Teacher Certification and Licensure

This article presents an overview of federal and state teacher certification and licensure, which have been an important part of teacher qualification since the early 1900s. Requirements for certification and licensure have widely varied since that time, along with how strictly these qualifications have been enforced, though a level of achieved education and teacher testing have consistently been its essential elements. In modern times, with the advent of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), teacher certification and licensure has received a lot of federal and state attention. This has led to an increasing number of requirements, including graduate degrees and extensive standardized teacher examinations, in order to become a "highly qualified" teacher. Though there are traditional and alternative means of achieving certification, and the requirements change from elementary to middle/high school grade levels, it remains important to hire and retain "highly qualified" teachers in school systems today.

Keywords Alternative Methods; Certification; Licensure; Social Efficiency; Social Mobility; Standardized Test; Teacher Education; Traditional Methods

Overview

Today, teacher certification occurs when a teacher candidate has fulfilled the federal and state requirements necessary to become a classroom teacher, through either traditional or alternative methods. In order to understand current policies and procedures, as well as the politics surrounding both, it is crucial to explore the historical foundations of teacher certification and licensure. From the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 1958, to the highly controversial No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB), the United States has become increasingly concerned with education. This has had a direct effect on the requirements and methods of teacher certification. The government, however, has not always been so involved. Formal standards for teacher certification have developed slowly over the last four hundred years. Prior to the twentieth century, teachers had few requirements other than a basic level of education and the determination of an adequate moral character (Lucas, 1997). Certification began to become a component of teacher education, with three states gaining control over aspects of teacher licensure, in 1898. By 1900, half of the states required elementary teachers to pass a primary-level examination in the subjects they were to teach. This statistic remained steady into the 1920s, when more states began using testing to determine teacher efficiency. In 1923, the American Association of Teacher Colleges created nine standards for all teacher preparation programs, both those at normal schools and at the college level (Lucas, 1997). However, even though these early attempts at regulating the efficiency of teachers existed, they did not greatly affect teacher mobility. Teachers were generally able to find a job, regardless of whether they took or passed these tests (Lucas, 1997). Candidates for these positions were still too few for officials to enforce the existing teaching requirements. This would change as educational requirements increased and certification standards became stricter.

Historical Perspective

In addition, teacher education sought to give graduates mobility by enabling them to pass increasing standards for licensure. By 1937, thirty-two states required a year or more of college training, even for elementary teachers. The creation of the National Commission on Teacher Education in 1946 led to the birth of the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) in 1954; an organization that has remained influential in evaluating the standards and practices of teacher education programs in modern times (Lucas, 1997). Receiving accreditation from the NCATE is an important aspect of a solid teacher education program, and graduation from a NCATE accredited program is a requirement for licensure in some states.

In addition to the NCATE, the NDEA (1958) was the beginning of the modern focus on legislation concerning education and teacher certification. It has been said that it arose from America's fears of inadequacy in the wake of the Russian launch of the Sputnik spacecraft in 1957 (Cohen-Vogel, 2005). The impetus behind this act was to better train teachers who would then better educate students to "compete globally and secure our nation's defenses" (Cohen-Vogel, 2005, p. 22).

The Higher Education Act of 1965 addressed possible teacher shortages with a focus on recruiting Peace Corps volunteers into an alternative teacher training program known as the Teacher Corps (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2003). Other alternative programs were to follow. The Education Professional Development Act of 1967 stated the need for increased teacher training to acquire and improve teachers. The 1990s saw a focus develop around outcomes and accountability (Earley & Schneider, 1996), with two more amendments to the Higher Education Act, in 1992 and 1998. In 1992, the Higher Education Act developed alternative routes to teacher certification as a means of recruiting mid-career professionals into teaching careers. The 1998 version focused on the ways to measure teacher quality, concluding that performance on standardized tests would achieve this goal. The 1998 Higher Education Act is also important because these amendments to previous versions gave Congress more power over teacher preparation programs. It allowed the government to compare teacher test scores between institutions in order to gauge the effectiveness of specific teacher preparation programs. If students from an institution received low standardized test scores, then the institution could lose its funding, including state financial aid for its students (Institute for Higher Education Policy, 2003). This consequence is easily comparable to K-12 schools which lose their accreditation without adequate yearly progress (AYP), as determined by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001.

NCLB 2001

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) has greatly influenced national teacher certification and licensure requirements. The central focus of this act is accountability; schools must provide an education resulting in a standardized level of achievement for all students, as measured by state-wide standardized testing. Each state must determine "adequate yearly progress" (AYP) for each grade level and then test scores are held against the AYP to determine if schools are meeting the required goals. Part of this impetus of student progress is the requirement of school systems to employ a high percentage of teachers with "highly qualified" status, as determined by NCLB.

NCLB has defined highly qualified teachers as those who have "obtained full state certification as a teacher (including certification obtained through alternative routes to certification) or passed the state teacher licensing examination, and holds a license to teach in such state, except that when used with respect to any teacher teaching in a public charter school, the term means that the teacher meets the requirements set forth in the state's public charter school law; and (ii) the teacher has not had certification of licensure requirements waived on an emergency, temporary, or provisional basis." (Title 1, section 9101). In general, this definition consists of three basic components:

• A bachelor's degree,

• Certification or licensure (as from a teacher test), and

• Knowledge/competence in the subject(s) taught (Rotherham & Mead, 2003).

Because of these requirements, there has been an increase in the number of alternative certification programs supported, evaluated, and funded by the government in an attempt to find and retain the most highly qualified teachers, especially for areas of extreme need, such as the sciences and special education.

Application

Certification Requirements

Teacher certification and licensure is an ongoing process throughout a teacher's career. Once teachers receive their initial certification, they are considered to be a licensed teacher. In many states, initial or provisional certification is given first, followed by a specified number of years and/or continuing education courses/degrees in order to achieve a professional-level status. However, even once this higher status has been obtained, professional development activities are still required throughout a teacher's career in order to maintain licensure.

Competency Testing

Elementary and middle/high school levels each have their own requirements, which vary by state. In general, though all teachers are required to take a general competency exam, elementary teachers are mandated to take an additional exam that covers the variety of subjects taught in a primary classroom. Middle/high school teachers, who usually teach by subject, must take an additional test specific to the subject area(s) that they intend to teach. The Praxis series of tests are a widely used method of achieving certification and licensure. Praxis I and II measure basic academic skills and general and subject-specific knowledge, respectively. 44 states currently use the Praxis tests for licensure (Educational Testing Service, 2007). States that do not accept the Praxis, such as Massachusetts, have their own version of standardized teacher tests in general competency and subject-specific areas.

Meeting Educational Criteria

Besides competency testing, teacher candidates must meet other educational criteria. Usually, this takes the form of teacher education. However, modern teacher education has been widely criticized by researchers, participants, and administrators as not achieving its social-efficiency goals (Cocke, 2003; Darling-Hammond, 2006; Howey, 1989; Labaree, 2004). This reflects the lack of preparedness that new teachers often feel during their early years of teaching. In 2008, research on teacher education (Darling-Hammond, 2006) showed that teachers need to learn how to think and act like teachers in order to handle the many roles teachers are expected to play, though this is not happening in many programs (Darling-Hammond, 2006, p. 35). When teacher training occurs separately from interactive field experience, information is learned as a purely student experience. Instead of teachers being actively trained to do their job, they are students passively learning about teaching. Without active interaction and practice, college students have difficulty integrating classroom knowledge received as students with real-life experiences as teachers (Darling-Hammond, 2006). This integration between the information received in the classroom and real-world practice is the center of the controversy around what constitutes modern teacher efficiency, and this has become more important as alternatives to the traditional undergraduate teacher education program have gained acceptance.

Alternative Programs

Alternative teacher education programs have become widespread. Since the 1990s, more than forty states have developed routes to teacher certification apart from undergraduate teacher education programs (Darling-Hammond, 2006). However, despite concerns researchers have voiced about the content and methods of many traditional programs (Darling-Hammond, 2006), teachers who graduate from a college program, as opposed to seeking alternate routes to teaching certification, are considered to be better teachers by administration and students (Wilson, Floden, & Ferrini-Mundy, 2001).

Because of the traditional and alternative teacher education programs available today, mobility, or job placement, has become a complicated issue. Each state has its own requirements; at the middle/secondary level, these usually consist of some kind of licensure examination in general competencies in addition to the subject area(s) to be taught. According to the Massachusetts Department of Education, certification as a secondary English teacher in Massachusetts requires passing a general competency examination, including reading comprehension, basic grammar, and writing skills, in addition to an in-depth exam on English content. Each test lasts for four hours and a 70% score is required. Once this exam is completed, an initial teaching license is given. Within five years of the license, the teacher needs to complete a master's degree in education or the subject matter being taught. When this has taken place, the teacher may apply for professional status. Even after this point, teachers must continue to take education classes as professional development (Mass. Dept. of Education, 2007).

If a prospective teacher has an undergraduate degree in a subject area, such as English, but has not taken any education courses, they are still eligible to become a "highly qualified" teacher. In the state of Massachusetts, candidates must have a bachelor's degree and pass the two required teacher tests, general competency and English content, in order to gain provisional certification for five years. This allows candidates, untrained in education, to teach. At the end of the five years, these candidates must also have received a master's degree in education or a related field in order to continue teaching. This group of teachers has the same level of mobility, and the same "highly qualified" status, as those who have received a degree in education. Although administration may be more inclined to hire a candidate with an education background, it is no longer a necessity in order to obtain a teaching position in most states. As this shows, alternative certification methods do not always include alternative teacher education programs.

Besides the state requirements for testing, education, and certification, there are always subjective factors that influence teacher mobility. Administrators often look for certain qualities in their teacher candidates, such as a strong educational background and multiple certifications. These credentials give candidates greater mobility. One that holds weight, as previously mentioned, is a degree in education. Another is having a graduate-level degree, so that the administration does not have to concern themselves with future problems regarding certification. In addition to these qualifications, dual certification, specifically in both a content area and special needs, greatly increases mobility. Dual certifications allow the administration greater flexibility concerning the teacher's role; considering that there is a strong focus on accommodating students with special needs in today's school systems. Partly due to the NCLB, subject area teachers with additional special education training are able to better implement strategies that reach all students in inclusive classrooms; therefore these teachers are a greater asset to school systems.

Viewpoints

Whichever path is taken to teacher certification and licensure, traditional or alternative, is certain to be controversial. The effectiveness of all types of teacher training programs, the reliability of standardized teacher testing, and the mandates from No Child Left Behind (2001) concerning "highly qualified" teachers are all frequently debated topics in education.

However, researchers analyzing the differences between traditional or alternative routes to teacher certification continue to consider which is more effective. Despite many attempts, (Decker, Mayer, & Glazerman, 2004; Goldhaber & Brewer, 1999; Laczko-Kerr & Berliner, 2002; Seftor & Mayer, 2003) results have been inconclusive as to which path produces a stronger teacher candidate. Without any clear-cut conclusions in either direction, controversy continues. In order to understand the basic tenets of the debate, it is essential to understand the elements of these teacher preparation methods, though there is much variance within individual programs.

Traditional Teacher Education

Traditional teacher education, leading to traditional methods of certification, naturally varies in small degrees between institutions. However, states attempt to hold teacher education programs to certain standards in order to unify programs across all institutions of higher learning, giving each new teacher a similar background of coursework, experience and skills acquisition (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). In addition to the liberal arts curriculum and a focus on a specific content area, such as English or math, coursework usually consists of about 36 credit hours on theory and pedagogy, along with practical application, such as classroom management and lesson planning (Sayler, 2003). In addition to this, field observations and an internship/student teaching experience lasting up to a full year are integral parts of traditional teacher education (Sayler, 2003).

Alternative Teacher Education

Alternative teacher education is not very different from its traditional cousin. Though the term "alternative" implies a distinct difference from "traditional," alternative certification is primarily different only in length, rather than content or methods. Instead of several years spent on coursework and field experience, most alternative programs last between five to eight weeks in the summer (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). During this time, prospective teachers work on the practical application of teaching methods, rather than discussions on theory or pedagogy. Some field experience is obtained, involving observation and/or student teaching, over part of that time. Since this training takes place during the summer, two common problems that arise are difficulties in placing teacher candidates with their subject area (since not all classes are offered as summer classes) and the trouble connecting student teachers with experienced mentor teachers, since not all summer teachers are veterans in the classes they are teaching (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). Despite its length, the structure of alternative teacher education is patterned after that of traditional teacher education.

There are many variables, which makes convincingly determining which method is most effective difficult. To begin with, the populations in traditional and alternative programs are usually very different. Traditional teacher education primarily consists of undergraduate college students aged eighteen to twenty-two, while alternative programs require a bachelor's degree prior to admittance, making their candidates older and more experienced. In addition, while both groups have received an education in the content of their subject area, the information is fresher in the minds of the traditional group, while the alternative group has had more life experiences to deepen insights and perception. The alternative group has often had job experiences that relate to their content area, or at least have had the opportunity to develop skills that can be translated into the classroom, such as managing a business (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005).

Balancing the factors of age and life/job experience are the benefits of a longer, more in-depth teacher education experience. In Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske's study (2005), all of the participants in the alternative teacher education programs stated that having a solid grasp of the content in a subject area, even being experts in that area, was not equal to an understanding or ability to teach that information. This feedback is not new information, but it is important to consider when reflecting on laws such as NCLB, which assume that the greater the content knowledge, the better the teacher. Teachers themselves, through personal reflection and observation of themselves and others, state that this is simply not the case (Kaplan & Owings, 2003).

Whichever of the route, both of these groups must pass their respective state requirements, usually involving the completion of an established traditional or alternative teacher training program coupled with some standardized teacher test, such as the Praxis I & II in states such as Connecticut and Louisiana, or the Massachusetts state teacher test (Johnson, Birkeland, & Peske, 2005). There are critics of traditional teacher education who simply do not think that it works, and that it therefore should not be a requirement for teacher certification and licensure (Paige, 2002). Many other studies have shown that both traditional and alternative groups graduate new teachers who are ill-prepared, largely unsupported, and poorly mentored in their early years of teaching (Darling-Hammond, Chung, & Frelow, 2002).

Terms & Concepts

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP): A term taken from the No Child Left Behind Act (2001) which refers to the student scores on standardized tests that determine if students are achieving at their grade level.

Alternative Teacher Education: Alternative teacher education refers to any teacher education program that falls outside the realm of a four-year liberal arts teacher education program. This usually involves mid-career professionals who are switching careers to become teachers.

Certification: Certification involves a teacher candidate completing an established preparation program and passing any assessments/examinations.

Highly Qualified Teacher: A "highly qualified teacher" is a term taken from the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, addressing all teacher candidates who meet the state requirements. This includes a specified degree of content knowledge combined with the successful completion of standardized teacher tests.

Licensure: Licensure occurs when the government grants the recipient permission to practice or work in their profession.

Mobility: Mobility as related to teacher education is the ability of teachers to acquire and continue in a teaching position.

Traditional Teacher Education: Traditional teacher education refers to training at a four-year liberal arts institution of higher learning.

Social Efficiency: Social efficiency as related to teacher education is the preparation of teachers to perform effectively in their job.

Standardized Test: Standardized tests are tests that are given in the same way to a large group of people in an attempt to objectively gather data about knowledge and progress.

Teacher Education: Teacher education is the training of teachers specifically for the job of teaching, whether in a traditional or alternative setting. Key focuses of teacher education include: theory, pedagogy, practical application, field observation, and field experience (student teaching). Preparation for teacher examinations is also a common part of the teacher education experience.

Bibliography

Brantlinger, A., & Smith, B. (2013). Alternative teacher certification and the new professionalism: The pre-service preparation of mathematics teachers in the New York City teaching fellows program. Teachers College Record, 115, 1-44. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=88950288&site=ehost-live

Cocke, P. S. (2003). An inquiry concerning new teachers' perceptions of the content and practicality of secondary English methods courses. [Electronic version]Ph.D. dissertation, The University of Mississippi, United States -- Mississippi.

Cohen-Vogel, L. (2005). Federal role in teacher quality: "Redefinition" or policy alignment? Educational Policy, 19 , 18-43. Retrieved June 13, 2007 from Sage Education Collection Online Database.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2006). Powerful Teacher Education: Lessons from exemplary programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L., Chung, R. & Frelow, F. (2002). How well do different pathways prepare teachers to teach? Journal of Teacher Education, 53 , 286-302. Retrieved on July 13, 2007 from Sage Education Collection Online Database.

Decker, P. T., Mayer, D. P., & Glazerman, S. (2004). The effects of Teach for America on students: Findings from a national evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Mathematical Policy Research.

Earley, P. M., & Schneider, E. (1996). Federal policy and teacher education. In J. Sikula, T. Buttery, & E. Guyton (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed., pp. 306-319). New York: Simon & Schuster.

Educational Testing Service. (2007). The Praxis Series: Teacher Licensure and certification. Retrieved on June 1, 2007, from http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.fab2360b1645a1de9b3a0779f1751509/?vgnextoid=48c05ee3d74f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD

Fox, A. G., & Peters, M. L. (2013). First year teachers: Certification program and assigned subject on their self-efficacy. Current Issues in Education, 16, 1-15. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=88843629&site=ehost-live

Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1999). Teacher licensing and student achievement. In M. Kanstoroom& C. E. Finn, Jr. (Eds.), Better teachers, better schools (pp. 83-102).Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.

Howey, K. R. (1989). Profiles of Preservice Teacher Education: Inquiry into the Nature of Programs (Teacher Preparation and Development Ser.). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Institute for Higher Education Policy. (2003). Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act: Issues and options. Washington, DC: Author.

Johnson, S. M., Birkeland, S. E., & Peske, H. G. (2005). Life in the Fast Track: How States Seek to Balance Incentives and Quality in Alternative Teacher Certification Programs. Educational Policy, 19 , 63-89. Retrieved on June 13, 2007 from Sage Education Collection Online Database.

Kaplan, L. S., & Owings, W. A. (2003). No Child Left Behind: The politics of teacher quality. Phi Delta Kappan, 84 , 687-692. Retrieved on June 13, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9688282&site=ehost-live

Labaree, D. F. (2004). The Trouble with Ed Schools. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Laczko-Kerr, I., & Berliner, D. C. (2002). The effectiveness of "Teach for America" and other under-certified teachers on student academic achievement: A case of harmful public policy. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 , 56. Retrieved on June 13, 2007, from Education Policy Analysis Archives http://epaa.asu.edu/

http://epaa.asu.edu/

Lucas, C. (1997). Teacher Education in America. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Massachusetts Department of Education. (2007). Information retrieved July 1, 2007, from http://www.doe.mass.edu

Okhremtchouk, I. S., Newell, P. A., & Rosa, R. (2013). Assessing pre-service teachers prior to certification: Perspectives on the performance assessment for California teachers (PACT). Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21, 1-27. Retrieved December 15, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=89187382&site=ehost-live

Paige, R. (2002). Meeting the highly qualified teachers challenge: The secretary's first annual report on teacher quality. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Rotherham, A.J., & Mead, S. (2003). Teacher quality: Beyond No Child Left Behind. NASSP Bulletin, 87 . Retrieved on June 13, 2007 from Sage Education Collection Online Database.

Sayler, B.A. (2003). Alternatively and traditionally certified teachers: The same, but different. NASSP Bulletin. 87 . Retrieved on June 15, 2007 from Sage Journals Online. http://bul.sagepub.com/

Seftor, N. S., & Mayer, D. P. (2003). The effect of alternative certification on student achievement: A literature review. Cambridge, MA: Mathematical Policy Research.

U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind Act. Retrieved on June 18, 2007, from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml

Wilson, S. M., Floden, R. E., & Ferrini-Mundy, J. (2002). Teacher preparation research: An insider's view from the outside. Journal of Teacher Education, 53 , 190- 204. Retrieved on June 15, 2007 from Sage Journals Online. http://jte.sagepub.com/

Suggested Reading

Apple, M. W. (2007). Ideological success, educational failure? On the politics of No Child Left Behind. Journal of Teacher Education, 58 , 108-116.

Baker, B. D., & Dickerson, J. L. (2006). Charter schools, teacher labor market, deregulation, and teacher quality: Evidence from the Schools and Staffing Survey. Educational Policy, 20 , 752-778.

Cohen, D. K. (1982). Policy and organization: The impact of state and federal educational policy on school governance. Harvard Educational Review, 52 , 474-499.

Hamel, F. L., & Mertz, C. (2005). Reframing accountability: A preservice program wrestles with mandated reform. Journal of Teacher Education, 56 , 157-167.

Ingersoll, R. (2000). A different approach to solving the teacher shortage problem. Policy Perspectives, 2 , 1-6.

Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38 , 499-534.

Ingersoll, R. (2002). The teacher shortage: A case of wrong diagnosis and wrong prescription. The NASSP Bulletin, 86, 16-31.

Ingersoll, R. (2003). Is there really a teacher shortage? A report co-sponsored y the Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy and the Center for Policy Research in Education. Seattle: University of Washington, Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.

Ingersoll, R. (2004). Four myths about America's teacher quality problem. In M. Smylie & D. Miretzky (Eds.), Developing the teacher workforce: The 103rd yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education (pp.1-33). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lucas, C. (1994). American Higher Education: A history. New York: St. Martin's Press.

National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America's future. New York: Author.

Nieto, S. (2003). Challenging current notions of "highly qualified teachers" through work in a teachers' inquiry group. Journal of Teacher Education, 54 , 386-398.

Serafini, F. (2002). Possibilities and challenges: The national board for professional teaching standards. Journal of Teacher Education, 53 , 316-327.