Can the Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction unilaterally require teachers from other states to pass an extra competency exam before being certified to teach in Oklahoma?

Plain-English summary

Representative Melissa Provenzano asked Attorney General Drummond whether the State Superintendent of Public Instruction could, on his own, require out-of-state teachers seeking Oklahoma certification to pass an additional competency examination beyond what Oklahoma law already requires. The answer is no.

The opinion walks through the structure of Oklahoma's education system. Four entities share authority: the Legislature sets state policy; the State Board of Education governs the public school system and sets rules; the State Superintendent (constitutionally the president of the State Board) has only the express powers the Constitution and statutes give him; and local school boards run the schools day-to-day. Within this structure:

• The State Board of Education, not the State Superintendent, has authority over "matters pertaining to the licensure and certification of persons for instructional, supervisory, and administrative positions" (70 O.S. § 3-104(A)(6)).
• The Legislature has identified seven pathways to certification (graduates of accredited teacher-prep programs, alternative certification, emergency certificates, National Board certified teachers, Teach for America participants, candidates passing a majority-state competency exam, and out-of-state certified teachers).
• The seventh pathway, out-of-state teachers, "expressly exempts the individual from any competency examination" under 70 O.S. § 6-190(G)(2). The Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact Act (70 O.S. § 6-190.3) goes further by limiting state-specific requirements to "coursework or examination that includes the content of unique interest to the state," and Oklahoma has not adopted any such requirements.

The State Superintendent's expressly granted powers include "interpret[ing]" State Board rules and policy (70 O.S. § 3-107.1), "advis[ing]" school districts on their powers, and "control[ling]" and "direct[ing]" the State Department. None of those grant authority to add a new competency-exam requirement.

Even reading the Superintendent's powers generously to include "implied powers" needed to fulfill express duties (under Western Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. State, 2022 OK 79), the AG concluded that no express duty here implies the power to demand a new exam. And any such implied power "must yield to the State Board's express authority over certification matters."

Because the Superintendent lacks the authority to require the exam, the AG did not need to reach the second question (whether such a requirement would conflict with state or federal law including the dormant Commerce Clause). Footnote 10 flags that issue but does not decide it.

What this means for you

If you are a teacher already certified in another state and considering moving to Oklahoma

Under existing Oklahoma law, you do not have to pass an additional Oklahoma competency examination to obtain reciprocal certification. 70 O.S. § 6-190(G)(2) grants reciprocal certification, expressly exempting out-of-state certified teachers from any competency exam. The Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact (§ 6-190.3) provides the same exemption.

If anyone tells you the State Superintendent has imposed a new exam requirement on out-of-state teachers, this AG opinion is the answer: he cannot do that unilaterally. Direct any concerns to the State Board of Education and the State Department of Education, and consider this opinion as part of your response.

If you are the State Superintendent of Public Instruction

Your express authority includes interpreting State Board rules, advising districts, and directing the State Department. It does not include adding new certification requirements unilaterally. Any change to certification testing requires the State Board (and in some cases the Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability or the Legislature). Coordinate with those bodies if you believe a change is needed.

The AG opinion is binding on you under 74 O.S. § 18b. Any unilateral implementation of additional testing for out-of-state teachers would be subject to challenge.

If you are on the State Board of Education

You retain authority over certification. If a policy concern about out-of-state teachers' qualifications has been raised, the path forward runs through Board rulemaking, with potential involvement of CEQA on competency exams (70 O.S. § 6-187(G)). The State Superintendent (Board president) participates as one member of the Board; the Board acts by majority.

If you want to require additional examination for out-of-state teachers across the board, you would also need to consider:

• The Legislature's express exemption of reciprocity-pathway teachers from competency exams.
• The Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact's narrow definition of permissible state-specific requirements.
• Federal dormant Commerce Clause concerns (flagged in footnote 10 of the opinion).

A Board rule that effectively requires out-of-state teachers to take an Oklahoma exam may be vulnerable on multiple grounds beyond just the Superintendent's authority.

If you are a local school district hiring a teacher

Once a teacher holds a valid Oklahoma certificate (whether through reciprocity, traditional path, alternative path, etc.), local school districts have authority under 70 O.S. § 5-117 to contract with, fix duties of, and compensate the teacher. The State Superintendent cannot dictate hiring decisions or impose pre-employment examination requirements on certified teachers.

If you are an Oklahoma legislator

The opinion confirms that adding new certification requirements is a legislative choice, possibly delegated to the State Board or CEQA. If members want stricter qualifications for out-of-state teachers, the path is statutory amendment to 70 O.S. § 6-190(G), § 6-190.3, or § 6-187. Consider any federal dormant Commerce Clause implications during drafting.

If members want to clarify the Superintendent's role, the opinion is a helpful map of what the Superintendent currently can and cannot do.

If you are an Oklahoma school district HR director

Continue processing certifications based on State Board rules. Out-of-state certified teachers do not need to pass an Oklahoma exam. Direct any questions about Superintendent-issued requirements through your school attorney.

Common questions

Q: What pathways exist to Oklahoma teacher certification?
A: Per the opinion, seven: (1) accredited teacher education program graduate, (2) alternative certificate (degree but not from teacher prep), (3) emergency certificate (school district demonstrates need), (4) National Board for Professional Teaching Standards certification, (5) Teach for America participant, (6) majority-state competency exam, and (7) out-of-state reciprocal certification.

Q: What is the difference between the State Superintendent and the State Board of Education?
A: The State Superintendent is an elected executive officer (Okla. Const. art. VI, § 1) and serves as president of the State Board (Okla. Const. art. XIII, § 5). The State Board is a separate governance body that acts as a whole; its powers and duties are prescribed by the Legislature in the School Code. The Superintendent has limited individual statutory authority; most education policy decisions belong to the Board.

Q: What is the Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact?
A: 70 O.S. § 6-190.3, enacted to facilitate teacher movement across states. It exempts qualified out-of-state teachers from competency exams on initial certification. A member state can require renewal-time state-specific requirements only if those requirements involve content "of unique interest to the state." Oklahoma has not adopted any such state-specific requirements under the Compact.

Q: Could the Legislature impose additional testing on out-of-state teachers?
A: Yes, in principle. The Legislature sets policy. But it would have to amend the existing exemption in § 6-190(G)(2) and consider the Compact and federal Commerce Clause issues.

Q: Could the State Board impose additional testing through rulemaking?
A: Possibly, depending on the scope. The State Board has authority over certification, but Board rules cannot conflict with the Legislature's express exemption of out-of-state teachers from competency exams. The opinion notes that current Board rules require "any person" applying for a certificate to pass certain Oklahoma Teacher Certification Tests, but those rules also have to be read together with the statutory exemption for reciprocity candidates.

Q: What did the Board's 2025 rule amendment do?
A: According to the opinion, the Board added a "written test based solely upon the U.S. Naturalization Test" to certification requirements (42 Okla. Reg. 1189, July 1, 2025). The opinion notes this requirement applies to "any person" seeking certification but does not explicitly address how it interacts with the out-of-state reciprocity exemption.

Q: What about the Commerce Clause concerns?
A: Footnote 10 flags but does not decide whether requiring out-of-state teachers to pass an Oklahoma exam (when in-state teachers do not face the same requirement) would violate the dormant Commerce Clause. The opinion cites CDR Sys. Corp. v. Okla. Tax Comm'n and Granholm v. Heald, but does not undertake the analysis since the answer to the first question (lack of Superintendent authority) makes the second question moot.

Q: Is the State Superintendent bound by this opinion?
A: Yes. AG opinions are binding on state officials affected by them under 74 O.S. § 18b.

Background and statutory framework

Oklahoma's education governance has four pillars (per the opinion): the Legislature establishes the system (Okla. Const. art. XIII, § 1); the Constitution vests instruction supervision with the State Board (art. XIII, § 5); the elected State Superintendent serves as Board president and performs duties prescribed by Constitution or law (art. VI, § 1); and local school boards run day-to-day school operations (Ritter v. State).

The State Board's powers are set out in 70 O.S. § 3-104. Subsection (A)(6) gives the Board "authority in matters pertaining to the licensure and certification of persons for instructional, supervisory, and administrative positions and services." The State Department of Education, headed by the State Superintendent, implements Board policy and runs day-to-day operations.

Teacher certification has two main statutory anchors. Section 6-187 sets up the competency examination, adopted by CEQA. Section 6-190 lists the certification pathways, including subsection (G)(2)'s exemption for out-of-state certified teachers and subsection (H)'s exemption for candidates passing the majority-state exam. Section 6-190.3 implements the Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact.

The State Superintendent's express powers come from § 3-107 and § 3-107.1. The Superintendent can "interpret" State Board rules and policy (§ 3-107.1), "advise" districts as to their powers and duties, "control" and "direct" the State Department, "adopt policies" within the State Department, and "have authority to coordinate the divisions" of the Department. None of these provisions grant the power to set certification requirements or competency exams.

Implied-power analysis (per Western Heights) lets an agency imply lesser powers necessary to fulfill an express duty. The AG concluded that no express duty here implies the power to add a competency-exam requirement, and that any such implied power would yield to the Board's express certification authority anyway.

Citations and references

Constitutional provisions:
- Okla. Const. art. VI, § 1 (Executive officers)
- Okla. Const. art. XIII, §§ 1, 5 (Public schools)

Statutes:
- 70 O.S. § 3-104 (State Board powers)
- 70 O.S. § 3-107.1 (State Superintendent's authority to interpret)
- 70 O.S. § 6-187 (Competency examination)
- 70 O.S. § 6-190 (Certificate eligibility pathways)
- 70 O.S. § 6-190.3 (Interstate Teacher Mobility Compact)

Cases:
- Ritter v. State, 2022 OK 73, 520 P.3d 370
- Western Heights Indep. Sch. Dist. v. State, 2022 OK 79, 518 P.3d 531
- Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 12 v. State, 2024 OK 39, 565 P.3d 23

Source

• Landing page: https://oklahoma.gov/oag/opinions/ag-opinions/2025/17.html
• Original PDF: https://oklahoma.gov/content/dam/ok/en/oag/opinions/ag-opinions/2025/AG%20Opinion%202025-17.pdf

Original opinion text

GENTNER DRUMMOND
ATTORNEY GENERAL
ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION
2025-17

The Honorable Melissa Provenzano
Oklahoma House of Representatives, District 79
2300 N. Lincoln Boulevard, Room 543
Oklahoma City, OK 73105

December 11, 2025

Dear Representative Provenzano:

This office has received your request for an official Attorney General Opinion in which you ask, in effect, the following questions:

1. Does the Superintendent of Public Instruction possess the statutory or constitutional authority to require only out-of-state teachers to pass an additional competency examination, beyond what is required under Oklahoma law, as a condition for certification or employment within the State of Oklahoma?
2. Would the implementation of such a testing requirement for out-of-state teachers conflict with any existing provisions of state or federal law governing teacher certification, licensure, reciprocity, or employment practices?

I. SUMMARY

The Superintendent of Public Instruction ("State Superintendent") does not possess any authority under Oklahoma law to require out-of-state teachers to pass an additional examination as a condition for certification. The State Board of Education ("State Board") has express authority over licensure and certification matters, including issuing certificates to individuals who otherwise meet certification requirements. To meet certification requirements in most instances, an applicant for a teaching license must pass a competency examination adopted by the Commission for Educational Quality and Accountability ("CEQA"). In some instances, the Legislature either (1) does not require passing a competency examination or (2) vests the State Board with the authority to establish certification requirements. However, while the State Superintendent is a member of the State Board, the Superintendent has no express or implied authority to unilaterally require a competency examination as a condition of certification. Because the answer to the first question is no, it is unnecessary to address the second question.

II. BACKGROUND

Oklahoma's educational system rests on four pillars. First, the Legislature must "establish and maintain a system of free public schools wherein all the children of the State may be educated." Second, the Constitution vests supervision of instruction in Oklahoma public schools with the State Board, "whose powers and duties shall be prescribed by law." Third, the State Superintendent is an elected executive officer who is the president of the State Board and who "shall perform such duties as may be designated in this Constitution or prescribed by law." Fourth, decisions on discretionary matters concerning the daily operations and affairs in the public schools belong to locally elected boards of education.

These four principles mean that, in effect, the public school system is collaboratively administered by the State Board, State Department of Education ("State Department"), State Superintendent, boards of education of school districts, and superintendents of local school districts.

III. DISCUSSION

A. The State Superintendent does not have unilateral authority to require out-of-state teachers to pass an additional competency examination as a condition for teacher certification.

Consistent with its charge of establishing and maintaining a state system of public school education, the Legislature enacted the Oklahoma School Code ("School Code") in 1949. Under the School Code, the State Board serves as the supervisory body and "governing board of the public school system." To fulfill this charge, the State Board has numerous powers and duties, including: adopting policies and making rules; performing all duties necessary to administration of the public school system; providing for the health and safety of school children and personnel; and performing duties not specifically delegated to any other agency or official.

Additionally, and relevant here, the State Board has "authority in matters pertaining to the licensure and certification of persons for instructional, supervisory, and administrative positions and services."

With regard to certification, and assuming the individual meets all otherwise applicable requirements, the School Code mandates that the State Board "shall" issue and grant a certificate to teach in at least the following seven instances: (1) a candidate graduates from an accredited institution of higher education and completes an accredited teacher education program; (2) a candidate has a college degree but not from an accredited teacher education program ("Alternative Certificate"); (3) a school district demonstrates a need and applies to the State Board for an emergency certificate; (4) a candidate has certification from the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards; (5) a candidate has been accepted into the Teach for America Program; (6) a candidate successfully completes a competency examination used by a majority of other states; and (7) an out-of-state candidate who is certified by another state.

In the first three situations, the School Code conditions certification on the individual also successfully completing a competency examination required under title 70, section 6-187 of the Oklahoma Statutes. Regarding the Teach for America certification pathway, Teach for America establishes any prerequisite examination. Concerning an applicant who successfully completes a competency exam used in a majority of other states, the candidate is not required to take any Oklahoma exam. As long as the candidate passes the competency examination used by a majority of other states and has a criminal history record check on file with the State Board, the State Board issues a certificate. Finally, with regard to out-of-state candidates who seek reciprocal certification under the seventh scenario listed above, the Legislature expressly exempts the individual from any competency examination.

If the Legislature intended to grant to the State Superintendent the separate and independent authority to require a competency examination as a condition of certification, it would have said so. It did not. Nowhere in the Constitution or in statute is the State Superintendent given express authority to establish, adopt, or require a competency examination as a condition of state certification. With that being the case, this office is unable to read into the law what is not there.

This is not to say that the State Superintendent lacks any implied powers. The Oklahoma Supreme Court has held that "[a] statute creating an express power in the nature of an express affirmative duty normally creates an implied power necessary to fulfill that express affirmative duty." Accordingly, this office must examine the State Superintendent's express powers and determine whether he or she has implied powers with regard to teaching examinations.

Constitutionally, the State Superintendent is the President of the State Board. However, without some delegation of authority, the Board acts as a body and not unilaterally through one person. The only express statutory power relevant here is that the School Code authorizes the State Superintendent to "interpret" State Board rule and policy.

The term "interpret" generally means the process of determining what something means. State Board rules require "any person" applying for a certificate to pass the "Oklahoma Teacher Certification Test(s)" in the field(s) which corresponds to the desired credential. This year, the State Board amended this rule to require passing the "written test based solely upon the U.S. Naturalization Test" in addition to the "Teacher Certification Test(s)." The State Superintendent has the express authority to interpret these administrative regulations. However, using the scenario in your inquiry, the Superintendent may not "interpret" this rule by establishing a testing requirement that only applies to out-of-state candidates for a teaching certificate. This is especially true because (1) the rule, by its plain terms, expressly applies to all persons applying for a certificate, whether a resident of Oklahoma or not, and (2) the Legislature expressly exempts a person who is certified by another state from any competency examination tied to receiving an Oklahoma teaching certificate.

Accordingly, and to bring this matter to a close, the Legislature does not authorize the State Superintendent to adopt a competency examination; nor does the State Superintendent have authority in matters pertaining to teacher certification. And the Legislature does not permit the State Superintendent to adopt or make rules for the operation of the public schools, or adopt a competency examination for teacher certification candidates. Those charges are expressly reserved for the CEQA, the State Board, and a local school district board of education. Even if the power to interpret encompassed a more expansive implied power to establish an additional testing requirement for certification, which it does not, such implied power must yield to the State Board's express authority over certification matters. As a result, any attempt by the State Superintendent to unilaterally require a competency examination as a condition of the State Board issuing a teaching certificate is a clear example of an agency or official expanding its powers beyond its own authority. And, that the Superintendent may not do.

It is, therefore, the official Opinion of the Attorney General that:

The Superintendent of Public Instruction lacks any legal authority under Oklahoma law to unilaterally require out-of-state teachers to pass an additional examination as a condition for teacher certification or employment by a local public school district in Oklahoma.

GENTNER DRUMMOND
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OKLAHOMA

BRADLEY CLARK
GENERAL COUNSEL