Appendix C: Definitions and Examples for Six Educator Policy Areas

Detailed information about how the authors defined each of the six identified educator policy areas, and determined whether state micro-credential policy existed in those areas, are offered below along with examples of policy scenarios that would or would not meet these criteria. Note that for the purpose of this analysis, the terms certification and license are used interchangeably, although some states only use one term or the other, or use these two terms to refer to distinct offerings.

1. Complying with state pre-service educator preparation program approval guidelines: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials in state-approved pre-service educator preparation programs (EPPs) offered by institutions of higher education and/or other accepted providers. An approved EPP choosing to offer micro-credentials on its own would not meet this criterion, nor would individual EPPs choosing to provide undergraduate or graduate level credit for earned micro-credentials.¹
2. Fulfilling requirements for initial or first-time professional educator certification: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials as part of the state requirements for obtaining initial or first-time professional certification that authorizes an individual to work as an educator in the state’s public schools. For example, a state may require an experienced educator to obtain an initial principal credential through a stack of state-approved micro-credentials that assesses required competencies, or allow individuals authorized to teach on a temporary certificate to earn micro-credentials to demonstrate the competencies necessary to move to a permanent professional license.
3. Providing curated professional development for current educators: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials that were curated, and often directly offered, by the state to promote professional learning on high-priority topics. Educator engagement with micro-credentials on curated topics may be required or optional, and states sometimes encourage engagement by offering these professional development opportunities free of charge or even offering financial stipends for successful completion. This type of professional development is not the same as the professional development requirements for license renewal (see next policy area) because the learning opportunities have been curated by the state to focus on a specific topic or narrow range of topics, and do not necessarily count toward relicensure. A state-required micro-credential stack on the science of reading, for example, or developing and promoting a curated list of micro-credentials focused on the top five LEA-identified areas for educator growth would be included in this category. An extensive repository of micro-credentials on varied topics would not meet this criterion. (Note that the focus of and methodology used for this policy area differ from those used in the 2020 policy scan. See Appendix D for details.)
4. Fulfilling professional learning requirements for educator license renewal: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials that count toward the state’s professional learning requirements for license renewal (i.e., retaining the ability to practice in the same role, and with the same license type for a specified number of years determined by each state).² An example would be a state that specifies that all micro-credentials offered by the state provide a specific value in the state’s license renewal currency (which holds various names and is measured in various ways across the states, such as continuing education units, clock hours, professional development credits, or professional learning points). For states where LEAs have broad discretion over what professional development counts toward educator license renewal, ones that explicitly allow or encourage LEAs to provide credit for earning micro-credentials would meet this criterion, but states that are silent on this topic would not, even if some LEAs are allowing micro-credentials for this purpose. (Note that the focus of and methodology used for this policy area differ from those used in the 2020 policy scan. See Appendix D for details.)
5. Fulfilling requirements for additional endorsements for current educators: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials for additional endorsements, which are typically ways for an educator to signal on their state license that they have expertise in a specific area. An example of an additional endorsement micro-credential policy would be allowing teachers to earn a computer science or teaching English learners endorsement by successfully completing a stack of micro-credentials on those topics. Some states offer endorsements that lead to the potential for a role change (e.g., teacher to instructional coach); in these cases, the policy would be tallied under the “advanced licensure” policy area.
6. Fulfilling requirements for an advanced license or endorsement for current educators: State policy explicitly allows, encourages, or requires the use of micro-credentials to earn the type of new license or endorsement that provides the potential for career advancement, such as moving to a master teacher, reading specialist, or instructional coach role. Policies for a teacher earning a first-time school administrator license were not included here but in the initial credential tally, as this move represents a new career field rather than advancement within the same career field. Allowing LEAs to provide salary bumps for micro-credential completion would not meet this criterion.