Should states be given the leeway to decide which of their teachers are "highly qualified?" One of the criticisms of NCLB is that, while certain aspects of education are micromanaged by the federal government, the definition of what makes a teacher qualified is not. Thus, the definition can vary greatly from state to state - and some states might be tweaking these definitions in order to keep up appearances.
This post from Ohio, for example, says that Ohio has one of the best sets of guidelines, yet some teachers were undoubtedly missed:
Ohio data showed 82 percent of the state's teachers are "highly qualified" by state standards. Among poor school districts, 78 percent of teachers meet the requirements...
Ohio's definition has been lauded as one of the best. Michigan replicated Ohio's and Kansas' models for its own. The Ohio definition requires teachers to have at least a bachelor's degree and be licensed in teaching areas. Those with master's in high school teaching areas also are considered highly qualified, as are teachers who passed the standardized education test, the Praxis...
The Ohio data sent to Washington reflects teachers during 2002-03, not the current year. It ignores some highly qualified teachers, those with master's degrees, and relies on statewide data. It does not divide that information down to the district level and offers no indication of trends because it is the first year of reporting.
On the other hand, there's California:
California had to scrap its initial definition, which converted nearly all teachers, whether on waivers or emergency permits, to highly qualified status. Responding to an outcry from education groups, the California State Board of Education is in the process of sculpting new requirements.
Another interesting report on California comes from the Pacific Research Insitute, which claims that California's credentialing procedure reduces the chances of the state's bringing highly qualified teachers on board. Why? Allegedly because the credential requirements haven't been validated, the training required for credentialing may not be related to teaching ability, and because there are so many loopholes that the minimum standards are often not met.
Only ten states have so far defined what constitutes a "highly qualified" teacher, and Florida is one of those states:
Guidelines regarding employment of highly qualified teachers have been distributed to each district. Florida has moved beyond "planning" into implementation of the requirements as stated in the law. This includes the provision that newly employed teachers in Title I schools must be highly qualified (effective at the beginning of the 2002-03 school) and that all teachers in core subject areas in all schools must be highly qualified by 2006.
I dug around until I found Florida's actual set of standards for a "highly qualified" teacher:
All teachers who give instruction in the core academic subjects of Arts-Visual Arts, Dance, Drama-Theatre, Foreign Languages, Language Arts, Mathematics, Music, Science, Social Studies and Graded Self-Contained at any level must meet the following criteria in order for a "yes" response to be provided:
* holds an acceptable bachelor’s or higher degree, and holds a valid Florida certificate in-field in the subject area assigned
In addition:
All (elementary, middle, and secondary) "not new" teachers of core academic subjects must meet one of the following criteria in order for a "yes" response to be provided:
* has passed the appropriate subject area test in the area assigned OR
* has a satisfactory or better performance evaluation in the area assigned (s.1012.34) OR
* has a major or equivalent courses in the subject area assigned as shown on a valid certificate for middle and secondary teachers only.
"New" elementary teachers (hired after the first day of school in the 2002-03 school year) must meet one of the following criteria in order for a "yes" response to be provided:
* has passed the appropriate subject area test in the area assigned OR
* holds a valid in-field Professional Certificate in the area assigned.
So becoming "highly certified" is possible even if the appropriate subject test is failed. That's interesting. Loopholes for the FCAT are accompanies by loopholes for the teachers as well.
If you've recently read an interesting article relating to teacher certification and/or definining "highly qualified" teachers for your state, be sure to send it to me. The Devoted Readers of this blog would be interested to hear about it.