Competency and testing; a natural affinity.

Hide Document

--1
I

Teacher Competency and
Albert Shanker and James Gordon Ward American Federation of Teachers

In times of crisis it is necessary to step back and analyze the causes and the possible solutions. We believe that a crisis exists in ensuring a steady stream of competent and qualified teachers to meet public school needs over the next decade. This crisis is marked by teacher shortages and doubts about the quality of new teachers. We will explain why this crisis exists and will offer some solutions to it, including why we think competen cy testing for entrants into the teaching field is necessary. All indications point to another period of teacher shortages in the 1980s and early 1990s. Shortages have already developed in most areas of the nation in mathematics, science, and special education. The current 16-25 age cohort is one of the smallest in recent times and the pool of college graduates will continue to decrease in coming years. Fewer and fewer college graduates will go into teaching because of the attractiveness of other career fields. The depressed salaries and poor working conditions in

teaching cannot compete with higher paying jobs in business, industry, and areas of government. There are many reasons why teach ing is not attracting as many people as it once did. The almost total job security it once provided used to attract teachers to the field. This security resulted from a growing teaching force and a demand for teachers that greatly exceeded the supply of available teachers. This is no longer true. Teaching is no longer seen as a secure career field when in many districts teachers with 5, 10, or 15 years experience are laid off. During the Depression and shortly afterward, teaching was one of the few fields that many college educated people aspiring to be professionals could enter. Good job opportunities with chances for career advancement did not exist in many job areas. This was especiall y true for women. This has changed also. While the expanded oppor tunities for women, minorities, and others are a good thing, it is depriving the education field of many exceptional individuals who

A Ibert Shanker is President of the American Federation of Teachers (since 1974) and Vice-President of the AFL-CIO. Mr. Shanker began his career as a mathematics teacher in the New York City schools. He was elected to the presidency of New York City's United Federation of Teachers in 1964 and still holds that office. Mr. Shanker has been active in numerous civic organizations (including the Jewish Labor Com mittee, A. Philip Randolph Insti tute, and League for Industrial Democracy) and advisory groups (including Princeton, Cornell, and International Advisory Council of the Population Institute). He has been a frequent contributor of articles both to national magazines and scholarly journals. 6

in past decades might have become teachers. The American public should be concerned about where our next generation of teachers will come from. We might be faced with schools with no teachers. How will we respond to a short age of teachers? If teaching posi tions go unfilled, there will be pressures to increase class size, increase teacher loads, and cut the number of programs offered, which will harm educational quality and make schools even less attractive to teachers. Standards at teacher edu cation institutions and standards for entry into the profession might be lowered to increase the supply of certified teachers which again would lower educational quality and weaken public confidence in schools. Teacher shortages also could lead to "emergency creden tialing" of individuals who cannot satisfy the normal standards for licensing. While the intent would be to temporarily fill empty class rooms, an understandable clamor for job security by those hired on temporary emergency certificates would ensue. As has happened before, these teachers might be "grandfathered" into permanent licensing status. Also, there might well be a period of conflict over changing structures in education. Differential staffing arrangements and merit pay plans might be proposed, not on any claim of educational merit, but because they would be expedient. Closely related to all this is the question of the caliber of students attracted to teacher education pro grams. Recent studies indicate that teacher education students rank below other college students on average Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores. For example, the January 2 1, 1982, Washington Post reported the results of a study conducted by the Virginia Council of Higher Education which showed that education majors at Virginia's

Educational Measurement

Testing: A Natural Affinity

state universities scored an average of 121 points lower on the SAT than did those who received bachelor's degrees in other fields. At Virginia private colleges, education majors scored an average of 80 points below other graduates. While we are on the verge of a major teacher short age, the quality of candidates for collegiate teacher preparation pro grams is low. Because the two phenomena work in concert, we will face a major crisis in education. Former U.S. Commissioner of Education Ernest Boyer remarked that "The teaching profession is caught in a vicious cycle, spiraling downward.. . . Rewards are few, morale is low, the best teachers are bailing out and the supply of good recruits is drying up" (Education Daily, January 2 1, 1982). Boyer highlights major probJems that must be addressed. Boston University education pro fessor W. Timothy Weaver ( 1979) studied this problem also. He looked at three conditions he pre sumes to be interrelated: a decline in the job market for teachers, a shift in student preferences away from the field of education, and a sharp decline in test scores of students intending to study education. As a result, Weaver sees those with low test scores go on to become graduat ing seniors who then go on to become teachers. It is particularl y devastating to note that in a com parison of the National Longitudi nal Study of the class of 1976, Weaver found that teacher educa tion majors who did not go into teaching scored higher on four out of five competence measures in the areas of mathematics, reading, and vocabulary than those who found teaching jobs. In its intermediate projections, the U.S. Department of Education National Center for Education Statistics ( 1980) reports that the total demand for additional certi fied teachers between 1984 and 1988 will be 745,000.

While similar projections for teacher supply indicate that the number of new teacher graduates will equal or slightly exceed the demand, a number of critical ques tions arise:
∑ How many of those new gradu ates will be attracted to public school teaching? ∑ How qualified will those new teachers be? ∑ How can we assure that only well-qualified individuals enter teaching?

Until we adequately answer these questions as a matter of public policy, the crisis will remain. Boyer proposes a three-part solu tion. He advocates that teacher education colleges tighten their admission standards, that they require seniors to pass competency tests before graduating, and that states award scholarships to prom ising teacher recruits. Weaver, on the other hand, concludes that schools of education must sever their close connection with the public schools and broaden their mission to recognize the need for education professionals in business, government, and other areas. He feels that this would attract better qualified students to schools of education. While these approaches address part of the problem, neither, in our

opinion, provides a comprehensive solution to problems of providing an adequate number of qualified teachers. We will offer some thoughts on how this situation might be remedied. Money is one critical factor. If teaching paid a salary comparable to that of other occupations requir ing similar preparation, there might not be a shortage of highly -qualified people to go into teaching and remain in teaching. This would alleviate the shortage. In the fall of 1982, the typical beginning teacher with a bachelor's degree will earn a salary in the $12-$14,000 range. According to a recent report (Endi cott & Lindquist, 1981), 1982 bache lor degree graduates can expect a starting salary of $25,428 in engi neering, $18,648 in accounting, $21,5 16 in mathematics and statis tics, $22,260 in computer science, and $17,448 in business administra tion. If teaching salaries started at $25,000 per year, there probably would be more highly qualified college students attracted to teach ing. While $25,000 per year may be a goal we must pursue, it is not realistic for the near future. The monetary incentive, however, re mains a real problem so long as teaching does not compete with other professions. There are, of course, other reasons why teaching is not attractive to many people but

James Gordon Ward is Director of Research for the American Federation of Teachers. He holds three degrees from the State Univer sity of New York at Albany, was a secondary school history and Eng lish teacher in New York State, and worked in the field of education policy with the New York State United Teachers, the state AFT affiliate in New York. His areas of specialization are education policy; public finance, budgeting, and financial management; and educa tion finance.

Summer 1982

7

..

>,

without adequate compensation, rectifying the other problems is impossible. With adequate salaries, the other problems have a chance of being improved. Teaching is a difficult job requir ing a complex set of knowledges and skills. According to Bartlett Giamatti (1980), president of Yale University,
A liberal education is at the heart of a civil society, and at the heart of a liberal education is the act of teaching .... The teacher chooses. The teacher chooses how to struc ture choice. The teacher's power and responsibility lie in choosing where everyone will begin and how, from that beginning, the end will be shaped. The choice of that final form lies in the teacher's initial act.... Somehow the line between encouraging a design and imposing a specific stamp must be found and clarified. That is where the teacher first begins to choose. (p. 24)

This definition of a teacher imposes awesome responsibility on those who choose to teach. It describes a person with a deep knowledge of learners and their ways, high-level skills in the science ∑of pedagogy, and a mastery of the subject being taught. A teacher is also a decisionmaker. We in the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) have very definite ideas about how we can ensure that the teachers our institutions of higher education produce are com petent. We also think it is perfectly appropriate and desirable to test new entrants in the teaching field to ensure that they meet minimum standards. As opposed to the leaders of the National Education Associa tiort (NEA), who hold that such tests are irrelevant and point the finger of blame everywhere but at themselves, the AFT welcomes fair and valid teacher competency tests. However, testing alone cannot produce competent teachers, teachers who in Giamatti's words can "choose how to structure choice." Also, we do not accept the frequent argument that we do not need to test college graduates be cause they have already satisfied the graduation requirements of the college. Colleges have different programs and different standards. A test would be valuable in ensuring that general standards are met. This
8

was, and remains, the purpose for tests such as the bar examination for lawyers or the CPA exams for public accountants. The public must be confident that lawyers, accountants, and teachers meet certain minimal standards. Tests are less subjective than measures such as personal interviews or examinations of anecdotal records. Tests should be viewed as a positive means to support standards. Teach ing deserves top-notch college students who will be able to moti vate and guide their students. Bright and able college students interested in teaching should be encouraged to enter teacher educa tion programs. The job of teaching, however, must be enriched so thatit will be attractive to the well rounded individual desiring to teach. If you do not know something, you cannot teach something. Teacher education students need a broad collegiate program in the arts and humanities, the social sciences, the natural and behavioral sciences, the pure and applied mathematics, and the subject(s) they are going to teach. A rigorous and demanding undergraduate program can pro duce this, and testing to ensure that the candidate has attained this knowledge can be an important milestone in the preparation of a teacher. The prospective teacher also needs specialization in a subject area. The undergraduate program should require that the student complete the requirements for a full major course of study in a subject. A history teacher should not be an education major with a brief back ground in history, but should have the skills and knowledge to teach history. Preparation in the area of specialization can be tested also. A rigorous program at the under graduate level in the arts and sciences and in a substantive spe cialization can help attract those students who are interested in teaching, but who find many current programs to be intellectual ly flabby. There is also substantive techni cal knowledge that goes into the making of a teacher. The prospec tive teacher needs professional or pedagogical training in develop mental and social psychology; the history, philosophy, and sociology

of education; diagnostic, planning, and prescriptive techniques; meth ods of instruction and classroom management techniques; tech niques of research and evaluation; curriculum development; and teaching special needs students. Testing of teacher education stu dents is appropriate in all these areas. Prospective teachers also need practical classroom experience be fore they are certified. Testing plays a part here because this experience must be evaluated continually and formatively so that the teacher candidate can most efficiently use this period as a learning experience. AFT's policy is that this practicum should take the form of a 2- to 3-year internship∑ in which the intern would not have a full teaching load and would be paid a negotiated base salary. It must be stressed that the internship is a final and important qualifying step. This test differs from the others we have discussed because it is based on actual perfor mance as a teacher, rather than on acquisition of knowledge. None theless, it is a critical assessment point in preparing a new teacher for the classroom. AFT's policy in this area calls for greater involvement by classroom teachers and teacher educators in setting and maintaining the stan dards for teaching. Specifically, AFT advocates a series of written examinations to test fundamental knowledge in language and compu tational skills, knowledge in gener al education and the subject area to be taught, and knowledge of peda gogy. These would be part of an extended licensure period and suc cessful completion of these tests would be required before beginning the internship. On completion of the internship, permanent certifi cation or licensure would be grant ed. In developing such a testing pro gram, it is important that teachers, school administrators, school boards, civil rights groups, com munity representatives, and others have the opportunity to comment on and suggest improvements in the tests. Such input will improve the quality of the program and increase its acceptance. To avoid any misunderstanding, while we strongly advocate the use of tests in the manner we described, a test should never be the only Edllcational l\Ieasurement

criterion used to evaluate the com petence of a teacher preparation candidate. Other criteria also must be employed, but even a single test can provide valuable information that can improve both the assess ment process and the end product. The test is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for entry into the profession. This idea is not that radical. Why not require entry tests universally for new teachers? We require physi cians, attorneys, public accoun tants, and others to pass exams before they are licensed to practice their profession. Maybe it is time we do the same for teachers. Those who oppose this idea, including some teachers and some teacher organizations, argue that passing a test does not guarantee a good teacher, because a test or series of tests cannot measure the complex set of abilities that go into making a good teacher. This is true, but it misses the point. If a student preparing to be a teacher cannot pass a test or series of tests, then that student should not be allowed to become a teacher until the deficien cies are corrected. The NEA in its Resolution C-2, first passed in 1969, stated its opposition to testing for teacher competence by saying that "examinations such as the National Teacher Examinations must not be used as a condition of employment, evaluation, criterion for certifica tion, placement, or promotion of teachers. The Association is con vinced that no test in existence is satisfactory for such usage." NEA Executive Director Terry Herndon said that the Educational Testing Service, which makes the National Teacher Examinations, "reminds me somewhat of armament manu facturers, who say guns don't kill people, people do" (NEA NOW, November 19, 1979). In 1972, NEA called for the abolition of the National Teacher Examinations. We believe this is a destructive stance and respond by pointing out that all other abilities are superflu ous if a math teacher cannot pass an exam in mathematics, or if an elementary teacher does not satisfy requirements of basic literacy, or if a teacher of the mentally handi capped cannot successfully com plete a test in psychology. Naturally the question arises of testing veteran teachers. Just as Summer 1982

naturally, teachers resist and will continue to resist until other veter an professionals are also retested periodically. On close examination, the entire notion applied to veteran teachers does not make sense. Testing for new teachers is a screening device to keep those wi th obvious deficiencies out of the profession. Mechanisms already exist to remove veteran teachers with similar deficiencies. During the teacher's probationary period, deficiencies can be identified and corrected by principals or other supervisors through the teacher evaluation system. An incompetent teacher who cannot correct his or her deficiencies can be terminated during the probationary period. Even after a teacher receives tenure, a competent supervisor can remove a teacher through a due process hearing procedure, if the supervisor can prove the case. Tenure only serves to provide an impartial process for evaluating teacher per formance and removing those who are incompetent. Under these cir cumstances, to retest all veteran teachers on a periodic basis would be extremely costly, time.con suming, and ultimately wasteful. Millions of dollars would be spent on a new procedure, while existing procedures of teacher evaluation and dismissal for just cause are absolutely adequate. Retesting all veteran teachers would be throwing tax dollars away. Another issue that must be ad dressed is the differential racial impact of testing. Experience with the National Teacher Examina tions in several states has shown that black teacher candidates are more likely to fail the test than are white teacher candidates. The real problem is the lack of resources and attention devoted to black schools in many parts of the country. The race differential has been declining in recent years because of the positive impact of the civil rights movement and the heightened sensitivity to the problem. Rather than simplistically brand a test as racist, we must strike at the root of the problem. We do not want to certify teachers who cannot satisfy minimum standards. We do want to improve the education of minorities and take affirmative action to provide blacks and other minorities with the opportunity to succeed in

teacher education programs and to become good teachers. This re quires a positive program that will actively encourage minority college students to pursue careers in teach ing. The issue comes down to answer ing some very fundamental ques tions, which should help frame the discussion and further explain our position. Does the public have the right to insist on minimum standards of teacher competence? Of course, the public has this right. As in any professional area where the states license individuals to practice, the public can and should insist that prospective teachers meet, and prove they can meet, certain min imum standards. We have already suggested what we think the min imum standards should be. Can tests be appropriate mea sures of teacher competence? Tests cannot measure everything well. However, tests can adequately and validly measure basic skill acquisi tions, knowledge of general educa tion and specific content areas, and knowledge of pedagogy. Skill areas can best be assessed by evaluating performance, but competence in knowledge areas is fundamental. Other qualities hardly matter if a person preparing to teach does not satisfy minimum competency re quirements in the areas described. Are tests of teacher competency the only key to reform? Teacher competency tests for new teachers are only one of the methods we can use to improve the quality of our teachers. Stronger academic pro grams for teacher education stu dents, better admission decisions for entry into those programs, and realistic internship programs are other methods. Employing them together will go a long way toward solving the problem. While these ideas may help solve the problems of teacher competen cy, how will they alleviate teacher shortages? Teacher shortages will continue to be a problem, but if we react by lowering standards and putting substandard teachers in classrooms, we will only lower quality in the schools and under mine the public's confidence in public education. One solution, as we discussed above, is to make Continued on page 26 9

\.

-,

.....

HODGKINS & MCKENNA Continued from page 12 on standard entrance examinations. Second, there is little or no evidence that the highest scoring students on standardized measurement are des tined to become outstanding teachers. Whatever the current situation with achievement levels of candi dates for teacher preparation, teachers want candidates to begin that preparation with the highest possible promise of becoming strong and effective professionals. But entrance examinations admin istered by education departments are not likely to provide the solu tion to this problem either. This is particularly so if such examinations are of the typical basic-skills and general education achievement types. The same reasons apply for rejecting tests for admission to preparation as those cited earlier for not using exit examinations: They represent a redundancy and waste of resources because certification of competence to enter professional schools should be by the depart ments and professors who have provided the prerequisite instruc tion. In addition, entry to preprofes sional and professional preparation should be based on a wide range of factors-interest, motivation, com mitment, and experience and suc cess in related areas and the like. Basic skills and knowledge achieve ment should be only one of a number of factors to be taken into account when such decisions are made. What Are the Alternatives? A first-level solution to the issues of entry to preparation for teaching might well be like that recom mended for exit examinations: Influence the appropriate adminis ,trative, policy, and political pro cesses to require departments in universities that teach basic skills, liberal arts, and the teaching spe cialties, to assure that their passing grades firmly and accurately indi cate competence. As an interim measure only, the academic departments that teach the content of the first 2 years of college should b urged to imple ment several basic skills and/or general education and teaching26

specialty proficiency examinations (criterion-referenced, written, oral, performance) no later than the end of the sophomore year. Passing these would be required to proceed to more advanced studies. Finally, education departments should be required to demonstrate, both for state approval and for national accreditation (through approval by the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education) that they implement and enforce a range of criteria for admission to preparation including grade point averages, recommenda tions of previous instructors, work samples, evaluations of experiential learning (particularly with children and youth) and other evidence of interest, commitment, and motiva tion. One promising move in this direction is a proposal under con sideration by the Standards Com mittee of the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Educa tion to include in the Council's standards a specific grade-point requirement for admission to pro grams of teacher preparation. Conclusion We reicerate our major premises:
∑ The'united teaching profession seeks more and stronger assessment for determining who shall be permitted to pursue teacher prepa ration programs and for evaluating successful completion of the pro grams. ∑ No existing written assessment is accurate enough for making such determinations.

SHANKER & WARD Continued from page 9 teacher salaries and working condi tions comparable to those in other professions so that teaching can compete in attracting bright and able college students. Although we believe this should be done, we do not believe it will be done in the current economic and social cli mate. Another potential solution is to reexamine the structure of public ,schools. There may well be innovative approaches to staffing which would allow highly qualified, experienced teachers to work wi th an instructional staff of certified individuals with varying back grounds, preparations, competen cies, and roles. We think this might be an answer to shortages of compe tent teachers and is an idea worth exploring. There is no doubt that the debate about testing beginning teachers will go on for some time. It simply makes sense to test knowledge in basic skills, subject area, and teach ing methodology, among other areas, to make sure that prospective teachers are not deficient in these areas. Why not start out right instead of complaining later about teacher incompetence?
References Endicott, F. S., & Lindquist, V. R. The Endicott Report 1982. Evanston, Ill.: The Placement Center, Northwestern University, 1981. Giamatti. A. B. The American teacher. Harper's, July 1980. pp. 24-29. U.S. Department of Education, Nation al Center for Education Statistics.

Accountability for assessing much of what is now being assessed or is proposed to be assessed for entry to preparation should rest with the departments of arts and sciences in colleges and universities.
∑ ∑ The assessment of professional studies accomplishments, includ ing the practicum, must be based on a variety of criteria, with perfor mance on paper-and-pencil assess ment (if used at all) being only one part of the whole. A final caveat: Don't equate the implementation of, complicated statistical systems, the counting of minute performance objectives achieved, or modules successfully negotiated, with relevant and accu rate assessment. ∑

Projections of education statistics to
1988-89. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Go vernment' Printing Office, 1980. Weaver, W. T. In search of quality: The need for talent in teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, September 1979, 46, pp. 2932 .∑

CALL FOR NOMINATIONS: NCME members are encouraged to submit nominations for the 1983-84 election to Committee Chair Robert Linn, ICBC Bldg., University of Illinois, 51 Gerty Drive. Champaign. IL 61820.

Fduca tiona I ;\Ieasur('nwll t

Hide Document