Tennessee House Bill HB0880

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/4/25
• Refer: 2/6/25
• Refer: 3/18/25

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, Chapter 1 and Title 49, Chapter 5, relative to educator training.

Summary

HB0880 requires the Tennessee Department of Education to compile and maintain a comprehensive list of state board-approved educator preparation providers and other approved educator training requirements for licensed K-12 educators employed by local education agencies (LEAs) or public charter schools. The department must publish the list on its website each year by June 30 and provide it to the relevant education committees in the House and Senate. The bill does not create new training mandates or change licensure standards directly; instead, it centralizes and publicizes information about existing educator preparation and training requirements. Its practical effect is to improve transparency and access to information for teachers, school systems, policymakers, and the public regarding approved pathways and requirements for educator training in Tennessee.

Impact

HB0880 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 49, Chapters 1 and 5 by adding a reporting and publication duty for the Department of Education. It affects the department’s administrative responsibilities and provides a recurring annual disclosure requirement to legislative education committees, but it does not itself alter educator licensure rules, certification standards, or training content. The main parties affected are the Department of Education, educator preparation providers, licensed K-12 educators, LEAs, and public charter schools.

Sentiment

The available vote history suggests the bill was received favorably in committee, passing the House Education Administration Subcommittee 6-0 with a recommendation for passage if amended and referred to the Education Committee. No committee transcript was provided, and there is no recorded opposition in the materials supplied. Overall, the bill appears to have been viewed as a straightforward administrative transparency measure rather than a controversial policy change.

Contention

There is little evidence of substantive contention in the provided record. The only notable procedural point is that the subcommittee recommended passage contingent on amendment and referral, which suggests members may have wanted technical or clarifying changes rather than objecting to the bill’s purpose. Because the bill is limited to compiling and publishing information, any concerns would likely center on administrative burden, completeness of the list, or how educator preparation providers and training requirements are categorized, but no specific objections are documented here.