Taking Note
NOVEMBER 2012
IV. Revise endorsement areas to ensure teacher knowledge
VI. Continue data collection and research
State standards dictate what students need to know, and therefore
what teachers need to teach, at each grade level and in each content
area. In order to ensure that teachers have the content knowledge
necessary to carry out standards based instruction, it is essential to
assess candidates in each area that an endorsement permits them
to teach. Candidates in Tennessee must pass an Elementary Content
Knowledge exam that covers reading/language arts, math, science,
and social studies, but only the overall score is taken into consideration
for passing; since the subject level scores are not provided, a candidate
could lack important content area knowledge and still pass the exam.
The state should consider requiring elementary teacher candidates
to pass a separately scored math subtest as part of the licensure
process; this is especially critical as schools transition to the Common
Core standards. Additionally, the state should consider making
endorsements more grade-level specific, particularly in the area of
special education. Currently, the state issues an endorsement that
certifies special education teachers to instruct students in grades K
though 12. However, the skills and knowledge needed by students, and
by extension teachers, differ dramatically within this grade range.
In Practice: Massachusetts requires special education and elementary
school teachers to have sufficient content knowledge through course
and testing requirements. For example, all elementary teachers must
demonstrate mathematical knowledge on a separately scored subtest.
They also require special education teachers at the elementary
school level to fulfill the same content knowledge requirements as all
elementary level candidates.
V. Link licensure progression to evaluation results
Given the implementation of a new teacher evaluation system and
the research citing the inability of input measures to predict teacher
outputs, licensure renewal decisions should be based on multiple
sources of data on teacher quality. It is worth examining past
licensure policies to prevent similar issues from arising. For example,
Tennessee implemented the Career Ladder Evaluation System
beginning in 1984, which created a five-tiered certification process.
In order to advance to the next tier, teachers underwent various
assessments of their practice, including classroom observations
and portfolio reviews. A move up the ladder was associated with an
increase in pay and career level status. The important intention of the
Career Ladder system was to reward excellent teaching; however
there were some challenges in the implementation of the system.
Educators cited, among other concerns, a lack of communication
regarding how the process worked and issues with the measures
used in the evaluation process.8
In Practice: Louisiana recently proposed to update teacher certification
requirements to incorporate its new teacher evaluation system.
Specifically, the state moved to alter the current certification process
to require all teachers to renew their licenses every five years, including
those who currently possess a lifetime certificate. The state also wants to
clarify that renewal of the license is contingent on being labeled effective
by the evaluation system three out of the five years in between renewals.
Page 4
As noted throughout the memo, research is limited in defining what
works in teacher preparation. We know that teacher quality is a
critical factor in improving student learning and that there is great
variation in teacher quality. However, the qualifications that teachers
bring to the job are not a good predictor of teacher effectiveness in
the classroom – “measures such as certification, master’s degrees,
and years of teaching experience have limited predictive power.”9
Given that Tennessee needs a large, diverse teaching force that
can meet the needs of individual schools and districts across the
state, it is unlikely that there is one best preparation pathway for all
teachers. However, the state should continue to collect data and
research best practices to improve the structure and requirements
of teacher training programs and methods.10
Conclusion
We know that effective teaching is the most important school-based
factor in improving student achievement, and we also know that there is
great variability in the quality of individual teachers. It is therefore critical
that Tennessee, in collaboration with teacher preparation programs,
develops a strategy to bring talented people into the profession, and
provide them with rigorous preparation and support from the beginning
of their training program. The licensure and certification process must
reflect the high expectations to which Tennessee teachers are held.
Tennessee has taken steps in the right direction by addressing Praxis
II cut scores, field testing a performance assessment, developing
Common Core and TVAAS training tools for pre-service teachers,
bringing experts together to revise licensure standards, and developing
a plan to improve program approval. The momentum for reform must
continue to ensure that important initiatives aimed at improving the quality
of the teaching force in the state are implemented well.
Rotherham, A.J. & Mead, S. (2004). Back to the future: The history and politics of state teacher licensure and
certification. In F.M. Hess, A. Rotherham, & K. Walsh (Eds.), A qualified teacher in every classroom? Appraising old
answers and new ideas (pp. 11-47). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
1
National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Committee on the Study of
Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, Center for Education. Divisio n of Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
2i
Tennessee Department of Education. Retrieved July 2012 from http://www.tn.gov/education/lic/acct_teacher_
education.shtml.
3
4
Tennessee Department of Education. Retrieved July 2012 from http://www.tn.gov/education/lic/app.shtml.
National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. Committee on the Study of
Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and
Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
5
Sahlber, P (2011). The Professional Educator, Lessons from Finland. American Educator. Retrieved from http://aft.org/
pdfs/americaneducator/summer2011/Sahlberg.pdf.
6
Pecheone, R.L. & Chung, R.R. (2007). Technical Report of the Performance Assessment for California Teachers
(PACT): Summary of Validity and Reliability Studies for the 2003-04 Pilot Year. Stanford University.
7
8
Handler, Janet R. (1986). Shaping Tennessee’s Career Ladder Program. Department of Education, Washington, D.C.
9
U.S. Department of Education (2009). Race to the Top eligibility requirements.
National Research Council. (2010). Preparing teachers: Building evidence for sound policy. P. 61 Committee on the
Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in the United States, Center for Education. Division of Behavioral and Social
Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
10
1207 18th Avenue South, Suite 326, Nashville, TN 37212 — tel 615.727.1545 — fax 615.727.1569 — www.tnscore.org