State education board reviews three-path proposal to ease certification barriers while retaining edTPA

Alabama State Department of Education staff outlined three options to the State Board of Education to reduce certification barriers that officials say are contributing to a teacher shortage while retaining the edTPA classroom performance assessment.

The board’s work session focused on: keeping the current rules (option 1); allowing candidates within one standard error of measure (SEM) below the Praxis cut score to advance if they meet a higher teaching-field GPA (option 2); and issuing a limited-duration nonprofessional certificate with a clear route to a professional certificate — either by later passing the Praxis cut score or completing 100 hours of department‑approved, high‑quality professional learning in the candidate’s content area (option 3).

Department presenters said all three options would leave edTPA intact. In the initial presentation Mister Martin of the Alabama State Department of Education said, “We’re not touching the edTPA,” describing edTPA as the department’s retained measure of classroom practice.

Why it matters: Board members repeatedly framed the policy debate as balancing two goals — maintaining quality expectations for incoming teachers while creating additional entry routes for candidates who are close to passing Praxis or who face other barriers such as test anxiety. Board members and superintendents told presenters they have students who are ready to teach but who are being blocked by narrow test cut scores.

Key elements of the three options presented

- Option 1 (status quo): Maintain current cut scores on Praxis, the required foundations-of-reading assessment where applicable (especially early‑grade certificates) and edTPA for professional licensure. Candidates who meet those standards would receive a professional certificate.

- Option 2 (sliding standard + GPA buffer): For candidates who score within one SEM below the Praxis cut score, allow certification if a higher teaching-field GPA threshold is met. The presentation used a sample higher threshold of 2.75 in the teaching field (up from the 2.5 teaching‑field GPA already used for program completion in many institutions). Presenters said the 2.75 example would be calculated using the university’s own GPA scale (for example, plus grades at some universities). Data provided by the department and ETS showed that applying a minus‑1 SEM could increase the number of available teachers in some subject areas; presenters cited historical numbers showing nearly 1,200 teachers between 2019–2021 would have been eligible under a minus‑1 SEM analysis.

- Option 3 (temporary nonprofessional certificate with conversion paths): Issue a nonprofessional temporary certificate valid for one year and renewable up to three years. During that period, candidates would convert to a professional certificate either by: a) later passing Praxis at the established cut score; or b) completing 100 hours of department‑approved professional learning or microcredentials in the certificate content area (presenters described that 100 hours as roughly equivalent to two rigorous college courses in content). Presenters noted institutions that require Praxis prior to student teaching would have to change policy to let candidates progress under option 3.

Board concerns and clarifications

Board members asked detailed questions about how teaching‑field GPAs would be computed (for elementary teachers, a teaching‑field GPA was already in use; for secondary fields, the GPA would be calculated on subject coursework only). Doctor Denise Peacock of the department clarified that the department already calculates an in‑field and an overall GPA and can request GPA samples from universities to standardize scoring across campuses.

Several board members pressed the department on process and timelines. One board member urged that the board consider moving the department’s recommendations to a vote in July so school systems and candidates could use the summer to implement changes; department staff said memos and materials could be ready for distribution immediately after a July vote.

Alternatives and related actions discussed

- Presenters described an expanded set of alternative‑pathway rules (covered in a companion presentation) for candidates who hold bachelor’s degrees in noneducation fields, including provisional certificates tied to coursework, mentor requirements and an eventual assessment route (edTPA or PLT) to earn a professional certificate.

- The department said it had discussed the options with ETS (the Praxis test vendor) and used test‑level data to model the effect of minus‑1 SEM on candidate counts by subject.

What the board directed (next steps)

Board members asked staff to return with materials for a potential July vote and to provide comparative analyses (how many candidates by subject would move forward under each option, who would be affected, and how institutions must change policies for option 3 to work). Several board members also requested that staff continue discussions with university deans and superintendents about whether institutions would permit candidates to begin student teaching without meeting Praxis, and that staff analyze GPA calculation differences across universities.

Ending

Board members and department staff agreed to continue the discussion at the July work session and to circulate detailed sample cut scores, the ETS modeling used in the proposal, and a timeline for implementation. No formal vote occurred during the work session.