'Highly qualified' teachers: Pretense or legal requirement?

Phi Delta Kappan

Volumn 85, Issue 9, 2004, Pages 690-696

  Rebell, Michael A ^a,b   Hunter, Molly A ^c  

^a Campaign for Fiscal Equity Inc ^*  (United States)

^b Och Spine at New York Presbyterian Hospitals   (United States)

^c CFE's National ACCESS Project

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 2642562239     PISSN: 00317217     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/003172170408500910     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Campaign for Fiscal Equity (CFE) v. State of New York, 187 Misc. 2d 1, 25-36 (Sup. Ct., New York County, 2001), affd, CFE v. State, 796 N.Y.S.2d 106, 113-14, 116 (2003).
2. Office of Postsecondary Education, Meeting the Highly Qualified Teachers Challenge: The Secretary's Second Annual Report on Teacher Quality (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2003), p. 70.
3. See, for example, William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students' Academic Achievement (Knoxville: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, University of Tennessee, 1996); Ronald F. Ferguson, "Can School Narrow the Test Score Gap?," in Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, eds., The Black-White Test Score Cap (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998), p. 351; Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching (New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1997); and Linda Darling-Hammond, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence (Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Document R-99-1, December 1999).
4. See, for example, William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students' Academic Achievement (Knoxville: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, University of Tennessee, 1996); Ronald F. Ferguson, "Can School Narrow the Test Score Gap?," in Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, eds., The Black-White Test Score Cap (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998), p. 351; Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching (New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1997); and Linda Darling-Hammond, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence (Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Document R-99-1, December 1999).
5. See, for example, William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students' Academic Achievement (Knoxville: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, University of Tennessee, 1996); Ronald F. Ferguson, "Can School Narrow the Test Score Gap?," in Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, eds., The Black-White Test Score Cap (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998), p. 351; Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching (New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1997); and Linda Darling-Hammond, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence (Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Document R-99-1, December 1999).
6. See, for example, William L. Sanders and June C. Rivers, Cumulative and Residual Effects of Teachers on Future Students' Academic Achievement (Knoxville: Value-Added Research and Assessment Center, University of Tennessee, 1996); Ronald F. Ferguson, "Can School Narrow the Test Score Gap?," in Christopher Jencks and Meredith Phillips, eds., The Black-White Test Score Cap (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998), p. 351; Doing What Matters Most: Investing in Quality Teaching (New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1997); and Linda Darling-Hammond, Teacher Quality and Student Achievement: A Review of State Policy Evidence (Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Document R-99-1, December 1999).
7. 1999 National Education Summit (Washington, D.C.: Achieve, Inc., 1999), p. 11.
8. Office of Postsecondary Education, Meeting the Highly Qualified Teachers Challenge: The Secretary's Annual Report on Teacher Quality (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 2002), pp. 6-7. In this report, issued shortly after NCLB became law, U.S. Secretary of Education Rod Paige emphasized the research literature on the strong correlation between qualified teachers and student achievement.
9. See, for example, CFE v. State, 796 N.Y.S.2d 113-14; Montoy v. State of Kansas, No. 99-C-1738 94 (Circuit Court of Shawnee County, 2 December 2003); and Hoke County Bd. of Educ. v. State of North Carolina, 95 CVS 1158 109-10 (Super. Ct., Wake County, 4 April 2002).
10. 20 U.S.C. § 6319(a) (2002).
11. 20 U.S.C. § 7801(23) (2002). Strict compliance with this provision would prove impossible in many small rural secondary schools, in which teachers must often teach in more than one subject area. At press time, the New York Times reported that the U.S. Department of Education plans to change the regulations for teachers in rural school districts. Diana Jean Schemo, "Rules Eased on Upgrading U.S. Schools," New York Times, 16 March 2004, p. A-17.
12. I b i d.
13. Not Good Enough: A Content Analysis of Teacher Licensing Examinations (Washington, D.C.: Education Trust, 1999), p. 2.
14. NCLB is mandating the few states that do not require any teacher credentialing exams to institute them. In direct response to NCLB, Alabama, for example, has restored requirements for minimum competency testing of teacher candidates for the first time in 17 years. The state plans to require academic subject-matter tests for new secondary teachers in time to meet NCLB's 2005-06 deadline for ensuring that all teachers are "highly qualified."
15. Not Good Enough, p. 2.
16. National Research Council, Testing Teacher Candidates: The Role of Licensure Tests in Improving Teacher Quality (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 2001).
17. Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Second Annual Report, p. 2.
18. Bess Keller, "Rigor Disputed in Standards for Teachers," Education Week, 14 January 2004, p. 1.
19. 34 C.F.R. § 9101 (23) (2002).
20. 20 U.S.C. § 7801(23) (2002).
21. 34 C.F.R. § 9101(23)(2002).
22. Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Annual Report, p. 39. The disparaging views of pedagogical training and skills found in the secretary's report were based on Kate Walsh, Teacher Certification Reconsidered: Stumbling for Quality (Baltimore, Md.: Abell Foundation, 2001). This apparently partisan report flies in the face of extensive research by a number of scholars who have concluded that pedagogical skills are essential, especially for children who are "at risk."
23. Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Annual Report, p. 39. The disparaging views of pedagogical training and skills found in the secretary's report were based on Kate Walsh, Teacher Certification Reconsidered: Stumbling for Quality (Baltimore, Md.: Abell Foundation, 2001). This apparently partisan report flies in the face of extensive research by a number of scholars who have concluded that pedagogical skills are essential, especially for children who are "at risk."
24. See, for example, Linda Darling-Hammond, "Research and Rhetoric on Teacher Certification: A Response to Teacher Certification Reconsidered,'" Education Policy Analysis Archives, 6 September 2002, p. 10; Daniel D. Goldhaber and Dominic J. Brewer, "Does Teacher Certification Matter?," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 2000, p. 29; and David Monk, "Subject Area Preparation of Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers and Student Achievement," Economics of Education Review, vol.12, 1994, p. 125.
25. See, for example, Linda Darling-Hammond, "Research and Rhetoric on Teacher Certification: A Response to Teacher Certification Reconsidered,'" Education Policy Analysis Archives, 6 September 2002, p. 10; Daniel D. Goldhaber and Dominic J. Brewer, "Does Teacher Certification Matter?," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 2000, p. 29; and David Monk, "Subject Area Preparation of Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers and Student Achievement," Economics of Education Review, vol.12, 1994, p. 125.
26. See, for example, Linda Darling-Hammond, "Research and Rhetoric on Teacher Certification: A Response to Teacher Certification Reconsidered,'" Education Policy Analysis Archives, 6 September 2002, p. 10; Daniel D. Goldhaber and Dominic J. Brewer, "Does Teacher Certification Matter?," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 2000, p. 29; and David Monk, "Subject Area Preparation of Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers and Student Achievement," Economics of Education Review, vol.12, 1994, p. 125.
27. Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Second Annual Report, p. 3.
28. Julie Blair, "Critics Question Federal Funding of Teacher Test," Education Week, 8 October 2003, p. 1.
29. The STEP process is described in Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Second Annual Report, p. 24.
30. American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education, Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (Washington, D.C.: AERA Publications, 1999), pp. 9, 17.
31. According to the Secretary's Second Annual Report, a majority of the states claim to have "linked" their teacher requirements to their student learning standards. However, the basis for these claims is unclear, since many of these states' teacher certification procedures were developed before their student learning standards were formulated, and only five states are known to have followed the rigorous STEP alignment process in their teacher training institutions.
32. Oklahoma General Competencies for Teacher Licensure and Certification, adopted 23 May 1996, pursuant to Okla. Stat. Tit. 70, § 6-189 (2002).
33. Sandy Garrett, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, Oklahoma Department of Education, "Full Subject-Matter Competencies for Licensure and Certification," Revised, February 2002.
34. I b i d.
35. Next Steps: Moving Toward Performance-Based Licensing in Teaching (Washington, D.C.: Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, 1995). Available at www.ccsso.org; click on publications, and search on title.
36. Interview with Ted Gillispie, executive director of the Oklahoma Commission for Teacher Preparation, 7 January 2003; 70 Okla. Stat. § 6-195 (2002); and Okla. Admin. Code § 712:10-11-1 (2000).
37. Okla. Stat. Tit. 70 § 6-185, 188 (2003); and Gillispie interview.
38. See Sam W. Swofford, "The Role of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing in the California Reading Initiative," in The Hows and Whys of New Standards (Amherst, Mass.: National Evaluation Systems, Inc., 1999), pp. 125-46. Unfortunately, while California has developed a rigorous reading certification test, the effect has been largely negated in recent years by the decision -prompted by a broad initiative to reduce class sizes - to allow schools to hire tens of thousands of uncertified teachers. See Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Second Annual Report.
39. See Sam W. Swofford, "The Role of the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing in the California Reading Initiative," in The Hows and Whys of New Standards (Amherst, Mass.: National Evaluation Systems, Inc., 1999), pp. 125-46. Unfortunately, while California has developed a rigorous reading certification test, the effect has been largely negated in recent years by the decision -prompted by a broad initiative to reduce class sizes - to allow schools to hire tens of thousands of uncertified teachers. See Office of Postsecondary Education, Secretary's Second Annual Report.
40. See Michael A. Rebell, "Educational Adequacy, Democracy and the Courts," in Timothy Ready et al., eds., Achieving High Educational Standards for All: Conference Summary (Washington, D.C.: National Research Council, 2002), p. 218.
41. CFE v. State, 187 Misc. 2d 1, 24-29; and Lake View School District v. Huckabee, 76 S.W.3d 250 (Arkansas, 2002).
42. CFE v. State, 796 N.Y.S.2d at 111-12, 113-14. See also Abbott v. Burke, 748 A.2d 82, 89-91 (New Jersey, 2000).
43. Idaho Schools for Equal Educational Opportunity v. Evans, 850 P.2d 724, 728 (1993). See also Hoke v. State, 95 CVS 1158 19 (Super. Ct. Wake County, 12 October 2000); and Unified School District v. State, 885 P.2d 1170 (Kansas, 1994).