TCTA testifies on teacher prep issues, disciplinary sanctions at SBEC meeting

The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) met Dec. 4-5 to discuss implementation of legislation from the 89th Texas Legislative Session. 

Teacher prep programs

Much of the Board's work in the past few meetings has been driven by significant changes to the state’s teacher preparation framework. House Bill 2, the wide-ranging education bill from 2025, includes stricter requirements on how long an uncertified teacher may teach before obtaining certification, investments in different teacher preparation pipelines, and some changes to the classes of certificates available to educators.

SBEC’s most time-consuming responsibility has been determining the rules for those new investments in teacher preparation. The new program is called the Preparing and Retaining Educators through Partnership program. PREP provides financial resources for different aspects of teacher preparation, including Grow Your Own programs that support non-teachers who already work in schools looking to make the jump to teaching, pre-service programs like universities and alternative certification programs that train new teachers, and teacher mentors who support novice teachers in their first few years in the classroom.

TCTA testified on rules regarding the mentorship allotment to ensure that teachers cannot be assigned to a mentorship role without their agreement. 

Teacher disciplinary sanctions

Two other bills require SBEC rulemaking: SB 12 and SB 571. 

SB 12 allows SBEC to issue sanctions if a school district employee attempts to encourage or coerce a child to withhold information from the child’s parent.

SB 571 creates the Temporary Suspension Committee within SBEC. The committee is charged with issuing temporary suspensions of educators’ certificates in certain circumstances. 

SBEC is charged with creating rules that incorporate these statutory changes and is also charged with investigating complaints in response to new reporting requirements imposed on school districts by SB 571. 

Typically, if there is a complaint against an educator, TEA investigates whether the complaint is credible or not and, if it is found to be credible, begins proceedings in administrative court. After the court proceedings conclude, SBEC makes the final decision on whether or not to sanction the educator’s certificate based on information from the proceedings. 

SB 571 reverses the order of a typical investigation if an educator is arrested for certain violent or sexual crimes or if they are determined to be an “imminent threat to the public welfare,” a term that SBEC will define in a future meeting. In these cases, the Temporary Suspension Committee votes on whether to temporarily suspend the educator’s certificate while the remainder of the process is carried out.

In recent years, the volume of complaints against educators has significantly increased and the TEA investigations division has experienced staffing difficulties, resulting in an ever-growing backlog of cases that can take years to resolve. TEA follows a prioritization procedure to determine which cases need to be investigated first, and this can result in some cases being pushed to the bottom of the pile again and again.

TCTA testified to the State Board of Educator Certification that it is concerned about the length of time it is taking to investigate and resolve complaints. Long investigation times harm teachers who have not been found to have engaged in misconduct but are labeled as “under investigation” while cases are reviewed. These teachers may experience difficulties when renewing certificates or seeking new employment. While the staffing conditions at TEA may remedy themselves in time, these years-long investigations have a tangible effect on educators now.

TCTA also testified on how SBEC will define “imminent threat" in determining which cases will be presented to the Temporary Suspension Committee. Given the lengthy investigative timelines, TCTA encouraged the board to adopt a maximum time limit on an imminent threat determination after which point the case would be relegated to the typical investigation process instead. 

These rules will be voted on at the next SBEC meeting in February. TCTA will continue to monitor the implementation of these rules to ensure they offer appropriate due process protections to educators.