The State Board for Educator Certification (SBEC) met Sept. 18–19 in Austin. The meeting agenda primarily focused on work the board must accomplish to implement legislation passed by the 89th Legislature, included discussion of: 

• Continued qualification for the Teacher Incentive Allotment through the National Board Certification program; 
• Updates to 19 TAC Ch. 247, Educator Code of Ethics, and Ch. 249, Discipline Procedures. 
• Program admission requirements for educator preparation programs (EPPs) under 19 TAC Ch. 227, educator preparation standards under 19 TAC Ch. 228, and updating certifications under 19 TAC Ch. 230.

Will National Board Certification continue to be a qualification for TIA? 

The board discussed whether National Board Certification will continue to be a way to qualify for the Teacher Incentive Allotment following the passage of House Bill (HB) 2 by Chairman Brad Buckley (R–Salado) by the 89th Legislature in 2025. Previously, under HB 3 passed by the 2019 Texas Legislature, Nationally Board Certified teachers qualified as “Recognized,” the lowest tier in the Teacher Incentive Allotment program. Following the passage of HB 2 by the Legislature in Spring 2025, SBEC has been charged with deciding if National Board Certification will even continue to be an eligibility pathway for TIA. Currently, approximately 1,400 Texas educators are nationally board certified.  

HB 2 charges SBEC with reviewing the National Board Certification curriculum to ensures it complies with state law, does not use Common Core standards, and does not use “three-cueing” (an approach to teaching literacy that has been banned in Texas). Once SBEC determines whether the National Board curriculum meets those standards, the board will decide whether to renew or revoke the ability of educators to receive a TIA designation through National Board Certification. SBEC must make this decision by December 2026 or the designations will be automatically revoked. The board discussed qualifications for reviewers of the curriculum. The chosen reviewers will review and prepare a report in November 2025, and a subcommittee will be chosen to review the report in December 2025 before presenting findings to the full board. Stay tuned to ATPE’s Teach the Vote for updates as this SBEC work progresses. 

Updates to the Educator Code of Ethics and discipline procedures 

SBEC must reopen 19 TAC Ch. 247 and 249, the Educator Code of Ethics and educator discipline procedures, respectively, in order to implement Senate Bill (SB) 12 by Sen. Brandon Creighton (R–Conroe) and SB 571 by Sen. Paul Bettencourt (R–Houston). The board discussed the two situations that allow for temporary suspension of an educator’s certificate under HB 571: arrest and “imminent threat.” The board is charged with deciding what constitutes an “immediate threat.” SB 571 leaves this vague and open to the board’s interpretation, requiring action only if the alleged offense “presents a risk to the health, safety, or welfare of a student or minor as determined by the board.” Importantly, TEA staff communicated to the board that educators who pose “imminent threat” are subject to that temporary suspension without notice, with a probable cause hearing taking place within 17 days.  

The board was also tasked with deciding whether section 3.9 in Ch. 247, which deals with inappropriate communications from educators, needs clarification following the passage of SB 571. Under SB 571, superintendents are now required to report allegations of misconduct to the Texas Education Agency (TEA) and the State Board of Educator Certification (SBEC) within 48 hours of an incident involving an employee, including failure to maintain “appropriate boundaries” with a student, solicitation of a romantic relationship with a student, and inappropriate communication with a student. The board shared concerns about needing to include communication via apps or other district platforms; whether practicum business partners for students participating in a co-op program are included under the law; and ensuring that administrators are aware and properly trained concerning the new requirements as failure to report is a felony. Member Rex Gore urged caution not to be overly restrictive in defining inappropriate communication and inadvertently create guidelines that could lead to confusion and overreporting. 

The board also discussed clarifying the “appropriate boundaries” standard under section 3.8. The term is currently not defined by SBEC. Member Julia Dvorak expressed interest in using previous discussions from last year, particularly involving the definition of grooming in the educator disciplinary standards, as a guide. She also expressed concern at striking a balance between ensuring due process and proper notice for an accused educator, while also making sure that the board could act swiftly. “We don’t want something bad to happen before we can do something,” Dvorak said. Chair Jean Streepey said she wanted to see more substance and a clear definition added to the section so that there was no confusion.  

Updates to educator preparation program (EPP) requirements due to HB 2 

The board had a lengthy discussion over implementation of the PREP program and allotment as prescribed in HB 2. This will require the board to reopen 19 TAC Ch. 228, which underwent lengthy revisions in 2023 and early 2024. The PREP allotment is intended to help EPPs and districts better train and prepare educators for the classroom through a variety of certification pathways, including traditional and alternative programs as well as programs that include a residency component.. The board discussed recommended requirements for districts and EPPs to qualify for PREP allotment money in each pathway, as well as developing training content and guidelines for standards in each pathway. TEA staff recommended this training content include reading and math academies; training in high-quality instructional materials (HQIM), particularly the state-sponsored Bluebonnet curriculum; and training in discipline and classroom management. The board approved TEA development of training materials for preservice alternative certification candidates, as well as requirements that EPP staff complete required training and certification in order to deliver training content. Finally, the board discussed the timeline and structure for approval of EPPs to offer preparation pathways under the PREP program. 

The board then moved to discussion on 19 TAC Ch. 227, admission requirements for teacher programs. The chapter, like 228, has to be opened to align it with HB 2. The board discussed possibly increasing the GPA requirement for admission to residency programs, which is currently 2.50. Members Andrews, Gore, and Turk-Zaafran indicated they wanted to see the GPA standards raised, while Deputy Commissioner of Educator Support Kelvey Oeser asked members to consider whether GPA was really an indicator of educator performance. Ultimately, board members requested that TEA staff bring them research on the correlation between GPA and teacher quality before they make a decision.  

The last discussion on code updates related to HB 2 concerned updating the certifications offered under 19 TAC Ch. 230. This update is necessary to allow for new certifications created by HB 2, including editing the Educational Aide I certificate requirements to allow high school students under the age of 18 to become certified; codifying the current preparation routes (traditional, residency, and alternative); and establishing a new intern with preservice certificate offered to preservice alternative candidates. This intern certificate will have a two-year validity period and delineate between teacher and non-teacher intern certificates. 

The State Board for Educator Certification is expected to meet again Dec. 4–5.