GoalsThe 2011 State Teacher Policy Yearbook rates states based on goals in the following areas: Area 1: Delivering Well-Prepared Teachers Area 2: Expanding the Pool of Teachers Area 3: Identifying Effective Teachers Area 4: Retaining Effective Teachers Area 5: Exiting Ineffective Teachers Area 1: Delivering Well-Prepared Teachers1-A: Admission into Preparation Programs
The state should require undergraduate teacher preparation programs to admit only candidates with good academic records.
1-B: Elementary Teacher Preparation
The state should ensure that its teacher preparation programs provide elementary teachers with a broad liberal arts education, the necessary foundation for teaching to the Common Core Standards.
1-C: Elementary Teacher Preparation in Reading Instruction
The state should ensure that new elementary teachers know the science of reading instruction.
1-D: Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics
The state should ensure that new elementary teachers have sufficient knowledge of the mathematics content taught in elementary grades.
1-E: Middle School Teacher Preparation
The state should ensure that middle school teachers are sufficiently prepared to teach appropriate grade-level content.
1-F: Secondary Teacher Preparation
The state should ensure that secondary teachers are sufficiently prepared to teach appropriate grade-level content.
1-G: Secondary Teacher Preparation in Science
The state should ensure that science teachers know all the subject matter they are licensed to teach.
1-H: Secondary Teacher Preparation in Social Studies
The state should ensure that social studies teachers know all the subject matter they are licensed to teach.
1-I: Special Education Teacher Preparation
The state should ensure that special education teachers know the subject matter they will be required to teach.
1-J: Assessing Professional Knowledge
The state should use a licensing test to verify that all new teachers meet its professional standards.
1-K: Student Teaching
The state should ensure that teacher preparation programs provide teacher candidates with a high-quality clinical experience.
1-L: Teacher Preparation Program Accountability
The state's approval process for teacher preparation programs should hold programs accountable for the quality of the teachers they produce.
Area 2: Expanding the Pool of Teachers2-A: Alternate Route Eligibility
The state should require alternate route programs to exceed the admission requirements of traditional preparation programs while also being flexible to the needs of nontraditional candidates.
2-B: Alternate Route Preparation
The state should ensure that its alternate routes provide streamlined preparation that is relevant to the immediate needs of new teachers.
2-C: Alternate Route Usage and Providers
The state should provide an alternate route that is free from regulatory obstacles that limit its usage and providers.
2-D: Part Time Teaching Licenses
The state should offer a license with minimal requirements that allows content experts to teach part time.
2-E: Licensure Reciprocity
The state should help to make licenses fully portable among states, with appropriate safeguards.
Area 3: Identifying Effective Teachers3-A: State Data Systems
The state should have a data system that contributes some of the evidence needed to assess teacher effectiveness.
3-B: Evaluation of Effectiveness
The state should require instructional effectiveness to be the preponderant criterion of any teacher evaluation.
3-C: Frequency of Evaluations
The state should require annual evaluations of all teachers.
3-D: Tenure
The state should require that tenure decisions are based on evidence of teacher effectiveness.
3-E: Licensure Advancement
The state should base licensure advancement on evidence of teacher effectiveness.
3-F: Equitable Distribution
The state should publicly report districts' distribution of teacher talent among schools to identify inequities in schools serving disadvantaged children.
Area 4: Retaining Effective Teachers4-A: Induction
The state should require effective induction for all new teachers, with special emphasis on teachers in high-needs schools.
4-B: Professional Development
The state should require professional development to be based on needs identified through teacher evaluations.
4-C: Pay Scales
The state should give local districts authority over pay scales.
4-D: Compensation for Prior Work Experience
The state should encourage districts to provide compensation for related prior subject-area work experience.
4-E: Differential Pay
The state should support differential pay for effective teaching in shortage and high-needs areas.
4-F: Performance Pay
The state should support performance pay but in a manner that recognizes its appropriate uses and limitations.
4-G: Pension Flexibility
The state should ensure that pension systems are portable, flexible and fair to all teachers.
4-H: Pension Sustainability
The state should ensure that excessive resources are not committed to funding teachers' pension systems.
4-I: Pension Neutrality
The state should ensure that pension systems are neutral, uniformly increasing pension wealth with each additional year of work.
Area 5: Exiting Ineffective Teachers5-A: Licensure Loopholes
The state should close loopholes that allow teachers who have not met licensure requirements to continue teaching.
5-B: Unsatisfactory Evaluations
The state should articulate consequences for teachers with unsatisfactory evaluations, including specifying that teachers with multiple unsatisfactory evaluations should be eligible for dismissal.
5-C: Dismissal for Poor Performance
The state should articulate that ineffective classroom performance is grounds for dismissal and ensure that the process for terminating ineffective teachers is expedient and fair to all parties.
5-D: Reductions in Force
The state should require that its school districts consider classroom performance as a factor in determining which teachers are laid off when a reduction in force is necessary.
|
|