Abigail Gray

Voting records currently not available. Please check back later.

Survey Responses

RESPONSES TO THE 2026 ATPE CANDIDATE SURVEY:

1. Role and Responsibility

If elected, what do you believe your primary role and responsibility as a State Board of Education (SBOE) member should be, particularly in comparison to or in coordination with the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the Legislature?

The SBOE has distinct responsibilities given to it by the Texas Legislature. TEA provides information and expertise to support the SBOE’s work and is tasked with implementing board decisions. My primary role when carrying out these responsibilities is to make well-informed, researched decisions. It is my duty to independently review evidence, ask critical questions, and understand the potential impact of each decision.

2. Top Priorities for Public Education

In your opinion, what is the most pressing issue facing public education in Texas?

Our achievement test accountability system stands out as the most pressing issue in Texas public education. Over time, this system has narrowed teaching and learning to test preparation, often at the expense of deeper understanding and critical thinking. It also results in students who are nowhere near passing standardized tests being left behind.

Because school accountability ratings are mainly based on standardized achievement scores, schools feel intense pressure to teach to what is tested and how it is tested. These ratings impact communities, property values, and can result in school takeovers or shutdowns. There is little time for authentic learning experiences or teaching critical thinking. Teachers are pressured to use all their time preparing students for what is tested.

When it comes down to it, teachers are also pressured to teach students who will earn the most points for their school through their standardized test scores. A commonly used practice is focusing instruction on the "bubble kids." These are students who are on the edge of scoring in the next achievement bracket and earning an additional point for their school. Teachers are prompted to focus on these students before the actual test, while students who do not have a chance of scoring higher are given alternative assignments to keep them busy.

We need an accountability system that incentivizes the growth and progress of all students and promotes authentic learning.

3. Educator and Stakeholder Input

If elected, what degree of input will you seek from educators, ATPE, and other educator organizations in policy decisions made by the SBOE? How would you seek that input?

I highly value the professional expertise of those in the field of education, and their input is crucial in making informed decisions. I would actively seek that input by ensuring I am accessible to contact and regularly engaging in opportunities to talk with educator organizations and classroom teachers across my district. I would pair that with staying up to date on research and evidence so that my decisions reflect professional insight and the needs of students statewide.

4. Weight of Educator Input in Curriculum Standards

How much weight should the SBOE give to educator input when developing curriculum standards (known as the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills, or “TEKS”) and approving instructional materials?

Educator input is the foundation of developing new standards and reviewing instructional materials. As a former instructional materials reviewer myself, I was encouraged to see that review teams were made up of other expert educators. They understand content standards and can determine if the curriculum addresses them in a high-quality way.

Additionally, expert educators should play a large part in developing curriculum standards. The State Board currently selects "content experts," or professionals in fields such as science and history, to participate in developing new TEKS. These professionals can bring valuable insight about the technical details of new standards. However, educators bring expert knowledge of what is developmentally appropriate for each grade level and ensure that standards are aligned as students move through the grade levels.

5. Parental Input

How should the SBOE approach curriculum and instructional materials decisions amid increased legislative emphasis on “parental rights”? What does meaningful parent engagement look like at the state level?

Parents deserve clear information about materials that are up for adoption and a platform to provide their feedback, questions, and concerns. Engagement at the state level should include transparent public review processes, formal public comment, and clear channels for parents to communicate with their elected SBOE representatives.

Ultimately, SBOE members should base their adoption decisions on instructional quality, research on the science of learning, and alignment to state standards. Adoption decisions should be free from members' biases and personal beliefs, or the personal beliefs of a portion of their constituents. Public education serves all students, and curricular decisions should reflect that responsibility.

6. Implementation of House Bill (HB) 1605

Under HB 1605, the SBOE now reviews and approves TEA-developed instructional materials, including state-funded “Open Education Resource” options. How should the board balance local control and state oversight to ensure materials are high-quality and aligned to standards, as well as reflect Texas values without politicization? 

Since schools receive additional allotment funding for using TEA-developed instructional materials rather than other adopted curricula, there is an inherent incentive to select TEA materials. Because of this, those materials should be held to a higher standard. The review process could include extending the review period to allow developers more time to make necessary revisions and increasing the number of reviewers assigned to TEA-developed materials to provide additional oversight.

Part of a reviewer's responsibility is to flag any material that violates the "Suitability" rubric, which details potentially harmful content that should not be included in instructional materials. Parts of that rubric prohibit favoring or having a bias towards any political ideology or any biased representation. TEA's materials should be rigorously analyzed to flag any potential violations in these areas and avoid politicization.

Schools locally should be encouraged to read reviewer reports and select instructional materials that best align with their students' needs. In reality, a bias towards TEA-developed materials will always exist, as long as schools can receive more money for using them.

7. Assessment and Accountability Reform

Texas is transitioning to new assessment and accountability systems under House Bill 8. The bill transfers board authority related to the testing and accountability system from the SBOE to TEA. What should the role of the SBOE be regarding the statewide testing and accountability system?

Before HB 8 passed, the SBOE was already quite limited in its testing and accountability responsibilities. While SBOE members do not have an official role related to accountability at this point, members still have a duty to use their position and platform to inform their constituents about new changes.

The TEA has an enormous task ahead of it with the test redesign. The nature of the test and how it measures student understanding are all changing. The SBOE should frequently ask the TEA questions about how they are making test design decisions, and ensure that any information that can be shared with the public is provided transparently. They should continue this practice once the test is released.

8. Charter School Oversight

Should the SBOE retain its authority to veto or approve new charter applications? Should the board’s veto authority be expanded to include charter expansion requests? How can the board ensure transparency and community input in this process?

The board should retain its veto and approval power, so long as its decisions are made using detailed information and considering input from a range of sources. Expanding the board's veto power to charter expansions would add an extra layer of checks and balances, which could be beneficial. It would require that board members evaluate the current state of the charter school and consider quality factors.

The community currently can provide input on charter applications, but the process for doing so is not very clear. The SBOE can send information to constituents about opportunities to review and comment on new charter applicants, making the process more accessible.

9. Special Education and Inclusive Curriculum

How should the SBOE ensure that curriculum standards and instructional materials meet the needs of students receiving special education services, English learners, and other diverse student populations?

Instructional materials should not only include well-designed whole-group lessons but should also be rich in supplementary materials for reteaching and reframing content for diverse student populations. I have seen many instructional materials adopted that include only the bare minimum of supports for English learners and limited reteach materials. This includes TEA’s math Open Education Resource, Bluebonnet, which is sorely lacking in reteach lessons and differentiated supports for students at different levels of English language proficiency. Instructional materials should include detailed support resources, rather than leaving teachers to spend hours creating differentiation from scratch.

Curriculum standards should build upon each other across grade levels. There should be no abrupt leaps in content expectations that leave diverse learners scrambling to fill knowledge gaps.

10. Transparency and Public Engagement

What steps should the SBOE take to make its processes, such as TEKS review committees, charter hearings, and instructional materials approvals, more transparent and accessible to educators and the public?

The SBOE currently updates information about its processes on its website, although navigating the website and finding pertinent information is far from accessible. The Board should take steps to directly communicate with education service centers, educators, and community stakeholders about these processes. This could be accomplished through direct emails to all Texas teachers, providing detailed information to service center agents, and connecting parents with information through school PTA organizations.

11. Oversight of the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC)

Do you believe the SBOE should continue to have the authority to review and potentially veto any rulemaking actions taken by the State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC)? Why or why not?

While I believe there should be checks and balances for any rulemaking actions, the State Board of Education may not be the most well-equipped to hold that power. Educator certification requires a deep understanding of what knowledge should be prioritized for educators to learn and how that knowledge impacts the quality of teaching. Not all SBOE members have a background in education or a deep understanding of quality teaching. I prefer that veto power belong to a body with strong knowledge of education philosophy and a deep understanding of the skills teachers need to feel prepared when they enter the classroom.