The current, controversial PELSB rulemaking (R-4615) seeks to implement systemic CRT, which PELSB calls "CRTP," "Culturally Responsive Teaching Principles." The current PELSB proposal, Rulemaking # R-4615, would, in the words of PELSB, reorganize the whole of required teacher training as "CRTP." The current, "Standards of Effective Practice," which are the pedagogy standards that were assembled by the Board of Teaching, is located with the administrative rules at Rules § 8710.2000 (a few minor modifications have updated certain matters regarding class technology updates).

There is no argument that the Board of Teaching's standards are defective or expired--there is merely a conclusory remark that old justifies replacement. It would be fair to expect that should PELSB want to disregard the proven work of the Board of Teaching that PELSB seek to comprehend and analyze the standards produced by the Board of Teaching--arguing why certain particulars need amending. Unfortunately, the bureaucrats in power today have no problem throwing out the work of the Board of Teaching without care or understanding, submitting objectively worse replacement parts.

PELSB cheerily remarks that cutting the number of standards by around 50%, is a job well done, because fewer standards mean an easier process to declare teacher candidates qualified. While there may be a hypothetical benefit there, PELSB gives this remark without an ounce of assurance against the obvious concern that such cuts would lower teacher training standards or a care to map out which standards it deemed worthy of cutting and why.

The public, coming to awareness of the PELSB activity late, due to the deliberate attempts of PELSB and other bureaucrats to minimize awareness, surged a chorus of disapproval at the oral hearing (virtual only) on the 24th of August, 2022, with essentially 99% of the public (excepting 7 apparent insiders and paid consultants who spoke in support of PELSB) urging that PELSB rescind its proposal or the ALJ Mortenson tell PELSB to go back to the drawing board. Over 70% of the written comment urged recission/rejection of R-4615 & data may indicate much of the pro-PELSB comments letters were written in possibly paid organized activist sessions--with either the union or consultants potentially paying for such. Following the oral hearing, a period of written comments followed, along with a brief rebuttal period after the general written comments.

See the PESLB R-4615 Docs page for downloadable versions of the proposed PELSB rule-text. The 4th version is the last PELSB version that contains the current text (cuts marked by strikethrough) in addition to the new text (underlined). The subsequent version, AR-4615, only shows the round of changes following the June 2022 Hearing.