Board reviews proposed rules for alternate teacher‑preparation organizations, with testing requirement central to debate
Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts
Subscribe
Summary
Staff outlined proposed administrative rules implementing the legislature’s 2022 authorization for alternate teacher preparation organizations; the department plans to require candidates from alternate providers to meet Alabama assessments or demonstrate a substantially aligned assessment, and to review vendor assessments for equivalency.
The State Board of Education heard staff explain proposed administrative rules to implement the legislature’s authorization allowing alternate teacher‑preparation organizations to operate in Alabama.
Staff said the statute gives non‑degree programs a pathway to certify candidates who already hold a college degree. The department’s draft rule would require alternate providers to document operational history or CAEP accreditation, meet minimum performance and program standards, and — critically — either require candidates to pass Alabama assessments (for content and pedagogy) or to provide an alternate assessment that is substantially aligned with Alabama standards. Staff said the department will review alternate vendor assessments and may contract a third‑party evaluator to determine whether an alternate exam (and its cut score) is equivalent to Alabama’s assessments.
Board members and staff discussed the policy tradeoffs: some alternate providers and their advocates asked the state to accept provider‑issued completion measures without an Alabama‑aligned end‑of‑program assessment; department staff and several legislators expressed concern that accepting such measures without independent alignment reviews could lower preparation standards. Several board members said they support a pathway but emphasized that students deserve an independent verification of teacher candidate knowledge and pedagogy.
Staff listed additional conditions in the draft rule: providers must document successful operation in multiple states or show CAEP accreditation; the department would require program documentation and reserves review authority over alternate assessments and cut‑score equivalency. Staff also said the department expects multiple organizations have expressed interest, including a mix of CAEP‑accredited and non‑accredited providers; exact vendor names and application details were not presented at the work session.
No formal rule adoption occurred at the work session; staff said the rules will return next month for the formal notice of intent and later for adoption under the administrative procedures timetable. Department staff said they will meet with interested providers to review any concerns about assessment equivalency.