Earlier this summer a bill was introduced
in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives by Representative Kristin Hill
(R-93) that, if enacted, would lead to new Instructional certification grade
bands in Pennsylvania. Rep. Hill’s sponsorship memorandum indicates the following about her bill:
Specifically,
my legislation would create the following certification levels for new
teachers:
· Early
childhood: pre-kindergarten, kindergarten, grades 1 though 4 or ages 3 through
9;
· Elementary:
kindergarten, grades 1 through 6 or ages 4 through 11;
· Middle:
grades 6 through 9 or ages 11 through 15;
· Secondary:
grades 7 through 12 or ages 11 through 21;
· Specialized
areas: pre-kindergarten through grade 12 or up to ages 21; and
·
Special education: pre-kindergarten
through grade 12 or up to age 21.
The bill stipulates that
certifications issued under current regulation would remain valid for the term
of those certificates, but that PDE would be obligated to develop pathways for
teachers holding those credentials to earn certification in the new grade bands
in the event they wanted to do so.
Language in the bill that is
not mentioned in the sponsorship memo involves what is essentially a repeal of
language in Chap. 49 requiring that applicants for certification in special
education (PK-8 or 7-12) must also obtain certification in another
certification area, such as PK-4 or a 7-12 content area. From the bill:
(6) Special education
- prekindergarten through grade twelve (12) or up to age twenty-one (21). An
additional content area shall not be required for a special education
certificate issued in accordance with this section.
HB 1386 is currently sitting
with the House Education Committee.
According to the House calendar, this committee has no meetings or
hearings scheduled at this time.
The PAC-TE Government
Relations Committee met on August 1, 2017 to discuss the bill and decide if it
is one on which we might want to take a position as an organization.
Since we were not able to come to consensus on that question, we decided to solicit input and opinions from the PAC-TE membership. We will use your input to develop a statement we would (potentially) share with the House Education Committee for their information and use as they consider the bill.
Since we were not able to come to consensus on that question, we decided to solicit input and opinions from the PAC-TE membership. We will use your input to develop a statement we would (potentially) share with the House Education Committee for their information and use as they consider the bill.
Please take a look at the
sponsorship memo and the bill linked above (the bill itself is quite short) and
provide us with your feedback using the following questions as a guide.
1.
What is your
initial opinion on the reorganization of the certification grade bands?
2.
The proposed
grade bands overlap each other. Does
this overlap make sense to you? Why or
why not? For example, will PK-4 and K-6
overlap too much? Does the slight shift
from 4-8 to 6-9 make sense?
3.
In your opinion
will the new grade bands serve the needs of our PK-12 partners? Why or why not?
4.
Do you agree with the requirement that special education revert back to a stand
alone certification (i.e., does not require previous or simultaneous
certification in another area such as PK-4, 4-8, or a secondary content area)?
5.
What other
thoughts and opinions do you wish to share?
Please provide your feedback
to these questions or general opinions about the bill in the comments section below no later than Friday,
September 1, 2017. Please include your
name, title, and institution. We will not
share this information beyond our organization without your express
permission. If you wish to follow the
feedback of others, please check back there from time-to-time.
Thanks so much,
George Drake
PAC-TE President-Elect and
Chair of Government Relations