North Dakota House passes bill to shorten time for educators to attain lifetime licensure
Jan. 27—BISMARCK — A bill that would reduce the time it takes for a North Dakota teacher to earn a lifetime educator license passed through the House by a substantial margin Friday, Jan. 24.
Representatives voted 79-12 to advance
House Bill 1238,
sponsored in part by Rep. Zachary Ista, D-Grand Forks.
The House Education Committee unanimously recommended the bill for passage Thursday, though the bill received mixed reviews among education circles during a hearing Tuesday.
The bill would make a teacher eligible for a lifetime license when reaching 20 years in their career, instead of the current 30-year mark.
Anyone with a lifetime license who intends to keep teaching shall report to the state's licensing agency, the Education Standards and Practices Board, at least once every five years, the bill states.
Reporting could include any crime a teacher committed or other behavior that could lead to license revocation or suspension.
Nothing in the bill would prevent the board from taking its own action against a teacher's lifetime license, if warranted.
The bill is a holdover from the last legislative session, Ista said, during which it received widespread support in the House but failed on a tie vote in the Senate, with one member absent.
One thing that is different this time is the reporting element, he said, which was a sticking point last time with ESPB.
Much of the support for HB 1238 comes in the name of improving recruitment and retention of teachers.
Ista said the bill would reduce continuing education expenses for teachers, estimating the average educator could save up to $1,000 in out-of-pocket expenses.
Also testifying in support Tuesday was Nick Archuleta, president of North Dakota United, the union representing public education and public services employees in the state.
Archuleta said some opponents maintain the bill would cause teachers to stop taking educational credits they might otherwise have earned.
"Not only is that argument a slight to the professionalism of teachers, it also discounts entirely the fact that teachers ... have to take coursework to make lane changes and advance on the salary schedule," he said.
Testifying in opposition of House Bill 1238 were representatives from the state Education Standards and Practices Board.
Executive Director Rebecca Pitkin said most states require continuing education for license renewal.
"Teachers are the model of lifelong learning. Ongoing education, potentially until almost the end of a career, is critical," she said.
Pitkin also said reducing ongoing education requirements for teachers would not promote the profession.
Cory Steiner, ESPB chair and superintendent of the Northern Cass School District, agreed.
"There could be unintended consequences, seeing education as 'less than' other fields, where it should be equal to or more than," he said.
Pitkin said there are currently around 18,000 licensed educators in the state system, with around 10,000 of them currently working.
Providing neutral testimony was Ann Ellefson, director of academic support at the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction.
Ellefson said the state's teachers have easy access to an online educational hub offering professional development, training opportunities and educator resources.
Many of the courses are no cost or low cost across all North Dakota zip codes, she said, while some do charge a nominal $40 fee at registration.
There are 557 active users taking part in 68 courses that include child nutrition, North Dakota Native American studies, science of reading, mathematics and educator ethics, Ellefson said.
On the House floor Friday, Rep. LaurieBeth Hager, a Fargo Democrat and cosponsor of the bill, said the legislation would reduce red tape for teachers.
Rep. Pat Heinert, R-Bismarck, said Friday the goal of the bill is to keep teachers in the profession.
Further action on the bill was not scheduled as of Friday.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
18 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump's $1,000-per-baby investment accounts: What to know
President Trump has lauded the House-approved spending bill for the 'pro-family initiative' tucked inside the legislation, which creates investment accounts for newborn babies. 'They'll really be getting a big jump on life, especially if we get a little bit lucky with some of the numbers and the economy,' Trump said at a Monday event at the White House that touted the accounts. The 'Big, Beautiful Bill' lays out rules for the Trump accounts. To qualify, a child must be a U.S. citizen, born within the next four years to at least one parent with a Social Security number. The money could be withdrawn starting at age 18. Here's what you need to know about the proposed federal program: Under the current bill text, the program would be available to families of all income levels, with babies born after Dec. 31, 2024, and before Jan. 1, 2029. A one-time $1,000 contribution would be provided by the Treasury Department and deposited into a diversified U.S. stock index fund or its equivalent. Families, guardians and private entities will be able to contribute no more than $5,000 per year to the account. An estimated 7 percent return on the $1,000 would compound to roughly $3,570 over 18 years, according to the Associated Press. The legislation does not provide a limit on the amount of money a nonprofit or company can donate to a child's investment account within the $5,000 annual contribution limit. Several businesses, including Uber, Dell, Goldman Sachs and Altimeter have committed to setting aside billions to invest in the accounts of company employees who become new parents. 'It's not just an account; it's a launchpad. It puts the unstoppable engine of compounding to work for our kids, building a future for them from day one,' Uber CEO Dara Khosrowshahi said about the initiative during a White House roundtable. Children enrolled in the investment program are eligible to withdraw half of the cash value amount between their 18th and 25th birthdays, according to CNN. Families and beneficiaries would pay a penalty for early withdrawal as there is no allowance for emergency use of the funds, the outlet reported. Funds withdrawn for anything other than 'qualified expenses,' including paying for higher education, buying a residence or starting a business, will be taxed. Researchers have said the investment accounts could widen America's wealth gap. 'Under the current proposal, every child starts with the same amount, and families can contribute up to $5,000 annually,' the Urban Institute, a think-tank focused on social policy, wrote in a late May report. 'But relatively few households hold substantial liquid wealth in the United States, meaning higher-income households are far more likely than their lower-income counterparts to have the means to contribute additional funds,' it continued. The study noted that Trump accounts are likely to only benefit those who have already maxed out existing tax-preferred savings opportunities, like 529 accounts. Instead, they suggested low income families with job insecurity are more likely to gravitate towards investing in traditional accounts that offer flexible guidelines. Trump's 'One Big, Beautiful Bill' still needs approval from the upper chamber. Senators considering potential changes or cuts to the legislation, hoping to pass the bill before July 4.
The Hill
28 minutes ago
- The Hill
Hegseth filibusters on cost of Trump's Los Angeles deployments
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday declined to discuss the expected cost of deploying National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles to suppress immigration raid protests, instead attacking Democratic leaders for their handling of current and previous incidents of civil unrest. Rep. Betty McCollum (D-Minn.), House Appropriations defense subcommittee ranking member, asked Hegseth about funding the deployment of the National Guard and Marines to Los Angeles. He instead defended Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as having 'the right to safely conduct operations in any state and any jurisdiction in the country.' He also referenced the George Floyd murder protests in 2020 in Minneapolis, attacking Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (D) for his actions at that time and arguing that the National Guard was 'eventually far too late mobilized.' 'President Trump recognizes a situation like that, improperly handled by a governor, like it was by Governor Walz, if it gets out of control, it's a bad situation for the citizens,' Hegseth said. The answer prompted McCollum to interrupt him to press him to address her original question. 'Chairman, I have limited time, I asked a budget question,' McCollum interjected. McCollum also asked Hegseth whether any trainings were being pushed off due to the troop deployment, but grew frustrated at his lack of answer. 'I will yield back my time if the secretary refuses to answer the budgetary questions I put before him. They're important,' she said. 'What training missions aren't happening? Where are you pulling the money from? And how are you planning this moving forward? These are budget questions that affect this committee and the decisions we're going to be making in a couple of hours.' Hegseth only replied that the Pentagon has the funding 'to cover down on contingencies, especially ones as important as maintaining law and order in major American city.' In her opening remarks, McCollum criticized President Trump's decision to call in some 4,000 California National Guard troops as 'premature,' and the decision to deploy 700 active duty Marines as 'downright escalatory.' 'I ask you Mr. Secretary, and I ask the president, follow the law,' she said.
Yahoo
43 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NextEra CEO says renewables needed as bridge to expanding gas power
By Valerie Volcovici WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Renewable energy sources like wind and solar power are needed to meet rapidly growing energy demand in the United States amid near-term obstacles to increasing natural gas capacity, said NextEra CEO John Ketchum on Tuesday. The head of the Florida-based power producer said at the Politico Energy Summit that competition and high costs to obtain gas turbines, a construction labor shortage, and the costs associated with tariffs mean that it will take at least seven years to get new gas-fired power plants online. "We need a bridge to get ourselves to 2032 when that gas shows up ... And when that gas shows up, it's going be three times more expensive than it's ever been," Ketchum said. "If we take renewables off the table, we are going to have a real power shortage problem in this country." U.S. House lawmakers narrowly passed a budget reconciliation bill last month that would phase out clean energy tax credits, slash spending on renewables, and claw back other climate-related funds. The House bill, which is now being debated by the Senate, shortens the window for developers to start and complete new clean energy projects to qualify for tax credits, and makes the incentives unworkable, Ketchum said. Ketchum's comments reverse an oft-repeated defense of natural gas in the fossil fuel industry during previous administrations seeking to fight climate change that had framed the fuel as a bridge to a renewables-driven carbon-free energy system. Trump opposes renewable energy subsidies and wants to expand production of oil, gas and coal. He has also declared an "energy emergency" to spur more fuel and electricity production, in part to meet growing demand for power for data centers and artificial intelligence. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
