@BowtiePrincipal I will start this essay by saying, “Teachers Matter.” Teachers matter more than any resource or human capital associated with the teaching profession and the enterprise we call education. When I think about the question, “Is the best way to solve the teacher shortage crisis to lower the requirements for teacher certification”, I think of decades of school reform articulating the view that the key to improving learning outcomes for all students is to improve teacher quality. Back in 2001, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) required states to set standards that teachers must meet to be considered highly qualified. NCLB required the following, in summary:
(1) States must have ensured that all teachers of core academic subjects were designated as highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.
(2) New elementary teachers were required to pass a rigorous state test of elementary school subjects to demonstrate subject-matter competency.
(3) New secondary teachers were required to pass a state test in each core academic subject taught.
For over twenty years, the nation was informed that highly qualified teachers were required to complete a rigorous teacher preparation program with supervised clinical field work, and then pass a state teacher certification examination before they were deemed highly qualified or considered competent to teach children. The idea of teachers no longer being required to complete a teacher preparation program with requisite field experience and passing state certification examinations flies in the face of over two decades of school reform that clearly stated that an individual was not “highly qualified” unless these standards were met. What changed? Why are teacher candidates now able to skip over these requisite standards and enter the profession without completing a teacher preparation program, without a supervised clinical field experience, without guidance under highly qualified mentors, and without having passed a state certification exam? What changed?
Like all other professions, the teaching profession has a body of knowledge, research, practice, and field work governing its proper execution. What are we now communicating about the teaching profession when a teacher candidate can skip over these standards, requirements, and qualifications to enter the teaching profession? What are we speaking to the public when marginally qualified teachers are now deemed “qualified” to teach your child? What impact will these minimally qualified teachers have on the learning outcomes for culturally and linguistically diverse students? What are the long-term implications of relaxing teacher certification requirements to circumvent the current teacher labor shortage?
Currently, states are changing the criteria for teaching licensure, others are lowering the qualifying score to secure teacher licensure, and some are eliminating all licensure requirements and teaching examinations. These decisions are being made after decades of telling the public that the absence of “highly qualified” teachers is why our children were “left behind” academically. What changed? Why is it now okay to place an unqualified teacher in the classroom?
Lowering the bar for entry into the teaching profession is just as political as the NCLB Act of 2001. NCLB put forth the false narrative that local school districts were broken and required federal intervention and that teacher quality was lacking, and more-and-more teacher testing and teacher accountability was the answer to improving learning outcomes for all students. Politicians are now using the teacher shortage to further de-professionalize a profession reeling from two decades of education and teacher reform policies that failed to empower teachers, marginalized their voices and refused to pay them a living wage adequately. Teachers were shamed, bullied, and threatened to improve student learning outcomes under the guise of accountability. The motto of the two-decade education reform should be “reform without resources,” as it adequately describes the highly qualified-teacher-movement during this period.
Lowering the bar for entry into the teaching profession will not eliminate issues of micromanagement, resource deficits, and inadequate pay. Minimally qualified teachers will be required to focus on raising test scores without the pedagogical competencies, skills, knowledge, experience, and language to articulate opposing viewpoints on the test-prep culture that has engulfed schools. Students will lose the voices of their strongest advocates for student-centered, culturally relevant teaching and learning opportunities.
Reducing standards to pave the way for more teachers to enter the profession is intentionally misleading. Teachers who are adequately prepared, treated as professionals, and compensated adequately are not leaving the profession. These teachers support teaching and learning standards that align with high-quality, rigorous, culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. Lowering standards to address the teacher labor shortage is a bad policy. This strategy will not benefit students but will prove supportive of the continued deprofessionalization of the teaching profession and the continued disinvestment in education.
From a root-cause analysis perspective, the current teacher shortage results from decades of failed school reform that proved successful in deprofessionalizing the teaching profession. Teaching is not an attractive profession when combined with disinvestment in schools. Why would a young college student select a profession where they are treated as if politicians and policy-makers know more about education than trained professionals? Why are seasoned, well-trained veteran teachers retiring or electing to walk away from a profession in which they incurred mountains of student loan debt to complete undergraduate training and secure advanced degrees and certifications? These teachers invested years of time and resources in perfecting their craft to do what they love: Teaching our nation’s children. Why are teachers quitting?
Teachers are quitting because of decades of bad policy, decades of poor education reform, decades of top-down decision-making, decades of deprofessionalizing the teaching profession, and decades of being treated like disposal commodities. And the solution—hiring minimally qualified teachers—is just another chapter in a horrid story titled “Teachers Do Not Matter.” As we think about the teacher shortage crisis, we need to reflect as a nation on this question: “Who do you want to educate your child? Highly qualified teachers or those entering the profession with minimal or marginal qualifications?” Politicians and policy-makers have answered this question by lowering the requirements for teacher certification.
Dr. Rashid Faisal
Associate Professor of Education & Department Chair at the College of Urban Education, Davenport University
(1) States must have ensured that all teachers of core academic subjects were designated as highly qualified by the end of the 2005-2006 school year.
(2) New elementary teachers were required to pass a rigorous state test of elementary school subjects to demonstrate subject-matter competency.
(3) New secondary teachers were required to pass a state test in each core academic subject taught.
For over twenty years, the nation was informed that highly qualified teachers were required to complete a rigorous teacher preparation program with supervised clinical field work, and then pass a state teacher certification examination before they were deemed highly qualified or considered competent to teach children. The idea of teachers no longer being required to complete a teacher preparation program with requisite field experience and passing state certification examinations flies in the face of over two decades of school reform that clearly stated that an individual was not “highly qualified” unless these standards were met. What changed? Why are teacher candidates now able to skip over these requisite standards and enter the profession without completing a teacher preparation program, without a supervised clinical field experience, without guidance under highly qualified mentors, and without having passed a state certification exam? What changed?
Like all other professions, the teaching profession has a body of knowledge, research, practice, and field work governing its proper execution. What are we now communicating about the teaching profession when a teacher candidate can skip over these standards, requirements, and qualifications to enter the teaching profession? What are we speaking to the public when marginally qualified teachers are now deemed “qualified” to teach your child? What impact will these minimally qualified teachers have on the learning outcomes for culturally and linguistically diverse students? What are the long-term implications of relaxing teacher certification requirements to circumvent the current teacher labor shortage?
Currently, states are changing the criteria for teaching licensure, others are lowering the qualifying score to secure teacher licensure, and some are eliminating all licensure requirements and teaching examinations. These decisions are being made after decades of telling the public that the absence of “highly qualified” teachers is why our children were “left behind” academically. What changed? Why is it now okay to place an unqualified teacher in the classroom?
Lowering the bar for entry into the teaching profession is just as political as the NCLB Act of 2001. NCLB put forth the false narrative that local school districts were broken and required federal intervention and that teacher quality was lacking, and more-and-more teacher testing and teacher accountability was the answer to improving learning outcomes for all students. Politicians are now using the teacher shortage to further de-professionalize a profession reeling from two decades of education and teacher reform policies that failed to empower teachers, marginalized their voices and refused to pay them a living wage adequately. Teachers were shamed, bullied, and threatened to improve student learning outcomes under the guise of accountability. The motto of the two-decade education reform should be “reform without resources,” as it adequately describes the highly qualified-teacher-movement during this period.
Lowering the bar for entry into the teaching profession will not eliminate issues of micromanagement, resource deficits, and inadequate pay. Minimally qualified teachers will be required to focus on raising test scores without the pedagogical competencies, skills, knowledge, experience, and language to articulate opposing viewpoints on the test-prep culture that has engulfed schools. Students will lose the voices of their strongest advocates for student-centered, culturally relevant teaching and learning opportunities.
Reducing standards to pave the way for more teachers to enter the profession is intentionally misleading. Teachers who are adequately prepared, treated as professionals, and compensated adequately are not leaving the profession. These teachers support teaching and learning standards that align with high-quality, rigorous, culturally responsive curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices. Lowering standards to address the teacher labor shortage is a bad policy. This strategy will not benefit students but will prove supportive of the continued deprofessionalization of the teaching profession and the continued disinvestment in education.
From a root-cause analysis perspective, the current teacher shortage results from decades of failed school reform that proved successful in deprofessionalizing the teaching profession. Teaching is not an attractive profession when combined with disinvestment in schools. Why would a young college student select a profession where they are treated as if politicians and policy-makers know more about education than trained professionals? Why are seasoned, well-trained veteran teachers retiring or electing to walk away from a profession in which they incurred mountains of student loan debt to complete undergraduate training and secure advanced degrees and certifications? These teachers invested years of time and resources in perfecting their craft to do what they love: Teaching our nation’s children. Why are teachers quitting?
Teachers are quitting because of decades of bad policy, decades of poor education reform, decades of top-down decision-making, decades of deprofessionalizing the teaching profession, and decades of being treated like disposal commodities. And the solution—hiring minimally qualified teachers—is just another chapter in a horrid story titled “Teachers Do Not Matter.” As we think about the teacher shortage crisis, we need to reflect as a nation on this question: “Who do you want to educate your child? Highly qualified teachers or those entering the profession with minimal or marginal qualifications?” Politicians and policy-makers have answered this question by lowering the requirements for teacher certification.
Dr. Rashid Faisal
Associate Professor of Education & Department Chair at the College of Urban Education, Davenport University