Although education officials dreaded the Bush Administration’s allegedly two-fisted approach to public schools in its No Child Left Behind program, a new study shows that they seem to have found ways to work around it. “For one thing, the law included a number of loopholes that allowed states to claim that veteran teachers were highly qualified using a wide variety of criteria that might not be associated with quality,” the Aspen Institute found. “For example, in Minnesota, all elementary teachers licensed before 2001 were deemed highly qualified, regardless of whether they demonstrated subject-matter competency (McClure, Piché and Taylor 2006).”
“Similarly, Wisconsin considered teachers highly qualified if they had completed an approved program at any college or university in the United States (Education Trust 2003).” It should be noted that the Aspen Institute is hardly a free-market think tank.
Nonetheless, despite its bias towards government programs, the AI researchers found official measurements of teachers’ competence wanting, to say the least. “For example, a study examining the impact of certification on student performance of 150,000 Los Angeles 3rd, 4th and 5th grade teachers from 2000 to 2003 found little difference between the achievement of students taught by certified teachers and that of students taught by uncertified teachers,” AI reports. “Many non-certified teachers—those deemed not
highly qualified under NCLB—taught students who exhibited substantial gains in
achievement, while many certified teachers, who earned highly qualified status, taught
students who showed small learning gains (Gordon, Kane and Staiger 2006).”
“A study of teachers in New York City produced parallel findings.” So did another in North Carolina.
“Although teachers who passed licensure tests—those who met the criteria for ‘highly qualified’ status—produced, on average, larger learning gains than teachers who did not pass, the study found, the difference between the two groups was small,” AI reveals. “In addition, some teachers who passed the test were not effective, while some teachers who did not pass were effective in the classroom.”
Thus, teachers whose students may actually learn something do not fare as well under NCLB as their union counterparts with seniority but not necessarily skill. Nevertheless, for what its worth, both get to participate in taxpayer-funded professional development days.
“Under Title II of NCLB, the U.S. DOE provides $2.9 billion annually in
grants to states and districts to improve teacher quality,” AI reports. “ However, in a study of how eleven districts used their Title II funds, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that many districts did not target their resources on any group of teachers, such as those who were not highly qualified (GAO 2005).”
“In each district, the GAO found, any teacher, highly qualified or not, could participate in professional development programs supported by Title II.”
The report was put out by AI’s Commission on No Child Left Behind, which former Bush Administration appointee Tommy G. Thompson co-chairs. Apparently, public employees become more reticent about the programs they promote when they leave the government payroll and find out how they actually work.
Malcolm A. Kline is the executive director of Accuracy in Academia.
