Exiting Ineffective Teachers Policy
The state should close loopholes that allow teachers who have not met licensure requirements to continue teaching.
Kansas allows new teachers who have not met all or part of their licensure testing requirements to apply for a one-year, nonrenewable teaching license. Teachers must complete all required tests during the school year in order to upgrade to the conditional teaching license.
Based on an exchange agreement with nine other states, Kansas allows teachers who hold a valid certificate from one of these states to teach on a two-year, nonrenewable Exchange Teaching certificate even if they have not met the state's licensure requirements, which include subject-matter testing. (See Goal 2-E)
New legislation allows the state's six innovative school districts to hire unlicensed teachers for hard-to-fill teaching positions. The certificate is valid for one year and is nonrenewable.
Kansas Administrative Regulations 91-1-201(q)1 and 91-1-204 Kansas State Board of Education July 14, 2015 Minutes http://www.ksde.org/Portals/0/Board/Minutes/2015/July%202015%20Minutes%20approved.pdf
Ensure that all teachers pass required subject-matter licensing tests before they enter the classroom.
While Kansas 's policy offering teachers who have not met all requirements licenses for one year minimizes the risks brought about by having teachers in classrooms who lack sufficient or appropriate subject-matter knowledge, the state could take its policy a step further and require all teachers to meet subject-matter licensure requirements prior to entering the classroom. Allowing out-of-state teachers who have not passed licensure tests to remain in the classroom for up to two years creates additional risk for students. (See Goal 2-E)
Kansas recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis. However, this analysis was updated subsequent to the state's review.
Teachers who have not
passed licensing subject-matter tests place students at risk.
While states may need a regulatory basis for filling classroom positions with a few people who do not hold full teaching credentials, many of the regulations permitting this put the instructional needs of children at risk, often year after year. For example, schools can make liberal use of provisional certificates or waivers provided by the state if they fill classroom positions with instructors who have completed a teacher preparation program but have not passed their state licensing tests. These allowances are permitted for up to three years in some states. The unfortunate consequence is that students' needs are neglected in an effort to extend personal consideration to adults who cannot meet minimal state standards.
While some flexibility may be necessary because licensing tests are not always administered with the needed frequency, the availability of provisional certificates and waivers year after year signals that even the state does not put much value on its licensing standards or what they represent. States accordingly need to ensure that all persons given full charge of children's learning are required to pass the relevant licensing tests in their first year of teaching, ideally before they enter the classroom. Licensing tests are an important minimum benchmark in the profession, and states that allow teachers to postpone passing these tests are abandoning one of the basic responsibilities of licensure.
Extended Emergency Licenses: Supporting Research
Research has shown that "the difference in student performance in a single academic year from having a good as opposed to a bad teacher can be more than one full year of standardized achievement." See E. Hanushek, "The Trade-Off between Child Quantity and Quality," The Journal of Political Economy, Volume 100, No. 1, February 1992, pp. 84-117. Hanushek has also found that highly effective teachers can improve future student earnings by more than $400,000, assuming a class of 20. "The Economic Value of Higher Teacher Quality", National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 16606, December 2010.