Texas Education Agency Commissioner Mike Morath told the House Committee on Public Education on March 1 that Texas has seen a sharp rise in first‑year teachers who lack state certification and that trend is linked to lower student performance and higher adult turnover.

Morath said the state currently hires roughly 50,000 new teachers each year and “about 20,000 of those are rehires,” but that of the roughly 30,000 new‑to‑teaching hires each year a growing majority are working without certification. “We have in the last 3 years gone almost entirely to hiring uncertified teachers,” Morath said.

The commissioner and several lawmakers framed that shift as a policy and operational concern. Morath said campuses with larger shares of uncertified teachers tend to have weaker performance: he cited data showing campuses in the F range averaged 15.9% uncertified teachers while A campuses averaged 4.7% uncertified teachers. He added that uncertified teachers “quit at much more frequent rates,” which drives local turnover and staffing instability.

Why it matters

Morath and members emphasized that teacher quality is the most important in‑school factor affecting student outcomes, and widespread reliance on uncertified hires increases the risk of learning loss and higher classroom instability. The committee sought specifics about the certification process and costs, and whether districts or the state are helping teachers become certified.

Details and context

- Cost and time to certify: Morath said the least expensive pathways (online/asynchronous programs) run about $4,000 and a residency can cost closer to $20,000 when accounting for lost earnings during a paid training year. He told the committee an uncertified teacher might effectively pay “$5,000 essentially to take a $5,000 pay cut for a year.”

- Preparation versus certification: Morath stressed the difference between ‘‘preparation’’ (classroom training and readiness) and statutory certification. He told the committee that the state does little to directly fund teacher preparation programs and that certification alone is not equivalent to an adequate preparation pipeline.

- Student attendance and outcomes: Morath said his office’s appendix shows a measurable difference in student outcomes and attendance tied to teacher preparation status; he cited a finding that students with new certified teachers had an average absence rate of 5.5% while students with new uncertified teachers had an average absence rate of 6.5%.

- Scale: Morath reported the overall teaching workforce is about 371,000 full‑time equivalent teachers (roughly 385,000 people) and that the portion of employed teachers who are uncertified is now about 11% statewide. He said the state hires roughly 30,000 teachers new to the profession each year (about 50,000 new hires when rehires are counted).

Lawmakers’ questions and concerns

Committee members pressed for: an inflation‑adjusted look at teacher pay, clarity on which parts of teacher pay are base versus stipends, and deeper data on student outcomes tied to different preparation pathways. Rep. Leach and others asked how uncertified teachers become certified and whether the state or districts provide incentives to offset the out‑of‑pocket cost and lost earnings; Morath said some districts invest local funds but not consistently statewide.

What the TEA proposed or offered

Morath suggested the legislature consider targeted funding or administrative support to expand high‑quality residency and re‑certification supports and to fund district capacity to run fair evaluation systems (an issue also tied to Teacher Incentive Allotment discussions). He said the agency can provide detailed county‑ and district‑level data on certification and turnover at lawmakers’ request.

Ending

Lawmakers left the hearing with a shared sense that the supply of prepared, certified teachers is a pressing policy problem for Texas schools. Committee members signaled interest in bills and budget options to expand supported preparation pathways and to incentivize certification, while seeking more granular data on outcomes and local practice before drafting statutory changes.