate, which leaves the choice of a career, college, or both to the student and family.
Tex. Educ. Code § 39.053. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tcss.legis.texas.gov/resources/ED/pdf/ED.39.pdf
This section of the Texas Education Code sets the performance indicators the state uses to rate school districts and campuses, including four-year high school graduation rates computed under federal definitions. Its Subsections (g) through (g-4) already direct the state to exclude certain groups of students from graduation-rate calculations, such as some students in special circumstances. The article uses this section to show that the bill's accountability changes follow an existing Texas model rather than inventing a new one, and readers can compare the current exclusions with the new Subsections (g-5) through (g-8), which give districts graduate credit when they prepared the student and neutral treatment when they did not.
Texas Education Agency. (2025a). Texas Certificate of High School Equivalency annual statistical report. https://tea.texas.gov/student-readiness-and-high-school/certificate-high-school-equivalency/txchse-annual-statistical-report-1.pdf
This official Texas Education Agency report gives yearly counts of people who completed all parts of the state's high school equivalency exam, the number who passed, pass rates, and certificates issued from 2019 through 2025, along with the ages of those who passed. It shows that 17,649 people passed in 2025 and that about three in four were 24 or younger, which makes it the primary source for how widely Texans already use the credential. It also records that the HiSET exam ended in Texas in August 2024, leaving one listed exam. The article uses it for the results table in Section 1, the first data tab, and the discussion of single-provider limits.
Texas Education Agency. (2025b). Secondary school completion and dropouts in Texas public schools, 2023-24. https://tea.texas.gov/data-reports/school-performance/accountability-research/dropcomp-2023-24.pdf
This is the Texas Education Agency's annual report on graduation, continuation, high school equivalency, and dropout outcomes, published in 2025 for the class of 2024. It reports that 90.2% of the 413,593 students in that class graduated in four years and 0.3% earned an equivalency certificate, and it explains that certificate earners are counted in a district's class but not as graduates when graduation rates are calculated. It also records 281 students who left high school during 2023–24 to enroll full time in college and were not counted as dropouts. The article uses it to document the accountability problem the bill fixes and to show that Texas already separates early college enrollment from dropping out.
Texas Education Agency. (n.d.-a). Eligibility requirements for high school equivalency testing. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tea.texas.gov/student-readiness-and-high-school/certificate-high-school-equivalency/eligibility-requirements-high-school-equivalency-testing
This Texas Education Agency web page explains in plain language who may take the high school equivalency exam under current state law and rules, including the general age requirement and the limited circumstances in which a 16- or 17-year-old may test. It is the agency's own public guidance, so it reflects how the rules are actually applied to Texans who want to test today. The article cites it together with the statute to describe the current age limits that the bill would replace with a single age-13 eligibility rule, without consent or withdrawal conditions. A copy of the page was captured for the source archive so readers can see the guidance even if the page later changes.
Texas Education Agency. (n.d.-b). GED test information. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tea.texas.gov/student-readiness-and-high-school/certificate-high-school-equivalency/ged-test-information
This Texas Education Agency page lists the four subjects of the equivalency exam currently offered in Texas, the passing score required in each subject, and the fees a test-taker pays: $145 for all four subjects at a testing center or $165 when tested online. It is the official state statement of what a Texan pays to earn the credential today, which makes it more reliable than secondhand reports of testing costs. The article uses it to show the cost barrier the bill removes by making preparation, testing, retesting, and the certificate free to students, and it offers a reference point for lawmakers preparing a fiscal estimate. A copy of the page is in the source archive.
Texas Education Agency. (n.d.-c). Texas First Early High School Completion Program. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://tea.texas.gov/educators/graduation-information/state-graduation-requirements/texas-first-early-high-school-completion-program
This Texas Education Agency guidance page explains how school districts carry out the Texas First Early High School Completion Program and which assessments students may use to show they are ready for college. It notes that legislation passed in 2023 changed the program so that districts must issue the diploma to a qualifying student rather than merely being allowed to do so. The page shows that the state already runs an early, mastery-based graduation pathway in practice, not only on paper. The article uses it to show that the bill extends an existing Texas policy to the high school equivalency route instead of creating something untested, and a copy of the page is in the source archive.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (n.d.). The Texas First Program. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.highered.texas.gov/the-texas-first-program/
This Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board page sets the rules for the Texas First Scholarship, which helps pay for college for students who graduate early through the Texas First program. It lists high school equivalency results at the 80th percentile as one accepted way to show qualifying achievement, along with other requirements such as credits completed and grade point average. That shows Texas already treats high school equivalency results as meaningful evidence of what a student knows, and already rewards students who finish high school early. The article uses it in Section 1 as part of the existing Texas policy record that supports early graduation, not as a standard the bill adopts.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (2026a). Dual credit and total enrollments, fall semesters [Data set]. https://reportcenter.highered.texas.gov/reports/data/dual-credit-and-total-enrollments-fall-semesters/
This official Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board data set reports, for every public college and university in Texas, the fall headcount of high school students taking dual credit courses alongside total enrollment, from 1999 through 2025. Statewide, it shows 276,064 high school students in dual credit in fall 2025, which is 16.5% of all higher education enrollment and more than twenty times the 11,921 students in fall 1999. The article uses it to show that Texas high school students already take and succeed in college coursework at a very large scale. The original workbook and an extracted statewide table are in the source archive, and the shares shown in the data tab were calculated from it.
Research on Moving Ahead — Section 4
Bernstein, B. O., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2021). Academic acceleration in gifted youth and fruitless concerns regarding psychological well-being: A 35-year longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 113(4), 830–845. https://doi.org/10.1037/edu0000500
This peer-reviewed study followed more than 1,600 intellectually talented young people identified before age 13 for over 35 years, and checked its results against a second sample of graduate students. It found that the amount of academic acceleration a student experienced had no meaningful relationship with adult psychological well-being, and that participants' well-being was above national averages. The article uses it to answer the common concern that moving ahead harms young students socially or emotionally. Its main limitation is that participants were high-ability students, so it best supports a pathway that ready students choose for themselves; the full text is freely available at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9355332/.
Miller, T., Kosiewicz, H., Wang, E. L., Marwah, E. V., Delhommer, S., & Daugherty, L. (2018). Dual credit education in Texas: Interim report (Report No. RR-2043). RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR2000/RR2043/RAND_RR2043.pdf
This RAND Corporation report, prepared for Texas, studied the state's dual credit students and compared their college enrollment, persistence, and completion with those of students who did not take dual credit. It found that dual credit students generally had better college outcomes but cautioned that the descriptive comparisons cannot show that dual credit itself caused those results, because the students who choose dual credit may differ in other ways. The article uses it to put the Coordinating Board's dual credit outcome figures in proper context. It shows that the article is not claiming more than the evidence supports, and the full report is in the source archive for readers who want the details.
Park, G., Lubinski, D., & Benbow, C. P. (2013). When less is more: Effects of grade skipping on adult STEM productivity among mathematically precocious adolescents. Journal of Educational Psychology, 105(1), 176–198. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029481
This peer-reviewed study tracked mathematically talented students for about 40 years and used matching methods to compare 363 students who skipped a grade with 657 similar students who did not. Grade skippers were more likely to earn doctorates and other advanced degrees, earned them at younger ages, and produced more patents and other professional accomplishments by midlife. The article uses it to show the long-term benefits of letting ready students move ahead rather than holding them to a fixed schedule. As with other acceleration research, it studies high-ability students, so it best supports a voluntary pathway for students who have shown mastery, which is how the bill is designed.
Song, M., Neering, K., Zeiser, K. L., Schwarzhaupt, R., & Mitchell, S. (2024). Accelerated postsecondary pathways: The longer-term impact of the early college high school model on postsecondary degree attainment. American Educational Research Journal. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312241276855
This peer-reviewed study compared 2,388 students who applied to early college high schools that admitted students by lottery. Because chance decided who was offered a seat, winners and non-winners were alike in every other way, which makes this an unusually fair test of what early college access does. Students offered early college completed degrees at higher rates and much sooner: 51.4% held a degree 10 years after expected high school graduation, compared with 42.8% of non-winners, and the gap was far larger in the early years. The article uses it as the strongest evidence that early access to college raises degree completion, and it supplies the table in Section 4 and the fourth data tab.
Steenbergen-Hu, S., Makel, M. C., & Olszewski-Kubilius, P. (2016). What one hundred years of research says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on K–12 students' academic achievement: Findings of two second-order meta-analyses. Review of Educational Research, 86(4), 849–899. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654316675417
This peer-reviewed synthesis combines the findings of research reviews covering a century of studies on ability grouping and academic acceleration in kindergarten through grade 12. It found that accelerated students outperformed similar same-age students who were not accelerated by a large margin, and performed about as well as the older students they joined. The article uses it as the broadest academic evidence that moving ready students ahead helps them and that they keep up afterward. Readers can find the full citation and abstract through the U.S. Department of Education's ERIC database at https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1121483, which also links to the journal article.
Steenbergen-Hu, S., & Moon, S. M. (2011). The effects of acceleration on high-ability learners: A meta-analysis. Gifted Child Quarterly, 55(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986210383155
This peer-reviewed review combined the results of 38 studies, published from 1984 to 2008, on the effects of acceleration for high-ability students. It found a positive effect on academic achievement and a slightly positive effect on social and emotional development, the area where parents and educators most often worry. Both effects are small, so the safest reading is that acceleration showed no harm, not that it produced large social gains, and the article presents it that way. The article uses it alongside long-term studies to answer concerns about maturity, while noting that, like most acceleration research, it focuses on high-ability students who chose to move ahead.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (2026b). Dual credit outcomes statewide summaries [Data set]. https://reportcenter.highered.texas.gov/reports/data/dual-credit-outcomes-statewide-summaries/
This official Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board data set reports college persistence and degree completion for Texas students, grouped by how many dual credit hours they took before entering college. For students entering in fall 2016 with 31 or more dual credit hours, 42% earned an associate degree within two years and 63% a bachelor's within five years, compared with 4% and 46% for students with 1 to 11 hours. The article reports these figures as descriptive only, because students who take more dual credit may differ from others in motivation and preparation. The original workbook is in the source archive so readers can review every year and category themselves.
Research on Equivalency Credentials — Section 5
California Department of Education. (n.d.-a). California Proficiency Program. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/cp.asp
This official California Department of Education page describes the state's current California Proficiency Program. A student who is at least 16, or who has completed one year of 10th grade, can pass the exam and earn a certificate that the page calls the legal equivalent to a high school diploma, and may then remain in school or leave with a parent's permission. The page also states that the earlier proficiency exam served as California's test from 1974 to 2023. The article uses it to show that early, test-based completion is an established policy in the nation's most populous state, not an experiment, and a copy of the page is in the source archive.
California Department of Education. (n.d.-b). California High School Proficiency Examination. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.cde.ca.gov/re/pr/chspe.asp
This California Department of Education page records that the California High School Proficiency Examination was discontinued on June 30, 2023, and replaced by the current proficiency program under California Education Code Section 48412. Taken together with the department's program page, which states that the exam served as California's proficiency test from 1974 to 2023, it shows that California has kept an early, diploma-equivalent exit option for about 50 years under several test designs. The article uses it to show the policy's long track record and that California has continued it rather than abandoning it. A copy of the page is in the source archive.
Heckman, J. J., Humphries, J. E., LaFontaine, P. A., & Rodríguez, P. L. (2012). Taking the easy way out: How the GED testing program induces students to drop out. Journal of Labor Economics, 30(3). https://doi.org/10.1086/664924
This peer-reviewed study by leading labor economists examined how changes in the difficulty and availability of the GED affected high school dropout rates in several settings. It found that easier access led some students to leave school, and it is the most frequently cited evidence for the concern that an equivalency option encourages dropping out. The article takes the finding seriously and explains how the bill differs from the setting studied. Under the bill, a student's attendance duty continues until the certificate is earned, so a student cannot leave school first and test later, or never test at all. The only exit the bill creates is a completed credential earned under unchanged state standards.
Heckman, J. J., Humphries, J. E., & Mader, N. S. (2010). The GED (NBER Working Paper No. 16064). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w16064
This research review by leading labor economists summarizes decades of evidence on people who earned the GED after leaving school. It concludes that, on average, the credential had minimal value in the labor market for those recipients, that few went on to finish college, and that differences in skills such as persistence help explain the results. It represents the leading critical view of the GED as a final credential for people who left school. The article uses it to state the critics' case accurately, and to explain why its findings describe a different group of people than the enrolled students this bill serves, who must prove college readiness before they complete.
Quinn, L. M., & Pawasarat, J. (2011). Attempted reform of the GED credential in Wisconsin. University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee Employment and Training Institute. https://minds.wisconsin.edu/bitstream/handle/1793/90186/2011AttemptedGEDReform.pdf?sequence=1
This report from a University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee research institute documents Wisconsin's 1988 decision to raise the minimum age for the GED to 18½ and to raise passing standards, citing concern about teenagers using the test as a shortcut out of high school. It is an example of a state that moved in the opposite direction from this bill, which is why critics may point to it. The article uses it only for the facts of that policy change, not for the authors' broader conclusions. It also shows how the bill's in-school, college-ready design answers the specific concerns Wisconsin raised, which led that state to raise its passing standards.
Tyler, J. H., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (1998). Estimating the impact of the GED on the earnings of young dropouts using a series of natural experiments (NBER Working Paper No. 6391). National Bureau of Economic Research. https://doi.org/10.3386/w6391
This working paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research compared young dropouts in states with different GED passing standards to estimate what the credential itself is worth in the job market. It found that earning the GED raised later earnings by 10% to 19% for young white dropouts whose scores were near the passing line, but found no statistically significant gain for nonwhite dropouts. The article uses it to show that the research on the GED is mixed even for people who left school, and that the credential's value depends on what the holder does next. The original paper is in the source archive.
Zajacova, A., & Everett, B. G. (2014). The nonequivalent health of high school equivalents. Social Science Quarterly, 95(1), 221–238. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssqu.12039
This peer-reviewed study used National Health Interview Survey data on more than 76,000 adults to compare the health of people with a GED, people with a regular diploma, and people who left school without either credential. It found that GED holders' health more closely resembled that of dropouts than that of diploma holders. The article includes it as part of the critics' case and explains why it describes adults who left school, often years earlier, rather than students who complete early at a college-ready level while enrolled and continue their education. The full text is freely available at https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4112190/.
Careers, College, Online Learning, and Federal Law — Executive Summary and Sections 2, 6, 7, and 8
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (2019). Providing access without unnecessary duplication [Board presentation, agenda item IV-A]. https://reportcenter.highered.texas.gov/training-materials/presentations/04-25-19-iv-a-ppt/
This presentation to the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board reported the statewide inventory of certificate and degree programs and how many were offered entirely online in 2019: 1,265 of 8,937 programs. It is the most recent statewide count of fully online programs available from the board, which is why the article cites it despite its age. The article uses it to show how limited fully online access was and why the bill requires each public institution to complete a current inventory, publish its in-person requirements, and join a public statewide online catalog. Because the figures date from 2019, the article identifies them as dated, and the presentation is in the source archive.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. (2025). Building a talent strong Texas: 2025 midpoint update. https://reportcenter.highered.texas.gov/agency-publication/miscellaneous/building-talent-strong-texas/
This is the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board's official midpoint update on the state's higher education strategic plan, which aims for 60% of Texans ages 25 to 34 to hold a postsecondary credential of value by 2030. It reports that 54% of Texans ages 25 to 34, and 52% of those ages 35 to 64, held such a credential in 2023, up from 48% for both groups in 2019. The article uses it to connect the bill to a goal the state has already set for itself, since students who reach college ready and sooner add to attainment. The full report is in the source archive.
34 C.F.R. § 300.102. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/34/300.102
This federal regulation under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act explains when a public school's obligation to provide a free appropriate public education ends for a student with a disability. It states that a high school equivalency credential is not a regular high school diploma for this purpose, so earning one does not by itself end a student's right to special education services. The article uses it to show that students with disabilities keep their federal protections under this pathway, which the bill expressly preserves in its continued-enrollment section. The regulation's text is reproduced by Cornell University's Legal Information Institute, and a copy is in the source archive.
34 C.F.R. § 600.2. Retrieved October 11, 2026, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/34/600.2
This federal regulation defines key terms the U.S. Department of Education uses to decide who can receive federal student aid. Its definition of a recognized equivalent of a high school diploma includes a state certificate a student receives after passing a state-authorized examination that the state recognizes as equivalent to a diploma. That means Texans who earn the state certificate can qualify for federal grants and loans on the same footing as diploma holders. The article uses it to show that the certificate already opens the door to federal financial aid, and that the bill's equal-treatment rule for public colleges matches how federal law already treats the credential.
20 U.S.C. § 7801(25), (43). https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title20-section7801&num=0&edition=prelim
These definitions in federal law, published by the U.S. House Office of the Law Revision Counsel, set how the federal four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate is calculated and what counts as a regular high school diploma. Both definitions exclude a recognized equivalent of a diploma, such as a general equivalency diploma. The article uses them to explain why the bill keeps a separate calculation for federal reports, and why the Texas First diploma matters for students who also meet its requirements. Because this is federal statutory law, the Texas Legislature cannot change it, which is why the bill changes only the state's own accountability calculations.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2025). Education pays, 2024. https://www.bls.gov/careeroutlook/2025/data-on-display/education-pays.htm
This U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data release reports 2024 median weekly earnings and unemployment rates by education level for full-time wage and salary workers age 25 and older, based on the Current Population Survey. It shows earnings rising and unemployment falling at each step of education, from $738 a week and 6.2% unemployment without a high school diploma to $930 and 4.2% with one. The article uses it to show why a completed high school credential matters for students who go straight to work, and what further education adds for those who choose it. These are national associations, not proof that a credential alone causes higher pay.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2026a). Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population 25 years and over by educational attainment, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity [Table 7, Current Population Survey]. https://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat07.htm
This federal table from the Current Population Survey reports 2025 labor force status for adults by education level. Its footnote states that the high school graduate category "includes people with a high school diploma or equivalent." That is the federal government's own definition, showing that the national labor statistics behind earnings comparisons group equivalency holders with high school graduates rather than with dropouts. The article uses it to show that the certificate counts as a completed high school credential in federal labor data, which supports students who choose to go straight to work. The page was captured for the source archive.
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2026b). Education pays [Chart]. https://www.bls.gov/emp/chart-unemployment-earnings-education.htm
This U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics page charts unemployment rates and earnings by educational attainment. Its note states that the education categories "reflect only the highest level of educational attainment" and "do not take into account completion of training programs in the form of apprenticeships and other on-the-job training, which may also influence earnings and unemployment rates." The article uses that note to show that federal earnings comparisons understate the value of career paths built on apprenticeships and job training, which many students may choose after earning the certificate. It supports the article's point that college is one option, not the only route to a good career.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Evaluation of evidence-based practices in online learning: A meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. https://www.ed.gov/sites/ed/files/rschstat/eval/tech/evidence-based-practices/finalreport.pdf
This U.S. Department of Education report combined results from 45 studies comparing online and face-to-face instruction. It found that, on average, purely online instruction performed about the same as face-to-face instruction, while blended instruction that combined online and in-person elements performed better. The report cautions that differences in learning time, materials, and course design may explain part of the blended advantage. The article uses it to show that well-designed online college pathways can deliver quality instruction, which supports the bill's requirement that public institutions build fully online pathways backed by student services equal to those available on campus.
Xu, D., & Jaggars, S. S. (2014). Performance gaps between online and face-to-face courses: Differences across types of students and academic subject areas. The Journal of Higher Education, 85(5), 633–659. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2014.11777343
This peer-reviewed study analyzed nearly 500,000 course enrollments of more than 40,000 Washington State community and technical college students to compare performance in online and face-to-face courses. All groups did somewhat worse online, and the largest drops were among male students, younger students, Black students, and students with lower grade point averages. The article treats this honestly as a real challenge for young online learners rather than dismissing it. It explains why the bill requires remote advising, tutoring, faculty office hours, and disability services for online students on terms equal to in-person students, and why online enrollment remains a choice.