UNLV-backed pilot would let alternative assessment supplement Praxis for new Nevada teachers; sponsors and unions back bill

Assemblymember Selena Torres Fawcett presented Assembly Bill 286, the "Teaching Beyond Testing Act," proposing a pilot to assess teacher candidates through alternative, performance‑based methods and structured mentorship.

The presenters—Dean Danica Hayes and Associate Dean Kenneth (Kenny) Varner of the UNLV College of Education—said the pilot aims to supplement, not simply replace, existing licensure mechanisms by aligning assessments with the Nevada Educator Performance Framework (NEPF) and embedding a sustained mentorship model to support early‑career teachers. They said Praxis Principles of Learning and Teaching (PLT) tests depend heavily on multiple‑choice test‑taking skills and can present barriers for candidates who otherwise demonstrate classroom competence.

UNLV’s proposal described a structured program including a trained mentor for each candidate, roughly 10 professional‑development sessions focused on instruction, classroom management, assessment and culturally responsive practice, and performance artifacts such as observed lessons and student work samples. Varner said the pilot would limit scale to preserve data quality—“up to 100 participants per year”–and aim for geographic and licensure‑area diversity. UNLV also proposed mentor training, mentors with at least three years of “highly effective” NEPF ratings, and tuition support for mentors who complete a master’s in teacher leadership.

Support came from a range of education stakeholders. The Nevada State Education Association, Nevada System of Higher Education, Nevada State University, the Nevada Association of School Superintendents and the Charter School Association of Nevada testified in favor, saying the pilot could remove unnecessary barriers and strengthen recruitment and retention. Several institutions said they would consider participating; the Assembly sponsor added the amendment was revised to permit any NSHE institution to run a pilot rather than limiting it to UNLV and to remove a direct appropriation from the bill text.

Opposition testimony, including a public commenter who also spoke against AB212, argued the bill would lower licensing standards and risk political or subjective hiring; that critic urged lawmakers to prioritize teacher pay and hiring instead of funding a pilot. The sponsor and university presenters said the pilot is evidence‑focused and intended to produce data for further legislative consideration; they described annual reporting requirements to the Legislature, the State Board of Education and the Commission on Professional Standards.

Committee members questioned scale, eligibility and whether the Praxis requirement remained; that point produced different explanations in the record. Varner and other presenters described Section 1 as written to authorize an exemption from the basic competency test requirement for pilot participants, while later remarks from the sponsor stated the bill does not remove the Praxis requirement and that mentors and program structure—not a testing waiver—are central. The transcript therefore records both descriptions; the committee did not take an action resolving the difference during the hearing.

The bill’s amended language (as discussed during testimony) extends the pilot’s availability through June 2029 and requires annual reports and performance data. The amendment removed a state appropriation from the bill text, making participation permissive for NSHE institutions that choose to stand up the program. No committee vote occurred during the hearing; the sponsor urged support and said the pilot is intended to generate data to determine whether the approach should expand.