Texas public education is navigating a period of significant change, marked by teacher shortages, declining enrollment, budget pressures, and shifting policy priorities. One of the most visible and debated developments is the rapid rise in the number of uncertified teachers working in public schools. What began as a temporary flexibility during the COVID-19 pandemic has evolved into a structural feature of the state’s education workforce, raising questions about instructional quality, equity, and sustainability.
According to data from the Texas Education Agency (TEA), the percentage of uncertified teachers statewide rose to 12 percent during the 2024–2025 school year, up from just 3.8 percent in 2019–2020. The increase reflects a growing reliance on educators who have not completed traditional university-based certification programs or state-approved alternatives before entering the classroom. While districts argue that uncertified teachers are often the only option amid severe staffing shortages, critics worry about the long-term academic and systemic consequences.
This issue does not lend itself to simple conclusions. Texas’s size, diversity, and decentralized education system mean that the impact of uncertified teachers varies widely by district, school type, and subject area. Understanding the rise of uncertified educators requires examining workforce trends, student outcomes, district-level realities, and the broader ideological debate about the role of certification itself.
How Texas Reached This Point
Teacher shortages in Texas predate the pandemic but intensified sharply after 2020. Retirements accelerated, fewer college students entered education programs, and working conditions became more challenging. In response, the state relaxed certain certification requirements, allowing districts to hire teachers on temporary or emergency credentials.
As Heath Morrison, CEO of the alternative certification program Teachers of Tomorrow, explained, “The state was trying to responsibly deal with the impact of the pandemic. But flexibility for individuals was never intended to be used at scale ... and a lot of states are allowing these people to stay on these temporary licenses for three years, five years, 10 years.”
Alternative certification programs expanded rapidly during this period. On its website, Teachers of Tomorrow says participants can “start teaching in as little as 8 weeks.” Supporters argue that such programs widen the pipeline, attract career-changers, and help districts fill vacancies quickly. Critics counter that speed can come at the expense of preparation, especially for teachers working in high-need schools.
The growth in uncertified teachers has been especially pronounced among newly hired educators. According to a University of Texas at Austin study titled “Beyond the Tipping Point: The Rise of Uncertified Teachers in Texas,” the percentage of newly hired uncertified teachers increased from 10 percent in 2013–2014 to 52 percent in 2023–2024. This shift represents a fundamental change in how Texas staffs its classrooms.
Academic Outcomes and Research Findings
One of the central concerns surrounding uncertified teachers is their potential impact on student learning. The UT Austin study found that, compared to students taught by university-certified teachers, students with uncertified teachers lost approximately six months of learning in high school English and nearly four months in high school math.
These findings have fueled calls for stronger certification requirements, particularly in core academic subjects. However, researchers and policymakers also caution against interpreting the data in isolation. Uncertified teachers are more likely to work in high-poverty schools, rural areas, and hard-to-staff subjects, where students may already face additional challenges. In such contexts, isolating the effect of certification from broader systemic factors is complex.
At the same time, the scale of the increase raises concerns about consistency and equity. When large numbers of students—often those in underserved communities—are taught by less-prepared teachers, disparities can widen, even if individual uncertified educators are dedicated and capable.
District-Level Variations
Statewide statistics mask significant variation among districts. In some cases, high percentages of uncertified teachers coexist with relatively stable or improving academic performance, while in others, uncertified staffing is part of a broader pattern of struggle.
Houston ISD currently has the highest percentage of uncertified teachers in the state at 20.58 percent, up from about 12 percent during the 2023–2024 school year. The district has been under a state takeover since 2023, scheduled to end in 2027. In October, Houston ISD terminated approximately 160 uncertified teachers due to declining enrollment, highlighting how staffing decisions are also shaped by demographic and financial pressures.
Fort Worth ISD, also under a state takeover for “chronic academic underperformance,” reports just 1.8 percent uncertified teachers. This contrast illustrates that uncertified staffing alone does not determine district outcomes, nor does state intervention necessarily correlate with higher or lower reliance on uncertified educators.
Austin ISD, which faces the possibility of a future state takeover and plans to close 10 campuses at the end of the school year, reports 11.85 percent uncertified teachers. Dallas ISD reports 14.83 percent uncertified teachers but has not been subject to the same level of state oversight as Houston or Fort Worth.
These examples underscore that the presence of uncertified teachers interacts with local leadership, enrollment trends, funding levels, and community context.
Charter Schools and Rural Districts
The highest concentrations of uncertified teachers are found in charter schools and rural districts. According to the TEA’s “Uncertified Teachers by School Systems” dataset, 40 charter school networks report uncertified teacher rates ranging from 70 percent to 100 percent.
The state’s largest charter network, IDEA Public Charter Schools, serves around 77,000 students and reports 67.8 percent uncertified teachers. In Dell City ISD, a small rural district in west Texas, 69 percent of teachers are uncertified.
Rural districts often struggle to attract certified teachers due to geographic isolation, lower pay, and limited housing options. Charter schools, meanwhile, typically have more flexibility in hiring and may prioritize subject-matter expertise or alignment with a particular educational philosophy over formal certification.
Supporters argue that this flexibility allows charters to innovate and staff classrooms creatively. Critics argue that it creates a two-tier system in which students in certain schools are far more likely to be taught by inexperienced or unprepared teachers.
Legislative Response: House Bill 2
Lawmakers addressed the issue during the 89th Legislative Session through House Bill 2 (HB 2), authored by state Rep. Brad Buckley (R-Salado). The law requires districts to reduce uncertified teachers in core subjects such as math and reading and includes provisions to increase teacher pay and provide additional funding for teacher preparation programs.
Under HB 2, districts may submit plans to the TEA for temporary exceptions to certification requirements, but full compliance is required by the start of the 2029–2030 school year. The delayed timeline reflects recognition of current workforce constraints, while signaling a long-term policy shift toward stronger certification standards.
Not all educators and administrators are confident that districts can meet these requirements without trade-offs. Former Mesquite ISD Superintendent David Vroonland warned, “What’s going to happen when we’re no longer able to hire uncertified teachers? Class sizes have to go up, programs have to disappear… We won’t have a choice. There will be negative consequences if we don’t put in place serious recruitment efforts.”
His comments highlight a core tension: improving teacher quality while maintaining access to programs, manageable class sizes, and staffing stability.
Opposition to Certification Requirements
Teacher certification is not universally supported. Some advocacy groups argue that certification does not necessarily equate to teaching effectiveness and that rigid requirements limit innovation and parental choice.
The Texas Homeschool Coalition emphasized that, due to its advocacy, Texas law under the Homeschool Freedom Act of 2025 (HB 2674) “now explicitly prohibits any regulation of homeschool by state agencies, further strengthening legal protections for Texas homeschool families.” While homeschooling operates outside the public school system, the statement reflects a broader skepticism toward state regulation of education.
In a commentary for the Heritage Foundation titled “Power to the Principals: Bureaucrats Need To Stop Gatekeeping New Teachers,” school choice advocate Erika Donalds argued against traditional certification in classical schools. “Current teacher certification rules aren’t a logical fit for classical schools, which are rooted in the Greek and Roman traditions of academic excellence and character development,” Donalds wrote, adding that such schools look for “instructors with strong character who are well read in the great books of Western civilization.”
These perspectives frame certification as a bureaucratic barrier rather than a safeguard, particularly in alternative education models.
The Broader Context Facing Texas Schools
The debate over uncertified teachers cannot be separated from other pressures facing Texas public education. Many districts are experiencing declining enrollment as families move, choose private or charter schools, or opt for homeschooling. Budget deficits have forced districts to close campuses, consolidate services, and reduce staff.
In response, districts are opening enrollment to out-of-district students, expanding career and technical education pathways, and experimenting with new staffing models. Within this environment, uncertified teachers are both a symptom of strain and a tool for coping with it.
A Complex Path Forward
The rise of uncertified teachers in Texas reflects practical realities, policy choices, and ideological disagreements about what matters most in education. Certification alone does not guarantee effective teaching, but preparation, mentoring, and support are widely recognized as important components of quality instruction.
HB 2 represents an attempt to balance flexibility with accountability, but its success will depend on sustained investment in recruitment, preparation, and retention. Without addressing pay, working conditions, and professional support, reducing uncertified staffing may prove difficult.
As Texas moves toward the 2029–2030 compliance deadline, the central challenge will be ensuring that efforts to strengthen the teaching workforce do not inadvertently reduce access, increase class sizes, or deepen inequities. The conversation around uncertified teachers is ultimately about how the state defines quality, equity, and responsibility in public education—and how it supports the educators asked to carry that mission forward.
.png)
