The state should help to make licenses fully portable among states for effective teachers, with appropriate safeguards. The bar for this goal was raised in 2017.
Eligibility for Standard License: Connecticut allows certificated out-of-state teachers to be eligible for a provisional license if they have taught for two years in the preceding 10 years.
Evidence of Effectiveness: Connecticut requires out-of-state teachers to show at least two satisfactory performance evaluations while teaching in the other state. Connecticut also requires that teachers with at least two years of experience must be exempt from completing the beginning educator program if they can show "effectiveness as a teacher...which may include, but need not be limited to, a demonstrated record of improving student achievement."
Testing Requirement: Connecticut allows out-of-state teachers to be exempt from the state's subject-area and basic skills tests if they either 1) have three years of "successful appropriate" experience in the past 10 years, or 2) have a master's degree in the subject area. Out-of-state applicants who meet all criteria except for Connecticut's assessment requirements may be issued a one-year, nonrenewable interim certificate.
Additional Requirements: Connecticut requires a criminal-history background check.
Public Act No. 16-41 (2016) Educator Certification http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/cert/obtaining1109aw.pdf
Require evidence of effective teaching when determining eligibility for full certification.
To facilitate the movement of effective teachers between states, Connecticut should require that evidence of teacher effectiveness, as determined by an evaluation that includes objective measures of student growth, be considered for all out-of-state candidates. Such evidence should indeed be a factor for candidates who come from states that make student growth a determinative factor of a teacher evaluation. (See 7-A: Measures of Student Growth analysis and recommendations.) Although Connecticut requires proof of satisfactory evaluations, the policy falls short of ensuring that evidence of effectiveness will be reflected in these evaluation scores.
To uphold standards, require that teachers coming from other states meet testing requirements.
Connecticut should insist that out-of-state teachers meet its own testing requirements, and it should not waive its teacher testing requirements unless an applicant can provide evidence of a passing score that meets its own standards. This is especially important when it comes to out-of-state teachers who have passed content tests that do not rise to the level of Connecticut's standard, such as an elementary content test that requires a passing score on each content core subject. (See 2-A: Elementary Content Knowledge analysis and recommendations.)
Connecticut was helpful in providing NCTQ with the facts necessary for this analysis. The state added that Public Act 17-68 allows for issuance of an interim certificate for one year and an extension of an additional two years for out-of-state teachers eligible for a bilingual education certificate. Also, Public Act 16-41 amended exemption requirements, including the course in special education and the TEAM Program.
6A: Requirements for Out-of-State Teachers
Evidence of effectiveness is far more important than transcript review. In an attempt to ensure that teachers have the appropriate professional and subject-matter knowledge base when granting certification, states often review a teacher's college transcript, no matter how many years earlier a bachelor's degree was earned. A state certification specialist reviews the college transcript, looking for course titles that appear to match state requirements. If the right matches are not found, a teacher may be required to complete additional coursework before receiving standard licensure. This practice holds true even for experienced teachers who are trying to transfer from another state, regardless of their prior success. The application of these often complex state rules results in unnecessary obstacles to hiring talented and experienced teachers. Evaluation systems which prioritize effectiveness and evidence of student learning offer an opportunity to bypass counterproductive efforts like transcript review and get to the heart of the matter: is the out-of-state teacher seeking licensure in a new state an effective teacher?
Testing requirements should be upheld, not waived. While some states have historically imposed burdensome coursework requirements, many have simultaneously failed to impose minimum standards for licensure testing. Instead, some states have offered waivers to veteran teachers transferring from other states, thereby failing to impose minimal standards of professional and subject-matter knowledge. In upholding licensure standards for out-of-state teachers, the state should be flexible in its processes but vigilant in its verification of adequate knowledge. It is all too common for states to develop policies and practices that reverse these priorities, focusing diligently on comparison of transcripts to state documents while demonstrating little oversight of teachers' knowledge. If a state can verify that a teacher has taught successfully and has the required subject-matter and professional knowledge, its only concern should be ensuring that the teacher is familiar with the state's student learning standards.
States licensing out-of-state teachers should not differentiate between experienced teachers prepared in alternate routes and those prepared in traditional programs. It is understandable that states are wary of accepting alternate route teachers from other states, since programs vary widely in quality. However, the same variance in quality can be found in traditional programs. If a teacher comes from another state with a standard license and a clean criminal record, has demonstrated evidence of effectiveness, and can pass the state's licensure tests, whether the preparation was traditional or alternative should be irrelevant.