Gov. Gavin Newsom has requested that the Commission on Teacher Credentialing develop two pathways to the Administrative Services credential: one for teachers and one for other credential holders that includes, but is not limited to, Occupational Therapists and Physical Therapists. This request was made following repeated appeals from the OT and PT lobbyists to create a pathway to an administrative credential thereby allowing OTs and PTs access to administrative positions within a school district. The key issue with the dual pathway credential is the potential impact of non-teaching administrators supervising and evaluating classroom teachers. AB 1009 (Rubio), signed by the governor, authorizes this possibility at the discretion of a local education agency.

Commission staff will begin by collecting information at the state and national levels to learn about the types of administrative credentials that may be issued in other states and the roles and responsibilities of administrators who do not supervise or coach teachers. This research will serve as the basis of a draft authorization statement for a non-teaching Administrative Services Credential and possible modification to the existing Administrative Services Credential. The draft authorization statement will be vetted by a focused workgroup, broadly distributed for field input, and presented to the CTC for input.

The final product will be a commission agenda item with proposed revisions that will be presented to a workgroup for feedback. The workgroup will include, at a minimum, representation from current preparation program faculty, employers, and practitioners serving in a variety of administrative roles, licensed and non-licensed. With input from the workgroup, CTC staff will develop a set of final proposed authorization statements as well as revised standards, content expectations, and performance expectations for commission review and approval.

Changes to the current Administrative Services Credential pathway, including development of a new non-teaching pathway, will not nullify the credentials of existing ASC holders. Additionally, programs will be given ample time to make necessary updates (typically two years from commission adoption of new standards or performance expectations) and commission-approved institutions wishing to offer the new non-teaching pathway will be able to apply through the commission’s Initial Program Review process.

Performance expectations for Child Development Permit In April 2024, the commission established a new PK-3 Early Childhood Specialist Credential, and in February 2025, it updated and adopted a revised Child Development Permit structure. The updated CDP includes four distinct role delineations (assisting, teaching, mentoring, and leading in an early learning and care setting). Staff presented a draft of revised Performance Expectations that align with the new permit structure and describe the set of knowledge, skills, and abilities expected of a Child Development Permit candidate at the point of beginning practice in an early learning and care program.

There are five distinct levels in the updated CDP adopted by the commission in February 2025. Each level authorizes the holder to provide distinct services in an early learning and care setting:

• Early Childhood Educator 1 (Assistant Teacher).
• Early Childhood Educator 2 (Teacher).
• Early Childhood Educator 3 (Mentor).
• Early Childhood Administrator 1 (Site Supervisor).
• Early Childhood Administrator 2 (Program Director).

The revised Child Development Permit Performance Expectations for Early Childhood Educator 1, 2, and 3 are organized across six domains to ensure that each element is appropriately placed, unified across the framework, and progressive in a manageable sequence for beginning candidates. The revised Performance Expectations for Early Childhood Administrator 1-2 are organized into four domains that guide leadership practice across site- and program-level roles.

A field review of these draft changes with the public and education partners will include a 30-day open survey which will be circulated to workforce partners to gather feedback on clarity, job relevance, and any missing or duplicative content.

Plan to improve options for meeting the SMRs Assembly Bill 130, signed into law in 2021, created new options for preliminary teaching credential candidates to demonstrate their credential-appropriate subject matter competence. Prior to AB 130, candidates could only meet the Subject Matter Requirement through successful completion of the credential and subject-specific California Subject Examination for Teachers (CSET) or through completion of a commission-approved subject matter program. Candidates may now meet subject matter requirements with an undergraduate degree in a major that aligns with the credential they are seeking, by completing coursework that aligns with the credential-specific content domain descriptions.

While these options have certainly created new opportunities for candidates to enter the teaching profession, they have also led to significant confusion both among preparation programs, charged with evaluating transcripts to determine if candidates have met the subject matter requirements through coursework, and among candidates, trying to determine what their options are and whether they have already satisfied requirements. Staff proposed five actions to expand Subject Matter Requirement options:

Action 1: Expand degree majors: Expanding degree majors would broaden the options to include closely aligned fields, an adjustment that could meaningfully expand access for candidates whose degrees already cover the core content expectations for teaching.

Action 2: Streamline Subject Matter Requirements for transcript review: Clarifying and standardizing the language of the current domains so that programs can apply them more consistently when evaluating coursework. Creating clarity and consistency to the SMRs, Action 2 will help candidates more easily determine whether their existing coursework satisfies subject matter requirements.

Action 3: Revise Subject Matter Requirement structures for future exams and transcript review: Rather than starting from the ground up, this work will build on the existing SMRs to update and reorganize them so that each reflects California’s adopted PK–12 standards and can support both transcript review and future examination development.

Action 4: Explore feasibility of artificial intelligence as a transcript analysis tool: For candidates, this innovation would provide faster, clearer, and more reliable determinations of how their prior coursework meets subject matter requirements, reducing delays and helping them transition into preparation programs more quickly.

Action 5: Explore possibility of micro-certifications: Clearly identifying groups of courses that meet defined subject matter domains, micro-certifications would allow candidates to complete only the coursework they need, reduce duplication and confusion, and create more affordable, transparent routes to demonstrate subject matter competence. This plan would improve how candidates and programs navigate the Subject Matter Requirement and ensure that all pathways remain rigorous, transparent, and aligned with California’s PK–12 standards.

The commission approved action items 1-3 and asked staff to provide additional information and foundation for action items 4 and 5.

Planned improvements for CTC-approved examinations Commission examinations serve distinct statutory purposes, including verifying basic skills (CBEST), subject matter knowledge (CSET), readiness to teach multilingual learners (CTEL), and preparation for entry-level administrative leadership (CPACE).

Over the past decade, statutory and regulatory changes have broadened the ways in which candidates may demonstrate readiness for credentialing. Examinations have shifted from being the default route to one of several options, alongside expanded coursework and degree-based pathways. At the same time, standards and credential structures have evolved. These changes prompt the need to review and revise examinations to ensure continued alignment.

Several current examination contracts are nearing the end of their terms, initiating a contract-driven update cycle and presenting an opportunity to modernize the state’s educator assessment system in a coordinated, cost-effective, and candidate-focused way. Commission staff will evaluate available options for each examination, including possible adoption or modification of existing off-the-shelf assessments. Where appropriate, recommendations will prioritize approaches that reduce candidate costs and burdens while upholding technical quality.