Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Teacher Certification Pathways topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board debates standards for new alternative teacher-preparation providers as colleges press for faculty requirements
Summary
The board discussed how to implement recent legislation enabling nondegree teacher-preparation providers. Universities urged including faculty-qualification standards; the superintendent proposed postponing a strict faculty rule pending an internal review of educator-preparation code provisions.
The State Board of Education spent a lengthy portion of the meeting discussing proposed rules to implement a recent legislative change that requires the board to create an approval pathway for alternative, nondegree teacher-preparation organizations.
College of education representatives urged the board to require rigorous faculty qualifications for any program that would recommend candidates for Alabama certification. Their proposed language (represented in board materials as a ''purple'' clause) would have required provider faculty to meet the same kinds of graduate-degree and credentialing expectations typical at accredited educator-preparation programs.
ALSDE staff told the board adding that faculty standard to the rule could effectively exclude the currently available national alternative providers; staff said only a small number of providers in the U.S. would meet the combined accreditation and faculty criteria immediately. Board members voiced two competing concerns: some wanted strong faculty protections to preserve program quality; others worried that an overly restrictive rule would frustrate the intention expressed by the Legislature to broaden pathways for candidates who already hold college degrees.
The superintendent advised the board to publish the proposed rules for public comment next month without the strict faculty clause and to ask department staff to return with a targeted proposal to address faculty qualifications for programs that do hold CAEP accreditation. Several board members supported that approach so the department and higher education could refine the educators''preparation code in a subsequent review rather than block alternative providers immediately.
Board members and higher-education deans also discussed other elements in the proposed rule package: requirements for an applicant organization to show operations in multiple states, continuous program evaluation, and a process that would let the board''once ALSDE vetting is complete''add an approved provider to a maintained database. The board agreed to place the rule package on the January agenda for a public-comment vote but asked staff to return in the work session with revisions that would (a) remove the strict faculty clause for the public-notice draft and (b) propose a parallel path that treats CAEP-accredited institutions differently if the board later chooses to do so.
Several participants said they are also working on apprenticeship and internship pathways as a potential new route to certification; department staff said those models would require additional guardrails (supervising teacher/mentor requirements, limits on roles a candidate may perform while in training) before being authorized.
