Provisional and Emergency Licensure: Arkansas
Hiring Policy
Analysis of Arkansas's policies
Emergency License(s) Availability: Arkansas authorizes the use of an emergency teaching permit by a nonlicensed teacher and waivers from licensure rules by request of a district. Persons teaching under either of these license exceptions must meet the state's Qualified Teacher Requirements. To meet the Qualified Teacher Requirements, an applicant must have a bachelor's degree or higher and one of the following: the degree is in the content area to be taught, passage of a content area assessment, National Board Certification, documentation of relevant work experience, or a bachelor's or advanced degree with at least 18 credit hours in the content area to be taught.
Arkansas also authorizes the state board to issue provisional licenses.
Additional Licensure Plan (ALP): A teacher with a standard license can teach out-of-field on an Additional Licensure Plan. The ALP is issued by the Arkansas Department of Education.
Traditional Preparation Route Candidates: A provisional license can be issued to a candidate who has completed all licensure requirements (including passage of content tests) except for: completed coursework in Arkansas history, passage of a pedagogy test, or, if applicable, passage of a reading test.
Emergency License Validity Period: The emergency teaching permit is valid for the school year in which it is issued, but may be extended for one additional school year with approval from the Arkansas Department of Education. Waivers from licensure rules or laws shall not be granted for more than five years.
Provisional licenses for traditional route candidates are issued for one year and are nonrenewable.
An ALP is valid for three years and is not renewable. If the ALP is issued for testing out of a content area, the teacher must attempt the content test during the first year. If the content test isn't passed, the teacher must complete six semester hours toward the new endorsement area each year until the content test is passed.
COVID-19 State Policy: Arkansas has implemented the following changes to its rules regarding Provisional and Emergency Licensure. Institutions of higher education will recommend candidates from their educator preparation programs for licensure. In the event that a graduate is missing one or more required components for a standard license, the DESE will exercise options to issue a Provisional License or an Emergency Teaching Permit as applicable. Additional Licensure Plans (ALP), Administrator Licensure Completion Plans (ALCP), Emergency Teaching Permits (ETP), and Long-Term-Substitute (LTS) will be approved or denied on a case-by-case basis using maximum flexibility due to COVID-19. Current documentation procedures still apply. COVID-19 policies do not
affect the state's grade in
Provisional and Emergency Licensure.
Requirements for Out-of-State Teachers: Because licensure requirements for out-of-state teachers are scored in Requirements for Out-of-State Teachers, only the state's policies regarding emergency/provisional
license(s) are considered as part of this goal.
Recommendations for Arkansas
Ensure that all teachers pass required subject-matter licensing tests before they enter the classroom.
All students are entitled to teachers who know the subject matter they are teaching. Permitting individuals who have not yet passed state licensing tests to teach neglects the needs of students, because it enables adults who may not be able to meet minimal state standards to earn teaching licenses. Arkansas should ensure that all teachers are required to pass licensing tests — an important minimum benchmark for entering the profession — before entering the classroom as the teacher of record.
Limit exceptions to one year.
Although suboptimal, there may be limited and exceptional circumstances under which conditional or emergency licenses are necessary. In these instances, it is reasonable for a state to give teachers up to one year to pass required licensing tests. Arkansas's current policy puts students at risk by allowing teachers to teach on emergency certificates up to three years without passing required subject-matter licensing tests.
State response to our analysis
Arkansas recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.
Updated: March 2021
-
Arkansas
Select another topic
Teacher Preparation
- Program Entry
- Teacher Shortages and Surpluses
- Program Performance Measures
- Program Reporting Requirements
- Student Teaching/Clinical Practice
Elementary Teacher Preparation
Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Middle School Content Knowledge
- Middle School Licensure Requirements
- Secondary Content Knowledge
- Secondary Licensure Requirements
Special Education Teacher Preparation
Alternate Routes
Teacher Diversity
Hiring
Teacher and Principal Evaluation
Teacher Compensation
Early Childhood Preparation
Retaining Effective Teachers
How we graded
6B: Provisional and Emergency Licensure
- Content knowledge: The state:
- Should not, under any circumstance, award a license to a teacher who has not passed all required content licensing tests.
- If it finds it necessary to confer emergency or provisional licenses to teachers who have not passed the required licensing tests, should do so only under limited and exceptional circumstances and ensure that all requirements are met within one year.
The total goal score is earned based on the following:
- Full credit: The state will earn full credit if all new teachers are required to pass each required content test as a condition of receiving provisional or emergency licensure, or the state does not issue emergency or provisional licenses. A state cannot get full credit in this goal if content tests are not required as part of its initial licensure policy.
- Three-quarters credit: The state will earn three-quarters of a point if it grants emergency or provisional licenses to teachers who have not passed the required content tests, but such licenses are granted for no more than one year and are not renewable. OR The state will earn three-quarters of a point if it grants an emergency or provisional license to a licensed teacher to teach out-of-field for no more than one-year without passing the applicable content test.
- One-half credit: The state will earn up to one-half of a point if it allows for emergency or provisional licenses to be granted for longer than one year, but the state has strong requirements for applicants (e.g., content area major or preparation program completion without requiring a content test). The state will also earn one-half of a point if the state does not issue emergency/provisional licenses, or issues emergency/provisional licenses with strong requirements, but content tests are not required as part of the state's overall initial licensure policy.
- One-quarter credit: The state will earn one-quarter of a point if it maintains minimum requirements that fall short of the requirements listed above or only offers emergency or provisional licenses to teachers under "extenuating circumstances."
Research rationale
Teachers who have not passed content licensing tests place students at risk. While states may need a regulatory basis for filling classroom positions with a few people who do not hold full teaching credentials, many of the regulations permitting this put the instructional needs of children at risk, often year after year.[1] For example, schools can make liberal use of provisional certificates or waivers provided by the state if they fill classroom positions with instructors who have completed a teacher preparation program but have not passed their state licensing tests. These allowances are permitted for up to three years in some states. The unfortunate consequence is that students' needs are neglected in an effort to extend personal consideration to adults who cannot meet minimum state standards.[2]
While some flexibility may be necessary because licensing tests are not always administered with the needed frequency, making provisional certificates and waivers available year after year could signal that the state does not put much value on its licensing standards or what they represent. States accordingly need to ensure that all persons given full charge of children's learning are required to pass the relevant licensing tests in their first year of teaching, ideally before they enter the classroom. Licensing tests are an important minimum benchmark in the profession, and states that allow teachers to postpone passing these tests are abandoning one of the basic responsibilities of licensure.
[1] Research often finds a correlation between teachers' content knowledge and their effectiveness. For how this effect can play out in elementary ELA, see: Carlisle, J. F., Correnti, R., Phelps, G., & Zeng, J. (2009). Exploration of the contribution of teachers' knowledge about reading to their students' improvement in reading. Reading and Writing, 22(4), 457-486.; For how this effect can occur in secondary STEM subjects, see: Monk, D. (1994). Subject-area preparation of secondary mathematics and science teachers and student achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2), 125-145; For broader information about teacher qualities and student achievement, see: Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1997). Why don't schools and teachers seem to matter? Assessing the impact of unobservables on educational productivity. Journal of Human Research, 32(3), 505-523.; National Council on Teacher Quality. (2010). The all-purpose science teacher: An analysis of loopholes in state requirements for high school science teachers. Retrieved from http://www.nctq.org/p/publications/docs/NCTQ_All_Purpose_Science_Teacher.pdf.
[2] Research has shown that "the difference in student performance in a single academic year from having a good as opposed to a bad teacher can be more than one full year of standardized achievement." See: Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84-117.; Hanushek has also found that highly effective teachers can improve future student earnings by more than $400,000, assuming a class size of 20. Hanushek, E. A. (2011). The economic value of higher teacher quality. Economics of Education Review, 30(3), 466-479. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w16606