Committee declines to approve Allcott Learning educator-prep program, sends application back for revisions

The Law and Licensing Committee of the Utah State Board of Education voted against approving Allcott Learning as an educator preparation program after extended questioning about whether the for‑profit applicant fits the board’s rule and about proposed clinical placements.

Allcott Learning representatives said they use a competency-based model and had received interest from charter school leaders and districts. Liz Quist, the applicant’s lead presenter, told the committee the proposal was designed to “help rural schools” and to offer administrative support to programs that struggle with Apple requirements. Josh Black, a co-presenter, said the group had prepared an extensive internal clinical-experience manual they could share with staff.

Staff and several board members said the application raised two discrete problems documented in staff’s denial: (1) the applicant’s lack of an established association with an institution of higher education, LEA or an existing consortium as contemplated in board rule R277-303, and (2) plans to place candidates in nontraditional or multistate clinical experiences that may not meet rule requirements limiting clinical placements to preK–12 classroom settings. Coordinator Lisa McLaughlin told the committee staff denied the application on those grounds and recommended an appeal to the full board if the applicant believed staff erred.

Vice Chair Bollinger and others pressed the applicants on verification and mentor requirements, including a rule that mentors hold a professional license and typically must have held it for three years. The applicants said they would verify credentials and were willing to “deprioritize” nontraditional or out‑of‑state placements to align with staff expectations.

Chair called for a motion to approve the application, which failed on a roll call vote. Member Longacre then moved to continue the item to the committee’s September meeting and invited the applicant to revise its application to address the concerns raised; the committee approved the continuance. The matter will go to the full board after committee reconsideration.