Advisory group split on plan for cross‑categorical special‑education license; board told more work and visuals are needed
January 23, 2026 | Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board, Agencies, Boards, & Commissions, Executive, Minnesota
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Professional Educator Licensing and Standards Board on Jan. 23 received a draft report from the Special Education Licensure Advisory Group laying out competing options for licensure structure.
"The group is fairly split," Dr. Bailey told the board, summarizing months of meetings and survey work. About half of advisory‑group members favored creating a moderate‑to‑severe cross‑categorical license to streamline licensure; about half preferred retaining the current system. Those who favored no change suggested, if the board nonetheless moved forward, creating two separate moderate‑to‑severe cross‑categorical licenses (for behavioral needs and for developmental needs).
All members, Bailey said, recommended keeping low‑incidence licenses — including deaf/hard of hearing, blind/visually impaired and developmental adaptive physical education — and pulling out the physical and health disabilities license as a standalone area. The group also recommended considering renewal‑time, specialized training requirements for teachers in any newly created cross‑categorical areas, which would likely require legislative and rulemaking steps.
Board members asked detailed questions about feasibility. Ms. Ajo and others asked whether higher education and alternative preparation providers could pivot to offer new programs; Bailey said the advisory group included higher‑ed and alternative prep representatives and that program development would likely take several years. Several members requested a visual mapping that shows which existing licenses would fold into any new cross‑categorical license and which would remain separate.
Dr. Bailey cautioned that evidence is limited on whether such a licensure change would address shortages or retention; other states the group examined did not provide clear data on that point. The advisory group will meet again in February and present a final recommendation to the board next month.
Provenance: presentation and Q&A recorded in meeting transcript.
"The group is fairly split," Dr. Bailey told the board, summarizing months of meetings and survey work. About half of advisory‑group members favored creating a moderate‑to‑severe cross‑categorical license to streamline licensure; about half preferred retaining the current system. Those who favored no change suggested, if the board nonetheless moved forward, creating two separate moderate‑to‑severe cross‑categorical licenses (for behavioral needs and for developmental needs).
All members, Bailey said, recommended keeping low‑incidence licenses — including deaf/hard of hearing, blind/visually impaired and developmental adaptive physical education — and pulling out the physical and health disabilities license as a standalone area. The group also recommended considering renewal‑time, specialized training requirements for teachers in any newly created cross‑categorical areas, which would likely require legislative and rulemaking steps.
Board members asked detailed questions about feasibility. Ms. Ajo and others asked whether higher education and alternative preparation providers could pivot to offer new programs; Bailey said the advisory group included higher‑ed and alternative prep representatives and that program development would likely take several years. Several members requested a visual mapping that shows which existing licenses would fold into any new cross‑categorical license and which would remain separate.
Dr. Bailey cautioned that evidence is limited on whether such a licensure change would address shortages or retention; other states the group examined did not provide clear data on that point. The advisory group will meet again in February and present a final recommendation to the board next month.
Provenance: presentation and Q&A recorded in meeting transcript.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
