(Illustration by Chen via Pixabay) field_54b3f951675b3

STATE LEADERS ARE advancing a new graduation framework that raises expectations for what it takes to earn a diploma, with stronger coursework aligned to college- and career-readiness. That’s exactly the right move. But there is a roadblock ahead that can’t be ignored: We are not producing anywhere near the number of teachers required to provide the more rigorous curriculum the new standards will require, especially in math and science, the very subjects the framework seeks to strengthen.

Today, many high schools across the Commonwealth already struggle to provide consistent access to advanced coursework. The numbers explain why. In 2024, our state teacher preparation programs produced 220 high school math and science teachers. Assuming average retention rates, this is less than half of the new math and science teachers we need each year. Over the past decade, the number of newly licensed high school math and science teachers declined by over 30 percent.

As students head back to school, these positions remain unfilled.

At Teach For America Massachusetts, we see the impact every year: schools in Chelsea, Lawrence, Springfield, Fall River, and Boston request more math and science teachers than we can place — and that’s under today’s expectations, not the higher bar the new standards will set.

Consider a parallel: Massachusetts produces one of the highest shares of doctors per capita in the nation, yet struggles to fill primary care roles that carry heavy debt and lower pay. Faced with that gap, state leaders acted: they named the consequences, convened a working group of government, public health, training institutions, and hospitals, and built a creative mix of education and employment incentives to lower the cost barriers to entry. We have treated a clinician shortage as a public priority. Policymakers must do the same for the teachers who make those professions possible.

We have advantages that many states lack: a deep bench of STEM talent in schools and in the workforce. The task is to channel that talent toward the classroom, starting with clear signals from elected leaders that building the STEM teacher pipeline is an explicit part of implementing the new standards. Schools can’t solve this alone. Massachusetts can move in three steps.

Step one: recruit the STEM talent already in our universities by making the path into teaching financially attractive. Scale up the subscale UTeach programs at UMass Boston and Lowell — and extend the model to every state campus with a concentration of STEM majors. Pair a low- to no-cost STEM degree with service-tied tuition assistance for those who commit to teaching in underserved communities, plus paid summer and afterschool training that lets aspiring teachers earn as they learn.

Step two: open an accelerated, paid pathway for career-changers. A biotech chemist or software engineer who wants to teach shouldn’t have to spend two years and tens of thousands of dollars to re-credential. States like Iowa offer STEM professionals paid routes that let them teach from day one, with mentoring, while completing certification. Massachusetts already has a registered teacher apprenticeship structure; we simply haven’t aimed it at STEM majors or at the industry professionals our economy produces in abundance.

Step three: fund the STEM teacher pipeline the way we fund every other in-demand industry. Tennessee scaled the nation’s largest teacher apprenticeship program by tapping sustained workforce funding, not fragile, year-to-year competitive grants. Massachusetts spends tens of millions through quasi-state agencies to build the STEM workforce, but not the teacher pipeline that feeds it. Redirecting even a fraction toward STEM educators would repay itself in economic productivity as more students qualify for high-paying jobs in life sciences, AI, health care, and advanced manufacturing.

The stakes are human. Somewhere in Lawrence or Springfield right now, a student has the aptitude to become a biomedical engineer. Whether they ever discover it may come down to something as simple as whether their high school can find a chemistry teacher. A vacancy isn’t a line item on a budget — it’s 100 students who never got the course they needed for college, or the shot at the career they might have dreamed of. These early breakdowns compound into the inequality that already divides our state.

We are asking more of our students than ever before. Now we need to build the pipeline of teachers who can get them there. Otherwise, the result is predictable: some students will have the opportunities needed to meet the new standards, and others will never have the chance.

Kerry Donahue is the executive director of Teach For America Massachusetts.