Sam Drysdale
State House News Service
A debate Tuesday over modest teacher licensure changes exposed a bigger concern: Massachusetts still lacks a comprehensive plan to fix educator shortages and diversify its workforce.
After over an hour of discussion, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education opted to delay action on the proposed changes until April, seeking more data and clarity — and signaling unease that the measures in front of them, while potentially useful, fall short of the scale of the problem.
The proposed regulations stem from a 2024 economic development law that authorized the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to create alternative certification pathways. The changes would allow some candidates to waive one of the Massachusetts Tests for Educator Licensure, either by substituting prior experience, advanced degrees, out-of-state credentials or a portfolio demonstrating subject matter competency.
But as the board dug into the details Tuesday, the conversation repeatedly drifted back to whether incremental changes like these are sufficient, and whether the state has yet to articulate a comprehensive strategy to build and diversify its educator pipeline.
"I have so many questions about the scope of the problem we're seeking to solve for," board member Christine Grant said, pressing for clearer definitions of whether the policy is intended to address teacher shortages, workforce diversity, or both. "Is this to diversify our workforce, or this to meet critical hiring? And what's the data that supports it?"
Supporters of the 2024 law, including Rep. Jessica Giannino, argued at the time that traditional testing requirements could be a barrier for otherwise qualified educators, particularly candidates of color and multilingual applicants. "We know that when students have educators that look like them, that they can see themselves succeeding," Giannino said during a June 2024 rally backing the legislation.
Commissioner Pedro Martinez acknowledged that the regulatory changes are limited in scope compared to the broader need.
"This agenda item is part of a larger ongoing commitment to both expand and diversify our educator workforce," he said, pointing to initiatives like teacher apprenticeships and high school-to-teaching pipelines. Still, he cautioned, "this, by itself, is not going to address our challenges we have with finding teachers with special ed, multilingual, bilingual programming. This requires a much bigger initiative."
The 2024 law was passed before Martinez was commissioner.
"When I look at the spirit of that law, I see all these hopes and aspirations and I, again, I'm clearly telling you: This, by itself, is not meant to solve all that. It's going to require a much bigger initiative that, frankly, those of us who have done it in the field understand," he said. "These other components, which are really valid, we have to address as part of a bigger plan. But the law itself, frankly, never even touched it."
Martinez responded that the department is taking steps toward those goals, but added that broader plan hasn't been funded.
"As much as everybody talks about this need, there's been no action behind it," he said. "There was no action behind it, in terms of, there was no money put into it. I mean, think about how much it's talked about. Where is it in any appropriation line?"
He described existing efforts, including teacher apprenticeship pilots, as too small to significantly move the needle. "Frankly, [they] are so tiny, I don't even talk about it publicly," he said.
That acknowledgment appeared to resonate with board members, even as they differed on how to proceed with the regulations in front of them.
Member Martin West urged colleagues to view the proposal as one piece of a larger puzzle, rather than a comprehensive fix.
"I think it's important that, when we come back, one of the things we're going to learn is that if you put some numbers next to these things, how many people may come through, it's going to be very small relative to the scale of the diversity and quality problem," West said. "So I don't think we should expect to be convinced that this is the silver bullet policy. We should actually assess it on its own merits as part of a broader strategy."
West successfully pushed for the addition of a five-year "sunset" provision, which would require the board to revisit the pathways in 2031 with more data — effectively treating them as pilot programs.
Other members echoed the idea that the regulations could still serve a purpose, even if limited.
"So if this is one tool in our toolkit, make it the best tool we can make it," Chair Katherine Craven said.
Member Ericka Fisher added, "We need to expect that this is not the silver bullet. This is one tool in our toolbox, it won't be used often, but when you need it, it works, right? That's what this is."
Fisher said the discussion itself helped clarify expectations.
"We all came in thinking this was solving a certain issue, right? For me, it's accessibility. For others, it may have been diversification. So, getting us all framing it correctly, I think, is a huge accomplishment of today's discussion," she said.
The board briefly considered splitting the proposal into two votes — advancing changes to the communication and literacy test pathway more quickly while delaying the more complex subject matter provisions — but ultimately rejected that approach over concerns it would trigger another public comment period. Schools do much of their hiring in the spring and summer for the following fall's school year.
Instead, members agreed to revisit the full package in April, after receiving additional information from the department.
By the end of the meeting, the debate had moved well beyond regulatory language, exposing an underlying frustration: that while the state has set ambitious goals to diversify and strengthen its educator workforce, board members and officials alike are still searching for the comprehensive plan to achieve them.