When the pandemic closed schools across the country in 2020, testing centers closed too—making it impossible for future teachers to take licensure tests and become fully certified. So the overwhelming majority of states took action, waiving portions of their licensure requirements and even creating or expanding existing emergency licensure policies.
While early studies suggested that teachers with emergency licenses were just as effective as teachers with other licenses, newer research has raised concerns about the impact of these less rigorous licenses on the teacher workforce and student achievement.
The first wave of research suggested all was well. An early 2024 analysis, based on data reflecting the impact of the first cohort of newly hired emergency licensed teachers (ELTs) in Massachusetts, found that 82% of newly hired ELTs received proficient evaluation ratings, which is in line with other new teachers, and achieved similar student test growth to their peers with provisional and initial licenses. A similar study in New Jersey echoes these findings. There, researchers discovered that, relative to the novice teacher workforce pre-pandemic, temporarily certified teachers were significantly more racially diverse, and these teachers had no notable differences in performance ratings or student achievement.
So is it time to do away with licensure altogether? Hold that thought.
In the earlier Massachusetts study, researchers only used data from the 2021–22 school year on ELTs in their first year of teaching, before subsequent cohorts of teachers entered the classroom on such licenses; while in New Jersey, researchers were limited to a sample of just under 230 teachers.
New research from Ben Backes, James Cowan, Dan Goldhaber, and Roddy Theobald of CALDER examines data on multiple cohorts of teachers who entered Massachusetts' classrooms on emergency licenses between 2021 and 2023, painting a more accurate—and sobering—picture of ELT effectiveness.
Including these new cohorts, researchers found stark differences: Students of ELTs scored significantly lower on math and science assessments than other students in the same school and same year—a direct conflict with previous research. For instance, elementary school students taught by ELTs who received their emergency licenses later in the pandemic performed worse on math assessments, roughly equivalent to the difference between a first-year teacher and a fifth- or sixth-year teacher. The study did not find differences in reading outcomes based on teachers' license type. ELTs were also five percentage points less likely to receive a proficient or exemplary performance rating, which is about the same difference between a first versus a second year teacher earning a high evaluation rating.
Students taught by ELTs also experienced statistically significant declines in non-test outcomes (including absences, disciplinary infractions, GPA, and grade progressions), which were slightly worse for Black students taught by ELTs than for white students.
The authors did find one positive but small outcome: ELTs were slightly (0.02 percentage points) more likely to remain in the teacher workforce and in the same school than teachers from other routes, about one-fifth of the difference between a first- and second-year teacher for both outcomes.
The authors think that these outcomes likely reflect the different levels of preparation and classroom experience the varied cohorts brought to the classroom. The earliest applicants for emergency licenses had significantly more preparation than later cohorts: 60% had already passed their first set of licensure assessments and a quarter had been enrolled in an educator preparation program. In later cohorts, only about half as many teachers had previously engaged with the teacher pipeline.
These findings underscore the need for evaluation if states make changes to requirements to enter teaching, and they must respond according to the full data and findings. Early analyses of emergency licensure policies were quite promising, but they did not fully reflect the preparation levels of applicants who may ultimately take advantage of such policies—and the consequences for students.
While early studies suggested that teachers with emergency licenses were just as effective as teachers with other licenses, newer research has raised concerns about the impact of these less rigorous licenses on the teacher workforce and student achievement.
The first wave of research suggested all was well. An early 2024 analysis, based on data reflecting the impact of the first cohort of newly hired emergency licensed teachers (ELTs) in Massachusetts, found that 82% of newly hired ELTs received proficient evaluation ratings, which is in line with other new teachers, and achieved similar student test growth to their peers with provisional and initial licenses. A similar study in New Jersey echoes these findings. There, researchers discovered that, relative to the novice teacher workforce pre-pandemic, temporarily certified teachers were significantly more racially diverse, and these teachers had no notable differences in performance ratings or student achievement.
So is it time to do away with licensure altogether? Hold that thought.
In the earlier Massachusetts study, researchers only used data from the 2021–22 school year on ELTs in their first year of teaching, before subsequent cohorts of teachers entered the classroom on such licenses; while in New Jersey, researchers were limited to a sample of just under 230 teachers.
New research from Ben Backes, James Cowan, Dan Goldhaber, and Roddy Theobald of CALDER examines data on multiple cohorts of teachers who entered Massachusetts' classrooms on emergency licenses between 2021 and 2023, painting a more accurate—and sobering—picture of ELT effectiveness.
Including these new cohorts, researchers found stark differences: Students of ELTs scored significantly lower on math and science assessments than other students in the same school and same year—a direct conflict with previous research. For instance, elementary school students taught by ELTs who received their emergency licenses later in the pandemic performed worse on math assessments, roughly equivalent to the difference between a first-year teacher and a fifth- or sixth-year teacher. The study did not find differences in reading outcomes based on teachers' license type. ELTs were also five percentage points less likely to receive a proficient or exemplary performance rating, which is about the same difference between a first versus a second year teacher earning a high evaluation rating.
Students taught by ELTs also experienced statistically significant declines in non-test outcomes (including absences, disciplinary infractions, GPA, and grade progressions), which were slightly worse for Black students taught by ELTs than for white students.
The authors did find one positive but small outcome: ELTs were slightly (0.02 percentage points) more likely to remain in the teacher workforce and in the same school than teachers from other routes, about one-fifth of the difference between a first- and second-year teacher for both outcomes.
The authors think that these outcomes likely reflect the different levels of preparation and classroom experience the varied cohorts brought to the classroom. The earliest applicants for emergency licenses had significantly more preparation than later cohorts: 60% had already passed their first set of licensure assessments and a quarter had been enrolled in an educator preparation program. In later cohorts, only about half as many teachers had previously engaged with the teacher pipeline.
These findings underscore the need for evaluation if states make changes to requirements to enter teaching, and they must respond according to the full data and findings. Early analyses of emergency licensure policies were quite promising, but they did not fully reflect the preparation levels of applicants who may ultimately take advantage of such policies—and the consequences for students.