Join the conversation

ESEA reauthorization is clearly a hot topic in the education community. Recently, the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (AACTE)—an LFA member—published a white paper outlining their policy recommendations to be included in this legislation. As the white paper puts it, “[a]s Congress works to reauthorize ESEA . . . transforming educator preparation and strengthening accountability for preparation programs is vital to ensuring that high school graduates are college- and career-ready.” So why is educator preparation important—especially in the context of many competing interests and organizations vying for ESEA consideration?

The white paper points out that students need to graduate from high school prepared to either enter college or begin a career—but too often they do not have adequate skills and knowledge to effectively do either. Many college students have to take remedial courses to catch up, and many entering the workforce are unable to offer necessary skills to employers. The paper notes that “in both cases, these high school graduates are at significant risk of not maximizing their employment and earning potential over time. Not only are these individuals disadvantaged by this reality, but our country suffers economically and socially when its citizens are not able to fully contribute to their community.”

In response, federal, state, and local policy makers are focusing on improving the education system to better ensure that students have the knowledge and skills they need, and educator preparation is a key element to improving the system. The paper reports that “currently 90% of new teachers are prepared in institutions of higher education (IHEs), and even those preparing to be teachers through nonprofit, state or district programs usually receive some of their preparation through IHEs.” Further, “[t]he schools of education at IHEs offer programs that lead to initial certification.

Among the difficulties related to this issue, general education teachers are required to effectively teach an increasingly diverse population, including low-income students (disadvantaged tend to have less effective teachers, further perpetuating inequality—in conjunction with other significant factors), students with disabilities, and English language learners.

Amid this context, the AACTE makes five compelling reauthorization policy recommendations. Among them:

The federally-funded Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) program has been highly effective at enabling partnerships “which provides funding to partnerships between teacher preparation institutions and high-need school districts”—allowing for mutual gains through strengthening teacher preparation based on classroom experience (including exposure to student diversity), and improving the already-established teachers at the school, all leading to increased student achievement. Further, colleges for teacher education “use these funds to improve their preparation programs by evaluating the effectiveness of their graduates, implementing targeted changes based on graduates’ experience, and strengthening and evaluating clinical practice.”

Thus, the AACTE urges Congress to include the TQP program in ESEA reauthorization, with the addition of more rigorous requirements for grantees, and an expanded focus on preparing and supporting all relevant school personnel.

Speaking of multiple measures, the third recommendation pushes for a diversity of assessment methods of teachers, including classroom observations, peer reviews, and school-wide progress on meeting goals (in other words, not simply test scores).

Another recommendation holds that “current accountability provisions in Title II of HEA should be streamlined and focused on program outcomes, and the federal government should actively enforce provisions regarding the identification and closure of low-performing and at-risk programs.”

A major theme of these recommendations is calling for stricter quality-control measures for teacher education colleges and programs—impressive given that AACTE’s membership includes these very organizations. They clearly want to make educator preparation better, and in turn public education better. Let’s hope Congress takes their pragmatic policy recommendations seriously.