Methodology: Selective admissions
In our examination of both undergraduate and graduate Illinois programs, we looked for evidence that teacher candidates are likely to be in the top half of the college population either because of the selectivity of the institution in which the education school is housed (in the case of undergraduate programs) or because of admissions standards used by the education school itself (in the case of both undergraduate and graduate programs). Requirements for exceptionally high grade point averages (GPA) of 3.5 or above will raise an institution's rating.
We note that education schools have established many other criteria for admission that are not evaluated in this standard. Many education schools require that applicants be interviewed, provide evidence of "positive dispositions" for teaching and/or have minimum grade point averages. Some require a considerable commitment to satisfy and provide insight on the orientation of the education school on the profession's mission. For example, the University of Illinois at Chicago requires undergraduates to the elementary preparation program to complete 100 hours of community service. Whatever their merit, these criteria are not relevant for this standard.
For undergraduate programs we used U.S. News and World Report (USNWR) ratings to determine if an institution is "more selective" or "most selective"; these levels of selectivity fully meet the standard of screening for teacher candidates in the top half of the college population without further analysis.
For programs in institutions with lower selectivity in general admissions, we looked at the program's requirements relative to tests of academic proficiency normed to the college population or the population of teacher candidates. Although tests such as the SAT and ACT commonly taken for college admission may be used for this purpose, these tests are not the only ones available. Additionally, any test required for admission need not be taken until a prospective teacher candidate has had the opportunity to remediate deficiencies during the first two years of college coursework.
The Illinois Certification Testing System's Basic Skills Test is generally the only standardized test used for admission into Illinois teacher preparation programs. The test appears to be more rigorous than most analogous tests because it assesses mastery of middle school level concepts rather than a mixture of elementary and middle school level concepts. (For example, the mathematics section assesses mastery of middle school level concepts and includes algebra and geometry problems.) In September 2010, new regulations went into effect raising the required scores needed to enter an education school in Illinois and only 22 percent of test-takers passed all four sections of the test. While this is a dramatic shift, it does not indicate whether or not the test is selecting candidates who are in the top half of the college-going population and it is incumbent upon the state to ascertain this so that it decide on the advisable level of cut-scores.
Countries that have education systems better than our own have much higher standards for applicants wanting to enter the teaching profession. Finland's education programs, for example, only admit the top 10 percent of their high school or college graduating classes. Singapore's programs only admit the top third of their high school graduating classes. We are only advocating that the floor be no lower than standards admitting the top 50 percent of the college-going population--still not as selective as the practices of higher-performing countries.
Does this violate our democratic tradition? Frankly, that democratic philosophy seems much more alive at the doors to education schools than at the doors to our PK-12 schools, with the result that the philosophy doesn't have a democratic effect at all. You won't find high-performing school districts willing to hire teachers who were themselves poor students and who have demonstrably low academic performance. Where are those teachers teaching? With high-poverty schools' staff having half the number of "upper third" teachers as the national average1, it is poor and minority children who are most likely to be assigned the teachers with the weakest academic backgrounds. The notion that academic background shouldn't matter that much has had disastrous consequences for poor and minority children, the ones who are most in need of a high-quality education. We tend to be okay with allowing low-performing teachers into the profession as long as they don't teach our own kids.
The shortages that could result are often cited as a reason not to raise admission standards, but there is little evidence from states that have raised their standards that big teacher shortages ensue. In truth, raising standards makes the profession more attractive to academically talented individuals who are otherwise put off by the profession's low standards. Massachusetts ignored warnings about shortages when it raised its standards to some of the highest in the nation and has not experienced any teacher shortages. Likewise, England found that teaching became the most popular profession among undergraduates and graduates after program standards were raised.
In fact, we can probably reduce the current number of education school students and not feel the effects at all in the classroom since many people getting teaching degrees never intend to teach. We can only surmise the popularity of teacher preparation programs are connected to the perception that it's an easy major.
Would all hopes of having a sufficient number of teachers of color be dashed with higher admission standards? While a far lower proportion of the most talented minority students choose to become teachers than do talented white students, highly selective education programs that heavily recruit talent of all colors do succeed in attracting minority teacher candidates. For example, 30 percent of Teach For America teachers are of color.
The long-term strategy to achieve a teaching force that better mirrors the student population is to immediately improve the educational prospects of every child by putting an effective teacher in every classroom. Those effective teachers we so desperately need will be produced by education schools with higher, not lower, admission standards. Among many other things, the fruit of more effective instruction will be many more minority high school graduates qualified to enter teaching in a decade, no matter how selective admissions have become.
In addition to meeting the criteria related to selectivity, in order for institutions to receive the highest rating on this standard they also must provide a flexible program of study tailored to students' knowledge and skill level. A flexible program of study allows students who satisfied general education course requirements before entering the teacher preparation program (for example, by taking Advanced Placement or International Baccalaureate courses) to take more advanced elective classes or other courses in areas in which they need reinforcement. An institution was judged to have this flexible program of study if it allows students to gain course credit based on scores on standardized tests of content mastery or its own institutional placement tests.
For graduate programs we examined admissions criteria to ascertain if programs require applicants to take a standardized test commonly used for admission to graduate programs, tests for teacher candidates of content mastery or tests for teacher candidates of basic skills. As in the case of undergraduate admissions, our standard is based on the presumption that applicants to any teacher preparation programs should demonstrate that their level of academic proficiency places them in the top half of the college-going population (a less selective expectation than that of proficiency placing them in the top half of the population intending to enroll in graduate school).
