You’re Fired! By the Way, I Took Your Certification too!


EDIT 8/16: The IEA was kind enough to forward some information via email that was unavailible online at the time of the original post, and I’ve updated the links below.

The IEA provided me with a nicely succinct document that does a good job summarizing what the board was voting on titled TIERED LICENSURE PROPOSAL FOR STATE RULES.

However, for those that want to read the gigantic official state file, it is available here.  Be forewarned: you’re going to need some quality reading time.

This information changes a few minor things, but I remain steadfast to the original post that this rule has the potential to strip certification.

For example, an initial residency certificate, if not renewed due to inability to meet new evaluation requirements, will effectively de facto strip that teacher of certification and force them to take at least 1 year off to work on “deficiencies.”

This contrasts to today’s procedure where a teacher’s employment might be terminated, but certainly not their certification.

In addition, a teacher on a professional certificate that is unable to meet renewal due to the new evaluation requirements will be stripped of their professional certificate and placed on a contingent certificate. Although this will allow the individual to continue teaching, it strips them of the professional certification and any leadership pay they may have had.

Again, this is much different than today’s procedure where employment might end, but the certificate remains in the hands of the instructor.

In other words, this rule proposal still has the potential to strip certification from a teacher; albeit the certification stripped depends on the type of certificate the instructor held to begin with.

Confusing right?

Original 8/14 Post:

Despite consistent criticism by Idaho’s teachers, the State Board of Education voted tonight to tentatively proceed with a rule change that would allow a teacher’s certification to be revoked by an administrator.

That’s right: for the first time in Idaho’s history, it won’t be the Idaho Standards Commission who is in charge of revocation of Idaho’s teaching certificates; rather, an administrator’s evaluation will dictate not only continued employment, but the ability to teach via the non-renewal of a teacher’s certificate.

That’s because, for the first time ever, an administrator will have control of not only continued employment (which I have no problem with), but of certification in general.

See, the Idaho State Standards Commission, up until now, has been tasked with overseeing possible violations that would qualify as being so egregious as requiring a teacher’s certification to be revoked.

Guess what?  They’ve done a pretty good job.  For example, remember that Deitrick teacher who was referred for an ethics violation for teaching reproduction because, ahem, his Biology curriculum includes a unit on, ahem, cellular reproduction?   He was cleared.  Because…well…it turns out that “sciency” stuff is true.

In other words, this commission, which includes actual teachers, is a safeguard against abuse of teachers; as a task-force including a variety of different individuals, including teachers, this group is able to make decisions without individual bias, grievances, or predisposition.

That is much unlike an evaluation by an administrator.  See, according to the new rules, an administrator will have the ability to strip the teaching certificate from the educator if the evaluation of the teacher doesn’t meet the proposed rule’s expectations.

Because that makes sense.  Clearly, an individual, as opposed to a collective group, is obviously capable of making this determination.

Dont worry!  If you’re a teacher, according to a recent exchange I had with Supt. Luna, there will be a grievance process in place for you to appeal.  Of course, you probably won’t have a job during this appeal, but that’s not important.

Oh, and even if you win your appeal, it’s not like your reputation would be tarnished, right?  Nope.  Nobody would judge you during the process.  Innocent until proven guilty right?  I mean, guilty now…but maybe innocent later…err…uhh…well

Yup.  That’s the legislation on the docket.

This is a tremendous policy change for Idaho teachers.  As Idaho Education Association President Penni Cyr recently reported on this site:

I can tell you that it is my belief that if these licensure steps are made rule or law, we will lose a whole lot more than SPED teachers that you refer to in your article.  I think this will have a devastating effect on our ability to retain (and attract) all teachers in Idaho…I mean, as you put it,  Why would anyone want to put up to $20,000 of compensation up to chance if they don’t have to? Or put the LOSS OF THEIR CAREER (revocation of licensure) up to a local evaluation that is about job performance.  

If there is a single call of action that teachers and parents can do this year, then this issue is it.

Idaho Board of Education is seeking input.  BUT TIME IS LIMITED!  We have only 21 days to tell them what we think of this rule.

Please contact the board at and let them know that this wrong and is completely inappropriate.

There is no other professional group that allows for a law like this.  Certification should be governed by a board of educators, as it is now, not through outside influences.

Certification revocation deserves a fair, impartial hearing as is guaranteed now.

Teachers deserve due process, as is guaranteed now.

This law provides none of those things.

Let the state board know this is bad policy.


11 thoughts on “You’re Fired! By the Way, I Took Your Certification too!

  1. Pamala Clark

    speaking from experience…Administrators are not above petty personally predjudiced actions….no ONE person should have complete control over another persons career. It seems that Idaho not only thinks teachers don’t deserve equal rights but LESS than equal rights


  2. Pamala Clark

    speaking from experience…Administrators are not above petty personally prejudiced l actions….no ONE person should have complete control over another persons career. It seems that Idaho not only thinks teachers don’t deserve equal rights but LESS than equal rights


  3. Tracy S

    Is this real? Is there a link to valid documentation? It’s so easy for incorrect information to spread like wildfire on the internet. Don’t get me wrong, if this is truly happening, then I want to take appropriate action.


  4. Levi B Cavener Post author

    Tracy S,

    I updated some of the links on the site today with info that was unavailible the night of the original post.

    There were a couple of minor changes as I explained in the edit post above.

    The new link titled “TIERED LICENSURE PROPOSAL FOR STATE RULES” at the beginning of the post is the text the IEA sent me that summarizes the gargantuan full state document availible here:

    Feel free to peruse both.


  5. Joel Williams

    Levi, I may have missed where it specifically says that one administrator can pull my teaching license. I am a teacher in Fruitland. I would like to be supportive of this blog post. Please direct me to the exact place where it says this. I have been reading subcommittee meeting all morning and my eyes are tired.

    Thank you,


    1. Levi B Cavener Post author

      On page 5 of the proposed rule change pdf document, an admin has control of tje following evaluation criteria required for renewal (or nonrenewal) of certification.

      In other words, the admin has defacto contrpl of certification renewal through the evaluation process.

      ing district.
      03. Idaho Professional Certificate. Teachers meeting the following criteria may apply for an Idaho Professional Certificate. The professional certificate is a five (5) year renewable certificate.
      a. Hold an Idaho residency certificate for three (3) years.
      b. For two (2) of three (3) years, including the final year prior to appling for a professional certificate: show demonstrated teaching proficiency on the Idaho state performance evaluation system by achieving:
      i. Sixteen (16) or more elements rated as proficient or higher.
      ii. No more than six (6) elements ranked as basic, no more than two (2) of the six (6) elements rated as basic in domain one (1) or domain four (4), and no more than one (1) element rated as basic in domain two (2) or domain three (3).
      iii. No elements rated as unsatisfactory.
      iv. Show increased measurable student achievement/growth.
      c. Have an annual individualized professional learning plan developed in conjunction with school district supervisor.


  6. Sadar7

    Can someone tell me what it takes to remove a member of this board? I would like to know where their accountability begins. Thanks!



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s