**Archived Information**

**U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION**

**NATIONAL COMMISSION ON MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE TEACHING FOR THE 21ST
CENTURY**

**MARCH 6-7, 2000 MEETING**

**RECRUITMENT GROUP PRESENTATION**

**CARLENE ELLIS**

*Transcript by:*

*Federal News Service*

*Washington, D.C.*

CARLENE ELLIS: Okay, well our team didn\'t have time to make t-shirts,
but I\'d like to introduce you to each member.

Nancy, from the proud State of Montana. Nancy Keenan, raise your hand
for everybody. Kelly, Department of Labor, Carlene, our leader. Oh,
pardon me. Transportation. They sound the same to me. Maria our leader,
Maria Lopez-Freeman. Yeah. Dennis, Iris Metts. Iris, where did you go?
Iris was invaluable for us, quite frankly. Barnett Berry, Richard
Stoddard, and Judy Sunley, and our staff guy, we couldn\'t remember his
name, where is he? Thank you. John Luczak was wonderful, too.

Okay.

We didn\'t do the format. I\'m sure that surprises you. But what we did
do --‑ but I\'m sure we can fill it in for homework. What we did do as a
brainstorming session and decided to use it was a supply side analysis.
And what that means is we thought about every possibility of supply for
the 2.5 million teachers we may or may not need, but assuming we need
them. One of our most radical assumptions was maybe we don\'t need those
teachers at all, and maybe we look at kind of technology as the teacher
with a facilitator model that\'s not a teacher. And how we got there was
if we truly can\'t find 2 1/2 million teachers, we\'ll probably go look
for something else. So that was our most out there kind of deal.

**\[See Slide 1\]** Let me just go to 12:00 high on. Retirees. Retirees
coming back into the system that have retired. Certified teachers who
left teaching in their first three years, and something has happened and
they want to come back to the new education. Existing teachers in other
fields that aren\'t in math and science. Paraprofessionals from
community colleges or other two-year institutions. We saw global
sourcing, which Iris mentioned this morning, planet Earth recruiting is
what we called it, as a supply side arrangement for those 2 1/2 million
teachers.

We looked at a concept, not as far out as technology as the teacher, but
master teaching concepts, with distance learning and classroom
facilitation and aides. And then we looked at typical new college grads
coming in, new teachers coming in from the colleges into the workforce,
with a provocative "how" that we want to get back into the high schools
and begin recruiting kids to be teachers at the high school level. Now,
I don\'t know if that sounds funny to you or not, but I assure you the
high tech companies are going to start recruiting kids in eighth grade
soon, because as supply and demand gets more out of whack, we\'ll go all
the way back into the high school system to sign up kids to work and go
to school. So that was our supply side arrangement. Did we leave
anything out? Where was that?

Oh, yeah. Business second-career people. There are many, many people in
companies I know today that would love to figure out how to teach and go
into teaching, many of them.

MEMBER: Did you get into...How about military retirees as second
careers?

MS. ELLIS: Yeah, you're exactly right. No, we didn't get into that.
Yeah. We didn\'t get that. Anything else we missed? Okay.

Okay, I'm going to skip this. I put it in the wrong order. Okay. **\[See
Slide 2\]** "How." Those were the "whats," those were the "whats" of
this supply side arrangement. So how would we go get these 2 1/2 million
teachers, in a very tough environment, and get them to go do this for a
career? Well, we\'d probably recommend we do everything. We'd give them
loans to go to school and then we'd forgive them. We'd give them
scholarships, a little different. We can give them the loans outside of
the college scholarship afterwards, or we can give them loans and
scholarships, whatever. We would get into the two-year system and the
high school system and start recruiting early. Somebody said in the
room, they said you know, if business professionals would quit telling
their kids \-- I heard Secretary Riley say this once \-- why are all
these people running around telling their kids not to be a teacher?
Well, there\'s some real truth to that. So if business professionals
would quit telling their kids not to go into teaching, it would probably
help, a little bit.

We think the salary structures, both at the state and district level,
need to change. We think there could be a retirement incentive, where
you retire from teaching \-- companies do this \-- you retire from what
you\'re doing, you get full payout on that retirement, and then you come
back in -- IBM's done a lot of this \-- come back in as a consultant.
Well, this is the concept you\'d retire from teaching, then come back
into teaching, additional pay with no limits, a la the Social Security
arrangement that\'s being proposed. That was a "how."

Housing assistance, which is being done in California, particularly in
the Bay area today. Alternative pathways, the second career, fast
tracking: you end your career, you get in a program to really become a
teacher, and you get fast track into some teaching arrangement.
Incentives. We listened to somebody this morning, 5K, 5K additional to
go into a Title I school. We thought that sounded pretty interesting.
Incentives for institutions to produce more math and science prepared
teachers.

And by the way, our scope here is K through 12. We got all hung up on
how we\'re going to have incentives for a kindergarten math teacher,
kind of, but the fact of the matter is if we don\'t go all the way back
we can\'t fix the systems. So we\'ve got to get back into K through 6
and make some difference there. Lastly, a thought of maybe, maybe we
need K through 8 math and science specialists in the short range, before
we can produce all these people. So maybe a short- term solution is to
get K through 8 math specialists.

So those were some of our recommendations, specifically, on "hows."

We had some overarching needs that we were worried about. So we put them
on a new page and wrote them in red. **\[See Slide 3\]** The first one
is a real belief there\'re some missing systems. We don\'t exactly know
how many teachers we need, exactly where and exactly when. That\'s a
system. That\'s called demand. We don\'t know exactly how many we\'ve
got, where and when, and what they look like. That\'s the supply. So in
our business this would be called a supply and demand system. So you can
produce product and ship it.

We see a system need here, math and science for K through 12, with a
database and indicators. Secondly, we kind of talked about \-- I don\'t
know much about this \-- but a K through 8 math and science licensing
process that, you know, got more math and science pumped into that K
through 8 curriculum and, therefore, teacher. So that was both a
licensing and a long \-- it\'s a long-term solution, and the short term
solution was to put specialists in K through 8 that probably came down
from high school. Okay?

Third, we need a distinct linkage process for this report thing we\'re
going to do between recruitment, induction, professional development,
and the teacher prep cycle itself. There\'s going to be standard
horizontal themes running through here. We\'ve got to make sure we\'re
linked. Kind of like linked teams.

**\[See Slide 4\]** We saw recommendations coming in at least three
levels, federal, state and local. The federal level, we named it NDEA
2000. We thought of a John Glenn Memorial thing here, but we didn\'t
think you\'d like that.

SENATOR GLENN: You were correct.

MS. ELLIS: So we came up with the NDEA 2000. At the state level,
national reciprocity for math and science K through 12 teachers, the
ability to source teachers from anywhere for anywhere. If we couldn\'t
do that in business we\'d be dead. So the concept of hiring from
anywhere for anywhere with licensing and credentials and everything
working themselves out. We think we needed to state salaries distinctly.
We had avoided it till the end, and we decided that we could go and do
everything we\'ve written up here. If we don\'t address the salary
issue, we\'re not going to address it. So we wrote it up boldly.

And then at the district level, to bring in business leaders, get \'em
in the high schools to turn kids on to teachers. You know, technology
has a National Engineers' Week. And there\'s probably 20,000 out of
80,000 INTEL employees that volunteer around the world. They walk right
in the school and tell the kids how great it is to be an engineer and
get stock options. Well, that has a profound impact on that kid, I\'ll
assure you.

MEMBER: Has a profound affect on a lot of teachers.

MS. ELLIS: Probably. So we need to declare the crisis we talked about,
and then get business out into the schools, and with our own kids,
encouraging them to be teachers. And then we\'ve got to address salaries
at the local level. Our thought was \-- well, I guess our thought was
that the state level was where most of the salary "umph" came from, but
we felt like it needed to be done at both.

That\'s all folks. That\'s it. Questions?

MEMBER: Weren\'t there any consideration, in terms of, like, public
announcements on TV, in terms of recruiting ?

MS. ELLIS: That\'s a good idea.

MEMBER: If you would indulge just one minute, Linda. From the Time
magazine, very short article. U.S. to help boost enlistment, Defense
Secretary Bill Cohen is asking some \-- asking celebrities to do
military recruiting ads. The Navy is airing a Spike Lee directed
commercial. James Brolin is narrating a video for the Marine Reserves.
You know, I wonder if that\'s a model to think about in terms of doing
the same for math and science teachers.

Thank you.

MS. ELLIS: Okay, got it. What I heard you say was sales and marketing
for recruiting, whether it\'s ads, radio, TV, whatever.

MEMBER: This is just about your salaries. Were you thinking
differentiated salaries for math and science teachers, or kind of
across-the-board? Or could you elaborate on that a little bit and any
particular strategies?

MS. ELLIS: Yeah. We talked about paying math and science teachers more,
and then we thought about the unintended consequences of doing that. You
know, you please the 20%, and tick off the 80% in one fell swoop, or
whatever the numbers are. So we clearly thought about it from a
permanent differentiation, and then the rest of team should speak. I
think we kind of didn\'t go there. Is that, right? Maria?

MEMBER: Yes. I think the question became \"Who would get that
differentiated salary?\" We kind of assumed that it would actually go to
the calculus and the physics teacher. And we were really talking about
the K-6 teacher, also. So we took a different take on that.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Any other questions or clarifications?

MEMBER'S DESIGNEE: Could I have a clarification on the following?

Did you talk about the possibility of working with the local industry,
government labs, to fill in the summer salary, I mean to make use of the
talents of these science and math, but they\'re working for the extra
money. Was that discussed?

MS. ELLIS: I don\'t remember it being discussed in this meeting, per se.
But it could \-- but it could have been.

Probably was incorporated in alternative pathways. It was a pretty
raucous session. Probably could imply a lot of things.

MEMBER: Yes, it's not easy. But then, none of this is.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Anything else? For recruitment? Well, let's move to
induction.

\[END OF RECRUITMENT GROUP PRESENTATION.\]