Overview

In several of the units that comprise this project, we note the ultimate inseparability of the issue of the qualifications of a state's teacher workforce from the consideration of teacher supply and demand. The demand for secondary science and mathematics teachers, who are the focus of this project, must be met by hiring individuals adequately qualified to teach the classes offered.

As we also note elsewhere in this project, there is no universally accepted definition of an "adequately qualified" teacher. And there is an additional challenge in finding a set of readily usable data points that would permit the easy identification of teachers' qualifications as adequate or inadequate in the kind of large-scale supply and demand analysis we are discussing here. For the sake of convenience and consistent with our supply and demand focus, we have suggested that states consider a class as being taught by an "adequately qualified" teacher only if the teacher (a) is fully licensed or certified (i.e., not teaching on the basis of a temporary or emergency credential or waiver), or has demonstrated solid knowledge of his or her field and is enrolled in a teacher preparation program and pursuing a license; (b) is not teaching "out-of-field" – i.e., has the subject knowledge required by licensure or endorsement in the field to be teaching the class; and (c) is taught by a permanent teacher and not a temporary substitute.

It is the specific purpose of this unit, Teacher Quality and Teacher Licensure, to elaborate on the issue of teacher qualifications and its relationship to teacher licensure and thus to provide guidance to policymakers, educators, and other state and district stakeholders in their efforts to assess the general quality of their pool of science and mathematics teachers as part of a statewide assessment of teacher need.

Staffing schools with well-qualified teachers is important in every subject, but for several reasons it is especially critical in science and mathematics:

1. These are highly technical subjects that can be adequately taught only be individuals who have a solid grasp of their science and mathematics disciplines
2. Partly because of a pervasive shortage of science and mathematics teachers and partly because of a lack of appreciation for the highly technical nature of the subjects, there is an all-too-common tendency to settle for marginally qualified teachers in these disciplines. This is especially true in the sciences, where solid training in one science field does not by itself qualify an individual to teach successfully in another science field
3. The
   

   Note

   1

   See especially Rising Above the Gathering Storm (2007). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
   prominent call¹ and
   

   Note

   2

   For example, the federal America COMPETES Act of 2007.
   political commitment² to increase the science and mathematics skills of our nation's students can only be met by recruiting, preparing, and hiring science and mathematics teachers with solid qualifications.

A key challenge in incorporating the consideration of teacher qualifications into an analysis of teacher supply and demand is developing a serviceable definition of what it means for science and mathematics teachers to be adequately qualified. The research literature on the knowledge, skills, and other characteristics of effective teachers is

Note

3

See, for example, Rice, J.K. (2003). Teacher Quality: Understanding the Effectiveness of Teacher Attributes. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute.

far from unequivocal³ and offers only limited guidance. Moreover, since the specific aim of Teacher Quality and Teacher Licensure is to help stakeholders incorporate a teacher quality dimension into a fairly coarse-grained assessment of the extent to which their state's corps of science and mathematics teachers meets current and projected state demand, detailed information about the background and performance of individual teachers is of little use. What is needed instead is a more ready means of identifying whether science and mathematics teachers have the qualifications presumed necessary to be successful.

At least in theory, states already have in place a mechanism that signals the basic adequacy of their science and mathematics teachers, namely, their teacher licensure and certification system. A rigorous and reliable licensure system ought to provide assurance that all secondary science and mathematics teachers in a state have at least the minimum qualifications required to teach their disciplines competently at their licensed instructional level (K-8, middle, or high school). For beginning teachers, this can be little more than a verification of adequate knowledge and character and the promise of teaching success. Beyond this, a solid licensure system should distinguish between teachers who meet the minimum standards for licensure and teachers who have proven, and even outstanding, subject knowledge and teaching ability.

A licensure system should not only signal the quality of a state's teachers, however, but also promote it. To that end, state licensure systems have at their disposal several key policy levers:

1. Denying teaching credentials to candidates whose knowledge of their discipline is inadequate
2. Withholding permanent licensure from teachers who fail to demonstrate both solid knowledge of their teaching subject and effectiveness in the classroom
3. Requiring the continued development and assessment of teachers' knowledge and skill for licensure renewal
4. Conferring advanced certification on teachers who have a demonstrated history of highly successful teaching

Licensure can fulfill its potential for promoting teacher quality through such policies, however, only through their rigorous application and enforcement and through the adoption of adequately high standards of teacher evaluation.

In reality, the licensure and certification system in most states falls well short of this ideal. Many states compromise their licensure standards – for science and mathematics teachers, frequently because of concerns about exacerbating an already existing shortage. And there are also inherent technical difficulties attending the development of assessments of teachers' knowledge and skill and the determination of the appropriate knowledge and course requirements. Moreover, teacher licensure and certification systems are one element of a larger nexus of state quality control mechanisms, including, for example, high school graduation standards and teacher preparation program approval, and are compromised to the extent that these are also inadequate.

Given such challenges, as well as the limitations of the relevant empirical research, we do not recommend specific standards for state adoption in this unit or provide detailed policy prescriptions. Instead, we offer broad policy suggestions and procedural guidelines for ensuring that states are systematic and rigorous in determining the licensure and certification-related policies and standards they ultimately do adopt. Part that rigor should result from a serious consideration of the guidelines and discussion offered here and an analysis of their implications for the state's efforts to ensure and assess the quality of its science and mathematics teachers. In addition, however, it is the admitted bias of this project that states should push for a science and mathematics teacher workforce that is as highly qualified as possible. And there is

Note

4

See, for example, Core Problems: Out of Field Teaching Persists in Key Academic Courses and High-Poverty Schools. (2008). Washington, DC: The Education Trust. Also see an earlier Education Trust report that notes the state-by-state disparities in teacher qualifications between high-poverty and low-poverty schools: Jerald, C. (2002). All Talk, No Action: Putting an End to Out-of-Field Teaching. Washington, DC: The Education Trust.

good evidence⁴ that all states have a good deal of work to do in order to achieve that ideal – some more than others – and especially to address the disparity in teacher qualifications between high-poverty and low-poverty schools.

Although national survey data do not necessarily reflect the reality in individual states and districts, the prevalence of marginal qualifications among science and mathematics teachers in our nation's high schools is

Note

5

Specifically, see Morton, B.A., Peltola, P., Hurwitz, M.D., Orlofsky, G.F., & Strizek, G.A. (2008, August). Education and Certification Qualifications of Departmentalized Public High School-Level Teachers of Core Subjects: Evidence from the 2003–04 Schools and Staffing Survey. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics (Table 4, p. 25).

documented⁵ in Table 5-1 below. The table confirms the considerable work that still needs to be done to improve teachers' backgrounds in those fields – especially in comparison with the qualifications of teachers in many other subjects. Moreover, the large disparity in the qualifications of teachers between high-poverty and low-poverty schools makes the onus to address the problem that much greater.

Table 5-1: Percentage of public high school-level classes of various subjects taught by a teacher without a major and without certification in that subject area, by selected subject areas: 2003-04

Consistent with the data in Table 5-1, the greatest emphasis in the discussion in this unit is on the adequacy of teachers' content knowledge. This is not a sufficient condition of effective teaching, but the research literature

Note

6

See the discussion of Question 1 in Allen, M. (2005). Eight Questions on Teacher Preparation: What Does the Research Say? Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.

strongly confirms⁶ that it is a necessary one. Also, although the effort to define the adequacy of content knowledge in science and mathematics is not

Note

7

See the discussion and Elaboration below on teaching endorsements and credentials in science and mathematics.

without controversy,⁷ it is easier – at least for initial licensure – to assess the extent of a teacher's content knowledge than the pedagogical skill and working knowledge that are

Note

8

Ball, D.L., Thames, M.H., & Phelps, G. (2008). Content Knowledge for Teaching: What Makes It Special? Journal of Teacher Education, 59 (5), 389-407.

also important⁸ to teaching success. Nevertheless, a solid licensure and certification system does offer the possibility, particularly through licensure renewal and advancement policies, of identifying those science and mathematics teachers who also have strong teaching skills and proven ability to advance their students' comprehension.