With lawmakers poised to make dramatic changes to the state's school accountability system, it's critical that they continue setting high expectations for all Texas students and hold schools accountable for meeting those expectations.

Lawmakers' well-intentioned efforts to include post-secondary readiness measures in the Texas public school accountability system shouldn't be used as an excuse to delay implementing the graduation requirements enacted in 2006. Nor should such efforts be used to game the state's dropout calculations, create an environment that condones social promotion of students or weaken accountability by delaying aggressive intervention in our state's lowest performing schools.

As a San Antonio native who attended public schools, it saddens me that we keep minority and low-income students at a disadvantage — which postponing or scaling back post-secondary graduation requirements would do. The lifetime earnings of someone with a bachelor's degree are about 60 percent higher than those of someone with only a high school diploma. The contrast is even more striking when you consider advanced and professional degrees.

Yet, nationally, only one in five Hispanic students graduates from high school prepared for college; in many cases, those who make it to college are the first in their families to do so. In addition, just 22 percent of high school seniors who take the ACT meet its college-ready benchmarks in all core subject areas (English, math, reading and science). Requiring students to pass end-of-course exams in only two of 12 classes — as one bill being considered would do — won't turn the dire situation around.

For too many years, Texas used a dropout rate calculation that masked the true extent of the problem. It now uses the U.S. Department of Education's dropout rate calculation, which not only provides a more accurate picture of the problem but also ensures that large numbers of students, who are all too often minority and economically disadvantaged, are not treated with indifference in our school system.

Using the national dropout definition allows for accurate state-to-state comparisons — and thus pressures state policy-makers to allocate resources and focus on dropout prevention.

For these reasons, Texas lawmakers should maintain the national dropout rate calculation and reject any attempt to carve out additional exceptions for various student groups.

Lawmakers also should not eliminate the significant limitations on the social promotion of students who don't meet minimum standards on state reading tests in third grade and reading and math tests in fifth and eighth grades. To do so would reverse one of Texas' most meaningful reforms and allow the system to push kids on to the next grade without the intervention needed to ensure grade-level competency in these core subjects.

The law doesn't prevent students from advancing solely on the basis of test scores. Instead, it requires that a committee consisting of the student's parents, teacher and principal consider the student's circumstances.

Returning social promotion to default status might make it easier on school administrators, but it won't help Texas children succeed. Making grade placement committees optional also would remove parental participation and allow districts to make decisions with less input from teachers and principals.

Finally, Texas must accelerate — not delay — the use of options available to turn around persistently failing schools. Hindering the ability of the state education commissioner to impose school closure or alternative campus management sanctions will harm generations of disadvantaged students. These sanctions create leverage that has been used to successfully intervene at failing schools across the state.

Proposals now under consideration would delay the mandatory use of these options from five years to either six or eight. There is no excuse for creating a system that would allow students to languish in a failed school for five years, yet alone more.

Students in Texas deserve the opportunity to reach their full potential so for the sake of those students, especially for those in low income and minority communities, the Legislature must not undo the important reforms enacted in 2006 — reforms that are making a measurable difference for those most at risk.

Pompa is vice president of education at the National Council of La Raza, which is based in Washington.