2017 General Teacher Prep Programs Policy
The state should ensure that special education teachers know the subject matter they are licensed to teach. This goal was reorganized in 2017.
Content Test Requirements: All special education teachers have to earn a passing score on the Pearson General Curriculum content test and the Praxis II Special Education: Core Knowledge and Mild to Moderate applications test. However, teachers may have until their second year of teaching to earn a passing score on this test, provided they attempt to pass it during their first year. The General Curriculum content test appears more rigorous than what is required in most states, but it does not report teacher performance in each subject area.
However, the state allows teachers to fulfill this testing requirement in their second year of teaching, provided they attempt to pass the assessments during their first year of teaching.
Praxis Test Requirements www.ets.org Test Requirements http://www.nc.nesinc.com/Home.aspx NC Board of Education Policy Manual, LICN-003
Ensure that secondary special education teachers possess adequate content knowledge.
Secondary special education teachers are frequently generalists who teach many core subject areas. North Carolina's current policy of only requiring an elementary-level content is problematic because it fails to ensure that all secondary special education teachers are adequately prepared to help their students meet rigorous learning standards. North Carolina should consider a distinct route for secondary special education teacher certification that allows candidates to demonstrate requisite content knowledge in the classroom through a combination of testing and coursework.
North Carolina recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis; however, the analysis was updated subsequent to the state's review. In addition, the state quoted information from the General Curriculum test regarding subarea performance:
4A: Special Education Content Knowledge
Generic K-12 special education licenses are inappropriate for teachers of high-incidence special education students. Too many states do not distinguish between elementary and secondary special education teachers, certifying all such teachers under a generic K-12 special education license. While this broad umbrella may be appropriate for teachers of low-incidence special education students, such as those with severe cognitive disabilities, it is deeply problematic for high-incidence special education students, who are expected to learn grade-level content. And because the overwhelming majority of special education students are in the high-incidence category, the result is a fundamentally broken system.
Special education teachers teach content and therefore must know content. While special educators should be valued for their critical role in working with students with disabilities and special needs, each state identifies them not as "special education assistants" but as "special education teachers," presumably because it expects them to provide instruction. Inclusion models, where special education students receive instruction from a general education teacher paired with a special education teacher to provide instructional support, do not mitigate the need for special education teachers to know content. Providing instruction to children who have special needs requires knowledge of both effective learning strategies and the subject matter at hand. Failure to ensure that teachers are well trained in content areas—presumably through subject matter licensing tests—deprives special education students of the opportunity to reach their academic potential.