Maryland education board withholds publication of proposed summary‑suspension regulation and moves forward on licensing updates with limited carve‑out

After lunch the board took up proposed regulatory changes to the educator‑licensure and disciplinary chapters of COMAR, and discussed statutory changes from Senate Bill 771 that affect exit requirements for educator‑preparation programs.

Disciplinary regulation and summary suspensions

MSDE staff presented proposed language to add a summary‑suspension procedure under COMAR 13A.12, citing state government authority to act when a licensee presents an imminent risk to health, safety or welfare. Legal counsel and multiple board members debated whether codifying a regulatory definition (including the legal term "moral turpitude") would undermine due process or invite broader use than the statute intended. Several board members warned that defining loosely framed legal terms for the education context could create ambiguity in enforcement and invite litigation.

After discussion the board considered a motion "not to publish" the proposed section 13A.12.0.6 (the summary‑suspension language). The motion was seconded and carried; the board therefore withheld publication of that particular regulation. The board recorded that the statutory authority (State Government §10‑226(c)(2)) already exists but members preferred to avoid adding a new regulatory definition at this time rather than create potential ambiguity in practice.

Licensure/regulatory packet: permission to publish with carve‑out

Staff reviewed a large set of technical and substantive amendments across educator‑licensure regulations (terminology updates from "certification" to "licensure," corrections to citations, military reciprocity language, reinstatement/exemptions clarifications, and other edits). The board approved a motion to grant permission to publish the licensure package (COMAR 13A.12) but explicitly removed section 0.03 (pages 10–12) from the publication request for additional consideration. The packet will be published with that exclusion and the department will proceed with standard public‑comment procedures for the remainder.

Special‑education 3‑credit requirement: options and next steps

The board discussed a staff memorandum presenting four options to address concerns that the new 3‑credit special‑education requirement for specialists and administrators could limit hiring (notably school social workers and out‑of‑state candidates). The options were: (1) take no action; (2) remove the 3‑credit requirement at initial licensure; (3) move the 3‑credit requirement to first renewal; or (4) open the temporary professional license to specialists/administrators for a two‑year nonrenewable period while the coursework is completed.

Members asked for more stakeholder input and noted the Blueprint special‑education work group’s interim report due in July. The board directed members and staff to collect questions and concerns, and the chair agreed to seek a meeting with the work group before its May 29 session if possible; if not, the board will return to the issue at its June meeting. Board members expressed a preference for a cautious, collaborative approach that avoids placing abrupt hiring burdens on local districts.

SB 771 and educator‑preparation exit requirements

Staff briefed the board on Senate Bill 771 (recently signed), which gives candidates beginning 07/01/2025 the option to meet exit requirements by completing either (a) a nationally recognized, nationally scored portfolio assessment approved by the State Board (currently edTPA or PPAT) OR (b) a rigorous local LEA induction program that includes an InTASC‑aligned portfolio component and is approved by MSDE. Members raised concerns about equity and cost (edTPA/PPAT expense), what pathways EPPs must offer, and how LEA–EPP partnerships will be governed; staff said guidance and approval rubrics will be needed and committed to returning with regulatory transmittal language and implementation details.

Next steps

The board asked staff to collect written concerns about the special‑education coursework requirement (email subject line: "special education work group"), to attempt a chair‑level meeting with the Blueprint work group before May 29, and to bring updated materials and a transmittal memo to the June meeting. The department will publish the licensure packet minus section 0.03 and will not publish the proposed summary‑suspension regulation at this time.