National Summary. State Teacher Policy Yearbook Progress on Teacher Quality. National Council on Teacher Quality

Transcription

1 National Summary 2007 State Teaher Poliy Yearbook Progress on Teaher Quality National Counil on Teaher Quality

2 Aknowlegments States Our most important partners in this effort have been state euation agenies, whose extensive experiene has helpe to ensure the fatual auray of the final prout. Every state formally reeive two ifferent rafts of the Yearbook for omment an orretion, first in spring 2006 an again in Deember States also reeive a final raft of their reports a month prior to release. All but three states graiously respone to our many, many inquiries. While states have not always agree with our approahes, most have exhibite a remarkable willingness to reflet upon the impat of their urrent poliies an to aknowlege that the system nees fixing. Funers NCTQ owes a great ebt of gratitue to the pioneer funers for this first eition of the State Teaher Poliy Yearbook: n Koret Founation n Ahelis Founation n Boman Founation n Daniels Fun n Fisher Family Founation n Gleason Founation n The Joye Founation n Ewing Marion Kauffman Founation n The Lyne an Harry Braley Founation n Martha Holen Jennings Founation n Milken Family Founation n The Teahing Commission n Thomas B. Forham Founation The National Counil on Teaher Quality oes not aept any iret funing from the feeral government. Staff NCTQ aknowleges the following iniviuals for their involvement in preparing this report. Our prinipal staff was Jess Castle an Sani Jaobs. Area analysts were Anrew Campanella, Niole Fernanez, Catherine Kelliher, Whitney Miller, Emma Snyer, an Danielle Wilox. Researh analysts inlue Emily Cohen, Eri Dang, Paige Donehower, Elizabeth MCorry, Tess Mullen an Nathan Sheely. Thank you to Colleen Hale at Summerhouse Stuios who esigne the print an web versions of the Yearbook.

3 Exeutive Summary Introution Countless reports have analyze the impat of the No Chil Left Behin At of 2001 on teaher quality an stuent ahievement. What many of these reports truly leave behin, however, is the reality that state governments not the feeral government have the strongest impat on the work of Ameria s 3.1 million teahers. With that in min, three years ago the National Counil on Teaher Quality (NCTQ) began the proess of analyzing states teaher poliies. NCTQ analysts sifte through tens of thousans of pages of state oes, regulations an rules, regularly orresponing with state offiials who graiously provie their important knowlege an perspetives. Truthfully, what began as an exerise motivate by a mixture of three parts--naiveté, hubris an a strong esire to o some goo--ene up as an important lesson in humility an respet for the work of states. To wrestle with the same enormous hallenges that states fae on a aily basis is to realize how har it is to ahieve the right balane between rigor an flexibility, authority an aountability, inputs an outputs all within the ontext of a moving target, the teaher labor market. The State Teaher Poliy Yearbook is the first projet of its kin to provie a 360-egree etaile analysis of any an every poliy that states have that impat the quality of teahers, speifially their reruitment, preparation, liensing, evaluation an ompensation. In all, the Yearbook projet is an enylopeia of iniviual state reports, totaling more than 5,600 pages of analysis an reommenations in 51 separate reports. What sets the Yearbook apart is not just its aunting length, but how we frame the analyses. We were not intereste in prouing yet another report from our perh in the nation s apital leturing states about what they are oing all wrong; we wante to be more onstrutive, proviing speifi reommenations for making state poliies better. While some will (an alreay have) ause NCTQ of inorinate arrogane for this eision, we an live with that aspersion if the Yearbook suees in fousing more attention on the ontribution an ulpability states share for teaher quality. Informe by researh an extensive onsultation, strengthene by refletion an a willingness to revise no matter how long it took to get it right, the Yearbook offers a blueprint for reform ontaine in the amittely awkwar number of 27 goals. While we o not preten that everyone will agree with us, the State Poliy Yearbook 2007 :

4 exeutive summary national summary Yearbook provies workable an ost-neutral moels for reform. It presents an unapologeti, reformist agena beause this is what the nation s teaher-quality problem emans. For the most part, the urrent system is a mixture of broken, ounterproutive an anahronisti poliies in nee of an overhaul. It s time to turn in the gas-guzzling lunker in exhange for the hybri. With the results now in from our first eition, we know that the work ahea is signifiant an aunting. States as a group meet or ome lose to meeting just 21 perent of the goals, with no state meeting even half of the goals. The top-performing state is New Jersey, whih meets or nearly meets 44 perent of the goals. New Jersey is losely followe by Massahusetts, Tennessee an Texas. The lowest-performing states are Alaska an Maine, with Hawaii, Iaho, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska an Nevaa not far behin. Refleting on this, one question surfaes. Are we suggesting that states like Alaska an Montana have lower-quality teahers than oes New Jersey or Massahusetts? No. There are a number of fators to also onsier. First, while states have more authority an impat over the teahing profession than any other entity, other fators still ontribute to teaher quality, suh as the overall quality of PK-12 shooling in the state (from whih future teahers are proue), a state s poverty rate, the quality of shool leaership, an the salaries istrits an affor to pay, to name a few. There are always some fators largely outsie the purview of states to hange. However, soun teaher poliies an mean the ifferene between having a goo teahing fore an a meiore one. It an even mean the ifferene between a superior fore an a goo one. Soun poliies aommoate the realities that annot be hange an, in oing so, get the most bang for the buk. Seon, improving teaher quality requires a ohesive strategy. For any number of pratial or politial reasons, a state may have aopte various strategies for improving teaher quality, but the result is too often sattershot. The 27 goals presente here, while they may raise issention, represent a tightly woven approah to solving the nation s teaher-quality problem. The goals are interepenent, meaning that aopting only one, a few or a hanful of the 27 goals may o little to hange the teaher-quality equation in a state. For example, one of the Yearbook s goals (Goal 3-C) alls for teahers to be evaluate on an annual basis, a goal that seven states inluing the Distrit of Columbia meet. However, many of these same states still o not require that these annual teaher evaluations onsier a teaher s effetiveness in the lassroom as the preponerant riterion for rating a teaher s performane (Goal 3-A). Neeless to say, it oes little goo to evaluate a teaher eah year if the teaher is not juge on lassroom effetiveness. Having ommitte ourselves to the task of prouing no fewer than 1,377 iniviual analyses (51 states x 27 goals), we foun ourselves looking longingly at the more entralize systems preferre by other ountries suh as Frane an China. While we ll amit to a ertain amount of self-interest in this regar, we also ame to a point in our knowlege of state poliy where we oul not ientify the philosophial justifiation for the nation s herishe eentralize system. If states still believe that there are 51 istint systems for the teaher profession, it is illusion. In fat, there are generally two or three systems, at most four versions. There are inevitable twists. There are regulatory remnants of times gone by that nee to go off the books. There are a few stan-out states that have aomplishe remarkable poliies suh as Massahusetts on teaher preparation an Floria on teaher ompensation. But for the most part, states look remarkably similar to one another. We have reate in some ways the worst ombination of systems, believing our system to be eentralize an ereting the barriers neessary for suh a system, but realizing in the en that we re all in the same leaky boat after all. 2 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

5 national summary exeutive summary Methoology Goals NCTQ formulate the Yearbook s poliy goals through a lengthy an omprehensive evelopment an review proess. The Yearbook goals were initially evelope three years ago by our Boar of Diretors an istinguishe Avisory Boar (see our insie bak over for a list of names). These goals were sent out for omment to more than 150 groups an iniviuals, inluing euation poliy groups, founations, researhers, eonomists, leaing innovators (like the TAP program an Teah For Ameria), an most importantly, teahers. Influential groups suh as the Amerian Feeration of Teahers, the Counil of Chief State Shool Offiers, the National Shool Boars Assoiation, NCTAF, Teah For Ameria, the National Governors Assoiation an NCATE were provie the goals for review. While some groups i not always agree with every one of our goals, their perspetives mae the goals stronger an more balane. Analyses NCTQ s analyses are roote in reviews of offiial state poliies. Speifially, NCTQ efines poliies as state laws, regulations, statutes, aministrative oe, state boar of euation rulings an teaher liensing ommission rulings. NCTQ took great are to utilize the most reent poliies, seeking multiple soures to valiate that the poliies we ite as the basis for our analyses are urrent. Poliies enate after April 2007 will not be reflete in this eition. Aitional soures of information were also utilize in eveloping analyses, inluing information requeste by NCTQ from state epartments of euation, researh an ata from the National Assoiation of State Diretors of Teaher Euation an Certifiation (NASDTEC), an the Data Quality Campaign. Iniviual states Title II reports were also use as bases for ertain analyses. When analyzing state teahing stanars, NCTQ also reviewe the stanars of professional teahing assoiations an those of the Interstate New Teaher Assessment an Support Consortium (INTASC). NCTQ performe aitional researh that shape our analyses as well. For example, we onute a omprehensive survey of shool istrit personnel offiials to gauge the flexibility of state poliies regaring teaher reiproity. For the most part, the Yearbook oes not assess states on the quality of poliy implementation. Muh oul be sai about what states o or o not o with the laws an regulations that they approve. We ame aross many regulations that are on the books, partiularly in regar to alternative ertifiation, that are rarely pratie or poorly implemente. Analyses may omment on what appears to be a little-use or poorly implemente poliy, but these observations o not etermine a state s rating. The Yearbook reflets poliy, not pratie. State Collaboration Of the many groups onsulte about the Yearbook, states provie the most helpful information. At times, they went beyon the all of uty, proviing NCTQ s front-line researhers with a tutorial in State Euation Poliy 101. On two oasions, NCTQ requeste that states provie a formal review of their state s analysis. Regarless of whether state offiials agree with the goals that NCTQ artiulate, most states prove onsistently responsive an helpful in proviing information, suggestions an itations. Their ollaboration was essential. States were provie with their final analysis one month before the release of the Yearbook. To the extent possible, even omments resulting from this late-hour review were inorporate. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 :

6 exeutive summary national summary The Future of the Yearbook We reognize the value that omes from traking progress, whih is why the Yearbook will be upate eah year. From year to year, NCTQ intens to measure the movement of states towar meeting the goals outline in the Yearbook, with the mission of ontinuing to ollaborate with state leaers an enouraging meaningful progress. As our knowlege an experiene grow, so too will the goals. While we expet our ore vision an approah to be relatively onsistent, we reognize that just as state teaher poliies must hange with the times, so too must the Yearbook. Our ommitment to states is fairness an full ollaboration throughout this proess. About the Yearbook Goals The Yearbook goals meet five riteria: 1. They are supporte by the best researh available. The Yearbook relies on the best teaher-quality researh available. We only onsiere researh that was presente in a referee journal, book or from a researh institute. The researh ha to be at least quasiexperimental, exluing ase stuies, ahering to aeptable researh methos. The outome measure ha to be improve stuent ahievement. In partiular, goals aressing the preparation of teahers an alternate routes relie heavily on researh (Goals 1-B, 1-C, 5-A, 5-B, 6-B an 6-C). All of the researh use to support the goals is poste on the NCTQ website ( linke speifially to eah goal. 2. They offer pratial, not pie-in-the-sky, solutions for improving teaher quality. While NCTQ oes not neessarily isagree with the many reports alling for ramati an ostly hanges in how teahers are prepare an ompensate, the agena presente here is feasible regarless of new infusions of funing. In some ases, implementing ertain goals requires that states just be willing to be more speifi, suh as improving their teahing stanars (Goals 2-A an 6-A). In other ases, the goals require upating poliies to reflet 21st entury praties suh as annual evaluations of teahers (Goal 3-C) an portability of lienses among states (Goals 2-C an 5-D). Goals all for states to eliminate loopholes that a unneessary burens to the teaher preparation proess (Goals 1-D, 2-B, 5-B an 6-D). Central to this philosophy, eah goal of the Yearbook honors the state earning a Best Pratie esignation. These esignations provie the learest eviene that the Yearbook goals are realisti an oable. 3. They take on the teahing profession s most pressing nees. Poliymakers seek answers to partiular problems with both shortages an quality. Six goals woul have a signifiant impat on a state s ability to attrat talente iniviuals to teah mathematis an siene, areas of signifiant shortages (Goals 1-A, 2-C, 3-D, 5-A, 5-B an 5-D). A whole area (Area 6) is eiate to the problem of severe shortages an poorly prepare speial euation teahers. Equally important, the Yearbook alls on states to fous muh more attention on the nee of elementary teahers to reeive a broa, liberal arts euation (Goal 1-B) an know how to teah reaing (Goal 2-D). 4. They are relatively ost neutral. Without isregaring the nee for ompensation reform as reflete in our Area 3 goals, the Yearbook oes not require large ommitments of new finanial resoures. In some ases, implementing these reommenations oul be onsiere reasonable ost-saving measures. In other ases, if implemente onurrently, the reommenations prove ost neutral. On ompensation reform, we think that states shoul at least get out of the way of istrits wanting to innovate (Goal 3-D). We o not all for more preparation; we all for more fouse preparation (Goals 1-B, 1-C, 4-D, 6-B an 6-C). We urge states to o more sreening up front of aspiring teahers, avoiing the signifiant investment of publi tax ol- : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

7 national summary exeutive summary lars on persons who are aepte into shools of euation but who o not possess the most basi skills aquire in mile shool (Goal 4-A). 5. They respet legitimate onstraints on states. The Yearbook goals fous on areas that are within the state s authority to regulate. States often laim that they annot aress ertain topis, beause they are matters of loal ontrol. This is frequently a matter of traition more than statute. Many states are extremely relutant to tell istrits (or teaher preparation programs for that matter) what to o. While shool istrits nee an eserve autonomy in many aspets of their operation, loal ontrol too frequently beomes a way for states to relegate responsibilities that are most appropriately an effiiently aresse at the state level. The alternative to anything goes oes not have to be one size fits all. By setting lear guielines an stanars an then enforing them, states signal their minimum expetations. For example, states nee not itate how teaher evaluations are to be onute, but they an an ertainly shoul insist on annual evaluations an provie basi riteria that must be aresse, suh as ensuring that stuent learning is the preponerant riterion (Goals 3-A an 3-C). Similarly, tenure is a ontratual matter between istrits an their teahers. Without manating speifi requirements, states an ensure that istrits o not provie teahers tenure in too few years to have emonstrate their effetiveness (Goal 3-E). State Poliy Yearbook 2007 :

8 Exeutive Summary: Goals Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Goal A Equitable Distribution of Teahers The state shoul ontribute to the equitable istribution of quality teahers by means of goo reporting an soun poliies. Goal B Elementary Teaher Preparation The state shoul ensure that its teaher preparation programs provie elementary teaher aniates with a broa liberal arts euation. Goal C Seonary Teaher Preparation The state shoul require its teaher preparation programs to grauate seonary teahers who are highly qualifie. Goal D Veteran Teahers Path to HQT The state shoul phase out its alternative HOUSSE route to beoming highly qualifie. Goal E Stanarizing Creentials The state shoul aopt the national stanar efining the amount of oursework neessary to earn a major or minor. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Goal A Defining Professional Knowlege Through teahing stanars, the state shoul artiulate an assess the professional knowlege of teahing an learning that new teahers nee, but steer lear of soft areas that are har to measure. Goal B Meaningful Lienses The state shoul require that all teahers pass require liensing tests before they begin their seon year of teahing. Goal C Interstate Portability The state shoul help to make teaher lienses fully portable among states with appropriate safeguars. Goal D Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution The state shoul ensure that new teahers know the siene of reaing instrution. Goal E Distinguishing Promising Teahers The state liense shoul istinguish promising new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Goal A Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness The state shoul require instrutional effetiveness to be the preponerant riterion of any teaher evaluation. Goal B Using Value-Ae The state shoul install strong value-ae instruments to a to shools knowlege of teaher effetiveness. Goal C Teaher Evaluation The state shoul require that shools formally evaluate teahers on an annual basis. Goal D Compensation Reform The state shoul enourage, not blok, efforts at ompensation reform. Goal E Tenure The state shoul not give teahers permanent status (tenure) until they have been teahing for five years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Goal A Entry Into Preparation Programs The state shoul require unergrauate teaher preparation programs to aminister a basi skills test as a riterion for amission. Goal B Program Aountability The state shoul base its approval of teaher preparation programs on measures that fous on the quality of the teahers oming out of the programs. Goal C Program Approval an Areitation The state shoul keep its program approval proess wholly separate from areitation. Goal D Controlling Coursework Creep The state shoul regularly review the professional oursework that teaher aniates are require to take, in orer to ensure an effiient an balane program of stuy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Goal A Genuine Alternatives The state shoul ensure its alternate routes to ertifiation are well struture, meeting the nees of new teahers. Goal B Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials The state shoul require all of its alternate route programs to be both aaemially seletive an aommoating to the nontraitional aniate. Goal C Program Aountability The state shoul hol alternate route programs aountable for the performane of their teahers. Goal D Interstate Portability The state shoul treat out-of-state teahers who omplete an approve alternate route program no ifferently than out-of-state teahers who omplete a traitional program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Goal A Speial Euation Teaher Preparation The state shoul artiulate the professional knowlege neee by the speial euation teaher an monitor teaher preparation programs for effiieny of elivery. Goal B Elementary Speial Euation Teahers The state shoul require that teaher preparation programs provie a broa liberal arts program of stuy to elementary speial euation aniates. Goal C Seonary Speial Euation Teahers The state shoul require that teaher preparation programs grauate seonary speial euation teaher aniates who are highly qualifie in at least two subjets. Goal D Speial Euation Teaher an HQT The state shoul ustomize a HOUSSE route for new seonary speial euation teahers to help them ahieve highly qualifie status in all the subjets they teah. : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

9 Exeutive Summary: Key Finings 1. State poliies are remarkably inflexible an outate. Consiering that human apital is the essential omponent of the teahing profession, states still ling to poliies that reflet neither the flexibility nor the reality of toay s workfore. n Most states o not require that teahers reeive annual performane evaluations, whih is ounter to the norm in most professions. Only 14 states require annual evaluations, an only 7 iret istrits that they an ismiss teahers after two unsatisfatory evaluations. n Pay reform has avane, with 28 states supporting programs that tie teaher pay to istrit an shool nees (ifferential pay). However, only 12 states fun programs rewaring teahers for lassroom effetiveness. n While signifiant avanements have been mae in eveloping value-ae methoologies, only 15 states have put the neessary omponents in plae to fairly evaluate a teaher s effetiveness through a value-ae moel. n Despite the promise of new alternate routes to teaher ertifiation for talente liberal arts grauates an mi-areer professionals, only 6 states offer genuine alternate routes. n In 23 states, urrent teahers who want to move to other states must navigate a Byzantine path to earn liensure, often having to omplete aitional oursework or even repeat preparation programs. Only 27 states have set appropriate stanars on what onstitutes a major for teaher grauates, further ompliating the proess. 14 states require annual teaher evaluations. 12 states fun performane pay programs. 2. States are not paying enough attention to who goes into teahing. States provie signifiant funing to teaher preparation programs, partiularly in state-fune universities, yet there is little oversight of aniates aaemi aliber. n Although 41 states require programs to aminister a basi skills test, 24 of these states elay testing until ompletion of the preparation program. Programs that aept aspiring teahers who annot pass a basi skills test may lower the rigor of their ourses, remeiating basi skills instea of preparing teahers for the lassroom. n States set insuffiient requirements for the aaemi seletivity of alternate route programs, espite the fat that these programs are premise on the onept that nontraitional aniates must have strong subjet-area knowlege an/or above-average aaemi bakgrouns. Only 12 states set a suffiient aaemi stanar for alternate route aniates, one that is higher than what is expete of traitional aniates. n Only a hanful of states reognize new teahers who bring superior aaemi aliber into the profession. 47 states o not onfer beginning teaher lienses that istinguish aniates aaemi performane. 47 states o not onfer lienses that ientify superior new teahers. 12 states set suffiient aaemi stanars for alternate route teahers. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 7

10 exeutive summary national summary 3. States o not appropriately oversee teaher preparation programs. 17 states require basi skills testing for program amission. 18 states ollet any ata on the effetiveness of program grauates. A major weakness in the teaher-quality equation is linke to the fat that states fail to hol teaher preparation programs aountable for their amissions stanars, effiieny of program elivery or, most importantly, the quality of their grauates. n States o not ensure that preparation programs only amit teaher aniates with suffiient basi skills to enable them to omplete the program. Only 17 states require programs to make basi skills testing a onition of amission. n States o not hol preparation programs aountable for the quality of the teahers they proue, but rather ontinue to use ineffetive program approval proesses that emphasize inputs. Only 18 states ollet any meaningful objetive ata that reflet program effetiveness. States o an even poorer job of holing alternate route preparation programs aountable. n 11 states further weaken their approval proesses by onneting program approval to areitation, whih is almost wholly fouse on inputs rather than outomes. n States also fail to prevent programs from requiring exessive professional oursework. NCTQ foun programs in 36 states that require the equivalent of more than two full majors of euation oursework, whih leaves little room for eletives an aequate subjet-matter preparation. n States provie even less guiane in the area of preparation of speial euation teahers. NCTQ foun programs in 16 states that require the equivalent of more than three full majors of euation oursework an these were not programs training teahers to work with severely isable hilren. 4. States use false proxies as measures of teaher quality. 17 states rely on transript review to etermine reiproal liensure. 28 states stanars plae too muh emphasis on untestable ispositions. Aross many poliy areas, states rely on inappropriate iniators that o not provie meaningful information about teahers qualifiations or effetiveness. n The majority of states rely on site visits an syllabi review to etermine approval of teaher preparation programs. Only 18 states inlue any meaningful objetive ata in their approval proess, suh as programs grauates first-year evaluations or the aaemi ahievement of grauates stuents. n 17 states rely on reviews of ollege transripts to eie whether to awar liensure to a teaher alreay liense in another state. Liensing tests are a more vali way to verify teahers qualifiations; yet only 16 states require all out of state teahers to pass their liensing tests. n While it is important to efine the attributes an attitues that teahers shoul have known as teaher ispositions, they annot be measure by a liensing test an thus shoul not be inlue in state stanars. 28 states stanars plae too muh emphasis on ispositions, rather than fousing on what teahers must know an shoul be able to o. 5. States o not appreiate the ual nature of liensing tests. Liensing tests an serve both as the gatekeeper on minimum qualifiations an as a tool that helps states to be more flexible. However, while European an Asian systems epen heavily on tests, states in this ountry are often relutant to o so. n At best, states sreen only for the most minimal stanars when iniviuals apply to unergrauate teaher preparation programs. Only 17 states require teaher aniates to pass a ommon : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

11 national summary exeutive summary test in basi reaing, writing an arithmeti that is estimate to assess mile shool level skills. No states require subjet-area tests as a riterion for entry, a useful mehanism that woul also allow programs to exempt qualifie aniates from some ore aaemi requirements. n While many states require that a teaher have a major in the intene subjet area, a rigorous test oul serve the same purpose. Only 16 states allow teahers going through an alternate route to take a test to emonstrate subjetmatter knowlege, failing to aommoate the iverse bakgrouns of the nontraitional aniate. n While some states require elementary teahers to take a reaing ourse, states have no assurane that these ourses eliver the sientifially base reaing instrution that teahers nee. A test woul solve this problem, but 40 states have yet to aopt this simple solution an another 7 have put in plae inaequate tests. n NCLB urrently requires mile shool teahers to earn a major or pass a test, but the law is problemati. Many teahers are relutant to take a test after they have been out of ollege for a while. States oul alleviate this problem by requiring programs to prepare an then test mile shool teahers in two areas, but only 15 states urrently o so. n While all states have teahing stanars, most states o not follow up to make sure teahers learn these stanars. 32 states require a test of professional knowlege an only 9 of these states have ustomize a test to math their own stanars. Stanars are meaningless unless they an be teste. n Liensing tests represent the minimal knowlege teahers nee. Yet 20 states give some teahers up to three years (or even more!) to pass these tests. That is three years of stuents being taught by someone who may not possess the basi knowlege neee for the job. n When eiing what liense to grant a teaher from out of state, states are generally relutant to waive their oursework requirements, but instea grant liberal waivers of testing requirements. 34 states exempt veteran teahers from tests, as if experiene oul serve as an aequate substitute for subjet-matter ompeteny. 4 states have an aequate test in reaing instrution. 20 states give teahers up to three years or more to pass liensure tests. 6. States ontinue to neglet ontent preparation for teahers. Despite ontinuous onern about improving the ontent preparation of Ameria s teahers, states are still failing to ensure breath, epth an relevane to the lassroom in ontent preparation. n States ontent stanars an oursework requirements for elementary teahers fall well short of the mark, omitting ritial areas of knowlege. For example, 18 states make no mention of geometry an 42 states make no mention of Amerian history. Only 3 states require the stuy of Amerian literature, 6 require hilren s literature an only 3 require the stuy of art history. n While NCLB has sueee in shoring up muh of the ontent preparation of seonary teahers, states still struggle with mile shool teaher qualifiations. 23 states still allow some teahers traine for the elementary lassroom to teah seventh an eighth graes. n Few states are oing enough to make sure that future elementary teahers know how to teah reaing, arguably the most important job of a teaher. Only 19 states require programs to prepare teahers in the siene of reaing. 3 states require elementary teahers to stuy Amerian literature. 42 states o not require Amerian history stuy for elementary teahers. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 :

12 exeutive summary national summary 7. States o not ensure that speial euation teahers are wellprepare to teah stuents with isabilities. 4 states have lear an expliit stanars for speial euation teahers. 14 states require programs grauate highly qualifie seonary speial euation teahers. States ontribute to speial euation teaher shortages by proviing too little guiane to teaher preparation programs an not taking steps to assist speial euation teahers in meeting highly qualifie requirements. n State stanars for the preparation of speial euation teahers are woefully inaequate. A mere 4 states have strong stanars that are lear, expliit an omprehensive about what teahers shoul know in orer to teah stuents with isabilities. n Few states require speial euation teahers to have subjet-matter knowlege. States shorthange speial euation stuents by proviing them with teahers who are not prepare to teah them ontent. n States are not requiring that teaher preparation programs assume any responsibility for ensuring that seonary speial euation teahers are highly qualifie, leaving the task up to istrits instea. Only 14 states require seonary speial euation teahers to grauate highly qualifie in even one ontent area. n Unlike most other teahers, a HOUSSE route is neee for seonary speial euation teahers, so that they an ahieve highly qualifie status in all the subjets they teah. Not one state has a ustomize HOUSSE route for new seonary speial euation teahers. n States give teaher preparation programs free rein over the professional oursework they require speial euation aniates to take. Programs that require the equivalent of three majors of professional oursework may be a eterrent to those onsiering a areer in speial euation. 8. State poliies are not geare towar inreasing the quality an quantity of math an siene teahers. 28 states support ifferential pay initiatives. 23 states attah too many strings to math an siene teaher reiproity. While states have put in plae many boutique initiatives to aress these shortages, strutural ajustments woul provie greater yiel. n By not fousing on the equitable istribution of teahers, states shorthange the neeiest hilren of qualifie math an siene teahers. Only 12 states have mae even some progress to ahieve this goal. n Alternate route programs provie exellent means by whih to reruit an prepare mi-areer professionals with bakgrouns in siene an math. 32 states o not allow someone to emonstrate subjet-matter knowlege by means of a test in lieu of their requirement of a major in the subjet. n The harer it is for teahers to move between states, the harer it is for a qualifie math an siene teaher to fin a new job. Yet 23 states attah lots of strings before issuing an equivalent liense to a teaher moving from out of state. Even worse, a qualifie math an siene teaher trying to fin a new job but who was prepare in an alternate route may be greete with an unwelome sign in 38 states. n Perhaps most key is the reality that there is suh a shortage of math an siene teahers beause they an earn so muh more money in other professions with these skills. 28 states support ifferential pay initiatives for teahers in shortage areas. 10 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

13 national summary exeutive summary 9. States alternate routes to teaher ertifiation lak truth in avertising. Despite the pereption of a proliferation of alternate routes, in reality, alternate routes often mirror traitional routes or appear to be emergeny ertifiates in isguise. n Of the 48 states that laim to offer alternate routes, only 6 states offer a genuine alternate route to liensure. 15 states offer alternate route programs that nee signifiant revision, while 27 states offer isingenuous alternate routes that more losely resemble traitional or emergeny routes than alternatives. n By an large, alternate routes are not esigne to meet the nees of nontraitional aniates. Only 16 states have amissions riteria that are flexible an allow iniviuals to emonstrate ontent knowlege by passing an examination. n Only 4 states require alternate route programs to measure an report the aaemi ahievement of the stuents of alternate route teahers. 48 states laim to offer an alternate route to teaher ertifiation. 6 states offer a genuine alternate route to teaher ertifiation. 10. The interests of aults frequently ome before the nees of the hilren. Far too many aommoations are mae for teahers in the areas of testing, tenure an evaluations, risking the possibility that too many hilren oul suffer signifiant aaemi harm from a ba teaher. n Only 3 states require teahers to pass liensure examinations before beginning to teah, with many states allowing three or more years to pass exams. This proves unfair to the stuents in these teahers lassrooms, who may not be learning from knowlegeable euators. n Only 4 states require lassroom effetiveness to be the preponerant riterion for evaluating teaher performane, with other states giving equal weight to fators suh as attening faulty meetings. n With the exeption of only 2 states, teahers are not require to work for at least 5 years before earning tenure whih makes it muh more iffiult to ismiss them if they are ineffetive. n By not juging teaher preparation programs on the lassroom effetiveness of their grauates, states are allowing failing programs to ontinue to proue teahers who may o more harm than goo in the lassroom. Only 9 states use ata regaring the effetiveness of program grauates as a means of etermining whether to approve the programs. n Perpetuating the viious yle of poverty, few states have set any benhmarks for reruiting an retaining teahers for high-nees shools. 3 states require teahers to pass liensure tests before entering the lassroom. 4 states require lassroom effetiveness to be the preponerant riterion for evaluating teaher performane. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 11

14 exeutive summary national summary Figure 1 Exeutive Summary States Suessfully Aressing Teaher Quality Goals Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Goal A Equitable Distribution of Teahers Goal B Elementary Teaher Preparation Goal C Seonary Teaher Preparation Goal D Veteran Teahers Path to HQT Goal E Stanarizing Creentials Best Pratie Massahusetts States Meeting Goal Connetiut California, Oregon Connetiut, Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, Massahusetts, Mississippi, Ohio, South Dakota, Virginia, West Virginia Alabama, Arizona, Colorao, Floria, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexio, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Wisonsin, Wyoming Alabama, Alaska, Delaware, New Jersey, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia Area 2 Teaher Liensure Goal A Defining Professional Knowlege Goal B Meaningful Lienses Goal C Interstate Portability Goal D Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution Goal E Distinguishing Promising Teahers Colorao, New York, Texas Massahusetts, Virginia Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorao, Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Iniana, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming Alabama, Hawaii, Maine, Massahusetts, South Dakota, Texas, Washington Tennessee, Texas Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Marylan, Virginia Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Goal A Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness Goal B Using Value-Ae Goal C Teaher Evaluation Goal D Compensation Reform Goal E Tenure Floria Tennessee Pennsylvania Floria Iniana, Missouri South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas Ohio Arkansas, Connetiut, Floria, Georgia, Iaho, New York, Oklahoma, Washington Iowa 12 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

15 national summary exeutive summary Figure 1 (ontinue) Exeutive Summary States Suessfully Aressing Teaher Quality Goals Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Goal A Entry Into Preparation Programs Goal B Program Aountability Goal C Program Approval an Areitation Goal D Controlling Coursework Creep Best Pratie New Jersey, Tennessee States Meeting Goal Connetiut, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia Alabama 1, Louisiana 1 Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorao, Connetiut, Delaware, Floria, Hawaii, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Goal A Genuine Alternatives Goal B Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials Goal C Program Aountability Goal D Interstate Portability Georgia Arkansas, Connetiut, Georgia, Kentuky, Louisiana, Marylan Arizona, Arkansas Kentuky 1 Alabama, Colorao, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Goal A Speial Euation Teaher Preparation Goal B Elementary Speial Euation Teahers Goal C Seonary Speial Euation Teahers Goal D Speial Euation Teahers an HQT New Mexio 1, North Carolina 1, Texas 1, Virginia 1 Massahusetts, Oregon Mihigan 1, New Jersey 1 1 While no state met this goal, this state ame lose. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 13

16

17 State Summaries Introution The following pages summarize eah state s progress in meeting teaher quality goals. A grae is provie for eah of six areas: Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Outomes, Teaher Liensure, Teaher Evaluation an Compensation, State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs, Alternate Routes to Certifiation an Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers. A esriptive term is also use to reflet the state s overall performane. For more etaile information about eah state s performane, please see its iniviual state report, available at: State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 15

18 How is Alabama Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE C b D C C D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Alabama s urrent ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments, are sorely laking. The state has soli minimum oursework requirements for future elementary teahers, but nees to be muh more speifi regaring the knowlege it expets them to attain. Alabama oes have sensible poliies for the subjet matter preparation of future seonary teahers, inluing meeting the inustry stanar of a subjet matter major. It is phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Alabama s teahing stanars, though measurable an non-ieologial, lak speifiity an o not suffiiently fous on the knowlege that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. Teahers must pass a liensure test base on its stanars within one year of entering the lassroom. Elementary teahers must omplete oursework in the siene of reaing instrution, but no test is aministere to ensure that new teahers have aquire the knowlege an skills neee. The state emonstrates flexible poliies for offering liensure reiproity to teahers from other states. Alabama oes not yet reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Alabama takes an ative role in shaping teaher aountability through its statewie teaher evaluation system, the effort often falls short. The teaher evaluation system is extensive, but fouses primarily on teaher mastery of partiular knowlege an skills. It laks suffiient emphasis on objetive measures of teaher effetiveness. Teaher evaluation is only require every three years. Furthermore, the state has yet to buil the apaity to provie value-ae ata, onstrains istrits with its minimum salary sheule, an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Alabama hols its programs more aountable than most states an has a sensible areitation poliy. Alabama oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Alabama oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Alabama oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure that aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, it oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Alabama, however, oes have a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Alabama s stanars for speial euation teahers are better than those of many states, but they o not aequately prepare teahers to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary speial euation aniates must meet ertain testing an general euation requirements, the requirements are insuffiient to ensure teahers will have the knowlege relevant to the topis taught in PK-6 lassrooms. Seonary speial euation teahers are likely to finish their preparation program highly qualifie in at least one subjet area; two shoul be the goal. Alabama also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom.

19 How is Alaska Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE D f f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Alaska s urrent ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments, are sorely laking. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers are highly inaequate as well. The state oes meet the inustry stanar of a subjet matter major an minor, an is phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Alaska s professional stanars lak speifiity in virtually all areas an o not have a measurable set of riteria that teahers must master before entry into the profession. Alaska oes not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. The state s poliies regaring reiproity for teahers from other states are goo, although the state s testing poliies rener them less effetive. Alaska oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation By not expliitly alling for objetive eviene of teaher effetiveness, Alaska s minimal teaher evaluation guielines fail to hol teahers aountable. While the state requires annual evaluations, it also allows a one-year waiver for teahers rate satisfatory. The state s teaher evaluation poliies are further unermine by the lak of value-ae ata an by granting tenure after only three years. Teaher ompensation in Alaska shows some promise, as the state is piloting a new performane pay program. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Alaska oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program or hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, Alaska has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state also inappropriately requires its programs to attain national areitation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Alaska oes not provie a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. The state oes not urrently lassify any route to ertifiation as an alternate route. Alaska, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Alaska s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, the state oes not ensure that speial euation aniates reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary teahing. Alaska not only falls short in ensuring programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, it has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 17

20 How is Arizona Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE D f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Arizona has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Arizona s subjet matter requirements for its future teahers, however, leave muh to be esire, inluing the fat that the state has not efine what it requires for a subjet matter major. The state is phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Arizona frames its stanars in referene to meeting stuent learning goals, but its professional stanars lak speifiity an fail to esribe in etail the professional knowlege that the state expets of new teahers. Furthermore, the state oes not have any poliies in plae to ensure that new teahers are prepare to teah the siene of reaing instrution. Arizona has its own peagogy assessment that teahers must pass within one year of entering the lassroom. The state s poliies regaring out of state teaher reiproity are problemati. Arizona oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Arizona requires annual teaher evaluations, the state s minimal guielines o not ensure that these evaluations are base on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further hinere by a lak of value-ae ata an granting teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. The state oes support performane pay in some istrits, a bright spot in an otherwise blan teaher aountability lansape. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Arizona has better-than-average aountability poliies for its programs, but it still has room for improvement. The state oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. In aition, it has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Arizona appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Although its offere route has strong an flexible amissions stanars, Arizona oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The state oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it also oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes ollet some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs, although the ata is not use to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Arizona has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Arizona s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare teahers to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, the state oes not ensure that speial euation aniates reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary teahing. Arizona oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers. Moreover, it has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 18 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

21 How is Arkansas Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Arkansas nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Arkansas has the founation for goo preparation of future elementary an seonary teahers, but this is unerut by testing poliies that o little to ensure that future teahers are reeiving aequate preparation in the areas they will teah. The state is not phasing out its HOUSSE route, but its efinition of a major is goo. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Arkansas professional stanars lak speifiity an fail to esribe in etail the professional knowlege that the state expets of new teahers. However, the state is making strong heaway, through oursework an liensure assessments, to ensure that new teahers know the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe up to one year to pass liensure exams. The state has mostly strong poliies regaring reiproity for teahers from other states. Arkansas oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Arkansas has some promising praties, these are unerut by the state s retiene to artiulate lear expetations for teaher aountability. While Arkansas oes require annual evaluations, the state s minimal guielines o not ensure that these evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. The state s efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further hampere by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule an granting teahers tenure after only three years. More promising is the evelopment of the state s value-ae assessment moel, whih is urrently in the beginning stages, an reently implemente ifferential pay initiatives. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Arkansas requires aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Its program aountability poliies are better than those of some other states, but Arkansas nees to o muh more to hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, Arkansas has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state also inappropriately requires its programs to attain national areitation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Arkansas is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. The state oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive an flexible. The state, however, oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Arkansas has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Arkansas stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in Arkansas foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. While elementary speial euation aniates are require to omplete the same subjet matter requirements as other elementary teaher aniates, this oes not ensure that they will reeive enough subjet matter preparation that is relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. Arkansas has one more than many states in requiring seonary speial euation aniates to reeive preparation in a ore aaemi area; however, it nees to o more to ensure that this preparation is suffiiently rigorous. Arkansas has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 19

22 How is California Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives California nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future teahers oul be improve, its efinition of a major is exessive, an the state is not planning to limit its HOUSSE route stritly enough. Area 2 Teaher Liensure California s teahing stanars lak speifiity in a number of areas an fail to fous on the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. Although reaing instrution stanars are fairly strong, the liensure test measuring teahers knowlege of the siene of reaing is not suffiiently rigorous. The state allows new teahers up to two years to pass liensure tests, an it has not suffiiently aresse reiproity for out of state teahers. California oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation California s overall approah to teaher aountability falls short. While the state requires istrits to inlue observations on teaher evaluations, it merely reommens the use of objetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, unermining their signifiane. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by only requiring evaluations every other year an by granting tenure after only two years. The state oes slightly better when it omes to ompensation, properly leaving eisions about teaher pay to the istrits an supporting ifferential pay for teahers in harto-staff subjets an shools. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs California oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. It oes not o enough to hol programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. The state oes require that all professional oursework be omplete in a fifth unergrauate year. While this poliy may be a less-than-ieal solution to the problem of program effiieny, it oes iretly aress the issue, something that few states have one at all. California also appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation California oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. For at least one of its routes, California ensures that programs o not require exessive oursework, although the state oes not ensure that aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. California has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers California s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in California foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. However, the state oes have a strong set of requirements governing the ontent areas that must be overe in teaher preparation programs. California also requires all seonary speial euation aniates to obtain a single- or multi-subjet reential, but has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 20 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

23 How is Colorao Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Colorao nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. It also nees to improve its poliies for the preparation of future elementary teahers. Its poliies for preparing high shool teahers are better, although its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. Colorao shoul also aopt a regulatory efinition of a major an minor. The state has artiulate a goo plan for phasing out the use of its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Colorao s professional teahing stanars are fouse, measurable, an serve as a moel for other states. Though Colorao has taken a goo first step to ensuring that all new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution, muh work remains. Teahers must pass a liensure test measuring a teaher s mastery of stanars within their first year of teahing. Although Colorao has signe an interstate reiproity agreement to failitate out of state teahers liensure in the state, its poliies in this area oul be improve. Colorao oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Colorao s minimal teaher evaluation guielines all for eviene of teaher effetiveness, they are too vague to guarantee istrits use atual stuent outomes. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further unermine by formal evaluations onute only every three years, a lak of value-ae ata, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. Although the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Colorao has better-than-average aountability poliies for its programs, but it still has room for improvement. The state oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. In aition, it has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Colorao appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Colorao oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Although the state oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use it to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Colorao, however, oes have a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Colorao s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. The state s general euation an testing requirements for elementary speial euation aniates have positive elements; however, its oursework guielines are too general to ensure that aniates will reeive enough subjet matter preparation that is relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. Seonary speial euation requirements o not require aniates to major in a subjet area. Colorao also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 21

24 How is Connetiut Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Connetiut has some of the best ata poliies in the ountry, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its poliies for preparing seonary teahers are also very goo. However, the state nees to improve its subjet matter poliies for future elementary teahers, efine a major, an be striter about phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Connetiut s stanars are inappropriately broa an fail to esribe the speifi professional knowlege an skills that new teahers must emonstrate to gain entry into the fiel. The state oes not have any poliies in plae to ensure new teahers know the siene of reaing instrution. Caniates may be in the lassroom for up to one year before passing state liensure tests. While Connetiut has taken a goo first step towar out of state teaher reiproity, the state s poliies in this area oul be improve. Connetiut oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation In the areas of evaluation an ompensation, Connetiut offers some promising praties, but there is room for improvement. Although the state requires annual teaher evaluations an even requires observations as well as limite objetive measures of teaher effetiveness, the state s guielines o not ensure that lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion of an evaluation. The state is further hinere by a lak of value-ae ata an has yet to implement or foster performane pay. The state oes not buren istrits with minimum salary sheules an grants tenure after four years, a longer probationary perio than most states. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Connetiut oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, it has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Connetiut oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Connetiut s alternate routes to ertifiation have a strong esign, but they are ompromise by inflexible amissions stanars. Connetiut oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. However, the state s stanars for amission to alternate route programs, while suffiiently aaemially seletive, are not aommoating to the nees of nontraitional aniates. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol the programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Connetiut has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Connetiut s stanars for the preparation of speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare teahers to work with stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in Connetiut foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. The state also oes not expliitly require elementary an seonary speial euation aniates to meet general euation requirements, resulting in a poliy that is insuffiient to ensure that they will have suffiient aaemi knowlege. Connetiut oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, an has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 22 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

25 How is Delaware Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Delaware nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are laking. Delaware s poliies for preparing seonary teahers are better, but all of the state s preparation poliies are signifiantly weakene by its problemati testing poliies, whih allow new teahers to teah for up to three years without passing a subjet matter test. Delaware is largely phasing out its HOUSSE routes an meets the inustry stanar for both a subjet matter major an minor. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Delaware s professional stanars lak speifiity an a measurable set of riteria for both peagogy an subjet matter that teahers must master before entry into the profession. The state s poliies o not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. Teahers may teah for up to three years before being require to pass liensing tests. The state has reasonably goo poliies regaring the liensure of teahers from other states. Delaware awars teahers with exeptional aaemi merit a istintion on their lienses.. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Delaware s poliies regaring the frequeny an ontent of evaluations are stronger than most but ontain ebilitating loopholes. The statewie system requires objetive an subjetive measures of teaher effetiveness, but oes not ensure that these are the preponerant riteria on an evaluation. Moreover, the state requires annual evaluations, but weakens this requirement by allowing a waiver for some teahers. The state s efforts are further hinere by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. More promising is the state s fleging attempts to provie limite ata about shool effetiveness through its stuent growth moel. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Delaware oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Delaware also inappropriately requires its programs to meet national areitation stanars. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Delaware oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Delaware oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Delaware has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Delaware s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. State poliy oes not ensure that elementary speial euation aniates will have the knowlege relevant to the topis taught in the PK-6 lassroom. State poliy oes not aequately help new seonary speial euation teahers meet subjet matter requirements. Caniates are not require to major in a subjet area, nor has the state evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help them one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 23

26 How is the Distrit of Columbia Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives The Distrit of Columbia nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. It also nees to improve its poliies for the preparation of future elementary teahers. The Distrit of Columbia s poliies for seonary teaher preparation are better, however, an it meets the inustry stanar of a subjet matter major. The Distrit of Columbia is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure The Distrit of Columbia s professional stanars lak speifiity an a measurable set of riteria that teahers must master before entry into the profession. The Distrit s polies o not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. The Distrit of Columbia allows new teahers to teah for up to three years before passing liensure tests. It nees to improve its reiproity poliies for transferring teahers. The Distrit of Columbia awars teahers with exeptional aaemi merit a istintion on their lienses. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation The Distrit of Columbia s passive approah to teaher aountability emonstrates a notable lak of muh-neee leaership. Without teaher evaluation poliies, eisions about the frequeny an ontent of evaluations are left ompletely to shools. Moreover, the Distrit laks value-ae assessment ata an oes not ensure a five-year waiting perio prior to granting teahers tenure. On a more positive note, the Distrit oes not have a require minimum salary sheule an is even initiating a performane pay pilot in multiple shools. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs The Distrit of Columbia oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, the Distrit has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The Distrit of Columbia also inappropriately requires its programs to meet national areitation stanars. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation The Distrit of Columbia oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes offere have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. The Distrit of Columbia allows programs to require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The Distrit ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. The Distrit also has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers The Distrit of Columbia s stanars for the preparation of speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary an seonary speial euation aniates must meet ertain general euation requirements, this is insuffiient to ensure teahers will have the knowlege relevant to the topis taught in the lassroom. The Distrit of Columbia oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor oes it offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 24 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

27 How is Floria Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE b f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Floria has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments, but work remains to be one. Floria s poliies for the preparation of future elementary an seonary teahers oul also be substantially improve. While the state oes not meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major, it is phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Floria has a strong set of teahing stanars. Not all areas, however, have the uniform levels of speifiity neee to learly artiulate the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have. The state has one a goo job of preparing teahers in the siene of reaing instrution; however, teahers may still pass the liensure test without emonstrating suffiient mastery of this ritial area. The state allows new teahers up to three years to pass its liensure test. While it has taken a goo first step towar reiproity, the state s poliies oul be improve. Floria oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among teahers at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Floria s teaher evaluation poliies plae an emphasis on assessing an rewaring teaher effetiveness. In aition to requiring annual evaluations, the state requires istrit teaher evaluations to make lassroom effetiveness the preponerant riterion. Other promising praties inlue the state s efforts to evelop stuent growth ata to etermine shool effetiveness an strong efforts to reate a performane pay system. One weakness is the state s granting of tenure after only three years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Floria requires aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to entering teaher preparation programs, but it offers some aniates a waiver. The state oes more than many others in holing its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation, but its poliies in this area nee improvement. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Floria appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Floria s alternate routes to ertifiation have a soun struture, but they are ompromise by low amissions stanars. Although the state oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, the level of support provie to new teahers oul be improve. The state s alternate routes are suffiiently flexible to aommoate nontraitional aniates. Floria ollets little objetive performane ata from the programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Floria, however, oes have a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Floria s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, the state oes not ensure that aniates will reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Floria oes not ensure that its programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor oes it offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 25

28 How is Georgia Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE f b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Georgia nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state also nees to improve its poliies for the preparation of future elementary teahers an efine its basi subjet matter requirements for a major an minor. Georgia s poliies for the preparation of future seonary teahers are goo, an the state has greatly limite the use of HOUSSE routes. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Georgia s professional stanars o not artiulate the speifi knowlege the state onsiers essential for a teaher to master before entry into the profession. The state oes, however, require teaher preparation programs to provie training in the siene of reaing instrution. The state s liensure test, whih teahers have up to one year to pass, oes inlue some questions on the siene of reaing instrution; however, a teaher an still pass the test without emonstrating knowlege of this ritial material. While it has taken a goo first step towar reiproity, the state s poliies oul be improve. Georgia oes not reognize the istint levels of aaemi aliber among teahers at initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation When it omes to evaluation an ompensation, Georgia has some promising praties an some room for improvement. While the state requires annual evaluations an even goes so far as to expliitly require objetive an subjetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, Georgia unermines its evaluations by not ensuring lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting tenure after only three years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Georgia oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Georgia oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Georgia is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. Georgia oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s stanars for amission to alternate route programs are relatively seletive an flexible. In aition, the state ollets some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs, although it is not use to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Georgia has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Georgia s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Georgia oes require elementary an seonary speial euation aniates to omplete the equivalent of a minor in a ore subjet area. This poliy, however, annot ensure that teahers will be prepare to teah multiple subjets. Furthermore, Georgia has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route speifially to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 26 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

29 How is Hawaii Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Hawaii nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Hawaii s subjet matter preparation poliies for elementary teahers oul be improve. The state nees to efine a major an phase out its use of the HOUSSE route. For the most part, the state has goo poliies for preparing seonary teahers. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Hawaii s stanars are inappropriately broa, employ emotional terms, an fail to ite the speifi professional knowlege an skills that new teahers must emonstrate to gain entry in the fiel. The state oes not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. The state allows teahers up to three years before passing liensure tests, an its poliies regaring teaher reiproity are goo. Hawaii oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Hawaii s teaher evaluation guielines are extensive but not suffiiently onerne with the most important objetive: assessing an rewaring teaher effetiveness. The state s evaluation guielines o not require objetive eviene of lassroom effetiveness nor o they make it the preponerant evaluation riterion. Moreover, the state only requires a full evaluation every five years, with only a ursory review uring the off years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further unermine by a lak of valueae ata, by manating a minimum salary sheule an by granting tenure after only three years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Hawaii oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Hawaii oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Hawaii oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes offere have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Hawaii oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Hawaii, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Hawaii s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in Hawaii foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not speifially limit potential exess. State poliy also oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Furthermore, Hawaii oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor oes it offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 27

30 How is Iaho Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE D f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Iaho nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its poliies for the preparation of elementary teaher aniates nee work as well. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future seonary teahers, on the other han, are unneessarily extensive. Iaho also nees to phase out its use of HOUSSE routes entirely, although the state oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Iaho s professional teahing stanars, although fouse on stuent learning stanars that teahers must have, o not learly artiulate the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state is moving in the right iretion towar ensuring that all new teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution; however, inepenent researhers have oubts about the strength of the state s reaing liensure test. The state allows new teahers up to three years before being require to pass state liensure tests. While the state has signe an interstate reiproity agreement, it has yet to aequately aress the issue of reiproity for out of state teahers. Iaho oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Iaho fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. Although the state requires annual evaluation, Iaho oes not provie the riteria for assessing teahers an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Teaher aountability efforts are furthere hampere by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Iaho oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, Iaho has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state also inappropriately requires its programs to meet national areitation stanars. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Iaho has an alternate route to ertifiation with a soun struture, but it is ompromise by low amissions stanars. While Iaho oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Iaho also has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Iaho s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Iaho oes not require elementary speial euation teahers to take any subjet matter ourses. The state, however, oes require seonary speial euation teahers to meet the ontent knowlege an oursework requirements neee for a seonary euation enorsement, ensuring that they are likely to finish their preparation highly qualifie in at least one area. The state, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 28 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

31 How is Illinois Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Illinois nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states. The state s requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. Illinois has not agree to phase out its use of the HOUSSE route. The state oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Illinois stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to new teahers. The state oes not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. Teahers, both new an out of state, have up to nine months to pass the state s peagogy test. The state has yet to aequately aress the issue of out of state liensure reiproity. Illinois oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation By not expliitly alling for objetive eviene of teaher effetiveness, Illinois minimal teaher evaluation guielines fail to hol teahers aountable. Moreover, Illinois only requires an evaluation every two years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness in the Prairie State are further hinere by a lak of value-ae ata an by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule. When it omes to tenure, Illinois oes a better job than most states, requiring a four-year waiting perio. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Illinois oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, it has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Illinois oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Illinois oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amission stanars. Illinois oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use it to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Illinois has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Illinois stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While the state oes require elementary speial euation teahers to have ontent preparation, it oes not o enough to ensure that seonary speial euation aniates reeive relevant subjet-matter preparation. Furthermore, the state oes not offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 29

32 How is Iniana Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE D f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Iniana nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are laking. The state s requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. Iniana has not efine a subjet matter major. The state has not agree to phase out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Iniana s stanars lak speifiity, o not learly refer to new teahers, an refer to lassroom-base appliation, muh of whih is emotionally entere an untestable. The state oes not require elementary aniates to know the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers may teah for up to one year before passing liensing tests. The state s poliies for liensing out of state teahers are problemati, although it has taken a first step towar reiproity. Iniana oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the level of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Asie from being one of two states that meets the goal of having teahers wait five years for tenure, Iniana fails to provie muh-neee leaership to hol teahers aountable for lassroom effetiveness. The state s minimal evaluation guielines o not require eviene of teaher effetiveness an go so far as to exlue state assessment ata. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further unermine by a lak of value-ae ata, by only requiring evaluations every three years, an by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Iniana has better-than-average aountability poliies, but it still has room for improvement. The state oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. It also has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Iniana appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Iniana oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with inflexible amissions stanars. Iniana oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive. However, Iniana oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Iniana has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Iniana s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary speial euation aniates are require to omplete the same general euation requirements as all teaher aniates, this oes not ensure that teahers will reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. Iniana oes not require seonary elementary euation aniates to reeive the subjet matter preparation neee to beome highly qualifie, nor has it evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 30 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

33 How is Iowa Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Iowa nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers are both laking. Iowa has phase out the use of HOUSSE routes, but its highly qualifie teaher poliies for veteran teahers remain problemati. The state oes have an appropriate efinition of a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Iowa s stanars are inappropriately broa an fail to ite the speifi professional knowlege an skills that new teahers must emonstrate to gain entry in the fiel. The state oes not require new elementary teahers to know of the siene of reaing instrution. The state requires new teahers to pass liensure tests before beginning their seon year of teahing. Signifiant obstales still remain for out of state teahers seeking liensure in Iowa, an the state oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of liensure. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Iowa s teaher evaluation guielines require lassroom observations an limite objetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, the state unermines its evaluations by not ensuring lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by only requiring full evaluations every three years, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. More promising is the state s approah to ompensation: Iowa oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, supports ifferential pay an is piloting a performane pay plan. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Iowa oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, it has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Iowa tehnially requires teaher preparation appliants to pass a basi skills test, but the state allows programs to set their own ut sores, signifiantly weakening a potentially goo poliy. The state has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Iowa oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Iowa oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Iowa has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Iowa s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary speial euation aniates are require to take the same ore ourses as elementary euation majors, this oes not ensure they reeive enough subjet matter preparation relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. Iowa oes require seonary speial euation aniates to major in a subjet area; however, it has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route speifially to help new seonary euation majors meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 31

34 How is Kansas Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Kansas nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, an, for the most part, its poliies for future seonary teahers are goo. The state has not entirely phase out its use of the HOUSSE route, however, an it has not efine a subjet matter major.. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Kansas stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to new teahers. Reaing instrution is only aresse in stuent urriular stanars, whih o not ensure that teahers are prepare in this ritial area before entering the lassroom. New teahers may teah for two years before passing liensure exams. While the state has taken a goo first step towar liensure reiproity, its poliies in this area oul still be improve. Kansas oes not reognize the istint levels of aaemi aliber for teahers at initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Kansas minimal teaher evaluation guielines all for eviene of teaher effetiveness, but they are too vague to guarantee istrits use objetive eviene as the preponerant riterion. Moreover, these evaluations only our every three years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further hampere by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Kansas oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, it has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Kansas oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Kansas oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Kansas oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure that aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs, although it oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Kansas has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Kansas stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While its general euation requirements for speial euation aniates are better than those foun in many states, the state s poliy oes not ensure that teahers will reeive all the subjet matter preparation relevant to the topis taught in the PK-6 lassroom. Kansas requires seonary speial euation aniates to obtain a major or the equivalent in a subjet area; however, the state has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route speifially to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 32 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

35 How is Kentuky Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE D b f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Kentuky nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers also nee improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are goo. Kentuky is mostly phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route, but it has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Kentuky s professional stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state has yet to aequately aress the nee for new teahers to be prepare in the siene of reaing, teaher reiproity, an aaemi istintion on initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Kentuky s teaher evaluation poliies o require observations, the requirements for other performane riteria are too vague to ensure teahers are evaluate base on a preponerane of objetive eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, full evaluations are only require every three years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness in Kentuky are further weakene by a lak of valueae ata, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Kentuky oes more than many other states in holing its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation, although its poliies in this area oul still use some work. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. It also oes not require all aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. Kentuky appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Kentuky has several alternate routes with soun strutures that woul qualify them as genuine alternate routes, but they are ompromise by low an inflexible amission stanars. For these routes, Kentuky oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures that aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, Kentuky is the only state in the ountry that sets minimum stanars for alternate route programs an hols them aountable base on objetive performane ata. Kentuky has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Kentuky s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure aniates reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the topis taught in the elementary or seonary lassroom. Kentuky oes not ensure that programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor oes it offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 33

36 How is Louisiana Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Louisiana nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, an its poliies for future seonary teahers are strong. Louisiana is also phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route an meets the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Louisiana s professional stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state has taken a strong step towar ensuring that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution, although it has yet to implement a separate reaing liensure test for elementary teahers. The state allows new teahers to teah for up to three years before passing their liensure exams. While the state has taken measures to failitate out of state teaher liense reiproity, its poliies nee to be improve. Louisiana oes not reognize the istint levels of aaemi aliber for teahers at initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Louisiana offers some promising praties, but it still has muh room for improvement. Besies only requiring teaher evaluations every three years, the state s minimal guielines o not ensure that istrits evaluate teahers on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Louisiana s efforts are further weakene by granting teahers tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an offers ifferential pay for teahers in har-to-staff subjets. The state s most promising initiative uses value-ae ata of teahers iniviual stuents to assess the quality of those teahers preparation programs. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Louisiana requires aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes more than most states to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. The state, however, inappropriately requires teaher preparation programs at publi institutions to attain national areitation. Furthermore, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Louisiana is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. The state oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. Louisiana s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are relatively seletive an flexible. The state, however, oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Louisiana has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Louisiana s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Although the subjet-matter oursework that seonary speial euation aniates are require to take is more extensive than that foun in most states, Louisiana is not oing enough to ensure that elementary speial euation aniates are prepare to teah ontent areas. Seonary speial euation aniates are also require to pass a ontent test in a speifi aaemi area, whih goes part of the way towar ensuring that teahers will be highly qualifie in one area. The state, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 34 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

37 How is Maine Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE f f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Maine nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers nee improvement, an it has not aequately efine a subjet matter major. Maine is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Maine s professional stanars lak speifiity an fail to esribe the speifi professional knowlege that the state expets of new teahers. Maine has not aresse the ritial nee for all new teahers to be prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. Maine s liensure poliy is seriously flawe, allowing teahers to be in the lassroom for up to three years before passing. The state has goo poliies regaring teaher reiproity. Maine oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber among newly ertifie teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Maine s urrent approah to teaher aountability reveals a notable lak of leaership. The state s minimal teaher evaluation guielines o not ensure that teahers are assesse base on eviene of lassroom effetiveness, nor is there any iretion about the frequeny of evaluations. Furthermore, Maine laks value-ae ata an grants tenure after only two years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, only properly stating a minimum starting salary. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Maine oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Maine also inappropriately allows programs to substitute national areitation for state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Maine oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amission stanars. Maine oes ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Maine, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Maine s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive the subjet matter preparation neee for the elementary or seonary lassroom. Maine oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor oes it offer a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 35

38 How is Marylan Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE D f b f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Marylan nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers also nee improvement. Its requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. The state is not phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Marylan oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Marylan s stanars o not fully artiulate the knowlege an skills new teahers must have for most areas. Although all new teahers must be traine in reaing instrution, the state s poliy oes not ensure that training is fully fouse on the siene of reaing. The state allows new teahers up to two years to pass liensure exams. The state oul improve its poliies regaring teaher reiproity. Marylan lienses istinguish aaemi aliber of promising new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Marylan has muh room for improvement. The state s minimal teaher evaluation guielines all for eviene of teaher effetiveness, but they are too vague to guarantee istrits use atual stuent outomes. Also, while the state requires annual evaluations, a gaping loophole allows teahers with avane liensure to be evaluate only two times in five years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness in the state are further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting tenure after only two years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an even supports some ifferential pay initiatives. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Marylan oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, Marylan has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state also inappropriately requires most of its programs to attain national areitation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Marylan has an alternate route to ertifiation with a soun struture that woul qualify it as a genuine alternate route, but it is ompromise by inflexible amissions stanars. Marylan oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Marylan has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Marylan s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the topis taught in the elementary or seonary lassroom. Marylan, furthermore, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom.. 36 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

39 How is Massahusetts Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Ahea of the Class GRADE b b D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Massahusetts nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers are very goo, an the state is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Massahusetts has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Massahusetts has some of the ountry s strongest liensure poliies. The state oes an exellent job in ensuring that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. Professional stanars, however, are inonsistent with other state efforts. Although frame in the ontext of stuent ahievement, the state s professional stanars lak speifiity. New teahers must pass liensure exams within one year of entering the lassroom. Out of state teahers enjoy a great egree of liensure reiproity, though the state oul improve its poliies. Massahusetts oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial liensure. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Massahusetts approah to teaher aountability is not suffiiently onerne with what shoul be the most important objetive: assessing an rewaring teaher effetiveness. The state s minimal guielines o not ensure that teaher evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Furthermore, the state s efforts are weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by only requiring evaluations every two years, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an even offers an innovative ifferential pay initiative. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Massahusetts oes a better job than most states in holing its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation, but it oul still improve its poliies in this area. In aition, the state oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Massahusetts appropriately separates areitation from state approval. NCTQ was unable to fin approve programs in Massahusetts with exessive professional oursework requirements. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Massahusetts is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. It oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are relatively seletive an flexible. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Massahusetts has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Massahusetts stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in Massahusetts foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. Massahusetts requires elementary speial euation aniates to pass the same extensive general subjet matter test as regular elementary teahers, helping to ensure aniates have the subjet matter preparation neee for the PK-6 lassroom. Requirements for seonary speial euation aniates, however, are inaequate: they o not ensure that aniates will be highly qualifie in a ore ontent area. Massahusetts also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 37

40 GRADE D 38 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 How is Mihigan Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Mihigan nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers also nee improvement. Mihigan s requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. It also meets the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major an is largely phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Mihigan s stanars, although speifi an testable, o not elineate the knowlege an skills that new teahers nee. The state requires new teahers to pass liensure tests within the first year of teahing. Mihigan s poliy oes not put appropriate emphasis on new teaher s knowlege in the siene of reaing instrution. The state has taken some steps towar failitating reiproity for out of state teahers, but its poliies oul be improve. Mihigan oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial liensure. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Mihigan s urrent teaher evaluation poliies are not suffiiently onerne with what shoul be their most important objetive: assessing an rewaring teaher effetiveness. The state s minimal guielines require observations, but they o not ensure evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata an by only requiring evaluations one every three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an grants teahers tenure after four years longer than most states, if not the reommene five-year minimum. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Mihigan oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Mihigan appropriately separates areitation from state approval. NCTQ was unable to fin approve programs in Mihigan with exessive professional oursework requirements. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Mihigan oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Mihigan plaes no limit on oursework requirements, although it oes require programs to provie some support to new teahers. The state oes ollet some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs, but it oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Mihigan has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Mihigan s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. The state oes not provie suffiient subjet-area preparation for elementary speial euation teahers, although it oes require seonary speial euation teahers to major in the subjet area they inten to teah an minor in a seon area. This poliy is stronger than that of most states, although allowing ompletion of two minors woul enhane flexibility. Mihigan, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route speifially to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom.

41 How is Minnesota Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE D f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Minnesota has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. However, the state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers nee improvement, an the state has not efine a subjet matter major. Minnesota is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Minnesota s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state s reaing stanars, whih aress all five areas of sientifially base reaing instrution, are one of its strengths. The state, however, oes not measure a aniate s knowlege of this ritial material through a separate liensure test. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to three years before passing liensure tests. Signifiant obstales remain for out of state teahers seeking liensure in Minnesota, an the state oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Minnesota offers some promising praties, but there is still muh room for improvement. By not expliitly requiring objetive an subjetive eviene of lassroom effetiveness, the state s minimal teaher evaluation guielines fail to hol teahers aountable. The state s efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further weakene by not requiring annual teaher evaluations, by a lak of value-ae ata, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports an optional performane-pay system that aresses many of the state s poliy weaknesses. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Minnesota oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Minnesota oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Minnesota oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Minnesota oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. Minnesota has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Minnesota s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Minnesota also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 39

42 How is Mississippi Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Mississippi nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, an its poliies for future seonary teahers are goo. Mississippi is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route an has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Mississippi s stanars lak speifiity an o not aress the neessary areas ritial for new teahers. The state oes not ensure that new teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution. New teahers must pass state liensure test within the first year of teahing. While the state has taken steps to failitate teaher reiproity, it oul improve its poliies. Mississippi oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Mississippi takes an ative role in shaping teaher aountability through its statewie teaher evaluation system, the effort often falls short. The teaher evaluation system is extensive, but it fouses primarily on teaher mastery of partiular knowlege an skills. It laks suffiient emphasis on objetive measures of teaher effetiveness. Furthermore, the state laks value-ae ata, neglets to manate the frequeny of teaher evaluations, an imposes a minimum salary sheule on istrits. The state also grants teahers tenure after only two years in the lassroom. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Mississippi has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Its poliies for holing programs aountable are better than those of many states, but oul still be improve signifiantly. Mississippi inappropriately requires teaher preparation programs at publi institutions to attain national areitation. The state oes require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Mississippi s alternate routes to ertifiation have soun strutures that woul qualify them as genuine alternate routes, but they are ompromise by low amissions stanars. Mississippi oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, but it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s amission stanars are suffiiently flexible to meet the nees of nontraitional aniates. The state, however, oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Mississippi has a flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Mississippi s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While speial euation aniates are require to omplete some general euation oursework, this oes not ensure that aniates will have knowlege that is relevant to the topis taught in the elementary or seonary lassroom. Mississippi also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 40 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

43 How is Missouri Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Missouri nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are mostly goo. The state is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route. Missouri oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Missouri s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state oes not require new teahers to be prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers may teah for up to three years before passing liensure exams. The state has taken strong steps towar failitating out of state teaher reiproity. Missouri oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Missouri takes an ative role in shaping teaher aountability through its statewie teaher evaluation system, the effort often falls short. The teaher evaluation system is extensive, but it fouses primarily on teaher mastery of partiular knowlege an skills. It laks suffiient emphasis on objetive measures of teaher effetiveness. Furthermore, the state laks value-ae ata, only requires full evaluations every five years, an imposes a minimum salary sheule on istrits. Bright spots in an otherwise blan teaher aountability lansape are the state s ifferential pay initiative an its granting of tenure after five years in the lassroom, one of only two states to o so. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Missouri oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Missouri oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Missouri oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Missouri oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an the level of support provie to new teahers oul use improvement. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Missouri has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Missouri s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Missouri also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 41

44 How is Montana Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Montana nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers also nee improvement, an the state is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route. Montana oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Montana s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state oes not require new teahers to be prepare in the siene reaing instrution. The state has not yet implemente subjet matter testing as a requirement of liensure, nor aresse obstales to teaher reiproity. Montana oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Montana fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Montana oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Montana oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Montana oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Montana oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Montana has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Montana s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Montana also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 42 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

45 How is Nebraska Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Nebraska nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers also nee improvement. The state is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route. Nebraska oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Nebraska s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. Though enorsement guielines aress the siene of reaing, the state has yet to fully aress this ritial area. The state has yet to implement subjet matter testing as a requirement of liensure or aress obstales to teaher reiproity. Nebraska oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Nebraska fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state efers important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations to istrits an thus oes not ensure that annual evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Nebraska oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Nebraska oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Nebraska oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Nebraska oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure that aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Nebraska has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses.. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Nebraska s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While speial euation aniates are require to omplete general euation oursework, this poliy is insuffiient to ensure that they will reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassrooms. Nebraska also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 43

46 How is Nevaa Faring? Overall Performane: Last in Class GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Nevaa has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement. Its requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. Nevaa is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route an has an exessive efinition of a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Nevaa s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state allows new teahers to teah for three years before passing liensure exams. Furthermore, new teahers are not require to know the siene of reaing instrution. The state has yet to aequately aress the issue of teaher reiproity. Nevaa oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Nevaa properly requires annual teaher evaluations, the state s urrent guielines are too vague to ensure that lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. The state also laks valueae ata although it is stuying how to evelop this apability an grants tenure after only two years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay initiatives. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Nevaa has faile to aress the teneny of teaher preparation programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. In aition, the state oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Nevaa appropriately separates areitation from state approval. In aition, the state oes more than most others to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Nevaa oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Nevaa oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Nevaa has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses.. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Nevaa s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Nevaa also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 44 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

47 How is New Hampshire Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives New Hampshire nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, although they still nee improvement. Its requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. New Hampshire is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route an has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure New Hampshire s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state allows new teahers to teah for three years before passing liensure exams. Furthermore, new teahers are require to know the siene of reaing instrution. The state has mostly strong poliies regaring teaher reiproity. New Hampshire oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation New Hampshire fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs New Hampshire oes not o enough to hol programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, New Hampshire oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation New Hampshire oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings an low an inflexible amissions stanars. For at least one of its routes, New Hampshire oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, but it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. New Hampshire has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers New Hampshire s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While the state requires speial euation aniates to take general euation oursework, this poliy is insuffiient to ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. New Hampshire also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 45

48 How is New Jersey Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Ahea of the Class GRADE b b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives New Jersey has better ata poliies than most states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are stronger. New Jersey is also phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route an meets the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure New Jersey s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. Teahers are require to pass their liensure tests before they enter the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution. The state has taken strong steps towar failitating out of state teaher liensure reiproity, but oul improve its poliies further. New Jersey oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation When it omes to evaluation an ompensation, New Jersey has some promising praties an some room for improvement. While the state requires annual evaluations an even goes so far as to expliitly require objetive an subjetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, New Jersey unermines its evaluations by not ensuring lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting tenure after only three years. Although the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs New Jersey limits the professional oursework requirements at most of its programs to a sensible amount, something that few states o. In other areas, however, New Jersey has some work to o. It oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission an oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. New Jersey also inappropriately requires teaher preparation programs to attain national areitation in orer to reeive state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation New Jersey is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. New Jersey oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are relatively seletive an flexible. In aition, the state oes ollet some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs, although it oes not use it to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. New Jersey has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers New Jersey s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in New Jersey foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. Elementary speial euation aniates are require to omplete extensive liberal arts oursework. New Jersey also requires seonary speial euation aniates to omplete a major or the equivalent in their intene teahing area, helping to ensure that teahers will be highly qualifie in at least one area. The state oes not, however, offer new seonary speial euation teahers a streamline HOUSSE route to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 46 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

49 How is New Mexio Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives New Mexio nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are very goo, although its poliies for future seonary teahers nee some improvement. New Mexio is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route, but it has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure New Mexio s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before beginning to teah. Teahers must pass their liensure tests before they enter the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution. The state has taken a first step towar failitating out of state teaher liensure reiproity, but its poliies oul be improve. New Mexio oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation In the area of teaher aountability, New Mexio has some positive praties as well as some room for improvement. While the state requires limite objetive an subjetive eviene of teaher effetiveness, it oes not make this the preponerant riterion of teaher evaluations. The state only requires full, omprehensive evaluations every three years, although the state oes require a minimal assessment uring the intervening years. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, only manating a minimum starting salary for eah of the state s three liensing tiers. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs New Mexio oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, New Mexio oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation New Mexio oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. New Mexio oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure that aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. New Mexio has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers New Mexio s stanars for speial euation teahers are better than those of many states, an they aequately aress all of the ritial areas of knowlege require to teah stuents with isabilities. However, the state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. The state oes not ensure that elementary speial euation aniates reeive preparation in subjet matter relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. New Mexio also requires seonary speial euation aniates to omplete the equivalent of a major in an aaemi ontent area. These requirements shoul help teahers beome highly qualifie. New Mexio, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 47

50 How is New York Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives New York nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers oul use some improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are better. New York also nees to improve its poliies for phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. It oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure New York s professional stanars exemplify the larity an speifiity that an serve as a moel for other states. Teahers must pass a liensure test, base on these stanars, before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution. The state has strong poliies regaring teaher reiproity. New York oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation In the area of teaher aountability, New York has some promising poliies as well as some room for improvement. While the state requires annual evaluations an even goes so far as to expliitly require subjetive an limite objetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, New York unermines its evaluations by not ensuring lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata an by granting tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an even supports ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs New York oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, New York oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state oes not wholly separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation New York oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings an inflexible amissions stanars. For at least one of its routes, New York ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers, but it oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive. The state, however, oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. New York has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers New York s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. New York oes require elementary speial euation aniates to omplete liberal arts oursework, an also requires seonary speial euation aniates to omplete a major or the equivalent in an aaemi ontent area, whih shoul prepare them to be highly qualifie in at least one area. The state oes not, however, offer new seonary speial euation teahers a streamline HOUSSE route to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 48 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

51 How is North Carolina Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives North Carolina has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee some improvement, an its poliies for future seonary teahers nee even more work. The state also has an inaequate efinition of a subjet matter major. North Carolina is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure North Carolina has reate a soli framework of state stanars that are more learly written than many other states. The stanars, however, lak neessary speifiity in several key peagogial areas. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution. New teahers may teah for up to three years before passing liensure exams. The state has worke to failitate teaher reiproity, but its poliies oul be improve. North Carolina oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation North Carolina s poliies regaring the frequeny an ontent of evaluations are stronger than most but ontain ebilitating loopholes. The statewie evaluation system requires objetive an subjetive measures of teaher effetiveness but oes not ensure that lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Moreover, while the state requires annual evaluations, it weakens this requirement by allowing istrits to grant waivers for some teahers. The state also burens istrits with a minimum salary sheule. North Carolina s more promising praties inlue its shool growth moel, whih provies limite eviene of teahers impat on stuent learning gains, an its performane pay plan, whih rewars them for these gains. The state also grants tenure after four years, a longer waiting perio than most states. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs North Carolina requires aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. It oes a better job than many states of holing its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. North Carolina, however, has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. In aition, it inappropriately requires programs to attain national areitation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation North Carolina oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low amissions stanars. North Carolina oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. North Carolina has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers North Carolina s stanars for speial euation teahers are better than those of many states, an they aequately aress all of the ritial areas of knowlege require to teah stuents with isabilities. However, the state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. North Carolina oes not ensure programs prepare highly qualifie teahers, nor has it evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 49

52 How is North Dakota Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE D f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives North Dakota nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers also nee improvement. North Dakota oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major an is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure North Dakota s stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in sientifially base reaing instrution, whether through oursework, stanars or a liensure exam. New teahers may teah for up to three years before passing liensure exams. Signifiant obstales remain for out of state teahers seeking liensure in North Dakota, an the state oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation North Dakota fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. Although the state requires annual evaluations, North Dakota oes not provie the riteria for assessing teahers an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Teaher aountability efforts are furthere hampere by a lak of value-ae ata an the alarming granting of tenure after only one year. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs North Dakota oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. If has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, North Dakota oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state, however, appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation North Dakota oes not provie a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. The state oes not urrently lassify any route to ertifiation as an alternate route. North Dakota has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers North Dakota s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While the state requires elementary speial euation teahers to meet the same aaemi stanars as general elementary teahers, the state s stanars nee improvement. Most seonary speial euation teahers are also require to reeive ual ertifiation, whih shoul help prepare teahers to be highly qualifie in at least one ore subjet area upon ompletion of a teaher preparation program. North Dakota, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 50 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

53 How is Ohio Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE D f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Ohio nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, although its poliies for seonary teahers are better. Ohio is ontinuing its use of the HOUSSE route, an has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Ohio s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. Ohio s reaing stanars partially aress the siene of reaing instrution, but this poliy alone is insuffiient to ensure that elementary teahers are prepare in this ritial area. New teahers may teah for up to one year before passing liensure exams. The state has taken steps to failitate teaher reiproity, but its poliies oul be improve. Ohio oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Despite some promising initiatives, Ohio nees to strengthen its teaher aountability poliies. Ohio s minimal teaher evaluation guielines all for eviene of teaher effetiveness, but they are too vague to guarantee istrits use objetive eviene as the preponerant riterion. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further weakene by not manating the frequeny of evaluations, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. More promising praties inlue the state s evelopment of a shool-level value-ae moel an the state s support of a performane pay pilot. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Ohio has faile to aress the teneny of its programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. It oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Ohio, however, appropriately separates areitation from state approval. It oes more than most states to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Ohio oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Ohio oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers, an it allows programs to require exessive oursework. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Ohio has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Ohio s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers will reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Furthermore, Ohio has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 51

54 How is Oklahoma Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Oklahoma nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are strong. Its requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers nee improvement. Oklahoma is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route an has not efine a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Oklahoma s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state s reaing stanars, however, o learly aress all five omponents of the siene of reaing instrution. The state has mae strong efforts at ensuring that all teahers are prepare in this ritial area. New teahers may teah for up to one year before passing liensure exams. The state s poliies regaring liensure of out of state teahers are goo. Oklahoma oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation In the realm of teaher aountability, Oklahoma has some soun poliies but also plenty of room for improvement. While the state requires annual evaluations an even goes so far as to expliitly require subjetive an objetive measures of lassroom effetiveness, Oklahoma unermines its evaluations by not ensuring lassroom effetiveness is the preponerant riterion. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting tenure after only three years. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Oklahoma oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Oklahoma oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Oklahoma oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Oklahoma ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers, but it oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Oklahoma, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Oklahoma s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. The state s poliy oes not ensure that teahers will reeive subjet-matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. Oklahoma s seonary speial euation poliy oes not require aniates to major in any ore ontent area, making it unlikely that they will be highly qualifie in a ore area upon ompletion of a teaher preparation program. Furthermore, the state has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 52 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

55 How is Oregon Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE D f D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Oregon nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are very goo, although its poliies for future seonary teahers nee improvement. Oregon has an inaequate efinition of a subjet matter major, an the state also nees to larify its poliies for phasing out its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Oregon s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to three years before passing liensure exams. While the state has taken a goo first step towar aressing teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. Oregon oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Oregon fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Oregon has better-than-average aountability poliies for its programs, but it still has room for improvement. The state oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. It has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. On a positive note, Oregon oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Oregon oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Oregon oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Oregon has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Oregon s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. The state requires elementary speial euation aniates to have ontent preparation, but its poliy is insuffiient to ensure that seonary aniates will reeive aequate subjet matter preparation. Furthermore, Oregon has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 53

56 How is Pennsylvania Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Pennsylvania nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers also nee some improvement. The state has not efine a subjet matter major. Pennsylvania oes have a goo plan for phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Pennsylvania s stanars are speifi an learly outline the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. A time frame in whih new teahers must pass liensure tests has not been speifie. While the state has mae efforts towar failitating teaher reiproity, its poliies reate signifiant obstales. Pennsylvania oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Despite manating annual evaluations, Pennsylvania s minimal guielines o not require objetive eviene of lassroom effetiveness, muh less a preponerane of eviene, to ensure teaher effetiveness. Efforts to promote teaher aountability are further weakene by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. More promising praties are the state s flegling value-ae system that will provie limite information on shool effetiveness an its support for ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Pennsylvania has better-than-average aountability poliies, but it still has room for improvement. The state oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. It has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Pennsylvania oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Pennsylvania oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have some strutural shortomings an inflexible amissions stanars. Although Pennsylvania oes ensure programs o not require exessive oursework for at least one of its routes, it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive. The state, however, ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use it to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Pennsylvania has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Pennsylvania s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While the state requires speial euation aniates to meet some general euation stanars, this poliy is insuffiient to ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. Pennsylvania, furthermore, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 54 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

57 How is Rhoe Islan Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Rhoe Islan nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers also nee a goo eal of improvement, an the state is not phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Rhoe Islan oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Rhoe Islan s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, lak speifiity an a fous on the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers may teah for up to two years before passing state liensure tests. While the state has mae efforts to failitate teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. Rhoe Islan oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Rhoe Islan fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay initiatives. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Rhoe Islan oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, the state has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Rhoe Islan oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state, however, appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Rhoe Islan oes not provie a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. The state oes not urrently lassify any route to ertifiation as an alternate route. Rhoe Islan, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Rhoe Islan s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While the state requires speial euation programs to meet some general euation stanars, this poliy is insuffiient to ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. Rhoe Islan, furthermore, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 55

58 How is South Carolina Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE b F state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives South Carolina has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. However, its subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary an seonary teahers nee improvement, an the state is not phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. South Carolina oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure South Carolina s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, lak speifiity an a fous on the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe to teah for one year before passing state liensure tests. While the state has mae efforts to failitate teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. South Carolina oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation South Carolina s poliies regaring the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations are stronger than most, but they nee some shoring up. The statewie system requires subjetive an limite objetive measures of teaher effetiveness an is one of the few states that makes the measure of lassroom effetiveness a neessary riterion to pass an evaluation. However, the state only requires full evaluation every three years, although it allows a more minimal review in the intervening years. The state s efforts are further hinere by the imposition on istrits of a minimum salary sheule an the granting of tenure after only three years. More promising is the state s fleging pilot program in whih limite value-ae ata about teaher effetiveness are use to rewar teahers performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs South Carolina has begun to ollet an use meaningful outome ata, but it has a long way to go in holing its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has also faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. South Carolina oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test, an it has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation South Carolina oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. South Carolina allows programs to require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes ollet some objetive performane ata from alternate route programs; however, it oes not use it to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. South Carolina has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers South Carolina s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy fails to ensure that prospetive teahers will reeive subjet matter preparation that is relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. South Carolina also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 56 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

59 How is South Dakota Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives South Dakota nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are better. South Dakota has not efine a subjet matter major. The state is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure South Dakota s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, lak speifiity an a fous on the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. The state allows new teahers to teah for up to two years before passing state liensure tests. The state has reasonably goo poliies regaring teaher reiproity. South Dakota oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation South Dakota fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. While the state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule, it also oes not promote ifferential or performane pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs South Dakota oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, South Dakota oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation South Dakota oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. For at least one of its routes, South Dakota ensures that programs o not require exessive oursework, but it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. In aition, South Dakota has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers South Dakota s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While speial euation aniates are require to meet some general euation stanars, this poliy is not nearly suffiient to ensure that they will reeive subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. South Dakota, furthermore, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 57

60 How is Tennessee Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Ahea of the Class GRADE b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Tennessee nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, but they still nee improvement, as o its poliies for future seonary teahers. Tennessee has not efine a subjet matter major. It is not phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Tennessee s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, lak speifiity an a fous on the knowlege an skills new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies for ensuring that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution are quite strong. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to three years before passing liensure tests. The state s teaher reiproity poliies are reasonably goo, but oul still be improve. Tennessee oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Tennessee takes an ative role in shaping teaher aountability, resulting in some soun poliies, but there is still room for muh improvement. The state is one of the few to require both subjetive an limite objetive eviene of teaher effetiveness an to ensure that a teaher annot pass an evaluation without meeting this riterion. However, this poliy is weakene by only requiring a full evaluation two times in a ten-year span, although the state oes require a ursory review in the intervening years. Efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further hinere by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule an by granting teahers tenure after only three years. The state s pioneering value-ae system is a valuable tool for aressing teaher aountability an shool effetiveness. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Tennessee has a sensible poliy aressing the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. It also requires aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. Tennessee appropriately separates areitation from state approval. Moreover, it oes more than most states to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Tennessee s alternate routes have strutural shortomings, espite the fat that some of its alternate routes to ertifiation have strong an flexible amissions stanars. For at least one of its routes, Tennessee oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it oes ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Tennessee, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Tennessee s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state oes limit the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates. While Tennessee s general euation requirements for speial euation aniates are better than those foun in many states, its poliy is still insuffiient to ensure that aniates reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. Tennessee, furthermore, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 58 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

61 How is Texas Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Ahea of the Class GRADE b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Texas has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, but they still nee improvement, as o its poliies for future seonary teahers. Texas nees to larify its poliies for phasing out the HOUSSE route. The state oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Texas teahing stanars are lear an speifi; they are among the best in the nation. Similarly, the state s poliies for ensuring that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution are quite strong. The state allows new teahers to teah for up to three years before passing state liensure tests, although it has goo poliies regaring teaher reiproity. Texas oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Texas takes an ative role in shaping teaher evaluation an ompensation, resulting in some strong poliies, but there is still room for neessary improvements. The statewie evaluation system is one of the few to require both subjetive an limite objetive eviene of teaher effetiveness an to ensure that a teaher annot pass an evaluation without meeting this riterion. Although the state requires annual evaluations, a wie loophole waives this requirement for profiient teahers. The state s efforts are further weakene by a lak of value-ae ata, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting teahers tenure in only three years. The state oes support both ifferential an performane pay initiatives. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Texas is one of only a few states that aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state is also oing more than many others to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. Texas also appropriately separates areitation from state approval, but it oes not require aniates to pass a basi skills test prior to amission. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Texas oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Texas allows programs to require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Texas has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Texas stanars for speial euation teahers are better than those of many states, an they aequately aress all of the ritial areas of knowlege require to teah stuents with isabilities. However, the state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Texas requires speial euation aniates to omplete the equivalent of an interisiplinary or aaemi major. This requirement shoul help seonary speial euation teahers beome highly qualifie in at least one ore area uring teaher preparation. Texas, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 59

62 How is Utah Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Utah nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, as o its poliies for future seonary teahers. Utah oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major an is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Utah s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. The state allows new teahers to teah for up to three years before passing state liensure tests. Its reiproity poliies may reate neeless obstales for out of state teahers. Utah oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Utah fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only three years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Utah oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. It oes not hol its programs suffiiently aountable for the quality of their preparation. In aition, Utah has faile to aress the teneny of programs to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. The state also inappropriately requires its programs to attain national areitation. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Utah oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. For at least one route, Utah ensures that programs o not require exessive oursework, but it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Utah has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Utah s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary speial euation teahers are require to pass a subjet matter test, the state s poliies o little to ensure that programs will prepare aniates for that test by requiring liberal arts oursework in topis relevant to the PK-6 lassroom. Seonary speial euation teahers, however, are likely to finish their preparation program highly qualifie in at least one subjet area, putting Utah ahea of most states in this area. Utah has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 60 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

63 How is Vermont Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Vermont nees to greatly improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement, although its poliies for future seonary teahers are better. Vermont oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. It is phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Vermont s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state s stanars o ensure that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution, but it oes not require new teahers to pass a test to emonstrate mastery of this ritial material. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to two years before passing state liensure tests. The state s poliies regaring teaher reiproity oul be improve. Vermont oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Vermont fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only two years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Vermont oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Vermont oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Vermont oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have strutural shortomings ombine with inflexible amissions stanars. Vermont oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are suffiiently seletive. The state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Vermont also has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Vermont s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. Furthermore, state poliy oes not ensure that prospetive teahers reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the elementary or seonary lassroom. Vermont also has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 61

64 How is Virginia Faring? Overall Performane: Weak but Progressing GRADE b state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Virginia nees to greatly improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, an its poliies for future seonary teahers are very goo. Virginia is not phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. It oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Virginia s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies for ensuring that new teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution are quite strong an are among the best in the ountry. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to three years before passing state liensure tests. While the state has reasonably goo poliies regaring teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. Virginia reognizes istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Virginia s minimal teaher evaluation guielines all for eviene of teaher effetiveness, but they are too vague to guarantee istrits use atual stuent outomes. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further unermine by formal evaluations onute only every three years, a lak of value-ae ata, an tenure grante after only three years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay. Virginia fails to exerise muh-neee leaership in the realm of teaher aountability. The state oes not efine important poliies about the frequeny an ontent of teaher evaluations an thus oes not ensure that evaluations are annual an base primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Moreover, the state laks value-ae ata an grants teahers tenure after only two years in the lassroom. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule an supports ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Virginia is one of only a few states with a poliy esigne to ensure effiient elivery of professional oursework. Virginia oes not wholly separate areitation from state approval. The state has a poliy requiring a basi skills test for prospetive teaher aniates, but it has a glaring loophole. Its program aountability measures are also improving, but nee more work. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Virginia s alternate routes to ertifiation have a soun struture that woul qualify them as genuine alternate routes, but they are ompromise by low amissions stanars. Virginia oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, but it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Virginia has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Virginia s stanars for speial euation teahers are better than those of many states, an they aequately aress all of the ritial areas of knowlege require to teah stuents with isabilities. Also unique among the states, Virginia limits the amount of professional an methoologial oursework in speial euation preparation programs. This poliy is a moel for other states to aopt. While the general euation oursework requirement for speial euation aniates is better than that foun in many states, Virginia s poliy oes not ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to elementary or seonary lassrooms. Seonary speial euation teaher aniates are not require to major in a ore ontent area. Furthermore, Virginia has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom.

65 How is Washington Faring? Overall Performane: Unsatisfatory GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Washington nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. Its subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, but its poliies for future seonary teahers are laking. The state also nees better poliies for phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. Washington oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Washington s teahing stanars, though measurable an nonieologial, o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to one year before passing state liensure tests. The state has strong poliies regaring teaher reiproity. Washington oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation Although Washington properly requires annual evaluations, the state s minimal teaher evaluation guielines o not ensure that istrits base evaluations primarily on eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Promoting teaher effetiveness is further unermine by a lak of value-ae ata, by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule, an by granting teahers tenure after a notably brief two years in the lassroom. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Washington oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Washington oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Washington is one of the only states that provies a genuine alternate route to ertifiation. For one of its routes, Washington oes not allow programs to require exessive oursework, an it ensures aequate support is provie to new teahers. The state s aaemi stanars for amission to alternate route programs are relatively flexible, although the state oes not require aniates to show eviene of goo aaemi performane. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Washington, however, has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, provie appliants have at least three years of experiene. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Washington s stanars for speial euation teahers o not aequately prepare them to work with stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While Washington requires speial euation aniates to omplete some subjet matter preparation, the state oes not aequately ensure that aniates are prepare for elementary or seonary lassrooms. Furthermore, Washington has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 63

66 How is West Virginia Faring? Overall Performane: Nees Signifiant Improvement GRADE D state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives West Virginia nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers are better than those of many states, an its poliies for future seonary teahers are very goo. The state also nees better poliies for phasing out its use of the HOUSSE route. West Virginia oes meet the inustry stanar for a subjet matter major an minor. Area 2 Teaher Liensure West Virginia s teahing stanars lak speifiity an o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. The state has strong oursework requirements to prepare teahers in the siene of reaing instrution, but oes not require a liensure test to ensure teahers unerstan this ritial material. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to one year before passing state liensure tests. While the state has taken steps to failitate teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. West Virginia oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation By not expliitly alling for objetive eviene of lassroom effetiveness, West Virginia s minimal teaher evaluation guielines fail to hol teahers aountable. Moreover, the state oes not manate the frequeny of evaluations for veteran teahers. West Virginia s efforts to promote teaher effetiveness are further unermine by a lak of value-ae ata, by granting teahers tenure after only three years an by burening istrits with a minimum salary sheule. The state oes support ifferential pay. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs West Virginia oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, West Virginia oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation West Virginia oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate route the state offers has strutural shortomings ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. West Virginia oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. West Virginia has a fairly flexible poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers oming from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers West Virginia s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While its general euation requirements for speial euation aniates are better than those foun in many states, the state s poliy oes not ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the topi taught in the PK-6 lassroom. West Virginia oes require aniates to major in a subjet area; however, it has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help new seonary speial euation teahers meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 64 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

67 How is Wisonsin Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Wisonsin has better ata poliies than many states, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee improvement. Its requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. The state also nees to efine a subjet matter major. Wisonsin is phasing out the use of its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Wisonsin s teahing stanars o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to two years before passing state liensure tests. The state nees to reue its obstales to liensure for out of state teahers. Wisonsin oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation While Wisonsin s minimal teaher evaluation guielines require subjetive observations, they o not ensure that evaluations are base primarily on a preponerane of eviene of lassroom effetiveness that inlues objetive measures. Teaher aountability is further unermine by only requiring evaluations one every three years, by a lak of value-ae ata, an by not ensuring istrits wait five years prior to granting teahers tenure. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Wisonsin oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Wisonsin oes require appliants to pass a basi skills test an has a sensible areitation poliy. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Wisonsin oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Wisonsin oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state ollets little objetive performane ata from alternate route programs an oes not use the ata to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Wisonsin has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Wisonsin s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. The state plaes no limit on the amount of professional euation oursework that its teaher preparation programs an require of speial euation aniates, resulting in program exesses. While elementary speial euation teahers are require to pass a subjet matter test, this poliy oes not suffiiently ensure that aniates will have the knowlege relevant to all of the topis they will have to teah. The state s seonary speial euation aniates are likely to finish their preparation program highly qualifie in at least one subjet area, but the state has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help them meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 65

68 How is Wyoming Faring? Overall Performane: Languishing GRADE f state analysis Area 1 Meeting NCLB Teaher Quality Objetives Wyoming nees to improve its ata poliies, whih an help it ameliorate inequities in teaher assignments. The state s subjet matter preparation poliies for future elementary teahers nee a goo eal of improvement. The state s requirements for future high shool teahers are aequate, but its expetations for mile shool teahers are insuffiient. The state also nees to efine a subjet matter major. Wyoming is phasing out the use of its HOUSSE route. Area 2 Teaher Liensure Wyoming s teahing stanars o not learly refer to the knowlege an skills that new teahers must have before entering the lassroom. State poliies o not ensure that teahers are prepare in the siene of reaing instrution. New teahers are allowe to teah for up to one year before passing state liensure tests. While the state has taken steps to failitate teaher reiproity, its poliies oul be improve. Wyoming oes not reognize istint levels of aaemi aliber at the time of initial ertifiation for new teahers. Area 3 Teaher Evaluation an Compensation While Wyoming has some soun poliies, the state s efforts to promote teaher effetiveness fall short. The state properly manates annual evaluations, but fails to artiulate meaningful riteria for them an thus oes not ensure that istrits base evaluations on a preponerane of eviene of lassroom effetiveness. Wyoming also laks value-ae ata an grants tenure after only three years. The state oes not buren istrits with a minimum salary sheule. Area 4 State Approval of Teaher Preparation Programs Wyoming oes not o enough to hol its programs aountable for the quality of their preparation. It has faile to aress their teneny to require exessive amounts of professional oursework. Furthermore, Wyoming oes not require aspiring teahers to emonstrate basi skills before entering a teaher preparation program. The state oes appropriately separate areitation from state approval. Area 5 Alternate Routes to Certifiation Wyoming oes not urrently provie a genuine alternate route into the teahing profession. The alternate routes the state offers have serious strutural flaws ombine with low an inflexible amissions stanars. Wyoming oes not ensure that programs o not require exessive oursework, an it oes not ensure aequate support is provie to new teahers. In aition, the state oes not use objetive performane ata to hol its alternate route programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Wyoming has a restritive poliy regaring liensure reiproity for teahers from out of state who were prepare in an alternate route program, making it iffiult for some teahers to transfer their lienses. Area 6 Preparation of Speial Euation Teahers Wyoming s stanars for speial euation teahers o not ensure that teahers will be well prepare to teah stuents with isabilities. Although a review of preparation programs in Wyoming foun no speial euation programs with exessive professional euation requirements, state poliy oes not expliitly limit potential exess. While its general euation requirements for elementary speial euation aniates are better than those foun in many states, Wyoming s poliy oes not ensure that teahers will reeive the subjet matter preparation relevant to the topis taught in the PK-6 lassroom. Seonary speial euation aniates are require to major in a subjet area, whih shoul help them to attain highly qualifie status in one ore aaemi area upon ompletion of a teaher preparation program. Wyoming, however, has not evelope a streamline HOUSSE route to help aniates meet aitional subjet matter requirements one they are in the lassroom. 66 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

69 Goal Summaries Introution The following pages summarize states overall progress in meeting teaher quality goals. For more information about an iniviual state s performane in meeting these goals, please see its iniviual state report, available at: State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 67

70 Area 1: Goal A Equitable Distribution of Teahers The state shoul ontribute to the equitable istribution of quality teahers by means of goo reporting an soun poliies. Goal Components The state shoul make shool-level ata about the perentage of highly qualifie teahers, the perentage of new teahers, teaher absenteeism an teaher turnover publily available. The state shoul inlue measurable goals, timelines, or other benhmarks to evaluate the suess of strategies aime at improving the equitable istribution of qualifie teahers. Finings Nearly all states have a long way to go to meet this goal. A better unerstaning of this important problem is neee in orer to aress the equitable istribution of teahers. However, most states ollet an report little ata that show the istribution of teahers among shools within a shool istrit. While most states report the perentage of highly qualifie teahers working in every shool in the state, only nine states report ata that are muh more meaningful, suh as the ratio of novie teahers to full shool staff. Only five states report the annual turnover rate of teahers in a shool, an important iniator of stability. Similarly, only five states report teahers absenteeism rates, important iniators of staff morale an quality of shool leaership. The Equity Plans for improving istribution that states were require to submit to the U.S. Department of Euation i not isplay a strong ommitment to solving this problem. Few plans inlue strategies aime speifially at reruiting an retaining qualifie teahers for highnees lassrooms. Even fewer ha set benhmarks that will iniate if these strategies are working. Figure 2 Equitable Distribution of Teahers How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 1 Connetiut State Nearly Meets Goal 3 New Jersey, North Carolina, South Carolina State Partly Meets Goal 8 Arizona, California, Floria, Minnesota, Nevaa, Rhoe Islan, Texas, Wisonsin State Meets a Small Part of Goal 39 Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorao, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Marylan, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexio, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming State Does Not Meet Goal 0 68 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers.

71 national summary AREA 1: goal a Best Pratie No state has a perfet reor when it omes to publi reporting of teaher ata an well-esigne poliies to ameliorate inequities in teaher quality, but Connetiut omes lose. Connetiut s publi reporting is the best among the states. Connetiut publishes information by shool on the perent of lasses taught by highly qualifie teahers, the perentage of inexperiene teahers, teahers attenane rates an annual turnover rates. For all of these iniators, the state provies omparisons with shools that have similar proportions of poor an minority stuents. Figure 3 Equitable Distribution of Teahers How Many States Publily Report Shool-Level Data about Teahers? 1 Ratio of novie teahers to full 12 shool staff Perentage highly qualifie 3 45 Annual turnover rate 5 Teaher absenteeism rate 5 1 States that ollet this information but o not publily report it were not given reit. States that report on these fators only by istrit were also not given reit. 2 States reporting at the shool level on teahers average years of experiene were not given reit, as this fails to apture what perent of the staff is new an just learning to be a teaher. 3 States were given reit for reporting publily at the shool level on either the perent of highly qualifie teahers or the more preferre perent of lasses taught by highly qualifie teahers. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 69

72 Area 1: Goal B Elementary Teaher Preparation The state shoul ensure that its teaher preparation programs provie elementary teaher aniates with a broa liberal arts euation. Goal Components The state shoul require that its approve teaher preparation programs eliver a omprehensive program of stuy in broa liberal arts oursework. An aequate urriulum is likely to require approximately 42 reit hours to ensure appropriate epth in eah of the five ore subjet areas (siene, mathematis, soial stuies, English an fine arts). This oursework shoul be iretly relevant to the broa subjet areas typially taught in the elementary graes an/or elineate in state stanars. Arts an sienes faulty, not euation faulty, shoul teah this oursework. The state shoul allow elementary teaher aniates to test out of speifi oursework requirements, provie the test that is aministere is speifi to only one partiular subjet area. Figure 4 Elementary Teaher Preparation How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Massahusetts State Meets Goal 2 California, Oregon 3 State Nearly Meets Goal Tennessee, Texas, Virginia finings Most states o not appreiate the ritial importane of ensuring that elementary teahers are broaly euate, well-verse in the ontent that they may nee to eliver an onversant in topis of interest to urious hilren. Even states that o have subjet-matter requirements ten to leave them so ambiguous that aspiring teahers may fulfill these requirements with ourses that bear no onnetion to the PK-6 lassroom. For example, only three states require elementary teaher aniates to stuy Amerian literature, whih woul ensure familiarity with great Amerian poets an writers. Only six states require stuy of hilren s literature, an only nine states require introutory stuy of Amerian history. While more states have requirements for math an siene, preparation is still generally laking. Stuy of algebra is require by 29 states an physial siene is require by 28 states. An saly, most states o little to ensure that lassroom teahers are apable of ultivating hilren s thirst for the arts, with only 30 states requiring a musi lass, an a mere three requiring art history. While states liensing tests for elementary teahers shoul evaluate teahers knowlege of various subjets, only five states tests report subjet-area subsores. In other states, sub- State Partly Meets Goal 12 Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Mihigan, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Washington State Meets a Small Part of Goal 15 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorao, Connetiut, Delaware, Floria, Georgia, Hawaii, Iowa, Nebraska, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Wisonsin State Does Not Meet Goal 18 Alaska, Distrit of Columbia, Iaho, Iniana, Kentuky, Maine, Marylan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nevaa, Ohio, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Wyoming 70 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

73 national Summary AREA 1: goal b jet-matter tests verify only that teahers meet a general passing sore. A teaher with an extreme weakness in a partiular subjet may pass the liensing test if he or she oes well enough in other areas to ompensate. Best Pratie Massahusetts requires elementary teaher aniates to omplete 36 reit hours of arts an sienes oursework inluing: omposition, Amerian literature, worl literature, U.S. history, worl history, geography, eonomis, U.S. government, hil evelopment, siene laboratory work an appropriate math an siene oursework. Figure 5 Elementary Teaher Preparation How Many States are Preparing Teahers in the Key Areas of Stuy? Key Areas of English Amer Literature 3 Wrl/Brit Literature 3 Writing/Grmr/Comp 23 Chilren s Literature 6 3 Key Areas of Math Founations 33 Algebra 29 Geometry 33 5 Key Areas of Siene Chemistry 3 Physis 3 Gen Physial Siene 28 Earth Siene 26 Bio/Life Siene 30 2 Key Areas of Fine Arts Art History 3 Musi 30 8 Key Areas of Soial Stuies Amer History I 9 Amer History II 3 Amer Government 14 Wrl History (Ant) 6 Wrl History (Mo) 2 Wrl History (Wst) 3 Wrl History (Non-Wst) 1 Geography 20 State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 71

74 Area 1: Goal C Seonary Teaher Preparation The state shoul require its teaher preparation programs to grauate seonary teahers who are highly qualifie. Goal Components Teaher preparation programs shoul require high shool aniates to earn a major in their intene teahing area. The state shoul enourage mile shool aniates to earn two minors in two ore aaemi areas, preferably over the hoie of a single major. The state shoul require that new mile shool teahers pass a test in every ore aaemi area they inten to teah. The state shoul require that new high shool teahers pass a subjet matter test. finings Sine 2000, states have mae signifiant progress in setting forth their expetations for the reentials that aspiring seonary teahers nee to earn, but a signifiant number of states have yet to shore up this relatively straightforwar area of teaher preparation. Half of all states now have soun requirements in plae. Most states require that high shool teahers earn a major in the subjet area they inten to teah. However, the area most in nee of attention is what states require of mile shool teahers, with 20 states falling short of ensuring that mile shool teahers meet NCLB highly qualifie requirements, within a ontext of staffing shools with teahers who an be assigne with some egree of flexibility. Only 11 states reognize that requiring mile shool teaher aniates to omplete two minors an pass subjet-matter tests to emonstrate ompeteny is the most flexible way to ensure that mile shool teahers will be qualifie to teah two subjet areas. In aition, many states still permit teahers uner a generalist liense (intene for teahing elementary stuents) to teah seventh an eighth graes. Six states allow any teaher with a generalist liense to teah graes seven an eight; an aitional 17 states allow this uner ertain irumstanes, suh as when the teaher is working in a K-8 shool. Figure 6 Seonary Teaher Preparation How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 10 Connetiut, Delaware, Georgia, Louisiana, Massahusetts, Mississippi, Ohio, South Dakota, Virginia, West Virginia State Nearly Meets Goal 13 Alabama, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Iaho, Kansas, Kentuky, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont State Partly Meets Goal 15 Arizona, California, Colorao, Illinois, Iniana, Maine, Marylan, Mihigan, Minnesota, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, North Dakota, South Carolina, Washington State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 Arkansas, Floria, Iowa, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, Tennessee, Texas, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Does Not Meet Goal 1 Alaska 72 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

75 national Summary AREA 1: goal Enouraging teaher preparation programs to aminister single subjet-area tests for multiple subjets oul help to signifiantly ease staffing problems at the mile shool level. Best Pratie Connetiut ombines rigor with flexibility, requiring mile shool teahers to omplete either a subjet-matter major or an interisiplinary major onsisting of 24 reit hours in one subjet an 15 in another. Georgia, Louisiana an Mississippi also require two minors of mile shool teaher aniates an a major for high shool teaher aniates. With the avent of NCLB, most states now require a subjet-matter major for high shool teaher aniates. Figure 7 Seonary Teaher Preparation What o States Expet of Mile Shool Teahers? Figure 8 Seonary Teaher Preparation Do States Allow Generalists to Teah in Graes 7 an 8? 6 Yes 17 Uner ertain irumstanes 28 No Major or more Major or two minors Two minors Less than a major Loose requirements State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 73

76 Area 1: Goal D Veteran Teahers Path to HQT For most teahers, the state shoul phase out its alternative HOUSSE route to beoming highly qualifie. Goal Components By the en of the 2007 shool year, states shoul signifiantly limit veteran teahers ability to use their High Objetive Uniform State System of Evaluation (HOUSSE) routes to ahieve highly qualifie teaher status. States still nee to provie a HOUSSE route for a limite number of teahers: rural teahers of multiple subjets, seonary speial euation teahers, an foreign teahers in the Unite States on a temporary basis. finings In 2001 Congress approve the HOUSSE route to help veteran teahers beome highly qualifie without having to take a test or omplete aitional oursework. Ambiguous feeral guiane left room for states to reate huge loopholes, effetively gutting the signifiane of the term highly qualifie teaher. While Congress may have intene for HOUSSE to be a temporary, transitional option, states fin that the route is still a neessary option for some teahers in speial irumstanes: rural teahers of multiple subjets, seonary speial euation teahers an foreign teahers in this ountry temporarily. Nineteen states ommenably have phase out their HOUSSE routes, with three of these states not permitting any exeptions. Another 15 states are in the proess of phasing out the route as a general option. However, a signifiant number of states ontinue to allow the use of HOUSSE routes for veteran teahers who o not have partiularly unique nees. Five states have iniate that they have no plans to en the use of HOUSSE. Best Pratie Alabama, Arizona, Floria, Louisiana, Maine, Minnesota an Wyoming have phase out HOUSSE in an extremely effiient manner. These states have alreay omplete the use of HOUSSE for veteran teahers an implemente a revise system that only allows extensions of the proess for teahers who fall uner the exat exeptions ientifie by the U.S. Department of Euation. Figure 9 Veteran Teahers Path to HQT How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 19 Alabama, Arizona, Colorao, Floria, Georgia, Louisiana, Maine, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexio, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Nearly Meets Goal 6 Alaska, Delaware, Kentuky, Oregon, West Virginia State Partly Meets Goal 9 Arkansas, Connetiut, Iaho, Iowa, Kansas, Nevaa, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 California, Marylan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 5 Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iniana, Rhoe Islan 74 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

77 Area 1: Goal E Stanarizing Creentials The state shoul aopt the national stanar efining the amount of oursework neessary to earn a major or minor. Goal Components A major shoul be efine as 30 reit hours. A minor shoul be efine as 15 reit hours. Figure 10 Stanarizing Creentials How States are Faring finings The feeral requirement that teahers earn a subjet-matter major is ilute by varying efinitions of this aaemi benhmark among states. The ambiguity also hurts teahers, beause their lienses are less portable. A teaher moving from a state that ha requires only a 24-reit hour major to a state with a 30-reit hour major may not be able to earn a reiproal liense without taking aitional oursework. Only 27 states efine a major as 30 reit hours, an only nine states efine a minor as 15 reit hours. Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 6 Alaska, Delaware, New Jersey, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia State Nearly Meets Goal 19 Alabama, Arkansas, Distrit of Columbia, Iaho, Illinois, Louisiana, Marylan, Mihigan, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, Washington State Partly Meets Goal 1 Iowa State Meets a Small Part of Goal 1 Mississippi State Does Not Meet Goal 24 Arizona, California, Colorao, Connetiut, Floria, Georgia, Hawaii, Iniana, Kansas, Kentuky, Maine, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 75

78 AREA 1: goal e national Summary Best Pratie Alaska, Delaware, New Jersey, Utah, Vermont an West Virginia all have appropriate efinitions of both a major an a minor (or their equivalent). Figure 11 Stanarizing Creentials Towars a National Definition Yes No Yes No State efines a major as 30 reit hours 1 State efines a minor as 15 reit hours 1 1 States were given reit if their efinitions were within a reasonable range of the reommene stanar. 76 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

79 Area 2: Goal A Defining Professional Knowlege Through teahing stanars, the state shoul artiulate an assess the professional knowlege of teahing an learning that new teahers nee, but steer lear of soft areas that are har to measure. Goal Components Stanars shoul esribe knowlege that is groune in siene an onsensus thinking about effetive teahing, while avoiing overt ieologial statements an esriptions of teahers soft attributes that annot be teste. Stanars shoul aress the nees of the novie teaher, esribing the state s expetations of what a new teaher nees to know before starting to teah. Stanars shoul be speifi enough to rive the instrution of teaher preparation programs an inform teaher aniates of what they nee to know in orer to beome liense teahers. The state shoul verify that new teahers meet its professional stanars by means of a liensing test. All stanars shoul be foun in one oument. finings Every state has a set of teahing stanars esigne to artiulate what teahers must know an be able to o. Many of these stanars also efine the attributes an attitues that teaher shoul have, referre to in the fiel as teahing ispositions. With some notable exeptions, most state teahing stanars are inaequate for a number of ommon reasons. Only five states unerstan the nee to artiulate a set of stanars that fous on the new teaher, so that aspiring teahers an the programs that prepare them know what the state expets. Twenty-eight states stanars are largely unable to be teste, plaing too muh emphasis on teahing isposition, rather than fousing on what teahers must know an shoul be able to o. Few states stanars are groune in sientifi researh. Some states refer to researh-base praties, but lak etails about whih researh an praties the states expets teahers to know. Most importantly, the lak of goo an rigorous tests to ensure that new teahers meet states stanars reates a funamental problem with this popular stanars-base Figure 12 Defining Professional Knowlege How States are Faring Best Pratie 3 Colorao, New York, Texas State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 2 Floria, Pennsylvania State Partly Meets Goal 11 Alabama, Arizona, California, Kansas, Marylan, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, Virginia, Washington State Meets a Small Part of Goal 29 Arkansas, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Jersey, New Mexio, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 6 Alaska, Georgia, Iniana, New Hampshire, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 77

80 AREA 2: goal a national Summary approah that nees to be aknowlege an aresse. Only 29 states require new teahers to pass a peagogy test in orer to attain liensure. Best Pratie New York, Colorao an Texas have lear an speifi stanars for what new teahers shoul know an be able to o. These states stanars elineate the professional knowlege new teahers must have in appropriate etail to form the basis of an entry-level test. They provie meaningful guiane to teaher aniates an teaher preparation programs, an are an exellent example for other states. Figure 13 Defining Professional Knowlege How Do States Artiulate an Assess Teahers Professional Knowlege? Figure 14 Defining Professional Knowlege How Many States Stanars Aress These Selete Basi Areas? State learning stanars 39 Reognizing hil abuse 10 ESL strategies 18 Euation law Stanars emphasize testable 28 knowlege Stanars are aime at novie teaher 5 Stanars are speifi 4 Verifie by a ommerial 23 peagogy test Verifie by a state s own 9 peagogy test 78 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

81 Area 2: Goal B Meaningful Lienses The state shoul require that all teahers pass require liensing tests before they begin their seon year of teahing. Goal Components States that onfer onitional, provisional, or sometimes even stanar lienses on teahers who have not passe the require liensing tests shoul eliminate their generous waiver poliies after one year. finings Liensing tests serve a ritial purpose. They provie the publi with assurane that a person meets the minimal qualifiations to be a teaher. Basi skills tests measure skills in reaing, writing an mathematis aquire in mile shool. Subjet-area tests measure, at most, knowlege usually aquire in high shool. Seven states give teahers up to two years to pass the tests, an 20 states give teahers three or more years. Twenty-two states have the soun poliy of requiring teahers to pass all tests before they begin teahing or by the en of their first year. Figure 15 Meaningful Lienses How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 21 Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorao, Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Iniana, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Mississippi, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming 1 State Nearly Meets Goal 0 State Partly Meets Goal 1 Iowa 1 State Meets a Small Part of Goal 0 State Does Not Meet Goal 29 Alaska, California, Delaware, Floria, Hawaii, Iaho, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Marylan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Wisonsin 1 State only requires elementary teahers to pass liensure tests. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 79

82 AREA 2: goal b national Summary Best Pratie Connetiut an Massahusetts eserve speial attention for their more restritive poliies regaring liensure tests. These states restrit the use of one-year testing waivers to transferring an harter shool teahers. Figure 16 Meaningful Lienses How Long an New Teahers Pratie without Passing Liensing Tests? No eferral 1 year 2 years 3 years + (or unspeifie) Montana an Nebraska o not urrently require liensing tests. 80 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

83 Area 2: Goal C Interstate Portability The state shoul help to make teaher lienses fully portable among states with appropriate safeguars. Goal Components The state shoul not use transript analysis as a means of juging the eligibility of a ertifie teaher moving from another state. The state an, an shoul, require eviene of goo staning in previous employment. The state shoul uphol its stanars for all teahers by insisting that teahers meet its testing requirements. Figure 17 Interstate Portability How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 finings Despite our mobile soiety, some states still make it ompliate for liense teahers moving from one state to another to obtain an equivalent teahing liense. The teahing profession oes not ompare favorably with other liense professions (suh as law an aounting) whih rely largely on testing to juge the suitability of a person for an equivalent state liense. Twenty-three states have restritive poliies. These states may require liense out of state teahers to omplete aitional oursework an other requirements -- even though they alreay omplete a traitional teaher preparation program. While many states refuse to waive oursework requirements, most states are happy to waive the more important requirement: state liensing tests. These tests oul provie a reay mehanism to ensure teahers meet state expetations for liensure without imposing a lot of aitional requirements. Yet states will routinely waive tests if a teaher has a few years of experiene. Stuents taught by a teaher who oes not know the subjet matter are no better off just beause a teaher has experiene. Only 16 states require all out of state teahers seeking liensure to pass their liensing tests or provie eviene that they met the state s minimal sore in another state. State Meets Goal 7 Alabama, Hawaii, Maine, Massahusetts, South Dakota, Texas, Washington State Nearly Meets Goal 20 Alaska, Arkansas, Colorao, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming State Partly Meets Goal 12 California, Floria, Georgia, Iaho, Kentuky, Marylan, Mihigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Utah, Wisonsin State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 Arizona, Connetiut, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Mexio, North Dakota, Vermont State Does Not Meet Goal 0 Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 81

84 AREA 2: goal national Summary Best Pratie Alabama, Hawaii, Maine an Texas have sensible poliies for granting liensure to teahers alreay liense in another state. These states will aept teahers who hol vali ertifiates an meet the state s testing stanars. Figure 18 Interstate Portability What Do States Require of Teahers Transferring from Other States? Yes No Yes No N/A Does the state offer reiproity without a lot of strings attahe? Does the state require all teahers to pass its liensing tests? 82 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

85 Area 2: Goal D Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution The state shoul ensure that new teahers know the siene of reaing instrution. Goal Components To ensure that teaher preparation programs aequately prepare aniates in the siene of reaing, the state shoul require that these programs train teahers in the siene of reaing. The most flexible an effetive way of ahieving this ruial goal is by requiring that new teahers pass a rigorous test of reaing instrution in orer to attain liensure. The test shoul not allow teahers to pass without knowing the siene of reaing instrution. finings In spite of its ritial importane to hilren s futures, most states are not ensuring that teahers know the firmly establishe siene of reaing instrution. Only 13 states require teaher preparation programs to aress all five of the essential instrutional omponents (phonemi awareness, phonis, flueny, voabulary an omprehension), either through oursework requirements or stanars that programs must meet. Thirty-two states o not require any preparation in the siene of reaing. Even fewer states follow up with their own requirements, making sure that aspiring teahers atually have aquire this knowlege. Though 11 states laim to require that all teaher aniates pass a test of peagogy, whih inlues a setion on reaing, only four of these states have a test in plae that is up to the task. For most of these tests, the siene of reaing is suh a small part that it is possible to pass without possessing the essential knowlege. Without stanars, oursework requirements an, most importantly, a rigorous test that aresses the siene of reaing, states are taking a great risk at the expense of hilren. Figure 19 Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution How States are Faring Best Pratie 2 Massahusetts, Virginia State Meets Goal 2 Tennessee, Texas State Nearly Meets Goal 4 Arkansas, California, Floria, Oklahoma State Partly Meets Goal 8 Alabama, Georgia, Iaho, Louisiana, Marylan, Minnesota, Vermont, West Virginia State Meets a Small Part of Goal 7 Arizona, Colorao, Iniana, Mihigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Rhoe Islan State Does Not Meet Goal 28 Alaska, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 83

86 AREA 2: goal national Summary Best Pratie Virginia an Massahusetts have some of the strongest poliies for teaher preparation in reaing instrution in the ountry. Both states require teaher preparation programs to aress the siene of reaing, an both require teaher aniates to pass a reaing exam. Reent reviews have rate Virginia an Massahusetts tests as among a very small number that atually verify teaher aniates knowlege of the siene of reaing. Figure 20 Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution How Many States Aress the Siene of Reaing? Figure 21 Teaher Prep in Reaing Instrution How Many States Measure New Teahers Knowlege of the Siene of Reaing? 4 State has stan-alone reaing test 7 State has inaequate reaing test States with requirements that partially aress reaing siene 6 40 State has no reaing test States with requirements that aress reaing siene States that o not aress reaing siene 84 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

87 Area 2: Goal E Distinguishing Promising Teahers The state liense shoul istinguish promising new teahers. Goal Components States shoul offiially reognize new teahers who are of superior aaemi aliber. finings Only a hanful of states reognize new teahers who woul bring superior aaemi aliber into the profession. Despite umulative researh showing the relationship between teahers own aaemi ability an their ability to positively affet stuent ahievement, 47 states o not onfer beginning teahers lienses that istinguish aaemi performane of the aniates. By reognizing aaemi ability on teahers lienses, states woul help shool prinipals an istrit aministrators to reognize the importane of this signifiant attribute in hiring eisions. Figure 22 Distinguishing Promising Teahers How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 4 Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Marylan, Virginia State Nearly Meets Goal 0 State Partly Meets Goal 2 New Jersey, Pennsylvania State Meets a Small Part of Goal 0 State Does Not Meet Goal 45 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorao, Connetiut, Floria, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 85

88 AREA 2: goal e national Summary Best Pratie Delaware, the Distrit of Columbia, Marylan an Virginia all offer the Meritorious New Teaher Caniate reential to new teahers with strong aaemi bakgrouns. MNTC holers must sore in the upper quartile on state liensing tests an ahieve a 3.5 GPA in their unergrauate teaher preparation (or, for seonary teahers, in the ontent major). They must also sore in the upper quartile of the verbal portion of the SAT, ACT or GRE. Figure 23 Distinguishing Promising Teahers Do States Reognize Aaemi Caliber on the Initial Liense? 47 4 Yes No 86 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

89 Area 3: Goal A Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness The state shoul require instrutional effetiveness to be the preponerant riterion of any teaher evaluation. Goal Components Evaluation instruments shoul be struture so as to make it impossible for a teaher to reeive a satisfatory rating if foun ineffetive in the lassroom. Evaluation instruments shoul inlue lassroom observations that fous on an oument effetiveness of instrution. Apart from observations, teaher evaluations shoul onsier objetive eviene of stuent learning. Figure 24 Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Floria finings States are not taking the most basi steps to ensure that teahers evaluations are base primarily on their impat on stuents. Only four states require that lassroom effetiveness be the preponerant riterion for teaher evaluation. If it is not the preponerant riterion, an ineffetive teaher an still earn a satisfatory evaluation, essentially tying the hans of the evaluator. Surprisingly, 22 states o not even require teaher evaluations to inlue lassroom observations, an 35 states o not require evaluations to inlue any objetive measures of stuent learning. It is muh harer to hol a teaher aountable for low performane, or even reognize a teaher for superior performane, if objetive eviene is not a fator. While states o not have to require istrits to aopt a single evaluation instrument, they o have a responsibility to ensure that teaher effetiveness is evaluate onsistently an appropriately. Only 16 states either require istrits to use the state s instrument or provie the regulatory guiane neee to ensure that istrits hol teahers aountable for lassroom effetiveness. State Meets Goal 3 South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas State Nearly Meets Goal 0 State Partly Meets Goal 12 Alabama, Connetiut, Delaware, Georgia, Iowa, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, Oklahoma State Meets a Small Part of Goal 20 Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorao, Hawaii, Illinois, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Marylan, Mihigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Utah, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin State Does Not Meet Goal 15 Arkansas, Distrit of Columbia, Iaho, Iniana, Maine, Massahusetts, Montana, Nevaa, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 87

90 AREA 3: goal a national Summary Best Pratie Floria is the only state that expliitly requires teaher evaluations to be base primarily on eviene of stuent learning. The state requires evaluations to rely on lassroom observations as well as objetive measures of stuent ahievement, inluing state assessment ata. South Carolina, Tennessee an Texas also struture their formal evaluations so that teahers annot get an overall satisfatory rating unless they also get a satisfatory rating on lassroom effetiveness. Footnotes for Figure 25 1 Signifiant guiane means the state requires istrits to use a statewie omprehensive evaluation system (or to evelop loal evaluations that have all the omponents of the state system an meet state approval OR the state provies signifiant regulatory guiane to istrits about the ontent an proess for teaher evaluations. Minimal guiane means the state provies only general instrution about teaher evaluations. 2 N/A states o not require teaher evaluation. Figure 25 Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness The Proper Role of States in Teaher Evaluation Extent of state guiane on teaher evaluation 1 Alabama signifiant Alaska minimal Arizona minimal Arkansas minimal California signifiant Colorao minimal Connetiut signifiant Delaware signifiant Distrit of Columbia n/a 2 Floria signifiant Georgia signifiant Hawaii signifiant Iaho none Illinois minimal Iniana minimal Iowa signifiant Kansas minimal Kentuky minimal Louisiana minimal Maine minimal Marylan minimal Massahusetts minimal Mihigan minimal Minnesota minimal Mississippi signifiant Missouri signifiant Montana n/a 2 Nebraska minimal Nevaa minimal New Hampshire none New Jersey minimal New Mexio signifiant New York minimal North Carolina signifiant North Dakota none Ohio minimal Oklahoma minimal Oregon none Pennsylvania minimal Rhoe Islan n/a 2 South Carolina signifiant South Dakota n/a 2 Tennessee signifiant Texas signifiant Utah minimal Vermont none Virginia minimal Washington minimal West Virginia signifiant Wisonsin minimal Wyoming minimal 88 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

91 Figure 26 Evaluating Teaher Effetiveness State Efforts to Consier Classroom Effetiveness Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming State requires evaluation to inlue lassroom observation State requires evaluation to inlue objetive measures of stuent learning State requires eviene of stuent learning to be the preponerant riterion for teaher evaluation national Summary AREA 3: goal a Footnotes for Figure 26 1 Louisiana has an optional teaher evaluation system that oes make expliit the nee to inlue objetive measures of stuent learning as part of the teaher evaluation. 2 Although Minnesota oes not have poliies regaring teaher evaluations, the state has implemente an optional teaher evaluation system base on eviene of stuent learning as measure by observations an objetive measures, suh as stuent ahievement ata. 3 For teahers partiipating in Utah s areer-laer program, in whih teahers earn inentives for taking on aitional responsibilities, teaher evaluations must inlue eviene of stuent ahievement gains. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 89

92 Area 3: Goal B Using Value-Ae The state shoul install strong value-ae instruments to a to shools knowlege of teaher effetiveness. Goal Components The state shoul be the leaing innovator in the evelopment of value-ae methoology. When multiple years of ata are available, the state an help its shools use this new methoology to obtain ata about iniviual teahers. Before multiple years of ata are available, value-ae analysis is also useful at the shool level. Value-ae systems an also be use to hol teaher preparation programs aountable. To lay the neessary grounwork for value-ae analysis, the state nees to establish a stuent- an teaherlevel longituinal ata system with at least three key omponents: n A unique statewie stuent ientifier number; n A unique teaher ientifier system; an n An assessment system with the ability to math iniviual stuent test reors from year to year. finings A value-ae moel, if properly applie, allows shools to fairly measure the effetiveness of a teaher, by alulating his or her stuents performane at the start of the year an omparing that with en-of-year performane. Beause it is a new tool, it is not surprising that most states have reservations about using value-ae analysis. Its urrent limitations also give many poliymakers pause. However, few states have in plae the key omponents that are neee in orer to evelop value-ae systems an avane the apaity of these systems. To put a value-ae moel in plae, states must have a longituinal ata system with three types of ata: a unique stuent ientifier system, a unique teaher ientifier system an an assessment system that is able to math stuent test reors over time. Only 15 states have all three of the neessary elements. Of the three elements, states are least likely to have the teaher ientifier system; only 18 states urrently assign an ientifier to eah teaher. Figure 27 Using Value-Ae How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Tennessee State Meets Goal 1 Ohio State Nearly Meets Goal 5 Arkansas, Delaware, Floria, Louisiana, South Carolina State Partly Meets Goal 11 Georgia, Hawaii, Kentuky, Minnesota, New Mexio, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming State Meets a Small Part of Goal 22 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Colorao, Connetiut, Iowa, Kansas, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, Wisonsin State Does Not Meet Goal 11 California, Distrit of Columbia, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Maine, Marylan, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oklahoma 90 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

93 Figure 28 Using Value-Ae Developing Capaity with the Three Key Components 1 Unique stuent ientifier system Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming not available Unique teaher ientifier system Test reors math over time Best Pratie national Summary AREA 3: goal b Tennessee pioneere the first statewie value-ae assessment that analyzes an reports stuent ahievement gains at the lassroom level. Although value-ae analysis is not inlue as an iniator on teaher evaluations in Tennessee, shool istrits o use the ata to better target the professional evelopment nees of teahers. Footnotes for Figure 28 1 Data soure: Data Quality Campaign, reporte Fall 2006, org. State responses were reporte by ata iretors from state euation agenies in September Although the Data Quality Campaign lists ten essential elements for eveloping a strong, funtional stuent-level longituinal atabase, NCTQ is highlighting the three elements that most statistiians an eonomists agree are absolutely essential for eveloping value-ae ata analysis: 1) a unique statewie stuent ientifier number that onnets stuent ata aross key atabases aross years, 2) a unique teaher ientifier system that an onnet iniviual teaher reors with stuent reors, an 3) the ability to math iniviual stuent test reors year to year to measure aaemi growth. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 91

94 Area 3: Goal C Teaher Evaluation The state shoul require that shools formally evaluate teahers on an annual basis. Goal Components The state shoul require that all teahers reeive a formal evaluation annually. The state shoul work with istrits to require all teahers who have reeive a single unsatisfatory evaluation to be plae on an improvement plan--no matter what their employment status may be. The state shoul work with istrits to require that all teahers who have reeive two unsatisfatory evaluations within five years be formally eligible for ismissal--no matter what their employment status may be. finings Most setors an professions insist on annual reviews of employee performane. Even for highly performing employees, these reviews provie an important an welome hane for feebak. This is not the ase in teahing. While most states weigh in on the frequeny of teaher evaluations, the majority of states o not require that teahers are evaluate every year. Only 14 states require annual evaluations. An equal number of states o not provie any guiane about the frequeny of evaluations. Three states allow teahers to go as long as five years between evaluations. While states generally weigh in on the ontent an frequeny of evaluations, they o little to enourage poor performers to leave the profession, or to set benhmarks for istrits to ientify when the ismissal proess shoul be initiate. Only seven states provie expliit guiane to istrits on the protool that shoul follow two unsatisfatory evaluations, putting stuents at risk by protrating a proess that shoul lea to ismissal. Figure 29 Teaher Evaluation How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Pennsylvania State Meets Goal 8 Arkansas, Connetiut, Floria, Georgia, Iaho, New York, Oklahoma, Washington State Nearly Meets Goal 5 Arizona, Nevaa, New Jersey, North Dakota, Wyoming State Partly Meets Goal 3 Delaware, New Mexio, South Carolina State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 Alabama, Alaska, California, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kentuky, Mihigan, Mississippi, North Carolina, Texas, Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 22 Colorao, Distrit of Columbia, Iniana, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Marylan, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, Wisonsin 92 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

95 national Summary AREA 3: goal Best Pratie Pennsylvania requires annual evaluations of all teahers an provies guiane to istrits about the nee to plae teahers reeiving unsatisfatory evaluations on probation. Furthermore, Pennsylvania requires that teahers who o not improve are formally eligible for ismissal. Figure 30 Teaher Evaluation Do States Require Annual Evaluations? Yes No State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 93

96 Area 3: Goal D Compensation Reform The state shoul enourage, not blok, efforts at ompensation reform. Goal Components The state shoul not have a minimum salary sheule; it shoul only artiulate the minimum starting salary that every teaher shoul be pai. Further, the state shoul not have regulatory language that woul blok ifferential pay. The state shoul enourage ompensation reform by offering ifferential pay programs that tie teaher pay to istrit an shool nees, suh as reruiting an retaining teahers in har-to-staff subjets an shools. The state shoul experiment with performane pay efforts, rewaring teahers for their effetiveness in the lassroom. Figure 31 Compensation Reform How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Floria State Meets Goal 1 Iowa finings Most states are making at least minimal efforts to enourage teaher ompensation reform by removing any obstales to istrits autonomy for eiing teaher ompensation pakages. Only three states fail to meet any part of this goal. Thirty-one states give istrits full authority to eie teaher pay rates. However, the remaining 20 states impose minimum salary sheules, whih limit shool istrits ability to be responsive to supply-an-eman problems. Twentyeight states support ifferential pay programs, tying teaher pay to istrit an shool nees, suh as reruiting an retaining teahers in low-performing shools. Fewer states support performane pay, whih rewars teahers for their effetiveness in the lassroom; only 12 states urrently fun performane pay initiatives. State Nearly Meets Goal 14 Alaska, California, Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Louisiana, Marylan, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New York, Rhoe Islan, Vermont, Virginia State Partly Meets Goal 20 Arkansas, Colorao, Iaho, Kansas, Maine, Mihigan, Montana, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Mexio, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 Arizona, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentuky, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Washington, West Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 3 Alabama, Iniana, Tennessee 94 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers.

97 Figure 32 Compensation Reform Are States Enouraging Compensation Reform? Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming State gives istrits full authority for pay rates 1 State supports ifferential pay 2 State supports performane pay national Summary AREA 3: goal Best Pratie Floria offers strong poliies that enourage an protet ompensation reform. The state has passe legislation that requires loal istrits to offer ifferential pay. Moreover, the state prohibits istrits from approving olletive bargaining agreements that prelue salary inentives. Footnotes for Figure 32 1 The state may still set the minimum starting salary, but the state lets istrits negotiate the terms an rates of all subsequent pay inreases. 2 Differential pay inlues state-sponsore finanial inentives for reruiting an retaining teahers in har-to-staff shools or subjet-area shortages. Data soures: Quality Counts, a projet of Euation Week ( states/); states Highly Qualifie Teaher plans submitte to the US Department of Euation ( an state responses to NCTQ inquiries. 3 Only performane pay initiatives that are fune or sponsore by the state are inlue. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 95

98 AREA 3: goal national Summary Figure 33 Compensation Reform What an a NBPTS 1 Certifie Teaher with a Base Salary of $50,000 Earn? 2 Footnotes for Figure 36 1 NBPTS=National Boar for Professional Teahing Stanars 2 Figures base on teahing in a high-nees shool. 96 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 New York South Carolina Delaware Mississippi North Carolina New Mexio Alabama Arkansas California Floria Georgia Hawaii Louisiana Missouri Oklahoma Virginia Distrit of Columbia Marylan Wyoming Washington Illinois Maine Montana Iowa Nevaa West Virginia Wisonsin Iaho Kentuky South Dakota North Dakota Kansas Ohio Vermont Alaska Arizona Colorao Connetiut Iniana Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Nebraska New Hampshire New Jersey Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan Tennessee Texas Utah 50,000 55,000 60,000

99 Area 3: Goal E Tenure The state shoul not give teahers permanent status (tenure) until they have been teahing for five years. Goal Components The state s probationary perio shoul not en until a teaher has been in the lassroom for five years. Figure 34 Tenure How States are Faring finings Tenure shoul be a meaningful milestone in a teaher s areer. Unfortunately, the eision to awar tenure is generally mae automatially, with little eliberation put into the eision. No other profession, inluing higher euation, offers pratitioners tenure after only a few years of working in the fiel. Only two states urrently have probationary perios of five years for new teahers. The majority of states require a probationary perio of only three years, an 11 states allow teahers to be grante tenure in two years or less. Shifting the probationary perio to five years oul help to improve the quality of the evaluation proess leaing to tenure. In some ases, it may require states to insist that there atually be an evaluation proess in plae. Best Pratie 2 Iniana, Missouri State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 0 State Partly Meets Goal 4 Connetiut, Illinois, Mihigan, North Carolina State Meets a Small Part of Goal 35 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorao, Delaware, Floria, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, West Virginia, Wyoming State Does Not Meet Goal 10 California, Distrit of Columbia, Maine, Marylan, Mississippi, Nevaa, North Dakota, Vermont, Washington, Wisonsin State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 97

100 AREA 3: goal e national summary Best Pratie Two states, Iniana an Missouri, urrently have probationary perios of five years for new teahers. Figure 35 Tenure How Long Before a Teaher Earns Tenure? 2 No poliy 1 98 : State Poliy Yearbook year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years Probation perio 2 Figure 36 Tenure How AREA Long 3: Before goal a E Teaher Earns Tenure? State-by-State Breakout Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming No poliy 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years

101 Area 4: Goal A Entry Into Preparation Programs The state shoul require unergrauate teaher preparation programs to aminister a basi skills test as a riterion for amission. Goal Components It is inappropriate to wait until teaher aniates are reay to apply for liensure to aminister a basi skills test that assesses reaing, writing, an mathematis. All approve programs in a state shoul use a ommon test to failitate program omparison. The state, not teaher preparation programs, shoul set the sore neee to pass this test. Programs shoul have the option of exempting aniates who submit omparable SAT/ACT sores at a level set by the state. finings Basi skills tests assessing reaing, writing an mathematis skills were originally offere by testing ompanies as a minimal sreening mehanism for teaher preparation programs to use at point of entry into a program. In many states, the tests--assessing skills typially taught uring mile shool-- are not being use as intene. Although 41 states require aspiring teahers to pass a basi skills test, 24 of these states o not require that teaher aniates pass this test as a onition for amission to a teaher preparation program. Of the 17 states that require basi skills testing prior to program amission, only seven require a ommon test for whih the state sets the passing sore an also allow the exemption of aniates who emonstrate equivalent performane on a ollege entrane exam. Ten states o not require any basi skills testing of teaher aniates at any time. Absent this minimal entrane stanar, states annot ensure the quality of instrution uring teaher preparation, as programs that aept aspiring teahers who annot pass a basi skills test may lower the rigor of their ourses, remeiating basi skills instea of preparing teahers for the lassroom. These states further risk investing resoures in aniates who may not be able to pass the test upon program ompletion. Figure 37 Entry Into Preparation Programs How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 7 Connetiut, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia State Nearly Meets Goal 7 Arkansas, Hawaii, Illinois, Missouri, Nebraska, Washington, Wisonsin State Partly Meets Goal 0 State Meets a Small Part of Goal 5 Floria, Iowa, Kentuky, Oklahoma, Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 32 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorao, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Iaho, Iniana, Kansas, Maine, Marylan, Massahusetts, Mihigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 99

102 AREA 4: goal a national Summary Best Pratie Connetiut, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee an West Virginia require aniates to pass a basi skills test as a onition for amission to a teaher preparation program. These states set a minimum passing sore for the test an also unneessary testing by allowing aniates to opt out of the basi skills test by emonstrating a suffiiently high sore on the SAT or ACT. Figure 38 Entry Into Preparation Programs When o States Test Basi Skills? Before amission to prep program During or after ompletion or prep program Does not require basi skills test 100 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

103 Area 4: Goal B Program Aountability The state shoul base its approval of teaher preparation programs on measures that fous on the quality of the teahers oming out of the programs. Goal Components The most important urrently available ata for states to ollet are aniates pass rates on state liensing tests, but more meaningful ata on this variable nee to be obtaine. The state shoul ask programs to report the perentage of teaher aniates who entere stuent teahing an who were able to pass state liensing tests. In aition to better pass-rate information, states shoul onsier olleting the following ata: average raw sores of grauates on liensing tests, satisfation ratings of programs stuent teahers, evaluation results from first an/ or seon year of teahing, aaemi ahievement gains of grauates stuents, an retention rate of grauates. The state shoul also establish the minimum stanar of performane for eah of these ategories of ata. Programs must be hel aountable for meeting these stanars an the state, after ue proess, shoul shut own programs that o not o so. The state shoul proue an annual report ar, publishe on the state s website, that shows all of the ata that the state ollets on iniviual teaher preparation programs. The state an also ollet eviene that the program limits amission to ertifiation areas that proue too many teahers, that it trains teahers in high-shortage areas, an about the number of its grauates who take jobs in-state, out-of-state, or who o not enter the profession. It may be unwise to use these ata as aountability measures. Figure 39 Program Aountability How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 2 Alabama, Louisiana State Partly Meets Goal 6 Floria, Kentuky, Massahusetts, Nevaa, North Carolina, Ohio State Meets a Small Part of Goal 12 Arkansas, Colorao, Iniana, Kansas, Mississippi, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia finings States nee to shift away from ineffetive proesses that emphasize inputs for approving teaher preparation programs, instea holing them aountable for outputs, the quality of the teahers they proue. Few states onnet the program approval proess to measurable outome ata about programs grauates. Only 18 states ollet any meaningful objetive ata that reflet program effetiveness. Only nine of these states have set the minimum stanars that programs must meet to ontinue reeiving approval. State Does Not Meet Goal 31 Alaska, Arizona, California, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Marylan, Mihigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Utah, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 101

104 AREA 4: goal b national Summary Most states also fail to meet the spirit, if not the letter, of Title II, Setion 207 of the Higher Euation At, whih requires states to ollet the average pass rate of teaher aniates on liensing tests. In aition, states are not proviing the publi with information about the effetiveness of programs. Only eight states post any ata at all about iniviual program performane on their websites. Best Pratie While no state fully meets NCTQ s reommenations for approval of teaher preparation programs, Alabama an Louisiana o base program approval on the quality of grauates. Footnotes for Figure 40 1 State sets minimal stanar of performane for some but not all of the areas reommene by NCTQ. 2 State makes reports on program pass rates on state liensure tests available on its website, but oes not make other key outome an performane ata available to the publi. 102 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 Figure 40 Program Aountability How o States Hol Teaher Prep Programs Aountable? State ollets objetive programspeifi ata State sets minimum stanars for performane1 Kentuky x x 1 x 2 North Carolina x x 1 x 1 State makes ata publily available on website Alabama x x x Alaska Arizona Arkansas x California Colorao x Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Louisiana x x Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota x Mississippi x x Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon x Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina x x x South Dakota Tennessee Texas x x Utah Vermont x x Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming

105 Area 4: Goal C Program Approval an Areitation The state shoul keep its program approval proess wholly separate from areitation. Goal Components The state shoul not allow its teaher preparation programs to substitute national areitation for state program approval. The state shoul not require its teaher preparation programs to attain national areitation in orer to reeive state approval. finings Most states are oing a goo job of keeping their approval proesses for teaher preparation programs separate from areitation. The reent growth in the popularity of national areitation has le some states to blur the line between the publi proess of state program approval, whih shoul be about outputs (see Goal 4-B), an the private proess of national areitation, whih is more appropriately onerne with inputs. Eight states inappropriately require all or some of their teaher preparation programs to attain national areitation in orer to reeive state approval. Three aitional states allow substitution of national areitation for state approval. The more ommon pratie of states onuting site visits with or without national areiting teams may be largely unneessary in its urrent usage, istrating states from fousing on program results rather than illuminating reasons behin poor or goo results. Figure 41 Program Approval an Areitation How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 36 Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorao, Connetiut, Delaware, Floria, Hawaii, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Nearly Meets Goal 3 Mihigan, New York, Virginia State Partly Meets Goal 6 Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Iaho, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi State Meets a Small Part of Goal 1 Marylan State Does Not Meet Goal 5 Alaska, Arkansas, New Jersey, North Carolina, Utah

106 AREA 4: goal national Summary Best Pratie The nature of this goal oes not len itself to a best pratie, as NCTQ is reommening that states avoi a speifi poliy, rather than pursuing one. Figure 42 Program Approval an Areitation Sie Stepping State Approval with Private Areitation Whih states allow substitution of national areitation for state approval? Georgia, Maine, Mihigan Whih states require some programs to attain national areitation in orer to attain state approval? Louisiana, Marylan, Mississippi Whih states requires all programs to attain national areitation in orer to reeive state approval? Alaska, Arkansas, New Jersey, North Carolina, Utah 104 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

107 Area 4: Goal D Controlling Coursework Creep The state shoul regularly review the professional oursework that teaher aniates are require to take, in orer to ensure an effiient an balane program of stuy. Goal Components The state shoul aopt poliies esigne to enourage effiient elivery of the professional sequene, for both its own requirements an the requirements mae by iniviual programs. The state shoul manate only oursework or stanars that are likely to make teahers more effetive in the lassroom. Figure 43 Controlling Coursework Creep How States are Faring Best Pratie 2 New Jersey, Tennessee finings States o not o enough to ensure that teaher preparation programs offer an effiient program of stuy, balaning professional knowlege an skills with knowlege of the subjet area(s). Thirty-seven states now employ a stanars-base approah, rather than the more traitional approah of speifying the oursework that teaher aniates must take to qualify for liensure. This approah requires only that the program ommit to teahing the state s stanars in return for approval by the state. While this approah may offer more flexibility in how programs eliver ourse ontent, states still nee to monitor the number of reit hours that programs en up requiring to ensure that they eliver ontent effiiently. Many states are not appropriately monitoring teaher preparation programs. NCTQ foun approve programs in 36 states that require 60 or more reit hours in euation oursework. These requirements leave little room for eletives, an may leave insuffiient room for aequate subjetmatter preparation. Furthermore, it is likely that suh exessive requirements isourage talente iniviuals from pursuing teahing. State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 2 California, Texas State Partly Meets Goal 3 Massahusetts, Mihigan, Virginia State Meets a Small Part of Goal 5 Alabama, Colorao, Floria, New York, Pennsylvania State Does Not Meet Goal 39 Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Marylan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 105

108 AREA 4: goal national Summary Best Pratie Tennessee an New Jersey have poliies that ensure teaher preparation programs o not require exessive professional oursework. Tennessee requires programs to base their oursework on a template that limits professional oursework to 20 perent. New Jersey expliitly limits the amount of professional oursework that programs may require. Figure 45 Controlling Coursework Creep How o States Regulate Teaher Prep Programs Course of Stuy? 37 Figure 44 Controlling Coursework Creep Are States Controlling Program Exesses? States with at least one approve program that requires 60 or more reit hours in e oursework Issue maximum oursework requirements Issue minimum oursework requirements Set stanars that programs must meet 106 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

109 Area 5: Goal A Genuine Alternatives The state shoul ensure its alternate routes to ertifiation are well struture, meeting the nees of new teahers. Goal Components There are nine features that efine a genuine, high-quality alternate route. 1. Amount of oursework. The state shoul ensure that the number of reit hours it either requires or allows shoul be manageable for the new teaher. 2. Program length. The alternate route program shoul be no longer than two years in length, at whih time the new teaher shoul be eligible for a stanar ertifiate. 3. Relevant oursework. Any oursework requirements shoul target the immeiate instrutional nees of the new teaher. 4. New teaher support. The state shoul ensure that aniates have an opportunity to pratie teah in a summer training program. Alternatively, the state an provie an intensive mentoring experiene. 5. Broa Usage. The state shoul not treat the alternate route as a program of last resort, restriting the availability of alternate routes to ertain geographi areas, graes, or subjet areas. 6. Diversity of proviers. The state shoul allow istrits an nonprofit organizations other than institutions of higher euation to operate programs. The three remaining features, esribe in the next goal, aress the riteria that shoul be onsiere in aepting iniviuals into a high-quality alternate route program: 7. Eviene of strong aaemi performane; 8. Verifiation of subjet matter knowlege; an 9. Availability of test-out options to meet stanars. Figure 46 Genuine Alternatives How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 6 Arkansas, Connetiut, Georgia, Kentuky, Louisiana, Marylan State Nearly Meets Goal 6 Floria, Massahusetts, Mississippi, New Jersey, Virginia, Washington State Partly Meets Goal 14 Alabama, California, Colorao, Delaware, Iaho, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah State Meets a Small Part of Goal 7 Arizona, Iniana, New Mexio, New York, South Carolina, Vermont, West Virginia finings While nearly every state now has something on its books that is lassifie as an alternate route to ertifiation, only six states offer a fully genuine alternative that provies an aelerate an responsible pathway into the profession, an that is esigne for talente iniviuals. With some moifiation of one or two omponents, an aitional 15 states oul also meet a genuine stanar. The remaining states have shifte away from the original vision of the alternate route movement establishe in the 1980s. Interpret- State Does Not Meet Goal 18 Alaska, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Mihigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, North Carolina, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, Wisonsin, Wyoming Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers. State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 107

110 AREA 5: goal a national Summary Figure 47 Genuine Alternatives What istinguishes a genuine alternate route from other postbaalaureate paths into the teahing profession? Premise Genuine Alternate Route Caniates with strong aaemi bakgrouns begin teahing while ompleting streamline preparation program. Postbaalaureate Traitional Route Caniates pursue traitional preparation program at the grauate rather than unergrauate level. Classi Emergeny Liensure Virtually any aniate is given a temporary liense to teah; stanar ertifiation requirements must be fulfille to onvert it to a regular liense. Seletivity Teaher provies eviene of above average aaemi performane (e.g., 2.75 or 3.0 GPA)--with some flexibility for mi-areer appliants. Teaher has a 2.5 GPA. Teaher nee not provie any eviene of previous aaemi performane. Subjet matter knowlege Teaher an emonstrate subjet matter knowlege on test. Teaher has a major in the subjet; may have to pass test. Teaher nee not have major, ollege egree, or pass test until program ompletion. Annual ourse requirements Requires no more than one ourse at a time uring shool year (roughly 12 reits per year, exlusive of mentoring reits). 15 reits per year on average. Requirements vary with teaher. Cap on oursework Offers aelerate stuy (e.g., woul not exee 6 ourses, exlusive of any reit for mentoring, over uration of program). 30 reits total on average. Unlimite epens on iniviual. Types of ourses require Relevant to immeiate nees of teaher--suh as reaing instrution; seminars groupe by grae or ontent. Full program of professional stuy. Full program of professional stuy an any missing ontent oursework. Program length Earns stanar ertifiate after two years. Earns stanar ertifiate after two years. Awars stanar ertifiate when oursework is omplete; maximum generally set for number of years emergeny liense is vali. New teaher support Has pratie-teahing opportunity an/or strong inution program oes not require teaher to quit previous job before summer. Has pratie-teahing an/or strong inution may require teaher to quit previous job before summer. Goes through stanar istrit inution program. Provier iversity Distrits, nonprofit proviers, an IHE an operate programs; oursework nee not be reit bearing. Only IHE. Only IHE. Use State atively enourages istrits to use the route. State atively enourages istrits to use the route. State terms route soure of last resort. 108 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

111 Figure 48 Genuine Alternatives Are States Really Offering Alternate Routes into Teahing? Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming Genuine or nearly genuine alternate route Alternate route that nees signifiant revision Offere route is isingenuous No alternate route offere ing alternate route as little more than earn as you learn, 27 states require or permit program proviers to insist that teahers omplete the same program of stuy as traitional route teahers. No fewer than 17 states now lassify as alternate routes what use to be labele as emergeny routes to ertifiation (no amissions riteria, no reution in oursework). Mentoring an inution are ritial nees of new teahers, partiularly for nontraitional aniates who have not ha a lot of stuent teahing experiene. Although many states require programs to provie mentoring, they are typially vague about the extent an nature of servies to be provie. Only 15 states require that alternate route teahers reeive mentoring of high quality an intensity. In a promising evelopment, a hanful of states are beginning to broaen the sope of authorize proviers. Both Teah For Ameria an The New Teaher Projet have been given permission in a few states to prepare their own teahers without being require to partner with a higher euation institution. Best Pratie Although all have areas that oul use some improvement, Arkansas, Connetiut, Georgia, Kentuky, Louisiana, an Marylan all offer struturally soun alternate routes to teaher ertifiation. Figure 49 Genuine Alternatives How Many States Really Offer Alternate Routes into Teahing? 6 Genuine or nearly genuine alternate route 15 Alternate route that nees signifiant revision 27 Offere route is isingenuous 3 No alternate route offere

112 AREA 5: goal a national Summary Figure 50 Genuine Alternatives Are States Curbing Exessive Coursework Requirements? Figure 51 Genuine Alternatives Are States Requiring Mentoring of High Quality an Intensity? Yes Somewhat No No alternate route 15 3 Yes No No alternate route 110 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

113 Area 5: Goal B Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials The state shoul require all of its alternate route programs to be both aaemially seletive an aommoating to the nontraitional aniate. Goal Components With some aommoation for work experiene, alternate route programs shoul sreen aniates for aaemi ability, suh as a 2.75 overall ollege grae point average (GPA). All aniates, inluing elementary aniates an aniates who have a major in their intene subjet area, shoul be require to pass a subjet matter test. A aniate laking a major in the intene subjet area shoul be able to emonstrate suffiient subjet matter knowlege by passing a test of suffiient rigor. finings The onept behin the alternate route in teahing is that the nontraitional aniate is able to onentrate on aquiring professional knowlege an skills beause he or she has emonstrate strong subjet-area knowlege an/or an above-average aaemi bakgroun. Beyon the three states that o not offer alternate routes, 21 states o not require alternate route aniates to meet any aaemi stanar. Fifteen states have set a stanar that is too low, as it is about the same as what is expete of a traitional aniate entering a four-year program. Only 12 states set a suffiient aaemi stanar. While 28 states require all alternate route aniates to pass a subjet-area test no later than one year after starting to teah, 20 states have insuffiient testing requirements. These states either o not require aniates to pass a subjet-area test, exempt some aniates from testing or o not require aniates to pass until the program has been omplete. Only 16 states have amissions riteria that are flexible to the nees of nontraitional aniates. The remaining 32 states require aniates to have a subjet-area major but o not permit aniates to emonstrate subjet knowlege by taking a test. Figure 52 Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 2 Arizona, Arkansas State Nearly Meets Goal 6 Georgia, Louisiana, Massahusetts, New Jersey, Tennessee, Washington State Partly Meets Goal 18 California, Colorao, Connetiut, Floria, Iaho, Iniana, Kentuky, Marylan, Mississippi, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Virginia, Wyoming State Meets a Small Part of Goal 14 Alabama, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, New Mexio, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, West Virginia State Does Not Meet Goal 11 Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Mihigan, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Rhoe Islan, Utah, Wisonsin Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers.

114 AREA 5: goal b national Summary Best Pratie Arizona meets three amission riteria for a quality alternate route: 1) a requirement that all aniates pass a subjet-area test; 2) flexibility built into its poliy that respets nontraitional aniates iverse bakgrouns; an 3) some eviene from aniates of goo aaemi performane. Figure 53 Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials Are States Ensuring that Alternate Route Teahers Have Subjet Matter Knowlege? Figure 54 Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials Are States Requiring Alternate Route Programs to be Seletive? No aaemi stanar Aaemi stanar too low 1 Suffiient aaemi stanar 2 No alternate route 20 1 State sets a primary stanar of a minimum 2.5 GPA, about the same expete of a traitional aniate entering four-year teaher preparation program. 2 State sets primary aaemi stanar above a 2.5 GPA, aknowleging the nee of the nontraitional aniate on fast trak to have above average aaemi reentials. 3 Figure 55 Limiting Alternate Routes to Teahers with Strong Creentials Do States Aommoate the Nontraitional Bakgroun of Alternate Route Caniates? All alternate route aniates must pass a subjet area test no later than one year after starting to teah Insuffiient testing requirements 1 No alternate route 32 1 State oes not require subjet area test at all; or exempts some aniates from having to take it; or oes not require aniate to pass test until program has been omplete : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 Test an be use to show subjet matter knowlege Test annot be use; major is require No alternate route

115 Area 5: Goal C Program Aountability The state shoul hol alternate route programs aountable for the performane of their teahers. Goal Components The state shoul ollet the following performane ata to hol alternate route programs aountable: average raw sore of eah program s teahers on state liensing tests, evaluation results from first an/or seon year of teahing; aaemi ahievement gains of grauates stuents, an retention rate of grauates. The state shoul also establish the minimum stanar of performane for eah of these ategories of ata. Programs must be hel aountable for meeting these stanars an the state, after ue proess, shoul shut own programs that o not o so. The state shoul proue an annual report ar, publishe on the state s website, whih shows all of the ata that the state ollets on iniviual teaher preparation programs. The state an also ollet eviene that the program limits amission to ertifiation areas that proue too many teahers, that it trains teahers in high-shortage areas, an about the number of its grauates who take jobs in-state, out-of-state, or who o not enter the profession. It may be unwise to use these ata as aountability measures. finings States are oing a poor job of holing alternate route programs aountable for the performane of their teahers, as only one state even omes lose to meeting this goal. Few states ollet any stanarize, objetive ata from alternate route programs, an still fewer have establishe minimum stanars to hol programs aountable for the quality of their teahers. Just eight states ollet the results of program grauates first-year evaluations, an a mere four states require programs to report on the aaemi ahievement of their grauates stuents. Best Pratie While no state earns a Best Pratie esignation in this goal, Kentuky omes the losest. Figure 56 Program Aountability How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 1 Kentuky State Partly Meets Goal 8 Arizona, Colorao, Delaware, Georgia, Kansas, Marylan, New Jersey, South Carolina State Meets a Small Part of Goal 8 California, Floria, Illinois, Mihigan, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, Wisonsin State Does Not Meet Goal 34 Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Iaho, Iniana, Iowa, Louisiana, Maine, Massahusetts, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhoe Islan, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 113

116 Area 5: Goal D Interstate Portability The state shoul treat out-of-state teahers who omplete an approve alternate route program no ifferently than out-of-state teahers who omplete a traitional program. Goal Components The state shoul aor the same liense to an experiene teaher who was prepare in an alternate route as it aors an experiene teaher prepare in a traitional teaher preparation program. The terms uner whih the state offers liensure reiproity to teahers who omplete a program but who have not yet taught three years shoul be no ifferent for the teaher prepare in an alternate route as the teaher prepare in a traitional route. finings Many states have unneessarily restritive poliies when it omes to granting lienses to teahers originally liense in other states. States are even more inflexible when it omes to teahers prepare in alternate route programs. Twenty-six states will still not grant reiproal lienses to experiene (three plus years) out of state teahers who omplete alternate routes, without a lot of strings attahe. States are even less likely to grant liense reiproity to outof-state teahers prepare in alternate route programs who have been teahing less than three years. Only 15 states will grant lienses without aitional requirements. Best Pratie Georgia s poliies on teahers prepare through an alternate route are the most fair. Georgia offers a stanar liense to a teaher who omplete a program but who i not yet have a stanar liense in the previous state, provie the only reason that prevente the teaher from earning the liense was time serve. Figure 57 Interstate Portability How States are Faring Best Pratie 1 Georgia State Meets Goal 10 Alabama, Colorao, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia State Nearly Meets Goal 4 Alaska, Arkansas, Mississippi, New Jersey State Partly Meets Goal 8 California, Delaware, Floria, Marylan, Massahusetts, New York, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina State Meets a Small Part of Goal 10 Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Hawaii, Kentuky, Louisiana, Mihigan, New Mexio, North Carolina, South Dakota, Washington State Does Not Meet Goal 18 Arizona, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Utah, Vermont, Wisonsin, Wyoming 114 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007 Goals with this ion are espeially important for attrating siene an mathematis teahers.

117 Area 6: Goal A Speial Euation Teaher Preparation The state shoul artiulate the professional knowlege neee by the speial euation teaher an monitor teaher preparation programs for effiieny of elivery. Goal Components Stanars for speial euation teahers nee to be expliit an researh base. It shoul not be possible for programs to train teahers in any metho, strategy or assessment an still meet the state stanars. The stanars shoul be speifi enough to rive the instrution of teaher preparation programs an inform teaher aniates of what they nee to know in orer to beome liense teahers. The stanars shoul be testable. States shoul aopt poliies that ensure effiient elivery of professional oursework an a orresponing balane between aaemi an professional oursework. Absent formal poliies, the state an still o muh to ahieve this balane. finings Most states have weak an ineffetive poliies relate to the preparation of speial euation teahers. A mere four states have strong stanars for the preparation of speial euation teahers that are lear, expliit an omprehensive. Twenty-nine states have stanars that provie little guiane about what speial euation teahers shoul know an be able to o. In the absene of soli stanars, teaher preparation programs are left to eie for themselves how speial euation teahers shoul be traine. States are also oing little to ensure that speial euation aniates reeive an effiient an balane program of stuy. Few states monitor the number of reit hours that preparation programs require, if only to ensure that they are elivering ontent effiiently, eliminating outate or reunant ourses. NCTQ foun approve programs in 41 states that require the equivalent of more than two full majors of euation oursework; 16 of these programs require the equivalent of three full majors. While more extensive requirements may be appropriate for teahers preparing to work with stuents with severe isabilities, these requirements seem exessive for general speial euation preparation an may isourage prospetive teahers from entering the fiel. Figure 58 Speial Euation Teaher Preparation How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 4 New Mexio, North Carolina, Texas, Virginia State Partly Meets Goal 2 Alabama, Hawaii State Meets a Small Part of Goal 23 Alaska, Arkansas, California, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, Kentuky, Marylan, Massahusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, West Virginia, Wyoming State Does Not Meet Goal 22 Arizona, Colorao, Floria, Iaho, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Mihigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New York, North Dakota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, Washington, Wisonsin State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 115

118 AREA 6: goal a national Summary Best Pratie While no state fully meets this goal, Virginia omes losest. Virginia s stanars for speial euation teahers are expliit an fous on the key areas for proviing effetive instrution to stuents with isabilities. In aition, Virginia s poliy allows for flexibility while still proviing proper guiane to teaher preparation programs regaring the role of professional oursework in speial euation teaher preparation. Figure 60 Speial Euation Teaher Preparation How o States Regulate Teaher Prep Programs Course of Stuy? 40 Figure 59 Speial Euation Teaher Preparation Do States Artiulate the Professional Knowlege Neee by Speial Euation Teahers? Issue maximum oursework requirements Issue minimum oursework requirements Set stanars that programs must meet Stanars provie lear guiane about expetations Stanars provie limite guiane about expetations Stanars provie little guiane about expetations 116 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

119 Area 6: Goal B Elementary Speial Euation Teahers The state shoul require that teaher preparation programs provie a broa liberal arts program of stuy to elementary speial euation aniates. Goal Components All elementary euation aniates shoul have preparation in five ontent areas: math, siene, English, soial stuies an fine arts. States shoul ensure that the oursework elementary speial euation teahers take is relevant to what is taught in the Pre-K through grae six lassroom. finings States are oing little to ensure that elementary speial euation teahers are well-prepare to teah aaemi subjet matter. Few states require that elementary speial euation teaher aniates omplete broa liberal arts oursework that is relevant to the elementary lassroom. Twenty-one states o not require elementary speial euation aniates to take subjet-matter oursework or emonstrate ontent knowlege on a subjet-matter test. The remaining states have requirements that vary tremenously in terms of the quality of ontent area preparation they require. States not requiring speial euation teahers to be welltraine in aaemi subjet matter are shorthanging speial euation stuents, who eserve the opportunity to learn grae-level ontent. Even speial euation teahers who are not assigne to a self-ontaine lassroom (for example, o-teahing) nee to have knowlege in subjet matter. Figure 61 Elementary Speial Euation Teahers How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 2 Massahusetts, Oregon State Nearly Meets Goal 4 Illinois, Kansas, New Jersey, New York State Partly Meets Goal 13 Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorao, Georgia, Iowa, Mihigan, North Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisonsin State Meets a Small Part of Goal 11 Delaware, Iniana, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Hampshire, New Mexio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, Utah, Washington State Does Not Meet Goal 21 Alaska, Arizona, Connetiut, Distrit of Columbia, Floria, Hawaii, Iaho, Kentuky, Maine, Marylan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, Vermont, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 117

120 AREA 6: goal b national Summary Best Pratie Massahusetts requires elementary speial euation teaher aniates to omplete the same oursework (an pass the same test) as other elementary aniates. They must omplete 36 reit hours of arts an sienes oursework inluing: omposition, Amerian literature, worl literature, U.S. history, worl history, geography, eonomis, U.S. government, hil evelopment, siene laboratory work an appropriate math an siene oursework. Figure 62 Elementary Speial Euation Teahers Do States Require Any Subjet-Matter Preparation? Yes 1 No 1 State requires either subjet-matter oursework or a subjet-matter test. 118 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

121 Area 6: Goal C Seonary Speial Euation Teahers The state shoul require that teaher preparation programs grauate seonary speial euation teaher aniates who are highly qualifie in at least two subjets. Goal Components The most effiient route to beoming aequately prepare to teah multiple subjets may be for teaher aniates to earn the equivalent of two subjet-area minors an pass tests in those areas. Preparation shoul also inlue broa oursework in remaining ore subjet areas, overing topis relevant to PK-12 teahing. Seonary speial euation teaher aniates woul therefore nee to beome highly qualifie in as few aitional subjet areas as possible upon ompletion of a teaher preparation program (see Goal 6-D). Figure 63 Seonary Speial Euation Teahers How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 0 finings States are not requiring that teaher preparation programs assume their fair share of ensuring that seonary speial euation teahers are highly qualifie, leaving the task up to istrits instea. Only one state ensures that seonary speial euation teahers are highly qualifie in two subjet areas upon program ompletion. An aitional 13 states require seonary speial euation teahers to be qualifie in one ore aaemi area. The remainer states -- o not require that programs grauate seonary speial euation teahers who are highly qualifie in any ore aaemi areas. These poliies plae too muh buren on istrits an shorthange speial euation stuents by enying them teahers who are prepare to teah subjet-area ontent. State Nearly Meets Goal 2 Mihigan, New Jersey State Partly Meets Goal 12 California, Iaho, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, New Mexio, New York, North Dakota, Utah, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Meets a Small Part of Goal 14 Alabama, Arkansas, Colorao, Georgia, Illinois, Massahusetts, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Hampshire, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas State Does Not Meet Goal 23 Alaska, Arizona, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Floria, Hawaii, Iniana, Kentuky, Maine, Marylan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevaa, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, Washington State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 119

122 AREA 6: goal national Summary Best Pratie While no state fully meets this goal, Mihigan an New Jersey ome losest. Mihigan requires seonary speial euation teahers to have ual ertifiation. As part of their ertifiation, all seonary teaher aniates must omplete a major in the subjet area they inten to teah an a minor in another area. New Jersey is phasing in a new speial euation ertifiate that requires a grae an subjet matter-appropriate enorsement. New Jersey requires mile shool teaher aniates to omplete a major in one area an a minor in eah aitional teahing area; it requires high shool teaher aniates to omplete a major or the equivalent in their intene teahing area. All new seonary teahers are also require to pass a subjet-area test in orer to attain liensure. Figure 64 Seonary Speial Euation Teahers What o States Require of New Teahers Upon Program Completion? Not require to be highly qualifie in any ore aaemi areas Require to be highly qualifie in one ore aaemi area Require to be highly in qualifie in two ore aaemi areas 120 : State Poliy Yearbook 2007

123 Area 6: Goal D Speial Euation Teahers an HQT The state shoul ustomize a HOUSSE route for new seonary speial euation teahers to help them ahieve highly qualifie status in all the subjets they teah. Goal Components The state shoul offer a ustomize High Objetive Uniform State System of Evaluation (HOUSSE) route for new seonary speial euation teahers who may fin the existing state HOUSSE route a mismath. This unique route shoul be fouse only on inreasing teaher subjet matter knowlege, not peagogial skills. finings Currently, no state has a separate HOUSSE route esigne espeially for new seonary speial euation teahers. States regular HOUSSE routes for veteran teahers are inappropriate for meeting this goal, as they typially awar signifiant points for teahing experiene, professional evelopment an other qualifiations that new teahers lak. Moreover, these options are usually insuffiient for ensuring aequate ontent knowlege. Although ieally seonary speial euation teahers will grauate with highly qualifie status in two ore areas, states shoul provie a pratial an meaningful way for them to meet highly qualifie status in all remaining ore subjets one they are in the lassroom. Figure 65 Speial Euation Teahers an HQT How States are Faring Best Pratie 0 State Meets Goal 0 State Nearly Meets Goal 0 State Partly Meets Goal 0 State Meets a Small Part of Goal 0 Best Pratie Unfortunately, NCTQ annot highlight any state s poliy in this area. State Does Not Meet Goal 51 Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorao, Connetiut, Delaware, Distrit of Columbia, Floria, Georgia, Hawaii, Iaho, Illinois, Iniana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentuky, Louisiana, Maine, Massahusetts, Marylan, Mihigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevaa, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexio, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhoe Islan, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisonsin, Wyoming State Poliy Yearbook 2007 : 121

124 Figure 66 Goal Summary Progress Towar Meeting Teaher Quality Goals Best pratie Fully meets Nearly meets Meets in part Meets Does not small part meet Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorao Connetiut Delaware Distrit of Columbia Floria Georgia Hawaii Iaho Illinois Iniana Iowa Kansas Kentuky Louisiana Maine Marylan Massahusetts Mihigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevaa New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexio New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhoe Islan South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisonsin Wyoming

125 boar of iretors Clara M. Lovett, Chair Presient Emerita, Northern Arizona University Staey Boy, Vie-Chair an Treasurer Founer, The Savvy Soure for Parents Danielle Wilox, Seretary an Founing Chair Consultant Chester E. Finn, Jr. Presient, The Thomas B. Forham Founation Ira Fishman Partner, Patton Boggs LLP Marti Watson Gartlett Laureate Euation, In. Avisory Boar Steven J. Aamowski, Superintenent Hartfor Publi Shools Roy E. Barnes, former Governor of Georgia The Barnes Law Group Alan D. Bersin, former Seretary of Euation, California San Diego County Regional Airport Authority Lawrene S. Braen, Teaher Saint Paul s Shool, New Hampshire Cynthia Brown, Diretor of Euation Poliy Center for Amerian Progress Cheryl Ellis, Shool Diretor Sugar Creek Charter Shool, North Carolina Mihael Feinberg, Co-Founer The Kipp Founation Ronal F. Ferguson, Professor Harvar University Eleanor S. Gaines, Milken National Euator Grayhawk Elementary Shool, Arizona Mihael Golstein, CEO an Founer The Math Shool, Massahusetts Eri A. Hanushek, Senior Fellow The Hoover Institution Freerik M. Hess, Diretor of Euation Poliy Stuies Amerian Enterprise Institute Paul T. Hill, Diretor Center on Reinventing Publi Euation E.D. Hirsh, Founer an Chair The Core Knowlege Founation Frank Keating, former Governor of Oklahoma Presient & CEO, Amerian Counil of Life Insurers Paul Kimmelman, Senior Avisor to the CEO Learning Point Assoiates Martin J. Kolyke, Founer an Chair Aaemy for Urban Shool Leaership Jason Kamras 2005 National Teaher of the Year Carol G. Pek former National Superintenent of the Year / Presient an CEO, Roel Charitable Founation of Arizona Anrew J. Rotherham Founer an Co-Diretor, Euation Setor Kirk T. Shroer former presient, Virginia State Boar of Euation / Partner, Shroer Filow, PLC Kate Walsh, Presient National Counil on Teaher Quality Weny Kopp, Founer an Presient Teah For Ameria Hailly Korman, Teaher 122n Street Elementary Shool, Los Angeles Amy Jo Leonar, Teaher Turtle Mountain Elementary Shool, North Dakota Deborah M. MGriff, Exeutive Vie Presient Eison Shools Ellen Moir, Exeutive Diretor New Teaher Center, University of California, Santa Cruz William Moloney, Commissioner of Euation Colorao Department of Euation Robert H. Pasternak, Vie Presient Maximus In. James A. Peyser, Chair Massahusetts Boar of Euation Mihael Pogursky, Professor Department of Eonomis, University of Missouri-Columbia Mihelle Rhee, CEO an Presient The New Teaher Projet Stefanie Sanfor, Senior Poliy Offier Bill an Melina Gates Founation Laura Shwees, Teaher KIPP: STAR College Prep Charter Shool Lewis C. Solmon, Presient National Institute for Exellene in Teahing Thomas Toh, Founer an Co-Diretor The Euation Setor Daniel Willingham, Professor Department of Psyhology, University of Virginia

126 National Counil on Teaher Quality 1341 G Street NW, Suite 720, Washington, DC Tel: Fax: Web: NCTQ is available to work with iniviual states to improve teaher poliies. For more information please ontat: Sani Jaobs Vie Presient for Poliy [email protected]