Tuesday, September 09, 2003
More on highly qualified from Education Gadfly:
Requiring highly qualified teachers: unfair and unwise?
As part of No Child Left Behind, states are now required to report what percentage of their teachers are "highly qualified"—in other words, what percentage has a bachelor's degree, state certification and clear knowledge of the subject they teach. It's that last clause that has many teachers and union officials up in arms. For middle and high school teachers throughout the country who do not have a degree in the subject they teach (who majored in education, for example), this requirement means they must pass a subject area test to prove they are "highly qualified." Despite the increasing volume of research that shows a high correlation between content-area knowledge and student achievement, and the lack of conclusive evidence linking traditional certification requirements with pupil achievement, teachers and their unions are decrying this as "unfair" because it "changes the rules in the middle of the game," and unwise because it "[lowers] the requirements for what it takes to actually teach these children." The same groups also condemn provisions in NCLB that allow teachers to work in traditional public and charter schools without having graduated from an ed school preparation program if they pass a rigorous test of both content and pedagogy (like the newly launched American Board Passport Certification). Holding teachers to higher standards and giving them more options to help meet these raised expectations might sound to most Americans like sensible steps for raising student achievement. But then again, most Americans don't work for the NEA.
As part of No Child Left Behind, states are now required to report what percentage of their teachers are "highly qualified"—in other words, what percentage has a bachelor's degree, state certification and clear knowledge of the subject they teach. It's that last clause that has many teachers and union officials up in arms. For middle and high school teachers throughout the country who do not have a degree in the subject they teach (who majored in education, for example), this requirement means they must pass a subject area test to prove they are "highly qualified." Despite the increasing volume of research that shows a high correlation between content-area knowledge and student achievement, and the lack of conclusive evidence linking traditional certification requirements with pupil achievement, teachers and their unions are decrying this as "unfair" because it "changes the rules in the middle of the game," and unwise because it "[lowers] the requirements for what it takes to actually teach these children." The same groups also condemn provisions in NCLB that allow teachers to work in traditional public and charter schools without having graduated from an ed school preparation program if they pass a rigorous test of both content and pedagogy (like the newly launched American Board Passport Certification). Holding teachers to higher standards and giving them more options to help meet these raised expectations might sound to most Americans like sensible steps for raising student achievement. But then again, most Americans don't work for the NEA.
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]