1

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System / TEACH Grant Program

Issue 1

Issue: Recommendations regarding current institution of higher education, 

teacher preparation program, and State reporting requirements on teacher 

education program quality.

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 205(a) & (b)

HEA Section 205(c) 

HEA Section 206

Regulatory Cite: None

Summary of Issue: Each year, institutions of higher education and teacher preparation 

programs report to States and to the general public, and States then report to the Secretary (and 

the general public), a variety of information on the nature and quality of their teacher education 

programs. Most of this information is input-oriented and some have questioned whether the 

utility of reporting this information is appropriate given the burden that is imposed on 

institutions, their teacher preparation programs, and States. 

Summary question(s): What changes to the current reporting system should be considered to 

reduce burden (see attached current institution and State report card templates)? Currently, 

States must consider and potentially enter data in up to 440 reporting fields and institutions 

potentially must complete more than 250 reporting fields. (Based on the feedback received, the 

Department will identify what changes can be made through appropriate administrative, 

regulatory, or, if necessary, potential statutory action that would result in a reduction in reporting 

burden.)

Statute:

Section 205(a) of the HEA provides: 

(a) INSTITUTIONAL AND PROGRAM REPORT CARDS ON THE QUALITY OF 

TEACHER PREPARATION –

(1) REPORT CARD. – Each institution of higher education that conducts a 

traditional teacher preparation program or alternative routes to State 

certification or licensure program and that enrolls students receiving Federal 

assistance under this Act shall report annually to the State and the general public, 

in a uniform and comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and 

methods established by the Secretary, the following:

(A) GOALS AND ASSURANCES. –

(i) For the most recent year for which the information is available for the 

institution –
2

(I) Whether the goals sent under section 206 have been met; and

(II) A description of the activities the institution implemented to 

achieve such goals.

(ii) A description of the activities the institution has implemented to meet the 

assurances provided under section 206.

(B) PASS RATES AND SCALED SCORES. – For the most recent year for which 

the information is available for those students who took the assessments used 

for teacher certification or licensure by the State in which the program is 

located and are enrolled in the traditional teacher preparation program or 

alternative routes to state certification or licensure program, and for those 

who have taken such assessments and have completed the traditional teacher 

preparation program or alternative routes to State certification or licensure 

program during the two-year period preceding such year, for each of such 

assessments –

(i) The percentage of students who have completed 100 percent of the 

nonclinical coursework and taken the assessment who pass such 

assessment;

(ii) The percentage of all students who passed such assessment;

(iii)The percentage of students who have taken such assessment who enrolled 

in and completed the traditional teacher preparation program or 

alternative routes to State certification or licensure program, as 

applicable;

(iv)The average scaled score for all students who took such assessment;

(v) A comparison of the program’s pass rates with the average pass rates for 

the programs in the State; and

(vi)A comparison of the program’s average scaled scores with the average 

scaled scores for programs in the State.

(C) PROGRAM INFORMATION.—A description of –

(i) The criteria for admission into the program;

(ii) The number of students in the program (disaggregated by race, ethnicity, 

and gender);

(iii)The average number of hours of supervised clinical experience required 

for those in the program;

(iv)The number of full-time equivalent faculty and students in the supervised 

clinical experience; and

(v) The total number of students who have been certified or licensed as 

teachers, disaggregated by subject and area of certification and 

licensure.

(D)STATEMENT. –In States that require approval or accreditation of teacher 

preparation programs, as statement of whether the institution’s program is so 

approved or accredited, and by whom.

(E) DESIGNATION AS LOW-PERFORMING. – Whether the program has been 

designated as low-performing by the State under section 207(a).

(F) USE OF TECHNOLOGY. – A description of the activities, including activities 

consistent with the principles of universal design for learning, that prepare 

teachers to integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction, and 
3

to use technology effectively to collect, manage, and analyze data in order to 

improve teaching and learning for the purpose of increasing student academic 

achievement.

(G)TEACHER TRAINING. – A description of the activities that prepare general 

education and special education teachers to teach students with disabilities 

effectively, including training related to participation as a member of 

individualized education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and to effectively teach 

students who are limited English proficient.

(2) REPORT. – Each eligible partnership receiving a grant under section 202 shall 

report annually on the progress of the eligible partnership toward meeting the 

purposes of this part and the objectives and measures described in section 204(a).

(3) FINES.—The Secretary may impose a fine not to exceed $27,500 on an institution 

of higher education for failure to provide the information described in this 

subsection in a timely or accurate manner.

(4) SPECIAL RULE. –In the case of an institution of higher education that conducts a 

traditional teacher preparation program or alternative routes to State 

certification or licensure program and has fewer than 10 scores reported on any 

single initial teacher certification or licensure assessment during an academic 

year, the institution shall collect and publish information, as required under 

paragraph (1)(B) with respect to an average pass rate and scaled score on each 

State certification or licensure assessment taken over a three-year period.

HEA section 205(b) provides:

(b) STATE REPORT CARD ON THE QUALITY OF TEACHER PREPARATION. –

(1) IN GENERAL. – Each State that receives funds under this Act shall provide to 

the Secretary, and make widely available to the general public, in a uniform and 

comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and methods established by 

the Secretary, an annual State report card on the quality of teacher preparation in the 

State, both for traditional teacher preparation programs and for alternative routes to 

State certification or licensure programs, which shall include not less than the following:

(A) A description of the reliability and validity of the teacher certification and 

licensure assessments, and any other certification and licensure requirements, used by 

the State.

(B) The standards and criteria that prospective teachers must meet to attain 

initial teacher certification or licensure and to be certified or licensed to teach particular 

academic subjects, areas, or grades within a State.

(C) A description of how the assessments and requirements described in 

subparagraph (A) are aligned with the State’s challenging academic content standards 

required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 and, as applicable, State early learning standards for early childhood education 

programs.

(D) For each of the assessments used by the State for teacher certification or 

licensure –
4

(i) for each institution of higher education located in the State and each 

entity located in the State, including those that offer an alternative route for 

teacher certification or licensure, the percentage of students at such institution or 

entity who have completed 100 percent of the nonclinical coursework and taken 

the assessment who pass such assessment;

(ii) the percentage of all such students at all such institutions and entities 

who have taken the assessment who pass such assessment;

(iii) the percentage of students who have taken the assessment who 

enrolled in and completed a teacher preparation program; and

(iv) the average scaled score of individuals participating in a program 

during the two-year period preceding the first year for which the annual State 

report card is provided, who took each such assessment.

(E) A description of alternative routes to teacher certification or licensure in the 

State (including any such routes operated by entities that are not institutions of higher 

education), if any, including, for each of the assessments used by the State for teacher 

certification or licensure –

(i) the percentage of individuals participating in such routes, or who have 

completed such route during the two-year period preceding the date for which the 

determination is made, who passed each such assessment; and

(ii) the average scaled score of individuals participation in such routes, or 

who have completed such routes during the two-year period preceding the first 

year for which the annual State report card is provided, who took each such 

assessment.

(F) A description of the State’s criteria for assessing the performance of teacher 

preparation programs within institutions of higher education in the State. Such criteria 

shall included indicators of the academic content knowledge and teaching skills of 

students enrolled in such programs.

(G) For each teach preparation program in the State –

(i) the criteria for admission into the program;

(ii) the number of students in the program, disaggregated by race 

ethnicity, and gender (except that such disaggregation shall 

not be required in a case in which the number of students in a 

category is insufficient to yield statistically reliable 

information or the results would reveal personally identifiable 

information about an individual student):

(iii)the average number of hours or supervised clinical experience 

required for those in the program;

(iv)the number of full-time equivalent faculty, adjunct faculty, and 

students in supervised clinical experience.

(H) For the State as a whole, and for each teacher preparation program in the 

State, the number of teachers prepared in the aggregate and reported separately by –

(i) Area of certification or licensure;

(ii) Academic major; and

(iii)Subject area for which the teacher has been prepared to teach.
5

(I) A description of the extent to which teacher preparation programs are 

addressing shortages of highly qualified teachers, by area of certification or licensure, 

subject and specialty, in the State’s public schools.

(J) The extent to which teacher preparation programs prepare teachers, including 

general education and special education teachers, to teach students with disabilities 

effectively, including training related to participation as a member of individualized 

education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act.

(K) A description of the activities that prepare teachers to –

(i) integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction, 

including activities consistent with the principles of universal design 

for learning; and

(ii) use technology effectively to collect, manage, and analyze data to 

improve teaching and learning for the purpose of increasing student 

academic achievement.

(L) The extent to which teacher preparation programs prepare teachers, 

including general education and special education teachers, to effectively teach students 

who are limited English proficient.

HEA section 205(c) requires the Secretary to regulate in the area of data quality with respect to 

institutional and State report cards:

(c) DATA QUALITY. – The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to ensure the reliability, 

validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted pursuant to this section. 

In addition, HEA section 206 requires each institution of higher education that must report under 

section 205(a) to establish quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers 

trained in teacher shortage areas, and to submit assurances to the Secretary regarding training 

provided to students in their teacher preparation programs. Specifically, section 206 provides:

Section 206. TEACHER DEVELOPMENT.

(a) ANNUAL GOALS. – Each institution of higher education that conducts a traditional 

teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing 

professional development programs) or alternative routes to State certification or 

licensure program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this 

Act, shall set annual quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective 

teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the State 

educational agency, including mathematics, science, special education, and 

instruction of limited English proficient students.

(b) ASSURANCES.—Each institution described in subsection (a) shall provide 

assurances to the Secretary that –

(1) Training provided to prospective teachers responds to the identified needs of the

local educational agencies or States where the institution’s graduates are likely to 

teach, based on past hiring and recruitment trends;
6

(2) Training provided to prospective teachers is closely linked with the needs of 

schools and the instructional decisions new teachers face in the classroom;

(3) Prospective special education teachers receive course work in core academic 

subjects and receive training in providing instruction in core academic subjects;

(4) General education teachers receive training in providing instruction to diverse 

populations, including children with disabilities, limited English proficient 

students, and children from low-income families; and

(5) Prospective teachers receive training on how to effectively teach in urban and 

rural schools, as applicable.

(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to require 

an institution to create a new teacher preparation area of concentration or degree 

program or adopt a specific curriculum in complying with this section.

Other Information:

States and institutions utilize online tools created by the Department to transmit required and 

supplemental Report Card information. The website for the Title II reporting system is: 

http://title2.ed.gov/default.asp. The website includes secure portals for States and institutions 

with teacher preparation programs to report Title II data; publicly available data from submitted 

State reports on issues such as teacher preparation and certification requirements; technical 

assistance materials to support the collection, analysis and reporting of Title II data; and contact 

information for the States and testing companies involved in the Title II data collection process. 

With regard to data quality and section 205(c) of the HEA, the definition of terms contained in 

the Glossary for the Title II reporting system at http://title2.ed.gov/TA/Glossary.pdf includes the 

following definitions for Title II reporting purposes:

 Reliability: Reliability is the consistency of your measurement, or the degree to which an 

instrument measures the same way each time it is used under the same condition with the 

same subjects. In short, it is the repeatability of your measurement. A measure is 

considered reliable if a person's score on the same test given twice is similar. It is 

important to remember that reliability is not measured, it is estimated. There are two 

ways that reliability is usually estimated: test/retest and internal consistency.

 Validity: Validity is the strength of our conclusions, inferences or propositions. Experts 

define it as the “best available approximation to the truth or falsity of a given inference, 

proposition or conclusion.” In short, were we right? Let's look at a simple example. Say 

we are studying the effect of strict attendance policies on class participation. In our case, 

we saw that class participation did increase after the policy was established. Each type of 

validity would highlight a different aspect of the relationship between our treatment 

(strict attendance policy) and our observed outcome (increased class participation).

The Department established these two definitions under the Paperwork Reduction Act; they are 

not regulatory. The terms data “integrity” and “accuracy” are not addressed in the Glossary or 

otherwise defined the Title II reporting system.
7

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 2

Issue: Recommendations for supplemental State reporting on teacher education 

program quality that would either replace or augment current reporting 

requirements.

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 205(a) & (b) 

HEA Section 205(c) 

HEA Section 206

Additional Related ARRA Section 14005(d)(3)

Statutory Provisions: America COMPETES Act Section 6401(e)(2)(D)

Regulatory Cite: None

Summary of Issue: Some States have built on the requirements for data systems developed 

under the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund (ARRA) to report the impact that specific teacher 

preparation program graduates have on elementary and secondary student achievement and other 

States are considering such efforts. At the same time, others have suggested that additional 

impact reporting, including, for example, teacher preparation program employment and customer 

satisfaction outcomes, be added to the State report.

Annually, institutions of higher education that receive Title IV HEA funds must report to States 

and to the general public, and States that receive title IV HEA funds must report to the Secretary 

and to the general public, information specified in Section 205 of the HEA regarding the nature 

and quality of teacher preparation programs and teacher preparation in the State. The Secretary 

has authority to add items to the statutorily-required list of data that States must report. States 

(and institutions) must report all relevant information in a uniform and comprehensible manner 

that conforms with definitions and methods established by the Secretary. Section 205(c) of the 

HEA requires the Secretary to prescribe regulations to ensure the reliability, validity, integrity, 

and accuracy of the data States (and institutions) submit.

Summary question(s): What, if any, requirements should the Secretary establish by regulation 

to ensure that meaningful content is included in report cards that States must provide to the 

Secretary and general public regarding the nature and quality of specific teacher preparation 

programs? Specifically, what additional topics should States report on with respect to program 

nature and quality?

Statute: 

Section 205(a) of the HEA provides: 
8

(b) INSTITUTIONAL AND PROGRAM REPORT CARDS ON THE QUALITY OF 

TEACHER PREPARATION –

(5) REPORT CARD. – Each institution of higher education that conducts a 

traditional teacher preparation program or alternative routes to State 

certification or licensure program and that enrolls students receiving Federal 

assistance under this Act shall report annually to the State and the general public, 

in a uniform and comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and 

methods established by the Secretary, the following:

(H)GOALS AND ASSURANCES. –

(iii)For the most recent year for which the information is available for the 

institution –

(III) Whether the goals sent under section 206 have been met; and

(IV) A description of the activities the institution implemented to 

achieve such goals.

(iv)A description of the activities the institution has implemented to meet the 

assurances provided under section 206.

(I) PASS RATES AND SCALED SCORES. – For the most recent year for which 

the information is available for those students who took the assessments used 

for teacher certification or licensure by the State in which the program is 

located and are enrolled in the traditional teacher preparation program or 

alternative routes to state certification or licensure program, and for those 

who have taken such assessments and have completed the traditional teacher 

preparation program or alternative routes to State certification or licensure 

program during the two-year period preceding such year, for each of such 

assessments –

(vii) The percentage of students who have completed 100 percent of the 

nonclinical coursework and taken the assessment who pass such 

assessment;

(viii) The percentage of all students who passed such assessment;

(ix)The percentage of students who have taken such assessment who enrolled 

in and completed the traditional teacher preparation program or 

alternative routes to State certification or licensure program, as 

applicable;

(x) The average scaled score for all students who took such assessment;

(xi)A comparison of the program’s pass rates with the average pass rates for 

the programs in the State; and

(xii) A comparison of the program’s average scaled scores with the 

average scaled scores for programs in the State.

(J) PROGRAM INFORMATION.—A description of –

(vi)The criteria for admission into the program;

(vii) The number of students in the program (disaggregated by race, 

ethnicity, and gender);

(viii) The average number of hours of supervised clinical experience 

required for those in the program;

(ix)The number of full-time equivalent faculty and students in the supervised 

clinical experience; and
9

(x) The total number of students who have been certified or licensed as 

teachers, disaggregated by subject and area of certification and 

licensure.

(K) STATEMENT. –In States that require approval or accreditation of teacher 

preparation programs, as statement of whether the institution’s program is so 

approved or accredited, and by whom.

(L) DESIGNATION AS LOW-PERFORMING. – Whether the program has been 

designated as low-performing by the State under section 207(a).

(M)USE OF TECHNOLOGY. – A description of the activities, including activities 

consistent with the principles of universal design for learning, that prepare 

teachers to integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction, and 

to use technology effectively to collect, manage, and analyze data in order to 

improve teaching and learning for the purpose of increasing student academic 

achievement.

(N) TEACHER TRAINING. – A description of the activities that prepare general 

education and special education teachers to teach students with disabilities 

effectively, including training related to participation as a member of 

individualized education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of 

the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and to effectively teach 

students who are limited English proficient.

(6) REPORT. – Each eligible partnership receiving a grant under section 202 shall 

report annually on the progress of the eligible partnership toward meeting the 

purposes of this part and the objectives and measures described in section 204(a).

(7) FINES.—The Secretary may impose a fine not to exceed $27,500 on an institution 

of higher education for failure to provide the information described in this 

subsection in a timely or accurate manner.

(8) SPECIAL RULE. –In the case of an institution of higher education that conducts a 

traditional teacher preparation program or alternative routes to State 

certification or licensure program and has fewer than 10 scores reported on any 

single initial teacher certification or licensure assessment during an academic 

year, the institution shall collect and publish information, as required under 

paragraph (1)(B) with respect to an average pass rate and scaled score on each 

State certification or licensure assessment taken over a three-year period.

HEA section 205(b) provides:

(b) STATE REPORT CARD ON THE QUALITY OF TEACHER PREPARATION. –

(1) IN GENERAL. – Each State that receives funds under this Act shall provide to 

the Secretary, and make widely available to the general public, in a uniform and 

comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and methods established by 

the Secretary, an annual State report card on the quality of teacher preparation in the 

State, both for traditional teacher preparation programs and for alternative routes to 

State certification or licensure programs, which shall include not less than the following:

(A) A description of the reliability and validity of the teacher certification and 

licensure assessments, and any other certification and licensure requirements, used by 

the State.
10

(B) The standards and criteria that prospective teachers must meet to attain 

initial teacher certification or licensure and to be certified or licensed to teach particular 

academic subjects, areas, or grades within a State.

(C) A description of how the assessments and requirements described in 

subparagraph (A) are aligned with the State’s challenging academic content standards 

required under section 1111(b)(1) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965 and, as applicable, State early learning standards for early childhood education 

programs.

(D) For each of the assessments used by the State for teacher certification or 

licensure –

(i) for each institution of higher education located in the State and each 

entity located in the State, including those that offer an alternative route for 

teacher certification or licensure, the percentage of students at such institution or 

entity who have completed 100 percent of the nonclinical coursework and taken 

the assessment who pass such assessment;

(ii) the percentage of all such students at all such institutions and entities 

who have taken the assessment who pass such assessment;

(iii) the percentage of students who have taken the assessment who 

enrolled in and completed a teacher preparation program; and

(iv) the average scaled score of individuals participating in a program 

during the two-year period preceding the first year for which the annual State 

report card is provided, who took each such assessment.

(E) A description of alternative routes to teacher certification or licensure in the 

State (including any such routes operated by entities that are not institutions of higher 

education), if any, including, for each of the assessments used by the State for teacher 

certification or licensure –

(i) the percentage of individuals participating in such routes, or who have 

completed such route during the two-year period preceding the date for which the 

determination is made, who passed each such assessment; and

(ii) the average scaled score of individuals participation in such routes, or 

who have completed such routes during the two-year period preceding the first 

year for which the annual State report card is provided, who took each such 

assessment.

(F) A description of the State’s criteria for assessing the performance of teacher 

preparation programs within institutions of higher education in the State. Such criteria 

shall included indicators of the academic content knowledge and teaching skills of 

students enrolled in such programs.

(G) For each teach preparation program in the State –

(v) the criteria for admission into the program;

(vi)the number of students in the program, disaggregated by race 

ethnicity, and gender (except that such disaggregation shall 

not be required in a case in which the number of students in a 

category is insufficient to yield statistically reliable 

information or the results would reveal personally identifiable 

information about an individual student):
11

(vii) the average number of hours or supervised clinical experience 

required for those in the program;

(viii) the number of full-time equivalent faculty, adjunct faculty, and 

students in supervised clinical experience.

(H) For the State as a whole, and for each teacher preparation program in the 

State, the number of teachers prepared in the aggregate and reported separately by –

(iv)Area of certification or licensure;

(v) Academic major; and

(vi)Subject area for which the teacher has been prepared to teach.

(I) A description of the extent to which teacher preparation programs are 

addressing shortages of highly qualified teachers, by area of certification or licensure, 

subject and specialty, in the State’s public schools.

(J) The extent to which teacher preparation programs prepare teachers, including 

general education and special education teachers, to teach students with disabilities 

effectively, including training related to participation as a member of individualized 

education program teams, as defined in section 614(d)(1)(B) of the Individuals with 

Disabilities Education Act.

(K) A description of the activities that prepare teachers to –

(i)integrate technology effectively into curricula and instruction, 

including activities consistent with the principles of universal design 

for learning; and

(ii) use technology effectively to collect, manage, and analyze data to 

improve teaching and learning for the purpose of increasing student 

academic achievement.

(L) The extent to which teacher preparation programs prepare teachers, 

including general education and special education teachers, to effectively teach students 

who are limited English proficient.

HEA section 205(c) requires the Secretary to regulate in the area of data quality with respect to 

institutional and State report cards: 

(c) DATA QUALITY. – The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to ensure the 

reliability, validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted pursuant to 

this section. 

In addition, HEA section 206 requires each institution of higher education that must report under 

section 205(a) to establish quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective teachers 

trained in teacher shortage areas, and to submit assurances to the Secretary regarding training 

provided to students in their teacher preparation programs. Specifically, section 206 provides:

Section 206. TEACHER DEVELOPMENT.

(c) ANNUAL GOALS. – Each institution of higher education that conducts a traditional 

teacher preparation program (including programs that offer any ongoing 

professional development programs) or alternative routes to State certification or 

licensure program, and that enrolls students receiving Federal assistance under this 
12

Act, shall set annual quantifiable goals for increasing the number of prospective 

teachers trained in teacher shortage areas designated by the Secretary or by the State 

educational agency, including mathematics, science, special education, and 

instruction of limited English proficient students.

(d) ASSURANCES.—Each institution described in subsection (a) shall provide 

assurances to the Secretary that –

(1) Training provided to prospective teachers responds to the identified needs of the 

local educational agencies or States where the institution’s graduates are likely to 

teach, based on past hiring and recruitment trends;

(2) Training provided to prospective teachers is closely linked with the needs of 

schools and the instructional decisions new teachers face in the classroom;

(3) Prospective special education teachers receive course work in core academic 

subjects and receive training in providing instruction in core academic subjects;

(4) General education teachers receive training in providing instruction to diverse 

populations, including children with disabilities, limited English proficient 

students, and children from low-income families; and

(5) Prospective teachers receive training on how to effectively teach in urban and 

rural schools, as applicable.

(c) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to require 

an institution to create a new teacher preparation area of concentration or degree 

program or adopt a specific curriculum in complying with this section.

Other Information:

The Department is interested in ensuring that teacher preparation programs, school districts and 

prospective students have access to meaningful, outcome-based as well as input-oriented 

indicators of program effectiveness that will promote improvements in those programs, and 

provide to potential employers and prospective students actionable information to guide their 

hiring and program application decisions.

Several States have mapped value-added elementary and secondary student outcome measures 

associated with specific teachers back to the preparation programs of those teachers, be they 

traditional or alternative route preparation programs. Several commentators have advocated 

other, additional indicators of teacher and program effectiveness also be mapped back to 

individual preparation programs or their parent institutions of higher education to create a full 

and fair ‘feedback loop’ between the elementary and secondary education system and higher 

education providers. 

Additional Related Statutory Provisions:

American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Section 14005(d)(3)

(3) IMPROVING COLLECTION AND USE OF DATA. The State will establish a 

longitudinal data system that includes the elements described in section 6401(e)(2)(D) of 

the America COMPETES Act (20 U.S.C. 9871).
13

America COMPETES Act Section 6401(e)(2)(D)

(D) EDUCATION DATA SYSTEM.— The State shall ensure that the statewide P–16 

education data system includes the following elements:

(i) PRESCHOOL THROUGH GRADE 12 EDUCATION AND POSTSECONDARY 

EDUCATION.— With respect to pre-school through grade 12 education and 

postsecondary education—

(I) a unique statewide student identifier that does not permit a student to be 

individually identified by users of the system;

(II) student-level enrollment, demographic, and program participation information;

(III) student-level information about the points at which students exit, transfer in, 

transfer out, drop out, or complete P–16 education programs;

(IV) the capacity to communicate with higher education data systems; and

(V) a State data audit system assessing data quality, validity, and reliability. 

(ii) PRESCHOOL THROUGH GRADE 12 EDUCATION.— With respect to preschool 

through grade 12 education—

(I) yearly test records of individual students with respect to assessments under 

section 1111(b) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 

6311(b));

(II) information on students not tested by grade and subject;

(III) a teacher identifier system with the ability to match teachers to students;

(IV) student-level transcript information, including information on courses completed 

and grades earned; and

(V) student-level college readiness test scores. 

(iii) POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION.—With respect to postsecondary education, data 

that provide—

(I) information regarding the extent to which students transition successfully from 

secondary school to postsecondary education, including whether students enroll in 

remedial coursework; and

(II) other information determined necessary to address alignment and adequate 

preparation for success in postsecondary education. 

(E) FUNCTIONS OF THE STATEWIDE P–16 EDUCATION DATA SYSTEM.—In 

implementing the statewide P–16 education data system, the State shall—

(i) identify factors that correlate to students’ ability to successfully engage in and 

complete postsecondary- level general education coursework without the need for prior 

developmental coursework;

(ii) identify factors to increase the percentage of low-income and minority students who 

are academically prepared to enter and successfully complete postsecondary-level 

general education coursework; and

(iii) use the data in the system to otherwise inform education policy and practice in order 

to better align State academic content standards, and curricula, with the demands of 

postsecondary education, the 21st century workforce, and the Armed Forces.
14

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 3

Issue: Criteria used by States to assess the performance of teacher preparation 

programs. 

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 205(b) of the HEA

HEA Section 205(c) of the HEA

HEA Section 200(23) of the HEA

Regulatory Cite: None

Summary of Issue: As part of the HEA required State report card, States must describe their 

criteria for assessing the performance of teacher preparations programs and include in those 

criteria indicators of the academic content knowledge and teaching skills of students enrolled in 

those programs. In the past, concern has been raised that institution of higher education and 

State reporting regarding program effectiveness and assessments thereof have been compromised 

by the lack of adequate criteria associated with implementation. 

Summary question(s): What should be included in the criteria that States use to assess the 

performance of teacher preparation programs? How should performance indicators be defined 

and measured to ensure they generate meaningful information about the performance of each 

teacher preparation program in a State (and thus provide information that can be viewed as 

reliable, valid, accurate, and having integrity)? What should the indicators be of academic 

content knowledge and teaching skills of students enrolled in teacher preparation programs? 

What, if any, parameters should there be for those indicators?

Statute:

Section 205(b)(1) of the HEA requires:

(1) IN GENERAL.—Each State that receives funds under this Act shall provide to the 

Secretary, and make widely available to the general public, in a uniform and 

comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and methods established by 

the Secretary, an annual State report card on the quality of teacher preparation in the 

State, both for traditional teacher preparation programs and for alternative routes to 

State certification or licensure programs, which shall include not less than the following: 

[please see Issue 2 for list]

Section 205(b)(1)(F) of the HEA requires States to include as part of their State report cards:

a description of the State’s criteria for assessing the performance of teacher preparation 

programs within institutions of higher education in the State. Such criteria shall include 
15

indicators of the academic content knowledge and teaching skills of students enrolled in 

such programs.

Section 200(23) of the HEA defines the term “teaching skills:”

(23) TEACHING SKILLS.—The term ‘teaching skills’ means skills that enable a teacher 

to—

(A) increase student learning, achievement, and the ability to apply knowledge;

(B) effectively convey and explain academic subject matter;

(C) effectively teach higher-order analytical, evaluation, problem-solving, and 

communication skills;

(D) employ strategies grounded in the disciplines of teaching and learning that—

(i) are based on empirically-based practice and scientifically valid research, 

where applicable, related to teaching and learning;

(ii) are specific to academic subject matter; and

(iii) focus on the identification of students’ specific learning needs, particularly

students with disabilities, students who are limited English proficient, students who are 

gifted and talented, and students with low literacy levels, and the tailoring of academic 

instruction to such needs;

(E) conduct an ongoing assessment of student learning, which may include the use of 

formative assessments, performance-based assessments, project-based assessments, or 

portfolio assessments, that measures higher-order thinking skills (including application, 

analysis, synthesis, and evaluation);

(F) effectively manage a classroom, including the ability to implement positive 

behavioral interventions and support strategies;

(G) communicate and work with parents, and involve parents in their children’s 

education; and

(H) use, in the case of an early childhood educator, age-appropriate and developmentally 

appropriate strategies and practices for children in early childhood education programs.

Section 205(c) of the HEA requires the Secretary to regulate in the area of data quality with 

respect to institutional and State report cards:

(c) DATA QUALITY. – The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to ensure the reliability, 

validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted pursuant to this section. 

 
16

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 4

Issue: Standards for State identification of low-performing or at-risk teacher 

preparation programs

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 207(a) 

HEA Section 205(b)

HEA Section 205(c) 

HEA Section 206

Regulatory Cite: None

Summary of Issue: HEA section 207(a) requires States to conduct an assessment to identify 

low-performing teacher preparation programs within the State. Section 207(a) also requires each 

State to describe the assessment in its State report card under section 205(b) and to provide the 

Secretary a list of teacher preparation programs it has found to be either low-performing or at 

risk of being found to be low-performing. While section 207(a) authorizes States to determine 

levels of teacher preparation program performance, it anticipates that the State assessments of 

program performance for which those levels are established will be meaningful. Section 205(c) 

of the HEA requires the Secretary to prescribe regulations ensuring the reliability, validity, 

integrity, and accuracy of data submitted to the Department as part of the State report card. 

Summary question(s): What definitions and minimum criteria should be established to ensure 

that State identification of low-performing teacher preparation programs is based on a 

meaningful assessment of program performance? Are there specific areas of program 

performance that States should have to consider to ensure a meaningful assessment and 

identification of low-performing or at-risk programs, separate from the question of minimum 

performance levels in those areas?

Statute: 

HEA section 207(a) requires States to identify low-performing teacher preparation programs in 

the State as follows:

SEC. 207. STATE FUNCTIONS

(a) STATE ASSESSMENT.—In order to receive funds under this Act, a State shall 

conduct an assessment to identify low-performing teacher preparation programs in the 

State and to assist such programs through the provision of technical assistance. Each 

such State shall provide the Secretary with an annual list of low-performing teacher 

preparation programs and an identification of those programs at risk of being placed on 

such list, as applicable. Such assessment shall be described in the report under section 
17

205(b). Levels of performance shall be determined solely by the State and may include 

criteria based on information collected pursuant to this part, including progress in 

meeting the goals of –

(1) Increasing the percentage of highly qualified teachers in the State, including, 

increasing professional development opportunities;

(2) Improving student academic achievement for elementary students; and

(3) Raising the standards for entry into the teaching profession.

Other information:

Despite the requirement since enactment of the 1998 HEA Amendments that States identify and 

improve their low-performing teacher preparation programs, States identify less than two percent 

of teacher preparation programs as “low performing.” In the most recent year for which we have 

data, States identified only 38 low-performing or at-risk teacher preparation programs at more 

than 1,400 institutions of higher education, many of which house multiple programs.

Examples, from the 2010 State reports, of the criteria used by States to identify traditional 

teacher preparation programs as "low performing" or "at risk of being low performing" include:

State A: Pre-teaching Experiences in Elementary/Secondary Schools (15% of total 

grade): (a) Hours required prior to the full time student teaching (5%), (b) Researchbased indicators of high quality pre-teaching experiences (10%), Partnerships with [State 

Name] Elementary/Secondary Schools (15% of total grade). [State Name] Prospective 

Teacher Testing Program (25% of total grade): (a) three basic skills tests (5%), and (b) 

Praxis II content knowledge tests (20%). On-the-Job Performance (45% of total 

grade): (a) Professional Education Personnel Evaluation Program (PEPE) Scores (35%); 

(b) New teacher/instructional support/administrator satisfaction survey (5%); and (c) 

Local school systems' satisfaction survey (5%). 

State B: Fewer than 80 percent of program completers pass any of the required 

certification tests.

State C: Low performing is defined as meeting all three of the following conditions: a. 

Three years of unit level aggregated Content Assessment pass rates are not at or above 

80%; and b. PAAR and/or Title II reports were not submitted, verified, and finalized by 

the published deadlines for one or more of the previous three years; and c. A significant 

discrepancy exists between the number of program completers and the number of 

completers who attempt and do not pass the Content Assessment in their field of

preparation. 

State D: None.

State E: Standards will be developed during RTT period.

State F: Any program that has been granted a 2 year approval is considered low 

performing
18

State G: A traditional or alternative route teacher education program Professional 

Education Unit is designated “low performing” if the professional education unit: • 

receives state or NCATE non-approval status based upon the findings of the review or 

failure to meet conditions of the “at risk” designation. The unit, including all teacher 

preparation program areas, is designated as “low performing” accreditation/approval for 

less than five years based on the NCATE/SATE unit review and fails to correct 

deficiencies and gain full approval within three years; or the institution received an 

approval status of “Accreditation Revoked” on their Continuing Accreditation Review 

from NCATE or Non-Approval status on a HTSB SATE Review; or the institution’s 

summary pass rate on PRAXIS II falls below 70% for a three year average.

State H: Institutions that are NOT recommended to the State Board of Education for 

continuing approval status will be designated as "low-performing." Any programs 

recommended to the State Board for less than the full seven-year approval period due to 

performance will be designated as "at risk of being considered low-performing."

 
19

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 5

Issue: Termination of eligibility of teacher preparation programs to enroll 

students receiving Title IV student assistance in cases where the State has 

withdrawn its approval or terminated its financial support based on the 

program’s poor performance

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 207(b) 

Regulatory Cite: None

Summary of Issue: HEA section 207(b) of the HEA describes the consequences of a lowperforming teacher preparation program’s loss of State approval or financial support. Lowperforming teacher preparation programs that have lost State approval or financial support are 

ineligible for funding for professional development activities awarded by the Department. In 

addition, these teacher preparation programs may not accept or enroll any student who receives 

Title IV student financial assistance. Further, the affected teacher preparation program must 

provide transitional support, including remedial services if necessary, for students enrolled when 

the loss of State approval or financial support occurred.

Once a State determines that a low-performing teacher preparation program has sufficiently 

improved its performance, the teacher preparation program may regain its eligibility for funding 

for professional development activities and to enroll students receiving Title IV student 

assistance.

Summary question(s): What regulations should we establish relating to termination of 

eligibility of teacher preparation programs to enroll students receiving Title IV student financial 

assistance in cases where the State withdraws its approval or terminates its financial support for 

the program, due to the program’s low-performance on the HEA section 207(a) State 

assessment? What regulations should we establish related to eligibility of teacher preparation 

programs to enroll students receiving Title IV student financial assistance in cases where a State 

reinstates approval or financial support to a program upon demonstration of improved 

performance?

Statute:

HEA section 207(b) describes the consequences to an institution that loses its State approval, 

including loss of Federal student aid funds (e.g., TEACH Grants, Pell Grants and Federal Student 

Loans). The provision states:

(b) TERMINATION OF ELIGIBLITY. – Any teacher preparation program from which the 

State has withdrawn the State’s approval, or terminated the State’s financial support, due 
20

to low performance of the program based upon the State assessment described in 

subsection (a) –

(1) Shall be ineligible for funding for professional development activities awarded by 

the Department;

(2) May not be permitted to accept or enroll any student who receives aid under title 

IV in the institution’s teacher preparation program;

(3) Shall provide transitional support, including remedial services if necessary, for 

students enrolled at the institution at the time of termination of financial support 

or withdrawal of approval; and

(4) Shall be reinstated upon demonstration of improved performance, as determined 

by the State.

Other information: 

None. 
21

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 6

Issue: Definition of “high quality teacher preparation program” 

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 101

HEA Section 102

HEA Section 420L(1)(A) 

Regulatory Cite: None. 

Summary of Issue: HEA section 420L(1)(A) of the HEA describes several criteria that an 

institution of higher education (as defined in HEA section 102) must meet to be eligible to 

participate in the TEACH Grant Program. One of the criteria is that the institution of higher

education provide a “high quality teacher preparation” and professional development services, 

including extensive clinical experience as part of pre-service preparation, as determined by the 

Secretary. However, the term “high quality teacher preparation” is not currently defined in either 

the statute or in regulation with the result that grants are awarded at more than 800 of some 1,400 

institutions of higher education that house a teacher preparation program and without a specific 

determination of teacher preparation program quality. Nearly two-thirds of the relatively small 

number of teacher preparation programs identified by states as low-performing or at-risk 

participate in the TEACH Grant program. 

Summary question(s): How should we define the term “high quality teacher preparation 

program” to ensure that TEACH Grant funds are directed to institutions that produce high quality 

teachers? What regulations should be established to ensure that a State’s assessment of teacher 

preparation programs and identification of low-performing or at-risk teacher preparation 

programs under Title II is consistent with a determination of a “high quality teacher preparation 

program” for TEACH Grant Program participation purposes? 

Statute: 

SEC. 101. GENERAL DEFINITION OF INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.

(a) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—For purposes of this Act, other than 

title IV, the term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ means an educational institution in 

any State that—

(1) admits as regular students only persons having a certificate of graduation from 

a school providing secondary education, or the recognized equivalent of such a 

certificate, or persons who meet the requirements of section 484(d)(3);

(2) is legally authorized within such State to provide a program of education 

beyond secondary education;

(3) provides an educational program for which the institution awards a bachelor’s 

degree or provides not less than a 2- year program that is acceptable for full credit 
22

toward such a degree, or awards a degree that is acceptable for admission to a 

graduate or professional degree program, subject to review and approval by the 

Secretary;

(4) is a public or other nonprofit institution; and

(5) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association, or 

if not so accredited, is an institution that has been granted preaccreditation status 

by such an agency or association that has been recognized by the Secretary for the 

granting of preaccreditation status, and the Secretary has determined that there is 

satisfactory assurance that the institution will meet the accreditation standards of 

such an agency or association within a reasonable time.

(b) ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS INCLUDED.—For purposes of this Act, other than 

title IV, the term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ also includes—

(1) any school that provides not less than a 1-year program of training to prepare 

students for gainful employment in a recognized occupation and that meets the 

provision of paragraphs (1), (2), (4), and (5) of subsection (a); and

(2) a public or nonprofit private educational institution in any State that, in lieu of 

the requirement in subsection (a)(1), admits as regular students individuals—

(A) who are beyond the age of compulsory school attendance in the State in 

which the institution is located;

or

(B) who will be dually or concurrently enrolled in the institution and a secondary 

school.

(c) LIST OF ACCREDITING AGENCIES.—For purposes of this section and section 

102, the Secretary shall publish a list of nationally recognized accrediting agencies or 

associations that the Secretary determines, pursuant to subpart 2 of part H of title IV, to 

be reliable authority as to the quality of the education or training offered.

Section 102

(a) DEFINITION OF INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION FOR PURPOSES OF 

TITLE IV PROGRAMS.—

(1) INCLUSION OF ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS.—Subject to paragraphs 

(2) through (4) of this subsection, the term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ for 

purposes of title IV includes, in addition to the institutions covered by the 

definition in section 101—

(A) a proprietary institution of higher education (as defined in subsection 

(b) of this section);

(B) a postsecondary vocational institution (as defined in subsection (c) of 

this section); and

(C) only for the purposes of part D of title IV, an institution outside the 

United States that is comparable to an institution of higher education as 

defined in section 101 and that has been approved by the Secretary for the 

purpose of part D of title IV, consistent with the requirements of section 

452(d).

(b) PROPRIETARY INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—

(1) PRINCIPAL CRITERIA.—For the purpose of this section, the term 
23

‘‘proprietary institution of higher education’’ means a school that—

(A)(i) provides an eligible program of training to prepare students for 

gainful employment in a recognized occupation; or

(ii)(I) provides a program leading to a baccalaureate degree in liberal arts, 

and has provided such a program since January 1, 2009; and

(II) is accredited by a recognized regional accrediting agency or 

association, and has continuously held such accreditation since October 1, 

2007, or earlier;

(B) meets the requirements of paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 101(a);

(C) does not meet the requirement of paragraph (4) of section 101(a);

(D) is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or 

association recognized by the Secretary pursuant to part H of title IV; and

(E) has been in existence for at least 2 years.

(2) ADDITIONAL INSTITUTIONS.—The term ‘‘proprietary institution of 

higher education’’ also includes a proprietary educational institution in any State 

that, in lieu of the requirement in section 101(a)(1), admits as regular students 

individuals—

(A) who are beyond the age of compulsory school attendance in the State 

in which the institution is located; or

(B) who will be dually or concurrently enrolled in the institution and a 

secondary school.

Subpart 9--TEACH Grants

SEC. 420L. DEFINITIONS.

For the purposes of this subpart:

(1) ELIGIBLE INSTITUTION- The term `eligible institution' means an institution 

of higher education, as defined in section 102, that the Secretary determines--

(A) provides high quality teacher preparation and professional 

development services, including extensive clinical experience as a part of preservice preparation;

(B) is financially sound;

(C) provides pedagogical course work, or assistance in the provision of 

such coursework, including the monitoring of student performance, and formal 

instruction related to the theory and practices of teaching; and

(D) provides supervision and support services to teachers, or assistance in 

the provision of such services, including mentoring focused on developing 

effective teaching skills and strategies.

Existing Regulatory Definitions Related to the Issue:

In 34 CFR 686.2(d), the regulations define a “TEACH Grant-eligible institution” as
24

An eligible institution as defined in 34 CFR part 600 that meets financial responsibility 

standards established in 34 CFR part 668, subpart L, or that qualified under an 

alternative standard in 34 CFR 668.175 and—

(1) Provides a high-quality teacher preparation program at the baccalaureate or 

master’s degree level that –

(i)(A) Is accredited by a specialized accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary 

for accreditation of professional teacher education programs;

(B) Is approved by a state and includes a minimum of 10 weeks of full-time preservice clinical experience, or its equivalent, and provides either pedagogical 

coursework or assistance in the provision of such coursework; and 

(ii) Provides supervision and support services to teachers, or assists in the provision 

of services to teachers, such as –

(A) Identifying and making available information on effective teaching skills or 

strategies;

(B) Identifying and making available information on effective practices in the 

supervision and coaching of novice teachers; and

(C) Mentoring focused on developing effective teaching skills and strategies;

(2) Provides a two-year program that—

(i) Is acceptable for full credit in a baccalaureate teacher preparation program of 

study offered by an institution described in paragraph (1) of this definition, as 

demonstrated by the institutions; or

(ii) Is acceptable for full credit in a baccalaureate degree program in a high-need 

field at an institution described in paragraph (3) of this definition, as 

demonstrated by the institutions;

(3) Offers a baccalaureate degree that, in combination with other training or experience, 

will prepare an individual to teach in a high-need field as defined in this part and has 

entered into an agreement with an institution described in paragraphs (1) or (4) of 

this definition to provide courses necessary for its students to begin a career in 

teaching, or

(4) Provides a post-baccalaureate program of study.

“TEACH-grant eligible program” is defined in 34 CFR 686.2(d) as:

A program of study that is designed to prepare an individual to teach as a highlyqualified teacher in a high-need filed and leads to a baccalaureate or master’s degree, or 

is a post-baccalaureate program of study. A two-year program of study that is 

acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate degree is considered to be a program of 

study that leads to a baccalaureate degree.

And, in 34 CFR 686.2(d), “teacher preparation program” is defined as:

A State-approved course of study, the completion of which signifies that an enrollee has 

met all the State’s educational or training requirements for initial certification or 

licensure to teach in the State’s elementary or secondary schools. A teacher preparation 

program may be a regular program or an alternative route to certification, as defined by 
25

the State. For purposes of a TEACH Grant, the program must be provided by an 

institution of higher education.

Other non-regulatory guidance:

The 2011-2012 Federal Student Aid Handbook provides the following information with respect 

to institutional participation in the Teach Grant Program: 

Eligibility for the Teacher Education Assistance for College and Higher Education (TEACH) 

Grant program is not automatically extended to an FSA-eligible postsecondary school. A school 

qualifies as a “TEACH Grant-eligible institution” if it offers a high-quality teacher preparation 

program at either the baccalaureate or masters level and provides supervision and support 

services to teachers (or assists in the provision of such services). The teacher preparation 

program must be—

• Accredited by a specialized accrediting agency recognized by the Department for the 

accreditation of professional teacher education programs, or 

• Approved by a state and must provide extensive pre-service clinical experience.

If a school does not have a teacher preparation program, it can qualify for TEACH grants if it—

• Provides one or more 2-year programs of study that are acceptable for full credit to 

either a baccalaureate teacher preparation degree program or a baccalaureate degree program 

in a high-need field at another TEACH-eligible school with which it has an agreement; 

• Offers a baccalaureate degree that, in combination with other training or experience, 

will prepare a student to teach in a high-need field and has an agreement with another 

institution that offers a teacher preparation program or a post-baccalaureate program that 

prepares students to teach; or 

• Offers a post-baccalaureate program that will prepare a student to teach.

Recognized agencies for the accreditation of professional teacher education programs include 

the Teacher Education Accreditation Council (TEAC) and National Council for Accreditation of 

Teacher Education (NCATE). (Note: On October 22, 2010, TEAC and NCATE agreed to merge 

as the Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP)).

Further information is also available in Dear Colleague Letter GEN-08-07. Specific 

regulations can be found in 34 CFR 686.2 and 34 CFR 686.4.

To qualify as an eligible program for TEACH Grants, an educational program must be a 

program of study that 

• Is designed to prepare an individual to teach as a highly-qualified teacher in a highneed field and leads to a baccalaureate or master’s degree (including 2-year programs of study 

that are acceptable for full credit toward a baccalaureate degree), or 

• Is a post-baccalaureate program of study for students who have completed a 

baccalaureate degree but need to take additional state-required courses for teacher certification 

or licensure. 

A post-baccalaureate program consists of courses required by a state in order for a student to 

receive a professional certification or licensing credential that is required for employment as a 
26

teacher in an elementary school or secondary school in that state. It must be a program that is 

treated as an undergraduate program for FSA purposes, and may not lead to a graduate degree. 

In addition, note that a program of instruction offered by a TEACH Grant-eligible institution 

that offers a baccalaureate degree in education cannot be considered a postbaccalaureate 

program.

The preamble to the June 23, 2008 TEACH regulations draws a distinction between program 

eligibility (where the school may identify, within the parameters of the regulations, the scope of 

school programs that are TEACH Grant-eligible) and student eligibility (where the school must 

adhere to the eligibility criteria in the regulations). The preamble further states: Ultimately, it is 

up to the institution to decide, based on regulatory requirements, what programs are TEACH 

Grant-eligible and when a student is considered to be accepted into a TEACH Grant-eligible 

program. For instance, a school can determine that only some of the programs for which it 

currently awards other FSA funds are also eligible for TEACH, even if some programs it does 

not wish to make TEACH Grant-eligible meet the regulatory definition.

Other information:

In Our Future, Our Teachers: The Obama Administration’s Plan for Teacher Education Reform 

and Improvement, Secretary Arne Duncan stated that “We want every teacher to receive the 

high-quality preparation and support they need, so that every student can have the effective 

teachers they deserve.” 

Unfortunately, data indicate that in some cases, teacher preparation programs are not preparing 

tomorrow’s teachers adequately. For example, as reported in Our Future, Our Teachers:

 Teacher preparation programs are not always attracting the strongest candidates – only 

23% of all teachers, and only 14% of teachers in high-poverty schools, come from the top 

third of college graduates;1

 More than three in five education school alumni report that their education school did not 

prepare them for “classroom realities;”2and

 Over half of all districts report difficulty recruiting highly qualified teachers in science 

and special education, and over 90% of high-minority districts report difficulty in 

attracting highly qualified math and science teachers.3

 

1 Byron Auguste, Pall Kihn, Matt Miller, Closing the talent gap: Attracting and retaining top-third graduates to 

careers in teaching (Washington, DC: McKinsey& Company, 2010), 5, 

http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/Social_Sector/our_practices/Educaiton/Knowledge_Highlights/~/media/Re

ports/SSO/closing_the_talent_gap.ashx

2 Arthur Levine, Educating School Teachers (Washington, D.C.: The Education Schools Project, 2006), 32, 

http://www.edschools.org/teacher_report.htm

3 U.S. Department of Education, Policy and Program Studies Service Report Highlights: State and Local 

Implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act Volume VIII—Teacher Quality Under NCLB: Final Report 

(Washington, DC: 2009), 3, http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/teaching/nclb-final/highlights.pdf.
27

Additionally, superintendents and principals have reported that:

 79% of their teachers were not prepared to work with parents;

 72% were not prepared to address the needs of students from diverse cultural 

backgrounds;

 70% were not prepared to address the needs of students with disabilities;

 84% were not prepared to address the needs of students with limited English language 

proficiency; and

 67% were not prepared to maintain order and discipline in the classroom.4

Despite these challenges, in many cases, States have not historically held teacher preparation 

programs to a high standard. Because there is no statutory or regulatory definition of “high 

quality teacher preparation program,” each State has defined the term in its own way. “In the 

most recent year for which data is available, states identified only 37 low-performing programs 

at the over 1,400 institutions of higher education that prepare teachers – and 39 states identified 

no low-performing programs at all.”5 And, of the programs identified as at-risk or lowperforming, nearly two-thirds continue to receive funds under the TEACH grant program. 

Section 420L(1)(A) of the HEA provides that in order to be eligible to participate in the TEACH 

Grant program, an institution of higher education must, among other requirements, provide “high 

quality teacher preparation and professional development services, including extensive clinical 

experience as part of pre-service preparation” as determined by the Secretary. “High quality 

teacher preparation” is not currently defined in either statute or regulation.

The current definition of a teacher preparation program that is used by the HEA Title II 

accountability system is: A State-approved course of study, the completion of which signifies 

that an enrollee has met all the State’s educational and/or training requirements for initial 

certification or licensure to teach in the State’s elementary, middle or secondary schools. A 

teacher preparation program may be either a traditional program or an alternative route to 

certification, as defined by the State. Also, it may be within or outside an institution of higher 

education. (For the purpose of reporting, all traditional teacher preparation programs at a single 

IHE are considered to be a single program.) The 2000 definition adapted for the TEACH Grant 

Program stated that the teacher preparation program may be a regular program or an alternative 

 

4 Arthur Levine, Educating School Teachers (Washington, DC: The Education Schools Project, 2006), 32. Primary 

data from the market research firm Synovate. 

5 Chad Aldeman, et al., A Measured Approach to Improving Teacher Preparation (Washington, DC: Education 

Sector 2011), 4-16, http://www.educationsector.org/publications/measured-approach-improving-teacher-preparation
28

route to certification. The current Title II reporting system definition uses the word “traditional” 

instead of “regular.” 

For purposes of a TEACH Grant, the teacher preparation program must be provided by an 

institution of higher education. The current definition in the Title II reporting manual indicates 

that an alternative route teacher preparation program may be within or outside an institution of 

higher education. Thus, there are some inconsistencies between the current Title II reporting 

system definition and that used in the TEACH Grant program.

The preamble to the final regulations (73 FR 35476) states that institutions whose programs are 

accredited by one of the specialized accrediting agencies recognized by the Secretary for the 

accreditation of professional teacher education programs listed on the Departments website at 

http://www.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation_pg8html#ed meet the pre-service clinical 

experience and pedagogical coursework requirements. 

The Department did not initially specify a minimum length of time for pre-service clinical 

experience, but a standard was determined to be necessary to ascertain if an institution whose 

teacher preparation program is not accredited is meeting the clinical experience requirement. A 

review of State requirements showed that a majority of States require at least 10 weeks of preservice clinical experience. The American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education 

(AACTE) also recommended 10 weeks.

Presently, “clinical experience” is addressed in section 686.2(d) under TEACH Grant-eligible 

institution (1)(i)(B) as one of the requirements to be a TEACH Grant-eligible institution through 

one of the “high-quality teacher preparation program” pathways that is accredited, approved by a 

State and includes a minimum of 10 weeks of full-time pre-service clinical experience, or its 

equivalent, and provides either pedagogical coursework or assistance in the provision of such 

coursework and provides supervision and support services to teachers, or assists in the provision 

of services to teachers. Services to teachers includes identifying and making available 

information on effective teaching skills or strategies; identifying and making available 

information on effective practices in the supervision and coaching of novice teachers; and 

mentoring focused on developing effective teaching skills and strategies.
29

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 7

Issue: Service and repayment obligations for the TEACH Grant Program:

Teaching service performed for an Educational Service Agency 

Statutory Cite: HEA sections 420N(b)(1)(B) and 465(a)(2)(A) 

Additional Related

Statutory Provision: Section 9101(17) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)

Regulatory Cite: 34 CFR 686.2

34 CFR 686.12(b)(1)

Summary of Issue: HEA section 420N(b)(1)(B) requires a TEACH Grant recipient to serve as 

a full-time highly-qualified teacher in a high-need field at an elementary or secondary school 

serving low-income children. An elementary or secondary school serving low-income children 

is defined in section 465(a)(2)(A) of the HEA. 

The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-315) (HEOA), amended HEA 

section 465(a)(2)(A) to include educational service agencies in the definition of elementary and 

secondary schools serving low-income children. Therefore, TEACH Grant recipients can now 

fulfill their teaching service obligation by teaching for an “educational service agency.” The 

ESEA defines an educational service agency as “a regional public multiservice agency 

authorized by State statute to develop, manage, and provide services or programs to local 

educational agencies.” The regulations governing the TEACH Grant Program have not been 

updated to include educational service agencies as satisfying the program’s agreement to serve. 

Summary Question(s): How should we amend 34 CFR 686.12(b) to provide that a TEACH 

Grant recipient may satisfy his or her service obligation by teaching for an “educational service 

agency” that serves low-income students? 

Statute: 

Section 420N(b)(1)(B) of the HEA requires that a student in order to fulfill the TEACH Grant 

service obligation must serve as a full-time teacher in the following manner:

(b) AGREEMENTS TO SERVE.—Each application under subsection (a) shall contain or 

be accompanied by an agreement by the applicant that—

(1) the applicant will—

*** 

(B) teach in a school described in section 465(a)(2)(A);
30

HEA Section 465(a)(2)(A) now specifically includes teachers who are employed by educational 

service agencies: 

(A) as a full-time teacher for service in an academic year (including such a teacher 

employed by an educational service agency)

(i) in a public or other nonprofit private elementary school or secondary school, 

which, for the purpose of this paragraph and for that year—

(I) has been determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations of the 

Secretary and after consultation with the State educational agency of 

the State in which the school is located) to be a school in which the 

number of children meeting a measure of poverty under section 

1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 

1965[20 U.S.C. 6313 (a)(5)], exceeds 30 percent of the total number 

of children enrolled in such school; and 

(II) is in the school district of a local educational agency which is eligible 

in such year for assistance pursuant to part A of title I of the 

Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965[20 U.S.C. 6311 et 

seq.]; or 

(iii)in one or more public, or nonprofit private, elementary schools or secondary 

schools or locations operated by an educational service agency that have 

been determined by the Secretary (pursuant to regulations of the Secretary 

and after consultation with the State educational agency of the State in which 

the educational service agency operates) to be a school or location at which 

the number of children taught who meet a measure of poverty under section 

1113(a)(5) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 [20 

U.S.C. 6313 (a)(5)], exceeds 30 percent of the total number of children taught 

at such school or location;

[Emphasis added.]

Section 9101(17) of the ESEA defines Educational Service Agency as the following:

(17) EDUCATIONAL SERVICE AGENCY- The term educational service agency means a 

regional public multiservice agency authorized by State statute to develop, manage, 

and provide services or programs to local educational agencies.

Regulations:

34 CFR 686.12 describes the TEACH Grant agreement to serve: 

§ 686.12 Agreement to serve.

-

(b) Contents of the agreement to serve. The agreement provides that, for each TEACH 

Grant-eligible program for which the student received TEACH Grant funds, the grant 
31

recipient must fulfill a service obligation by performing creditable teaching service 

by—

(1) Serving as a full-time teacher for a total of not less than four elementary or 

secondary academic years within eight calendar years after completing the 

program or otherwise ceasing to be enrolled in the program for which the 

recipient received the TEACH Grant—

(i) In a low-income school;

(ii) As a highly-qualified teacher; and

(iii) In a high-need field in the majority of classes taught during each 

elementary and secondary academic year.
32

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 8

Issue: Teaching in a high-need field to fulfill the TEACH Grant Agreement to 

Serve

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 420N(b)(1)(C) 

Regulatory Cite: 34 CFR 686.12(d)

Summary of Issue: Prior to the enactment of the HEOA, and as reflected in the current TEACH 

Grant regulations, a TEACH Grant recipient was required to teach in a high-need field that was 

designated by the Secretary as such at the time the recipient began teaching. Because the list of 

high-need fields is subject to change at any time during a student’s studies, the HEOA amended 

HEA section 420N(d)(1) to provide that a TEACH Grant recipient may fulfill his or her service 

obligation by teaching in a field that was designated as high-need when the recipient applied for 

the grant, even if the field is no longer designated as high-need when the recipient begins 

teaching. This change became effective July 1, 2010.

In accordance with the change made by the HEOA, a TEACH Grant recipient who otherwise 

meets the requirements of 34 CFR 686.12 may satisfy the requirement to teach in a high-need 

field if the grant recipient:

 Teaches in a field that is designated as high-need by the State in which the grant recipient 

is teaching at the time the grant recipient begins qualifying teaching service (even if that 

field subsequently loses its high-need designation for that State); or

 Beginning with the 2010-2011 school year, teaches in a field that was designated as highneed by the State in which the grant recipient is teaching for any award year in which the 

student received a TEACH Grant, even if the high-need field is no longer designated as 

high-need for that State when the grant recipient begins qualifying teaching service.

Summary Question: How should we amend the TEACH Grant regulations to comply with a 

statutory change that was implemented on July 1, 2010 and otherwise change?

Statute:

HEA section 420N(d)(1) of the HEA provides that a TEACH Grant recipient may fulfill his or 

her service obligation by teaching in a field designated as high-need when the recipient applied 

for the grant:

(d) ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.—
33

(1) CHANGE OF HIGH-NEED DESIGNATION.—If a recipient of an initial grant under 

this subpart has acquired an academic degree, or expertise, in a field that was, at the 

time of the recipient’s application for that grant, designated as high need in accordance 

with subsection (b)(1)(C)(vii), but is no longer so designated, the grant recipient may 

fulfill the service obligation described in subsection (b)(1) by teaching in that field.

Regulations:

34 CFR 686.12 provides the regulatory requirements regarding a TEACH Grant Agreement to 

Serve, including the provisions for majoring in a high need field, which have not been updated to 

reflect the HEA, as amended: 

§ 686.12 Agreement to serve.

***

(d) Majoring and serving in a high-need field. A grant recipient who completes a 

TEACH Grant-eligible program in a field that is listed in the Nationwide List cannot 

satisfy his or her service obligation to teach in that high-need field unless the highneed field in which he or she has prepared to teach is listed in the Nationwide List for 

the State in which the grant recipient begins teaching at the time the recipient begins 

teaching in that field.

Other Information:

The Department published a Dear Colleague Letter on August 13, 2009 containing the following 

guidance: 

... Under 34 CFR 686.12(d), a TEACH Grant recipient may satisfy his or her service obligation 

by teaching in a high-need field that is listed in the Nationwide List only if that field is 

designated by a State as high-need at the time the recipient begins qualifying teaching in that 

field in that State. 

The Higher Education Opportunity Act (the HEOA), Pub. L. 110-315, amended section 

420N(d)(1) of the HEA to allow the recipient of an initial TEACH Grant who has acquired an 

academic degree, or expertise, in a field that was designated as high-need at the time of the 

recipient’s application for the grant (rather than at the time of teaching as provided in the 

Department’s regulations), but is no longer so designated, to fulfill the service obligation 

associated with the TEACH Grant by teaching in that high-need field. This change is effective on 

July 1, 2010. 

In accordance with the change made by the HEOA, a TEACH Grant recipient who otherwise 

meets the requirements of 34 CFR 686.12 may satisfy the requirement to teach in a high-need 

field if the grant recipient: 

 Teaches in a field that is designated as high-need by the State in which the grant 

recipient is teaching at the time the grant recipient begins qualifying teaching service 

(even if that field subsequently loses its high-need designation for that State); or 
34

 Beginning with the 2010-2011 school year, teaches in a field that was designated as 

high-need by the State in which the grant recipient is teaching for any award year in 

which the student received a TEACH Grant, even if the high-need field is no longer 

designated as high-need for that State when the grant recipient begins qualifying 

teaching service. 
35

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 9

Issue: Eligibility for a new TEACH Grant after receiving a discharge of the 

TEACH Grant agreement to serve based on total and permanent disability 

Statutory Cite: None

Regulatory Cite: 34 CFR 686.11

34 CFR 682.200(b)

Summary of Issue: Recipients of Federal student financial aid may be eligible to have their 

loans discharged if they are determined to have a “total and permanent disability,” which broadly 

refers to an inability to engage in employment for a period of at least 60 months. Similarly, 

recipients of TEACH Grants who have yet to complete the requirements of their agreements to 

serve are eligible to have their agreements discharged if they are determined to have a total and 

permanent disability. There are certain circumstances where an individual, having recovered 

from such a disability, wishes to receive additional loan or grant funding. The regulations 

governing most types of Federal student financial aid contain procedures that students must 

follow to regain eligibility for such aid. The current TEACH Grant regulations do not contain 

parallel rules governing the method by which a student can receive a TEACH grant following a 

determination of total and permanent disability. The TEACH Grant eligibility requirements 

should be consistent with and conform to those governing other types of Federal student 

financial aid. 

Summary Question(s): How should 34 CFR 686.11 of the TEACH Grant program regulations 

be amended to add eligibility requirements for TEACH Grant recipients who wish to obtain a 

TEACH Grant after receiving a discharge on a previous agreement to serve or Federal student 

loan?

Regulations:

34 CFR 682.200(b) provides the definition of a total and permanent disability:

Totally and permanently disabled. The condition of an individual who—

(1) Is unable to engage in any substantial gainful activity by reason of any medically 

determinable physical or mental impairment that—

(i) Can be expected to result in death;

(ii) Has lasted for a continuous period of not less than 60 months; or

(iii) Can be expected to last for a continuous period of not less than 60 months; or

(2) Has been determined by the Secretary of Veterans Affairs to be unemployable 

due to a service-connected disability.
36

The Perkins, FFEL and Direct Loan program regulations (broadly referred to here as the “title IV 

loan program regulations”)6as well as §686.42 of the TEACH Grant regulations provide for the 

discharge of a title IV loan or a TEACH Grant agreement to serve based on a borrower or grant 

recipient’s total and permanent disability. However, while the title IV loan program regulations 

address the conditions that a student must meet to establish eligibility for a new title IV loan after 

a receiving such a discharge, the TEACH Grant regulations do not address this issue. 

By way of example, 34 CFR 685.200(a)(iv)(A) provides the eligibility requirements for a Direct 

loan borrower who had a TEACH Grant service obligation discharged due to total and permanent 

disability:

(a) Student Direct Subsidized or Direct Unsubsidized borrower. (1) A student is eligible 

to receive a Direct Subsidized Loan, a Direct Unsubsidized Loan, or a combination of 

these loans, if the student meets the following requirements:

***

(iv) In the case of a borrower whose previous loan or TEACH Grant service 

obligation was cancelled due to total and permanent disability, the student—

(A) In the case of a borrower whose prior loan under title IV of the Act or 

TEACH Grant service obligation was discharged after a final 

determination of total and permanent disability, the borrower—

( 1 ) Obtains a certification from a physician that the borrower is 

able to engage in substantial gainful activity;

( 2 ) Signs a statement acknowledging that the Direct Loan the 

borrower receives cannot be discharged in the future on the 

basis of any impairment present when the new loan is made, 

unless that impairment substantially deteriorates; and

( 3 ) If the borrower receives a new Direct Loan, other than a 

Direct Consolidation Loan, within three years of the date that 

any previous title IV loan or TEACH Grant service obligation 

was discharged due to a total and permanent disability in 

accordance with §685.213(b)(4), 34 CFR 674.61(b)(3)(i), 34 

CFR 682.402(c), or 34 CFR 686.42(b) based on a discharge 

request received on or after July 1, 2010, resumes repayment 

on the previously discharged loan in accordance with 

§685.213(b)(3)(ii)(A), 34 CFR 674.61(b)(5), or 34 CFR 

682.402(c)(5), or acknowledges that he or she is once again 

subject to the terms of the TEACH Grant agreement to serve 

before receiving the new loan.

 

6

34 CFR sections 674.61, 682.402(c), and 685.213, respectively.
37

TEACHER PREPARATION ISSUES COMMITTEE

Title II, HEA Reporting System/ TEACH Grant Program

Issue 10

Issue: Discharge of the TEACH Grant agreement to serve based on the total and 

permanent disability of a TEACH Grant recipient 

Statutory Cite: HEA Section 420N(d)(2)

Regulatory Cite: 34 CFR 686.42(b)

34 CFR 682.200(b)

Summary of Issue: 34 CFR 686.42(b) provides that a TEACH Grant recipient’s agreement to 

serve is discharged if the recipient becomes totally and permanently disabled, as defined in 34 

CFR 682.200(b), and the grant recipient applies for and satisfies the eligibility requirements for a 

total and permanent disability discharge in accordance with 34 CFR 685.213. The current 

TEACH Grant regulations include several references to a “conditional discharge” process as 

described in 34 CFR 685.213 that is no longer in effect. Final regulations published on October 

29, 2009 and effective July 1, 2010 amended the Direct Loan Program total and permanent 

disability discharge regulations by replacing the conditional discharge process with a different 

process. 

This issue concerns a regulatory change being proposed to conform the TEACH Grant Program 

regulations to changes already made to the Direct Loan Program regulations and put into practice 

by the higher education community. Instead of receiving a three-year conditional discharge, 

individuals now receive a discharge immediately, with possible reinstatement of the obligation to 

repay or serve under certain circumstances. These circumstances include earning an annual 

income in excess of 100 percent of the poverty guideline for a family of two or receiving a new 

TEACH Grant or certain types of Federal student aid.

Summary Question(s): How should we amend the TEACH Grant regulations to reflect the 

current total and permanent disability discharge process?

Statute:

Section 420N(d)(2) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (HEA) provides the Secretary of 

Education with regulatory authority to provide for the circumstances under which a grant 

recipient can receive a discharge of his or her obligations under the agreement to serve:

(d) ADDITIONAL ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.—

***

(2) EXTENUATING CIRCUMSTANCES.—The Secretary shall establish, by 

regulation, categories of extenuating circumstances under which a recipient 

of a grant under this subpart who is unable to fulfill all or part of the 
38

recipient’s service obligation may be excused from fulfilling that portion of 

the service obligation.

Regulations:

34 CFR 686.42(b) provides the circumstances under which a TEACH Grant recipient can receive 

a discharge of his or her obligations under the agreement to serve based on total and permanent 

disability. This section refers to the conditional discharge period described in 34 CFR 

685.213(c)(2), which no longer exists.

§ 686.42 Discharge of agreement to serve.

-

(b) Total and permanent disability. 

(1) A grant recipient's agreement to serve is discharged if the recipient becomes 

totally and permanently disabled, as defined in 34 CFR 682.200(b), and the 

grant recipient applies for and satisfies the eligibility requirements for a total 

and permanent disability discharge in accordance with 34 CFR 685.213.

(2) The eight-year time period in which the grant recipient must complete the 

service obligation remains in effect during the conditional discharge period 

described in 34 CFR 685.213(c)(2) unless the grant recipient is eligible for a 

suspension based on a condition that is a qualifying reason for leave under 

the FMLA in accordance with §686.41(a)(1)(ii)(D).

(3) Interest continues to accrue on each TEACH Grant disbursement unless and 

until the TEACH Grant recipient's agreement to serve is discharged.

(4) If the grant recipient satisfies the criteria for a total and permanent disability 

discharge during and at the end of the three-year conditional discharge 

period, the Secretary discharges the grant recipient's service obligation.

(5) If, at any time during or at the end of the three-year conditional discharge 

period, the Secretary determines that the grant recipient does not meet the 

eligibility criteria for a total and permanent disability discharge, the 

Secretary ends the conditional discharge period and the grant recipient is 

once again subject to the terms of the agreement to serve.