Licensure for Substitute Teachers: Washington

2017 Hiring Policy

Goal

The state should ensure that substitute teachers are appropriately placed and assessed in the classroom. This goal was new in 2017 and was not graded.

Analysis of Washington's policies

Substitute License(s): Washington offers three types of substitute certifications: a Substitute Teacher Certification, Emergency Substitute Teacher certificate, and an Intern Substitute Teacher certificate. The Substitute Teacher Certification requires a bachelor's degree and completion of an approved preparation program or currently hold or have held a teaching certificate. 

Length of Assignment:
Washington permits individuals who hold the Substitute Teacher Certification to teach any subject or grade level for up to 30 consecutive days, but if longer than 30 days, then the state  must "develop a plan of professional learning for the individual that is appropriate to the assignment and designed to support their professional growth and enhance instructional knowledge and skills to meet district needs and better assist students in meeting the state learning goals." Teachers with this certificate can teach for up to 180 days in the same assignment. 

Individuals who hold the Emergency Substitute Teacher certificate are restricted to use by the requesting school district. Individuals who hold the Intern Substitute Teacher certificate are student teachers who may serve in the classroom to which they are assigned to student teach. The state does not specify a limit on the number of consecutive days that an intern substitute can teach. 

Evaluation of Long-Term Substitutes: Washington has no requirements for the evaluation of any of its substitute teachers. Washington state policy is unclear on whether substitutes with a current teaching license would be subject to evaluation under the state's current teacher evaluation requirements.

Citation

Recommendations for Washington

Distinguish requirements for short-term and long-term substitutes.
Washington should distinguish between requirements for short-term and long-term substitutes so that it can ensure that its requirements are appropriate for the needs of these teachers. The state's long-term substitute requirements should be rigorous (e.g., that all long-term substitutes have current or expired licenses) to help ensure that teachers who are spending extended periods of time with students are prepared to do so.

Limit the number of consecutive days a short-term substitute can teach in the same classroom.
Washington should limit the number of consecutive days a short-term substitute can teach in the same classroom without completing additional requirements or obtaining a long-term substitute license. The maximum number of days should be no more than 10 percent of the length of the school year. Washington's policy of allowing substitute teachers to teach 30 consecutive days in the same classroom may be detrimental to instructional quality and daily productivity.

Require long-term substitute teachers to be evaluated.
Washington should maintain standards for substitute teacher quality and accountability for all substitutes, but especially for long-term substitutes who are expected to stand in for licensed teachers for extended periods of time. Washington can help ensure that substitute teachers are held to high standards and have access to the supports necessary to improve their practice by requiring evaluations — which it may find appropriate to modify from its standard, state-required teacher evaluations — of long-term substitutes.

State response to our analysis

Washington had no comment on this goal.

Updated: December 2017

How we graded

Not applicable. This goal was not scored in 2017.

Research rationale

Research finds that teacher absences negatively affect student achievement and growth.[1] While some of this is attributable to the disruption of regular classroom practices and instruction,[2] it may also be attributable to substitute teacher quality. The gap in instructional quality and daily productivity when a regular teacher is replaced by a substitute teacher is significant.[3] However, absences covered by substitutes licensed by the state are not as detrimental to student achievement as those covered by non-licensed substitutes.[4] Some research hypothesizes that the low-skill level and mobility of substitute teachers may contribute to the reduction in instructional focus and quality and that even when substitute teachers are good instructors, they may be unable to effectively implement a teacher of record's long-term instructional strategies.[5] Parents, teachers, principals, and students have concerns about substitute teachers' quality and qualifications.[6] States should maintain rigorous standards for substitute teacher quality and accountability for all substitutes, but especially for long-term substitutes who are expected to stand in for teachers for long stretches of time.


[1]Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). Do teacher absences impact student achievement? Longitudinal evidence from one urban school district. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 181-200.; Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2009). Are teacher absences worth worrying about in the United States? Education Finance and Policy, 4(2), 115-149.; Joseph, N., Waymack, N., & Zielaski, D. (2014). Roll call: The importance of teacher attendance. National Council on Teacher Quality. Retrieved from https://www.nctq.org/dmsView/RollCall_TeacherAttendance; Zubrzycki, J. (2012). Educators take another look at substitutes. Education Week, 31(36), 1-16.
[2] Rundall, R. A. (1986). Continuity in subbing: Problems and solutions. Clearing House, 59(5), 240.; Turbeville, I. F. (1987). The relationship of selected teacher characteristics on teacher absenteeism in selected school districts of South Carolina (Unpublished Dissertation). University of South Carolina.
[3] Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). Do teacher absences impact student achievement? Longitudinal evidence from one urban school district. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 181-200.; Varlas, L. (2001). Succeeding with substitute teachers. Education Update, 43(7).; Gagne, R. M. (1977). The conditions of learning (3d ed.). New York, NY: Holt Rinehart and Winston.; Capitan, J. H., & et al. (1980). Teacher absenteeism. A study of the Ohio Association of School Personnel Administrators. Seven Hills, OH: American Association of School Personnel Administrators; Herrmann, M. A., & Rockoff, J. E. (2012). Worker absence and productivity: Evidence from teaching. Journal of Labor Economics, 30(4), 749-782.
[4] Note that this study did not define what "licensed" meant in the context of substitutes; see: Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2009). Are teacher absences worth worrying about in the United States? (Working Paper 24). National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research.
[5] Miller, R. T., Murnane, R. J., & Willett, J. B. (2008). Do teacher absences impact student achievement? Longitudinal evidence from one urban school district. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 30(2), 181-200.
[6] Abdal-Haqq, I. (1997). Not just a warm body: Changing images of the substitute teacher. ERIC Digest.; Ostapczuk, E. D. (1994). What makes effective secondary education substitute teachers?: Literature review. ERIC Digest.; Weems, L. (2003). Representations of substitute teachers and the paradoxes of professionalism. Journal of Teacher Education, 54(3), 254-265.; Seldner, J. K. (1983). Substitute teaching: Is there a better way? Teacher Education Quarterly, 61-70.