ElizaBeth McCay, Editor

Training, Certification and Licensure

Defining the Problem: Across the United States licensure requirements vary. The fear of pending teacher and administrator shortages has led states and localities to become creative in order to fill vacancies in the classrooms. Meeting these demands, then retaining educators, and providing ongoing training, only just begin to ensure an educator in every classroom — without sacrificing quality of teaching.

Key Definitions: It is important in the discussion to consider the distinction among the terms teacher quality, teaching quality, and teaching qualifications. As noted by the US Department of Education (Fabiano, 1999), the first two of these in particular are highly complex issues and difficulty to define, much less assess. Teaching qualifications generally include general ability, content knowledge, pedagogic (teaching methods) knowledge, and credentials. Even these components are difficult to assess.

Other important terms include licensure and certification. Licensure is the process by which an agency of the state government grants permission to persons meeting determined state qualifications to practice the educational profession. Certification is the process by which a non-governmental agency or association grants professional recognition to an individual who has certain predetermined qualifications specified by that agency or association. (Virginia Department of Education’s Report on Teacher Education and Licensure, 2000)

Routes to Licensure: Two primary routes to licensure exist, and are detailed here.

State-Approved University Programs: Typically colleges and universities offer an on-campus curriculum followed by a semester of student teaching. However, some programs provide a wide variety of field experiences in various settings, prior to the culmination of the student teaching experience. The state-approved programs offered at local universities permit recommendations for licensure based on a student’s completion of the program. Non-traditional students who return to college also may participate in approved, yet different, programs based on prior degrees and experience.

According to the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) 2000 standards, accredited universities in the 21st century will be expected to focus on candidate performance. Not only will teacher candidates be expected to show mastery of content knowledge, but also must demonstrate they can teach effectively. Second, colleges of education will be responsible for evaluating the effectiveness of their programs and using the information to improve the current program. Both internal (GPA, portfolios, lessons, video, written reflections) and external (licensing exam, employer evaluations, placement rates) methods will be used to show levels of acceptable performance have been attained. The identified institutional benchmarks will be reflective of national benchmarks.

Amidst the frenzy of teacher shortages, the university level offers the positive news that 10% of college freshmen say they have plans to teach in schools. This percentage is the highest since the 1970’s. However, approximately one half of students preparing to enter the teaching profession fail to do so within four years of graduation. In addition, of those who do enter, one in five leave the educational arena within three years of beginning their careers.

Tests are designed to identify the competence of those seeking to go into education. The Professional Teacher’s Assessment includes Praxis I (academic skill assessment); and Praxis II (specialty area tests). The tests require prospective teachers to pass according to standards predetermined.

Three traditional routes exist for individuals to become licensed to teach in Virginia. The first begins with enrollment in a state-approved college or university program. Second, teachers relocating to Virginia and holding a license from a state-approved program in another state and national certification are offered reciprocity. Third, through the recommendation of a Virginia school division or non-public school a teacher can be offered a three-year provisional license. The provisional license is given to an individual who holds a bachelor’s degree and satisfies requirements in one or more specified endorsement areas.

Alternative Programs: Alternative programs seek to fill key shortage areas around the country. One report indicates that 41 states offer alternative certification or licensure programs (Feistritzer & Chester; 1996). Alternative licensure programs provide a quicker route to the classroom through emergency certification or significantly condensed teacher preparation programs. Some of these avenues include:

College graduates. National programs such as Teach for America offer intensive, five-week study programs designed to place individuals holding a bachelor’s degree in the classroom after specialized training. The program focuses output into under-funded, remote rural, and inner city schools, all of which have critical shortages of teachers. Another route in Virginia includes licensure based on coursework. The candidate must have earned a bachelor’s degree and have met criteria for teaching endorsement requirements. In addition, the candidate must complete the Professional Teacher’s Assessment and meet Praxis I (academic skill assessment) & II requirements (specialty area tests) and have completed specified course hour requirements (15 hours—grades 6-12; 18 hours—Pre/K-3, Pre/K-6 and special education).

Military. Troops to Teachers, designed specifically to assist with military reductions, offers the opportunity for positive role models and a relief to the impending teacher shortage problem. Building on the premise that many military personnel have experience in teaching and discipline and hold a bachelor’s degree, they seem to be prime candidates for recruitment by the education field.

Paraprofessionals. Para-educator to educator teacher programs exist in thirty states. Concentrated in California, Texas and New York, the focus is to expand the number of minority teachers. More recently, agreements have developed between some four-year institutions and community colleges to provide more direct, intensive support for paraprofessionals who are interested in teaching (Fideler, 2000).

Special Education. In Virginia, special education teachers who do not hold appropriate special education criteria may be issued a three-year, nonrenewable teaching license. The conditional license is issued to an individual with a baccalaureate degree, an assigned mentor, a planned program of study, and who has completed a minimum of six (6) semester hours in the core area of special education.

Technical Professional. Technical professional, five-year renewable licenses are also issued in Virginia. Those graduating from high school and exhibiting academic proficiency, technical competency and hold 4000 hours or two years of experience qualify. This license if acceptable in teaching health occupations, business education, vocational education, work and family studies, trade and industrial education and marketing education.

Local Eligibility License. The Virginia General Assembly (2000) amended the Code of Virginia to establish a mechanism for local school boards to issue a valid three-year, nonrenewable license to teachers according to specified criteria. Candidates must hold a baccalaureate degree and have experience or training in the content area intended for teaching. During the three years, the candidate must complete training prescribed by the state Board of Education. The license is only valid in the issuing division. Local school boards provide information to Virginia’s Board of Education about teachers receiving local licenses. The Board of Education may revoke and reinstate a local school board’s authority.

On-the-Job Training: Improving teacher retention rates through better pre-service education and early-career support may help reduce the current teacher shortage fear.

Induction: The themes of fostering improvement through new teacher induction programs are now common. Programs designed to support, assist, train and assess teachers within their first three years of employment in public schools are booming. Because no national program exists, each state determines how involved it will be in helping school districts induct teachers; funding levels allocated to such programs vary.

Mentoring: The leading emphasis in most new-teacher training initiatives is the support designated through the use of a coach or mentor. At least one-half of all states have a training program, regardless of the licensure route a new teacher has taken. Other key emphases include orientation to school processes and policies. Virginia implemented a requirement that school divisions establish mentoring programs in 2000. The process for instituting this requirement, however, is still under development; training for mentors has not necessarily been provided.

Professional Development School Certification: On the cutting edge of teacher training and licensure is the idea of Professional Development School Certification. Through the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, a proposal, presented by Secretary of Education Riley, has been introduced for teachers beginning with an initial license, followed by a professional license and, finally, the teacher could seek a voluntary advanced license. The initial license is granted upon successful completion of a written exam of content and teacher knowledge and performance. Assessment of performance could be completed through traditional teacher program or during the first year of mentored teaching. The initial license represents the minimum level of knowledge and skills and indicates a trial period. The professional license would be based on clear standards developed by participating states, identifying what teachers should know and be able to do. Teachers would be assessed on their performance through classroom observation by a group of peers and a supervisor. Teachers are expected to keep knowledge of skills up to date and renew license periodically.

Accountability: The Virginia Education Accountability Act (EAA, 1998) holds local schools responsible for provisional license holders in various ways. Local school requirements include:

• (22.1-303 and 22.1-305, lines 264-270 & 297-298)
• Probationary teachers must be evaluated annually during the probationary period
• Use evaluation procedures developed by school board for instructional personnel
• Superintendent must consider evaluation when making non-renewal recommendations to school board
• Provide mentor teacher for 1st-year probationary teachers (22.1-303, 259-264)

The five year-renewable license is awarded after three conditions have been met:

• Professional Teacher’s Assessment (Praxis I & II)
• Professional Studies Requirement (four-year institute or alternative route)
• One year successful teaching in public or non-public school with the support of a mentor.

Licensure is currently being transformed in at least thirty states in attempts to truly measure a teacher’s knowledge and skills as a prerequisite for licensure. In addition, colleges across the nation should be planning for a performance-based system. Teacher candidates will be expected to show mastery of the content knowledge in their fields and demonstrate that they can teach it effectively. (Wise & Gollnick, N.D.).

Loopholes: Emergency licensure, incidental teaching and misassignments are quite common. Many teachers are hired who are either not yet certified as teachers, or who are unendorsed in the area of specialization which they will be expected to teach. According to the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (DATE):

• More than 1/4 of teachers enter the profession without having fully met state standards
• 12% are hired with no license at all
• 15% hold temporary, provisional, or emergency licenses
• Further, the US Department of Education (2000) indicates 30% of new teachers enter the profession without full certification.

Nearly every state provides loopholes in the licensing and certification process, allowing teachers in the classroom that have not met the criteria. For example, 36 of 39 states requiring teachers to pass a test of basic skills (e.g., Praxis) allow people to begin teaching without having passed the exam. Of the 36, only 20 set a time limit on the exception, while the remaining 16 allow for unqualified educators in the classroom until a qualified applicant has been hired.

Teaching without an appropriate license seems most evident at the middle school level, and also in high-poverty localities, small schools, among beginning teachers, and in lower track academic classes. Only 17 states require middle school teachers to obtain secondary level licenses in academic subjects they expect to teach. In addition, only nine states require all prospective middle school teachers to pass tests in their academic disciplines. Eleven states permit teachers to instruct out of their content area for part of the day and only the state of Florida requires parents be notified if children are taught by an out-of-field teacher.

In Virginia, teachers who have successfully taught for at least two years in an accredited public or nonpublic school outside of Virginia are exempt from the assessment requirement. Other loopholes exist as well. For example, individuals failing the Praxis test are granted a three-year provisional nonrenewable license. Upon successful completion of the test, licensure will be granted.

Ensuring teachers know their subjects and how to teach just begins to skim the surface of successful teaching. In addition teachers are expected to understand students, know what to do if a child is having difficulty and challenge those with advanced abilities in the classroom. The means for accomplishing this complex task receive significant debate in the field. Differing views are discussed here.

Licensure and Training

Admissions: Differing opinions prevail regarding raising or lowering the bar for acceptance requirements into preparation programs and licensure. Some argue that in order to increase the number of teachers entering the pipeline, standards for admission to preparation programs should be lowered. Others argue that standards should be raised to attract the best and brightest to the field. Most proponents of the latter view explain, however, that raising the bar without improvements to the field of teaching will not address the problem. A more comprehensive approach to the problem is suggested.

Minimize licensing and certification requirements: One view of the licensing-requirements debate suggests keeping these to a minimum. Supporters believe that requirements as they stand act as an artificial hurdle, keeping talented people from entering the profession. They suggest that minimal standards for licensure should include a criminal check, evidence of solid general education, and demonstration of content mastery. They also argue that principals should be free to hire teachers as needed and pay them based on performance and demand. Accountability for school performance would ensure schools seek competent teachers, proponents suggest. Certain programs specifically target underfunded schools, addressing one of the critical shortage areas. The negative is that those with potentially the least teacher training are serving the most educationally needy.

Emergency hiring: Emergency licensure and out-of-area teaching assignments are areas of debate in the field. Many of those responsible for hiring decisions see no choice when shortages exist in certain subject areas or in special education. Opponents of such practices argue adamantly against emergency hiring practices and, instead, emphasize concentrating on other measures to train and attract quality applicants. There is evidence that the proportion of teachers on emergency certificates is a strong negative predictor of student achievement (Darling-Hammond, 1999). Candidates may be hired ‘cold,’ without any prior training or preparation. This places increased burden on the local school and division, particularly teachers in those schools, for mentoring and training on the job. One special education department chair in a large, suburban high school in Virginia indicated that an increasing number of teachers being hired have neither training and experience with special education populations, nor basic classroom teacher training. This places a tremendous responsibility on school personnel who must provide massive on-the-job training, in addition to their regular teaching and administrative duties.

Late career starters: Some suggest the hiring of older personnel, typically those coming to teaching after another career or later in life, including retired military personnel. Proponents of this idea believe that such candidates bring maturity to the job, as well as an attraction to the altruistic nature of the profession. Often such prospective applicants are provided with reduced requirements for training, such as a one-summer (or less) intensive program, or post-hiring requirements for coursework. Opponents argue that the intensive, short-term training provided to such candidates is insufficient to prepare these recruits for the job.

Increase licensing and certification requirements: On the other hand the National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future recommends increasing requirements for licensure, including: improving teacher preparation and assessment; raising standards; encouraging professional preparation; and providing support for beginning teachers. Supporters of increased requirements argue that merely “jumping through the hoops” does not guarantee quality teachers. With regard to national testing, for example, there exists significant debate as to whether the test accurately measures what it seeks to achieve. One example of efforts to improve requirements includes the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC)—a group of more than 30 states working together to create more rigorous licensing standards. Content knowledge is only one element of the licensure requirements for individuals from accredited programs. The National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) standards incorporate not only the ability to show mastery in field of expertise, but also demonstrate the ability to effectively teach so that children may learn. In addition, the theme of technology is interwoven throughout the standards established.

Five-year programs: Some suggest that states provide incentives for the establishment of more extended (e.g., five-year and fifth-year) teacher education programs. The concept behind this proposal is to increase the depth of training provided at the university, including extensive clinical preparation. Others argue for reduction in time requirements for preparation, saying that the route to licensure discourages potential applicants.

Addressing shortage areas: It has been suggested by some that universities should work in conjunction with local school divisions to determine current and projected shortage areas, and encourage students to pursue those subject areas. Some simply suggest that universities expand teacher education programs in high-need fields.

Common ground: Although the views on whether to lower or raise requirements vastly differ they do hold some common ground. Both believe that teachers need to know subjects they teach, and that more learning about how to teach should take place in actual schools under the supervision of master teachers.

Reciprocity: Some in the field advocate that states establish licensing reciprocity across states, to allow for ease of teacher movement from one location to another. In areas experiencing a mobile teaching population, interstate licensure would ease the process of hiring teachers. Those who oppose this idea, however, express concern about inconsistency of expectations from state to state. Another suggestion most recently is that states grant a license to out-of-state entrants who have achieved certification with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. The U.S. Department of Education (2000) reported learning is doubled among students receiving instruction from board certified teachers.

University level preparation: Within the realm of training at the university level, two dichotomous opinions, and a third composite, are evident. Regarding the content of teacher preparation programs, one view is that pedagogy should be emphasized. That is, pre-teachers should be well versed in the methods of teaching. One study pointed out that teachers with less preparation in teaching methods are more likely to leave the field than peers with more training in this area (NCES, 2000). Another view holds that training should have a greater emphasis on content knowledge, arguing that a stronger academic background in one’s intended field of teaching is essential to effective teaching (Forbes, 1998). Yet a third view suggests that both content knowledge and methods training are essential in the preparation of teachers (Darling-Hammond, 1999; and others). After viewing 20 years of research, Darling-Hammond found a strong and consistently positive influence of education coursework (i.e. pedagogical study) and licensure on student achievement (cited in Laitsch, 2000). Another suggestion is to provide incentives for community colleges and others that prepare paraprofessionals for certification. Proponents of this measure suggest that paraprofessionals enter teaching with experience in schools, and are therefore excellent candidates to move from paraprofessional to professional roles as teachers. In addition, in many localities this may also increase the pool of minority educators.

On-site induction and mentoring: Induction and mentoring programs for new teachers are currently required in Virginia, but not yet implemented in all localities nor assessed to determine quality of implementation. It is generally, and relatively recently, accepted that support for new teachers is critical in keeping them on the job. Over half of new teachers surveyed nationally by Public Agenda expressed a desire for increased time with an experienced supervisor. A focus on high-quality programs is key. Detractors of this plan take issue only with the lack of depth and/or follow through by mentors within the program (e.g., meeting a mentor one time, but receiving no direct assistance).

Trade-offs: Recent measurement studies seesaw between findings that alternative routes produce teachers who are better prepared and that traditionally prepared teachers remain in the classroom longer. (Shen, 1997; Stoddart & Flodden, 1995; cited in Ferraro, 1998). This suggests that neither the traditional nor alternate routes alone are sufficient to address the challenges of teacher shortages and licensing requirements.

An external review of the Massachusetts Teacher Tests (MTT), which have received national attention for excessive failure rates among teachers, reported that scores in reading and writing were “highly unreliable” (Haney, Fowler, Wheelock, Bebell, & Malec; 1999). A rebuttal from a representative of the Educational Testing Service (ETS) argued in at least partial support of the use of the MTT with necessary improvements (Wainer, 1999).

Some examples of the licensure and training issues around the nation include:

All fifty states, as well as District of Columbia, license prospective teachers. Although the requirements vary and some can be waived, they remain key in promoting teacher quality (Laitsch, 2000)

Revising licensing standards: Connecticut’s 1986 Education Enhancement Act eliminated shortages and improved quality. Standards for licensure were strengthened through more rigorous requirements for teacher education, carefully designed licensing exams, and a beginning teacher internship and assessment program. In addition, a consortium of 38 states is working together to devise new, rigorous standards for beginning teachers and to come up with new ways of measuring whether candidates deserve a license to teach.

Redesigning teacher education: U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley announce 5.13 million in new grants to redesign teacher education in Florida, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, and Oklahoma. The focus will be on changing statewide policies and practices that continue when federal funding ends. (Press Release, 2000)

Partnerships: Examples of partnerships between universities and local school divisions abound. The University of Cincinnati and Cincinnati Public Schools have engaged in a partnership for more than a decade, training aspiring teachers in Professional Practice Schools. Success is noted in hiring rates of teachers trained via this model; demonstration of leadership; increased ratings by principals; and increased collaboration. Ongoing professional development of experienced teachers is provided through the model. These teachers demonstrate leadership; higher rates of national board certification; greater commitment to school reform and use of research-based practices. University faculty benefit as well in their work. The University of Colorado at Denver and surrounding public schools also have developed a two-pronged approach for teacher preparation and ongoing development. Governance for the programs is shared by the university and partner schools. In St. Louis, Maryville University and Parkway South High School have partnered to develop secondary teachers. Through this partnership, a mentoring team made up of faculty members from Arts and Sciences, the School of Education, and the high school follow students through the program. The mentor team assists in the development of an action research plan and the individual’s professional portfolio. The University of Southern Maine revised its teacher preparation program during the last decade, in response to criticisms of the quality of graduates. They now offer the Extended Teacher Education Program (ETEP), a two-tiered program including a bachelor’s degree and graduate program in education. Their partnership is with Southern Maine Partnership schools; together they have developed clearly defined expected outcomes for graduates. The El Paso (Texas) Collaborative for Academic Excellence was formed with collaboration from the University of Texas at El Paso and El Paso Community College, business and local government leaders, area superintendents, and a community organization. A primary focus has been on simultaneously improving the teacher education program and the quality of education in area schools. Two essential features have been the efforts to incorporate technology into effective teaching practices, and preparation for how to work together with parents—particularly addressing the local needs of low-SES and minority parents. Wyoming has addressed its unique problems of a highly rural and remote school population with the Video Education Interactive Network (VEIN), a statewide compressed video system. The network is used for course instruction, statewide meetings, meetings with pre-service students in field placements. Students’ professional portfolios are recorded on a CD-ROM. Coursework in teaching with technology is an integral part of the preparation program. Other outstanding programs are noted in Chattanooga, Milwaukee, Washington, DC, Oregon, Albuquerque, Ohio, and other areas. (US Department of Education, National Conference on Teacher Quality: Exemplary Practices; 2000)

Recognizing national certification: Nearly half of the states provide raises for teachers completing certification with the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards. North Carolina teachers earn a 12% raise as a result of successful completion. Approximately 15 states honor National Board certification, allowing teachers to carry a teaching license from state to state (where recognized). Currently, many teachers who move to a new state leave the teaching field rather than complete the new state’s requirements for certification.

Twenty-four states currently provide extra resources for teachers seeking this voluntary certification, while another five states have recently approved the practice.

Alternate routes to licensure: Approximately 40 states offer alternative means for obtaining licensure, beyond the typical college path, particularly for mid-career switchers and retired military personnel. Another pool of potential teachers includes paraprofessionals; at least six states thus far provide incentives and training for this group. In Virginia, the DeWitt-Wallace Reader’s Digest Program at Norfolk State University has prepared a number of paraprofessionals for teaching. For military personnel, Old Dominion University has been preparing approximately 200-250 teachers per year in their Troops-to-Teachers program, through an agreement between Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES). Massachusetts offered $20,000 bonuses in 1998 over four years to selected individuals who were not in a traditional teaching preparation program. Recipients of this bonus were provided an intensive summer training program to prepare them to enter teaching. Critics argue, however, that this money could be more wisely invested during the 3rd-5th years of teaching, based on successful (and rigorous) performance reviews.

Programs to increase minority applicant pool: NCATE initiated a support network for historically black colleges in 1995. Currently 80% have teacher preparation programs receiving NCATE accreditation or preparing to seek accreditation (Gehrig, 2000).

The issues surrounding licensure and training are numerous, most of which are addressed in this series of policy briefs. Provided here is a brief mention of some of the related issues.

Professional Development: Ongoing professional development on the job is a generally accepted practice. Its implementation, however, is generally assumed and often falls drastically short of intended benefits.

Retention: Not only must school divisions fill initial positions, but they must also attend to retaining teachers and administrators in the job. Attrition rates of new teachers are extremely high; some reports estimate that 20% of teachers leave the field by their fifth year, while other estimates are higher.

Improve societal perception of teaching as a career: On a societal level, increasing the image of and worth given to teaching as a career is suggested by many as critical to attracting quality applicants to the profession. In addition, states and localities might consider increasing the incentives to not retire.

Recruiting young students in middle and high school: Some programs target young students before career decisions are made. Programs typically offer a course or club, in some cases targeting minorities and males.

New teacher benefits: Increased pay and benefits for new teachers are suggested by some. The idea behind this strategy is to entice new teachers into the field, with the hopes that they will stay in the job.

The importance of having well-prepared and qualified teachers in our educational system is well documented. As with most components within education, the need for good teachers is stated simply. However, the challenge of training and licensing teachers in order to accomplish this goal is a highly complex one. No single policy, plan, or perspective can address all that is involved in this process.

It is critical that policy makers and educators view this as a holistic, systemic challenge, involving many complex components. Needs of students and communities will vary from region to region and state to state, and these needs must be considered in developing local policy. The needs of a large urban division may differ greatly from those of a small rural system or a suburban locality. Needs also are different for various populations of students, such as those with a low number of English language learners or a high rate of transience, for example. In many cases, teachers might benefit from preparation to address specific needs in diverse settings. This is not to say that licensure requirements need necessarily be unique to the situation; the preparation and induction support may need to be individually tailored, however.

As noted earlier, defining quality is yet another highly complex and challenging task. This term provides, often, a moving target. How are quality teaching and teacher preparation defined? Significant debate exists on this issue. Policy makers and educators will want to keep in mind that quality should not be considered synonymous with course credits, test scores, and other such measures alone. Extensive and interactive discussion is needed at all levels (policy, university, K-12, community) to explore this issue in depth and in an ongoing manner.

Policy makers may want to consider the benefits of increasing the ease with which localities could hire experienced teachers from a national pool of applicants. In addition to accepting National Board Certification in place of state level requirements, establishing or increasing licensing reciprocity among states demonstrating similar standards and high quality assessments could be examined further. This would allow localities with shortages to hire teachers from other geographic regions where teacher supply exceeds the demand.

Given the current and projected trends in teacher and administrator retirements, school divisions need flexibility in hiring practices. However, it is crucial that student learning is not traded for haphazard hiring practices. In addition, the impact of unprepared teachers on the local school faculty must also be considered. As emergency hires are made (often at the last minute to fill a vacancy) peer faculty and administrators face immediate, unanticipated demands for providing intensive training and supervision to assist the teacher without a license or subject area certification. This point is often overlooked in the sometimes desperate need to find a “warm body” to fill a vacancy as school opens. Policy makers may want to consider the impact that such policies, without supporting resources for local schools, are likely to have.

Use of targeted incentives from federal and state governments to expand programs in shortage fields might be considered. Funding may be available for areas such as special education, higher level sciences and mathematics, for example.

Recruiting potential applicants to the field is critical. Providing channels for middle and high school level students to explore teaching as a career option is one avenue for consideration. Recruiting students to college initially and then among non-education majors is another means for generating interest in a teaching career. Alternative routes for mid-career changers provide yet another way for schools to attract potential educators. Policy makers might consider the financial costs associated with such diverse recruiting efforts and provide funding sources for this work to build the pool of potential teachers.

Those teachers trained in five-year programs enter and remain in higher rates than those in traditional programs. In addition, the costs are less to prepare students in extended programs. Policy makers may want to consider the long-term benefits and cost effectiveness associated with supporting the development of such programs. In addition, partnerships among universities and school divisions warrant significant consideration. Development of meaningful professional development school programs and integrated training partnerships contribute to effective preservice training and ongoing professional development for teachers. Partnerships including community colleges might provide pathways for paraprofessionals not yet in college, often increasing the pool of minority teachers. Again, such efforts require extensive commitment of time and resources from all parties involved. Policy makers might consider funding incentives for the development or enhancement of such initiatives.

Intensive mentoring of new teachers results in fewer turnovers. Training for mentors is critical, and an ongoing relationship is essential. Such training will require funding and release time for master teachers and novices alike. The induction process for new teachers in the early career years cannot be overlooked. Provision of resources to support new teachers is likely to increase retention rates of those teachers, thereby serving as a long-term, cost-effective measure.

Currently there is more rhetoric than reality in current established standards if districts hire teachers who do not meet the standards; teachers who meet standards do not stay in the profession, and; states eliminate or lower standards for entry into the teaching profession. Increasing, or — for that matter — lowering, the standards for licensing and certification are not likely to address the problems at hand. A more comprehensive approach to this very complex issue is called for. This might include consideration of what quality teaching looks like, how it is achieved, and how to support its continued development both before and after hiring. Rather than an either/or approach to teacher preparation (either traditional or alternative), reframing the issue in a both/and perspective (creating and sustaining diverse, effective preparation and ongoing training programs at all levels) is more likely to bring desired results. This would include high quality university and college preparation programs as well as carefully designed, high quality alternative routes for those outside the field of education. Only with a holistic, comprehensive, ongoing view regarding the preparation, retention, and development of quality educators are we likely to see significant resolution to these issues surrounding training and licensure.

Click here for summary of recent Virginia Legislative history of “Training, Certification, and Licensure.”

Alternative certification on the rise, study says. (2000). What Works in Teaching and Learning, 32,3.

American Council on Education. (1999). To touch the future: Transforming the way teachers are taught, an action agenda for college and university presidents. Washington DC: ACE Fulfillment Service.

Anderson, J.(1998). Service-learning and teacher education. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. ED421481.

Bowan, D.H. (2000). Nonprofit group aims to groom new breed of leaders. Education Week on the Web.

Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future.

Fabiano, L. (1999). Measuring teacher qualifications. Working paper 1999-04 (February 1999). U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Educational Statistics.

Farkas, S., Johnson, J., and Foleno, T. (2000). Is certification the problem? A sense of calling: who teaches and why. A Report from Public Agenda.

Feistritzer, C.E., and Chester, D.T. (1996). Alternative teacher certification: A state by state analysis. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information.

Ferraro, J. M. (1998). “I already have a bachelor’s degree, how can I obtain a teaching license?” Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. ED426057.

Fideler, E. (2000). State initiated induction programs: Supporting, assisting, training, assessing, and keeping teachers. The State Education Standard, Winter, 2000.

Gehrig, J. (2000). Minority-serving colleges call for teacher-training help. Education Week [On-Line].

Haycock, K. (1998, Summer). Good teaching matters: How well-qualified teachers can close the gap. A Publication of The Education Trust, 3, 2.

Haney, W., Fowler, C., Wheelock, A., Bebell, D., & Malec, N. (1999). Less truth than error? An independent study of the Massachusetts Teacher Test. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 7, 4 (February 11, 1999).

Haselkorn, D. and Fideler, E. (1996). Breaking the class ceiling: Paraeducator pathways to teaching. A national study conducted by Recruiting New Teachers, Inc. on behalf of the DeWitt-Wallace Reader’s Digest fund.

Hinkle, A.B. (2000, June 27). Military personnel help fight teacher shortage. The Richmond Times Dispatch.

Hoff, D.J. (2000). Effort to recruit math, science teachers urged. Education Week on the Web.

Huling, L. (1998). Early field experiences in teacher education. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. ED 429054.

Jerald, C.D. & Boser, U. (2000). Setting policy for new teachers. Education Week [On-Line].

Keller, B. (2000). States move to improve teacher pool. Education Week on the Web, 19, 40, 1,20.

Kysilko, D. (Ed.). (2000). Ensuring quality and quantity in the teaching work force: Policies that can make it happen [Premiere Issue]. The State Education Standard, Winter, 2000.

Laitsch, D. (2000, April 6). Pro & Con: Don’t Dumb the Down the Classroom. Intellectual Capital.com.

Lashway, L. (1997). Measuring leadership potential. Eugene, Oregon: ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management. ED409605.

Nakamura, D. & Samuels, C.A. (2000, June 25). In school, changes at the top. The Washington Post, p. A01.

Oakes, T. J.(2000). A guide to organizations involved with licensing and certification of teachers and accreditation of teacher education programs. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teaching and Teacher Education. ED437367.

Olson, L. (2000). Sweetening the pot. Education Week on the Web.

Olson, L. (2000). Finding and keeping competent teachers. Education Week on the Web.

Powell, T. (2000, February 26). Nine action steps to improve teaching profession. The Charleston Gazette.

Press Release (2000). $18.5 million grant to support national board for professional teaching standards.

Press Release (2000). Riley announces grants to improve teacher quality.

Quality Counts 2000. Virginia Report Card. Education Week

Raising licensing and certification standards. (1998). Promising practices: new ways to improve teacher quality.

Reforms in preservice preparation programs and teacher certification standards(1996). Improving America’s schools: Newsletter on issues in school reform – May 1996.

The road to certification (2000, June 25). The Washington Post, p. B04.

Riley, R.W. (1999). Updating teacher licensure and compensation for the 21st century: a possible approach for states. United States Secretary of Education 6th Annual State of American Education Speech.

Teaching as a profession (2000). Education Week on the Web.

To touch the future: Transforming the ways teachers are taught (1999). Action Agenda for College and University Presidents, American Council on Education.

U.S. Department of Education. (2000). National Conference on Teacher Quality – Exemplary Practices.

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (1998). The redesign of the schools and staffing survey for 1999-2000: A position paper, Working Paper No. 98-08, by Mary Rollefson. Washington, DC.

Virginia Board of Education. (2000). Regulations establishing standards for accrediting public schools in Virginia (8 VAC 20-131-10 et.seq.).

Virginia Department of Education (2000). Report on teacher education and licensure(brief).

Virginia Department of Education. (2000). Routes to Teacher Licensure.

Virginia Department of Education. (2000). Virginia’s “career switcher” alternative route to licensure pilot programs for military personnel.

Wainer, H. (1999, February 17). Some comments on the ad hoc committee’s critique of the Massachusetts Teacher Tests. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 7, 5.

Welsh, Patrick (2000, June 25). Great ones don’t always fit the mold. The Washington Post, p. B01.

Who should teach? The states decide (2000). Education Week on the Web. 19,18, 8-9.

Wise, A. & Gollnick, D. (N.D.) Performance-based accreditation for the new millennium. National Council for the Accreditation of Teachers.

For state testing requirements, see www.ets.org.

Click cepi@vcu.edu to provide comments or additional information. Please indicate in an e-mail the copyright source and contact information for new inclusions.

Back to Top

Copyright © CEPI 2000
CEPI grants permission to reproduce this paper for noncommercial purposes if CEPI is credited.