U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

75–109 PDF 2012

EDUCATION REFORMS: DISCUSSING THE VALUE OF 

ALTERNATIVE TEACHER CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, 

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 24, 2012 

Serial No. 112–66 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Bob Goodlatte, Virginia 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Scott DesJarlais, Tennessee 

Richard L. Hanna, New York 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Larry Bucshon, Indiana 

Trey Gowdy, South Carolina 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Kristi L. Noem, South Dakota 

Martha Roby, Alabama 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Dennis A. Ross, Florida 

Mike Kelly, Pennsylvania 

George Miller, California, 

Senior Democratic Member 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

David Loebsack, Iowa 

Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii 

Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Barrett Karr, Staff Director 

Jody Calemine, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, 

ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION 

DUNCAN HUNTER, California, Chairman 

John Kline, Minnesota 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Bob Goodlatte, Virginia 

Richard L. Hanna, New York 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Kristi L. Noem, South Dakota 

Martha Roby, Alabama 

Mike Kelly, Pennsylvania 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan 

Ranking Minority Member 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on July 24, 2012 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Hunter, Hon. Duncan, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education .............................................................. 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Kildee, Hon. Dale E., ranking member, Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education .............................................. 3 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Andrew, Seth, founder and superintendent, Democracy Prep Public 

Schools ........................................................................................................... 23 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 26 

Banta, Maura, director of citizenship initiatives in education, IBM Corp. . 9 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 11 

Brown, Cynthia G., vice president for education policy, Center for American Progress Action Fund ........................................................................... 16 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 18 

Mulhern, Jennifer, vice president, TNTP ....................................................... 5 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 7 

Additional Submissions: 

Mr. Andrew’s response to questions submitted for the record ..................... 61 

Chairman Hunter: 

Questions submitted to Mr. Andrew ........................................................ 60 

Questions submitted to Ms. Mulhern ...................................................... 64 

Ms. Mulhern’s response to questions submitted for the record .................... 65 

(1) 

EDUCATION REFORMS: DISCUSSING THE 

VALUE OF ALTERNATIVE TEACHER 

CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS 

Tuesday, July 24, 2012 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, 

Elementary and Secondary Education 

Committee on Education and the Workforce 

Washington, DC 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Duncan Hunter [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Hunter, Kline, Petri, Biggert, Foxx, 

Noem, Roby, Kildee, Scott, Davis, and Woolsey. 

Staff present: Katherine Bathgate, Deputy Press Secretary; 

Adam Bennot, Press Assistant; James Bergeron, Director of Education and Human Services Policy; Casey Buboltz, Coalitions and 

Member Services Coordinator; Heather Couri, Deputy Director of 

Education and Human Services Policy; Lindsay Fryer, Professional 

Staff Member; Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Dan Shorts, Legislative Assistant; Alex Sollberger, Communications Director; Linda 

Stevens, Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General Counsel; Alissa 

Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Brad Thomas, Senior Education Policy 

Advisor; Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk; Meg Benner, Minority Education Policy Advisor; Kelly Broughan, Minority Staff Assistant; 

Jody Calemine, Minority Staff Director; Jamie Fasteau, Minority 

Deputy Director of Education Policy; Ruth Friedman, Minority Director of Education Policy; Kara Marchione, Minority Senior Education Policy Advisor; Megan O’Reilly, Minority General Counsel; 

and Julie Peller, Minority Deputy Staff Director. 

Chairman HUNTER. Good morning. A quorum being present, the 

subcommittee will come to order. Welcome to our subcommittee 

hearing. I would like to thank our witnesses for joining us. We appreciate the opportunity to get your perspectives on the benefits of 

alternative teacher education—excuse me, certification programs. 

Studies have repeatedly shown teacher quality to be one of the 

most influential factors on student academic achievement. As a father of three young children, I have seen first-hand how positively 

kids respond when inspired and motivated by an exceptional teacher. They work harder, enjoy learning and seem more fulfilled after 

a challenging day in the classroom. 
2 

Today we are here to discuss teachers who obtain their certification through alternative routes. Alternative certification programs allow individuals who already have a post-secondary degree 

to obtain certification to teach without having to go back to college 

to complete a traditional teacher education program. As a result, 

aspiring teachers can begin working with students faster and more 

efficiently. 

The number of educators who obtain their certification through 

alternate routes has increased significantly over the years. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, from 1996 to 2006 

the number of alternative certifications issued nationwide increased from 4,000 to 60,000. Now approximately one third of the 

new teachers hired annually complete alternative certification programs. 

Helping schools recruit, hire and obtain more effective teachers 

is a top priority in the Republican effort to reform elementary and 

secondary education law currently known as No Child Left Behind. 

Earlier this year the committee approved two pieces of legislation 

that would help schools identify the most talented teachers. 

A key pillar in the legislation is a provision to eliminate the outdated and widely criticized highly qualified teacher requirements. 

Instead of focusing on an educator’s ability to keep students engaged, motivated and learning, these prescriptive requirements 

place undue emphasis on credentials and tenure, ultimately restricting schools’ ability to hire the best teachers. 

Unless we repeal the highly qualified teachers’ requirements, 

however, our neediest schools will always be prevented from hiring 

teachers certified through alternative pathways. As the president 

so often reminds us, this nation suffers from a shortage of good 

teachers. All the more reason we should continue to support policies that allow educators certified through alternative routes to 

stay in the classroom. 

Rigorous studies have consistently shown alternatively certified 

teachers are equally as effective, if not more so, than traditionally 

certified educators. For example, a 2009 national randomized study 

commissioned by the Department of Education found that there is 

no statistically significant difference in performance between the 

students taught by teachers certified through alternative routes. 

Similarly, an American Education Research Association report determined there were no differences in teacher efficacy or teacher 

confidence to an alternatively and traditionally certified teachers. 

We have seen the exceptional talent the educators from these 

programs can offer the nation’s K through 12 schools. Alternative 

certification routes help address teacher shortages in particular geographic areas and subject matter, as well as strengthen the overall quality of the teaching profession. 

While Republicans know there is no one size fits all federal solution to help put more effective teachers in the classroom, supporting the availability and acceptance of alternative certification 

programs is one way the public and private sectors can join together to ensure more students have access to a quality education 

from an extraordinary educator. I look forward to learning more 

about alternative teacher certification programs from our witnesses 

today. 
3 

And I will now recognize my distinguished colleague, Dale Kildee, for his opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairman Hunter follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Duncan Hunter, Chairman, 

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education 

Studies have repeatedly shown teacher quality to be one of the most influential 

factors on student academic achievement. As a father of three young children, I’ve 

seen firsthand how positively kids respond when inspired and motivated by an exceptional teacher—they work harder, enjoy learning, and seem more fulfilled after 

a challenging day in the classroom. 

Today we are here to discuss teachers who obtain their certification through alternative routes. Alternative certification programs allow individuals who already have 

a postsecondary degree to obtain certification to teach without having to go back to 

college and complete a traditional teacher education program. As a result, aspiring 

teachers can begin working with students faster and more efficiently. 

The number of educators who obtain their certification through alternate routes 

has increased significantly over the years. According to the National Center for Policy Analysis, from 1996 to 2006 the number of alternative certifications issued nationwide increased from 4,000 to 60,000. Now approximately one third of the new 

teachers hired annually complete alternative certification programs. 

Helping schools recruit, hire, and retain more effective teachers is a top priority 

in the Republican effort to reform elementary and secondary education law, currently known as No Child Left Behind. Earlier this year, the committee approved 

two pieces of legislation that will help schools identify the most talented teachers. 

A key pillar in the legislation is a provision to eliminate the outdated and widely 

criticized ‘‘Highly Qualified Teacher’’ requirements. Instead of focusing on an educator’s ability to keep students engaged, motivated, and learning, these prescriptive 

requirements place undue emphasis on credentials and tenure, ultimately restricting schools’ ability to hire the best teachers. 

Unless we repeal the Highly Qualified Teacher requirements, however, our neediest schools will be prevented from hiring teachers certified through alternative 

pathways. As the president so often reminds us, this nation suffers from a shortage 

of good teachers—all the more reason we should continue to support policies that 

allow educators certified through alternative routes to stay in the classroom. 

Rigorous studies have consistently shown alternatively certified teachers are 

equally as effective, if not more so, than traditionally certified educators. For example, a 2009 national randomized study commissioned by the Department of Education found that there is no statistically significant difference in performance between students taught by teachers certified through alternative routes. Similarly, an 

American Educational Research Association report determined there were no differences in teacher efficacy or teaching competence between alternatively and traditionally certified teachers. 

We have seen the exceptional talent the educators from these programs can offer 

the nation’s K-12 schools. Alternative certification routes help address teacher shortages in particular geographic areas and subject matter, as well as strengthen the 

overall quality of the teaching profession. While Republicans know there is no onesize-fits-all federal solution to help put more effective teachers in the classroom, 

supporting the availability and acceptance of alternative certification programs is 

one way the public and private sectors can join together to ensure more students 

have access to a quality education from an extraordinary educator. 

I look forward to learning more about alternative teacher certification programs 

from our witnesses today. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to thank our 

distinguished witness panel for the participation in today’s hearing. 

As a former teacher myself, I believe the conversation about teacher quality is a very important one, and one that we should continue 

to have discussion on because education is dynamic and not static. 

And so we really welcome you here today. 

I look forward to your insights on the benefits and challenges of 

alternative certification and how it can be used as tool to provide 

a quality education for all students. Alternative certification of 
4 

teachers may provide one option to increase the supply of teachers, 

especially in the subject shortage areas and high needs schools. 

However, we must be sure that teachers have both subject expertise and proper teaching methodology. States must ensure that alternative certification programs are high quality, and that teachers 

demonstrate sufficient pedagogical and academic knowledge before 

entering the classroom. 

As I said, alternative certification is only one tool. It is not the 

answer by itself. We must focus on the issue of teacher quality at 

large. Both teachers who took the traditional route and those who 

went through the alternative certification need resources and support to be successful in the classroom. We must ensure quality and 

accountability for both types of programs through data systems 

that measure effectiveness. 

Additionally, the teachers need high quality pre-service training, 

targeted professional development, mentoring and the support of 

parents and community partners. All of these strategies are necessary to create a system where teachers are ready when they 

enter the classroom, and have the encouragement to grow and improve. 

What problems should we be concerned with as we consider the 

hoped for benefits of alternative certification? This is one question 

I hope to pursue in this hearing. And I want to thank the chairman 

for calling today’s hearing, and look forward to the discussion. 

[The statement of Mr. Kildee follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Dale E. Kildee, Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary and Secondary Education 

Thank you Mr. Chairman. 

I also want to thank our distinguished witness panel for their participation in today’s hearing. As a former teacher myself, I believe the conversation about teacher 

quality is an important one. 

I look forward to your insights on the benefits and challenges of alternative certification, and how it can be used as a tool to provide a quality education for all 

students. 

Alternative certification of teachers may provide one option to increase the supply 

of teachers, especially in subject shortage areas and high-needs schools. However, 

we must ensure teachers have both subject expertise and proper teaching methodology. 

States must ensure that alternative certification programs are of high-quality and 

that teachers demonstrate sufficient pedagogical and academic knowledge before entering the classroom. 

As I said, alternative certification is only one tool. It is not the answer by itself. 

We must focus on the issue of teacher quality at large. Both teachers who took the 

traditional route and those who went through alternative certification need resources and support to be successful in the classroom. 

We must ensure quality and accountability for both types of programs through 

data systems that measure effectiveness. Additionally, teachers need high-quality 

pre-service training, targeted professional development, mentoring, and the support 

of parents and community partners. 

All of these strategies are necessary to create a system where teachers are ready 

when they enter the classroom and have the encouragement to grow and improve. 

What problems should we be concerned with as we consider the hoped for benefits 

of alternative certification? 

This is one question i hope to pursue in this hearing. I want to thank the Chairman for calling today’s hearing, and look forward to the discussion. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentleman from Michigan. 
5 

Pursuant to Committee Rule 7(c), all subcommittee members will 

be permitted to submit written statements to be included in the 

permanent hearing record. And without objection, the hearing 

record will remain open for 14 days to allow statements, questions 

for the record and other extraneous material referenced during the 

hearing to be submitted in the official hearing record. 

It is now my pleasure to introduce our distinguished panel of witnesses. First, Ms. Jennifer Mulhern. Good? All right. Thank you. 

Is the vice president for New Teacher Effectiveness for TNTP 

where she oversees the Assessment of Classroom Effectiveness 

Screen, an effort to link teacher certification decisions to impact on 

student achievement. 

Next, Ms. Maura Banta is the director of Citizenship Initiatives 

in Education at IBM. She oversees the company’s community engagement efforts to improve educational opportunities. 

Ms. CYNTHIa Brown is vice president for Education Policy at the 

Center for American Progress where she directs the Education Policy Program. 

And Mr. Seth Andrew is the superintendent of Democracy Prep 

Public Schools, a network of six K through 12 charter schools in 

Harlem which he founded in 2005. He has also worked with special 

education students as a special education teacher and administrator for 11 years. 

Before I recognize each of you to provide your testimony, let me 

briefly explain our lighting system. You will have 5 minutes when 

you start. When the light turns yellow you will have one minute. 

And when the light turns red I would ask you to wrap up your remarks as best as you are able. And after everyone has testified 

members will each have 5 minutes to ask questions of you. 

I would now like to recognize Ms. Mulhern for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF JENNIFER MULHERN, VICE PRESIDENT FOR 

NEW TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS, TNTP 

Ms. MULHERN. Kildee and committee members. I am Jennifer 

Mulhern. I serve as vice president to TNTP, a national nonprofit 

that has been working for 15 years to increase access to great 

teaching for high-needs students. Our work is driven by the knowledge that teacher quality plays a greater role in students’ success 

than any other school-based factor. But the students who need 

great teachers most are often least likely to get them. 

To address this challenge, TNTP partners with school districts 

across the country to streamline the path to teaching for accomplished career changers and recent graduates. To date, TNTP has 

recruited or trained approximately 49,000 teachers in partnerships 

with more than 200 districts in 31 states. We estimate that these 

teachers have influenced the education of approximately eight million students. 

The majority of these teachers enter the profession through our 

Teaching Fellows program, which are among the most recognized 

and highly selective alternative certification programs in the country. In 2011 just 10% of all applicants to our programs were accepted, making them as difficult to get into as some Ivy League universities. 
6 

We start by aggressively recruiting top candidates and rigorously 

screening applicants to ensure they have the attitude, skills and 

expertise needed to be successful in the classroom. We then provide 

intensive pre service training to our fellows arrive on the first day 

of school having mastered specific foundational skills that enable 

them to be immediately effective as new teachers. Once the school 

year begins, teachers enroll in TNTP Academy to earn certification, 

attending biweekly evening seminars led by outstanding local 

teachers with a record of success raising student achievement. 

Just as teachers set high standards for their students, TNTP 

Academy sets high—sets a high bar for earning certification, a 

proven track record of success in the classroom. While teachers’ 

qualifications and training tell us something about the likelihood 

of teaching effectively, performance once in the classroom tells us 

much more. That is why we are among the first teacher preparation programs in the country to require participants to demonstrate 

effectiveness in order to be recommended for state certification. 

TNTP uses the Assessment of Classroom Effectiveness, ACE, to 

ensure that all fellows are on track to become great teachers. 

Through ACE we strive to create the fullest possible picture of each 

teacher’s performance using multiple measures such as principal 

evaluations, classroom observations, student surveys and where 

available student achievement data. I think the strongest evidence 

for the value of alternative certifications can be seen in the results 

our programs have achieved to date. 

In Louisiana for 4 straight years, a state-sponsored study of traditional and alternate route teacher preparation pathways has 

found that TNTP-trained teachers are consistently among the most 

effective in the state. We have received more top ratings for individual subject areas than any other institution. And new teachers 

trained through our program have outperformed even experienced 

teachers in raising student achievement in several core subjects. In 

math our results have been particularly consistent and noteworthy 

with TNTP Academy teachers achieving a positive impact on student learning that may even outweigh the negative effects associated with poverty. 

In New York City our 10-year partnership has profoundly transformed teacher quality in the nation’s largest urban school district. 

More than 9,000 teaching fellows work in city schools, mostly serving low-income students. Fellows now account for more than 20 

percent of New York’s math, science and special education teachers. And a 2007 Urban Institute study found that fellows are largely responsible for a remarkable narrowing of the gap in teacher 

qualifications between high and low-poverty schools. 

In addition, alternate route programs like ours are also instrumental to high-needs district in addressing critical staffing needs. 

We increase the diversity of the teacher workforce. For example, in 

our programs on average 37 percent of all 2010 teaching fellows 

are people of color, exceeding the national average. 

In addition, we are a particularly important source of new math, 

science and special education where many schools face chronic 

shortages. Our programs alone have supplied 9,000 math, science 

and special education teachers since 2005. 
7 

Most importantly, rigorous research shows that teachers certified 

through alternate routes are as effective as traditionally certified 

teachers. As you mentioned a 2009 nationwide randomized study 

commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education found that 

there were no statistically significant differences in performance. 

Ultimately what matters most is not how a teacher got into the 

classroom, but whether their students learn and grow. We should 

value teachers for their actual effectiveness in the classroom, not 

paper qualifications. The teachers we recruit and train are talented, dedicated, diverse and capable of delivering high quality instructions to the students who need great teachers most. 

Unlike traditional route programs, alternate route programs like 

ours are also able to consider actual classroom performance before 

awarding certification and the privilege of making a career in the 

classroom. Sustaining alternative pathways to teacher certification 

remains essential to ensuring that all students have access to the 

most important resource in education, an effective teacher deeply 

invested in their academic success. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

[The statement of Ms. Mulhern follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Jennifer Mulhern, Vice President, TNTP 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Kildee and committee members, I am Jennifer Mulhern, and I serve as Vice President of TNTP, a national nonprofit that has 

been working for fifteen years to increase access to great teaching for high-need students. 

Our work is driven by the knowledge that teacher quality plays a greater role in 

student success than any other school-based factor. But the students who need great 

teachers the most are the least likely to get them, especially in chronic shortage 

areas like math, science and special education. To address this challenge, TNTP 

partners with school districts across the country to streamline the path to teaching 

for accomplished career changers and recent graduates, building a pool of talented 

teachers specifically for high-need schools and subjects. 

To date, TNTP has recruited or trained approximately 49,000 teachers in partnership with more than 200 districts in 31 states. We estimate that these teachers have 

influenced the education of roughly 8 million students. 

The majority of these teachers entered the profession through our Teaching Fellows programs, which are among the most recognized and highly selective alternative certification programs in the country. In 2011, just 10% of all applicants to 

these programs were accepted, making them as difficult to get into as some Ivy 

League universities. 

Our Teaching Fellows benefit from rigorous training that is specifically designed 

for people without formal education backgrounds with a focus on mastering the fundamentals and a great deal of practice and coaching designed to lead to gap-closing 

performance. Our goal is to ensure that only Fellows with a proven ability to raise 

student achievement enter and remain in the classroom. 

Our focus on effectiveness begins before Fellows enter the classroom. We start by 

aggressively recruiting top candidates and rigorously screening applicants to ensure 

that they have the attitudes, skills, and expertise needed to be successful in the 

classroom. Each candidate is assessed against both skills and essential traits 

through a three-phase selection process that includes a day-long interview and demonstration lessons. 

We then provide intensive pre-service training so our Fellows arrive on the first 

day of school having mastered specific, foundational skills that enable them to be 

immediately effective as new teachers. Only candidates who demonstrate proficiency 

in these skills are granted the privilege of teaching students. 

Once the school year begins, teachers enroll in TNTP Academy, attending biweekly evening seminars led by outstanding local teachers with a record of success 

raising student achievement. 

At the heart of TNTP Academy is our unique Teaching for Results curriculum, 

which uses approaches proven to improve outcomes in high-need schools where students often lag several grade levels behind. Teaching for Results focuses on three 
8 

core areas of teacher proficiency: content, assessment and instruction. The curriculum is immediately relevant to teachers’ work in the classroom, so they can 

apply what they learn in the evening with their students the very next day. 

Just as teachers set high standards for their students, TNTP Academy sets a high 

bar for earning certification: a proven track record of success in the classroom. 

While teachers’ qualifications and training tell us something about their likelihood 

of teaching effectively, performance once they get in the classroom tells us much 

more. We have a responsibility to track teachers’ performance carefully, use what 

we learn to help them develop and make smart decisions early in their career. That 

is why we are among the first teacher preparation programs in the country to require participants to demonstrate effectiveness in the classroom in order to be recommended for state certification. 

TNTP uses the Assessment of Classroom Effectiveness (ACE) to ensure that all 

Fellows are on track to become great teachers. Through ACE, we strive to create 

the fullest possible picture of each teacher’s performance using multiple measures 

such as principal evaluations, classroom observations, student surveys, and—where 

available—student achievement data. 

ACE helps Fellows be more successful by giving them insights on their practice. 

ACE observations identify each teacher’s strengths and weaknesses so they can improve their teaching and take advantage of professional development opportunities 

that address their individual needs. Our staff also uses this information to provide 

targeted, personalized support through seminars and coaching sessions. 

At the end of our Fellows’ first year, we review evidence from ACE to assess Fellows’ performance; only those teachers who earn a passing score and who successfully complete all program and state regulatory requirements are recommended for 

certification. Fellows who fall short but demonstrate potential are granted an extension year to continue improving. Fellows who struggle and show limited prospect of 

improvement are removed from our program without earning certification. We set 

high expectations, and we enforce them. 

The strongest evidence for the value of alternative certification can be seen in the 

results our programs have achieved to date: 

TNTP’s ten-year partnership with the New York City Department of Education 

has profoundly transformed teacher quality in the nation’s largest urban district. 

More than 9,100 Teaching Fellows—11 percent of New York’s teaching force—work 

in the city’s schools, most serving low-income students. Fellows now account for 

more than 20% of New York’s math, science, and special education teachers, and 

a 2007 Urban Institute study found that Fellows are largely responsible for a ‘‘remarkable narrowing’’ of the gap in teacher qualifications between high- and low-poverty schools. 

In Louisiana, for four straight years, a state-sponsored study of traditional and 

alternative route teacher-preparation pathways has found that TNTP-trained teachers are consistently among the most effective in the state. TNTP Academy has received more top ratings for individual subject areas than any other institution in 

the state, and new teachers trained through our program have outperformed even 

experienced teachers in raising student achievement in several core subjects. In 

math, results have been particularly consistent and noteworthy, with TNTP Academy teachers achieving a positive impact on student learning that may even outweigh the negative effects associated with poverty. 

Alternate route programs like ours also provide instrumental support to high-need 

districts in addressing their most critical staffing needs and do so at scale. Twenty 

to thirty percent of all new teachers hired annually are trained by alternate route 

programs, bringing effective teachers into the classroom that would have otherwise 

been unable to join the profession. In fact, 54% of people who came to teaching as 

a career changer say they would not have become teachers if an alternate pathway 

to certification had not been available to them. 

Alternate route programs increase the diversity of the teacher workforce. For example, in our programs, on average 37% of all 2010 Teaching Fellows are people 

of color. This exceeds the national average; nationwide, approximately 12% of all 

teachers are Black or Hispanic, according to 2004-5 data from the U.S. Census Bureau. 

Finally, alternate route programs are also a particularly important source of new 

teacher talent in math, science, and special education, where many schools face 

chronic shortages. In Texas, for example, nearly 40% of individuals obtaining secondary mathematics certification and about 55% of individuals obtaining secondary 

science certification came through alternative certification programs in 2007. In contrast, about 20% of math teachers and 8% of science teachers entered the profession 

through traditional pathways. Our programs alone have supplied over 9,000 math, 

science and special education teachers since 2005. 
9 

Most importantly, rigorous research shows that teachers certified through alternate routes are as effective as traditionally certified teachers. 

• A 2009 nationwide, randomized study commissioned by the U.S. Department of 

Education found that, ‘‘There was no statistically significant difference in performance between students of alternative route to certification teachers and those of traditional route to certification teachers.’’ 

• A 2009 analysis that compared educational outcomes in states with ‘‘genuine’’ 

alternative certification against those that have it in name only found that, ‘‘Students attending schools in states with genuine alternative certification gained more 

on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) between 2003 and 

2007 than did students in the other states. The finding holds, even when one adjusts for changes in the ethnic composition, free-lunch eligibility, class size, and education expenditures for each state.’’ 

Ultimately, what matters most is not how a teacher got into the classroom, but 

whether their students learn and grow. We should value teachers for their actual 

effectiveness in the classroom, not their paper qualifications. The teachers we recruit and train are talented, dedicated, diverse, and capable of delivering high-quality instruction to the students who need great teachers most. Unlike traditional 

route programs, alternate route programs like ours are also able to consider actual 

classroom performance before awarding certification and the privilege of making a 

career in the classroom. Sustaining alternative pathways to teacher certification remains essential to ensuring that all students have access to the most important resource in education: an effective teacher deeply invested in their academic success. 

Thank you for your time and consideration. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you. And you ended right on time. 

Ms. BANTa is recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF MAURA O. BANTA, DIRECTOR OF CITIZENSHIP 

INITIATIVES IN EDUCATION, IBM CORP. 

Ms. BANTA. Good morning, Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member 

Kildee and committee members. I am Maura Banta from the IBM 

Company, and I thank you for inviting me to testify this morning 

about our model Transition to Teaching. 

I helped design the program and have managed it since its inception in 2006. My plan is to share our experiences with you. But 

more importantly, to share why I think many companies could use 

this model to help students develop science, math, engineering and 

technology skills. 

I want to thank the committee for taking the time to engage in 

thoughtful discussion about how we might attract more experienced professionals to move into the classroom to share their applied knowledge with students. At IBM we are most successful 

when we design initiatives that bring the skills of our people directly into the classroom, students, teachers and administrators to 

provide what we call smarter education. 

The program that I am going to share with you today was developed out of our desire to help with the STEM teacher pipeline. We 

knew that not enough students were graduating with STEM degrees, and our theory was that if we could equip IBMers to become 

full-time K through 12 STEM teachers they could help math and 

science come alive in the classroom. 

We believed that our employees would bring content expertise, 

real-world experience and the working understanding of problembased learning to launch the next generation of innovators. More 

than 120 IBMers have participated in the Transition to Teaching 

program. Each person is a math or science professional with at 

least one degree in a STEM field. 
10 

The applicants are mature, accomplished professionals with a variety of IBM experiences. While most come from our engineering 

discipline, they literally come from every part of the company. As 

part of the program they participate in a range of teacher certification programs. And that depends on their expertise, prior 

coursework and the specific licensure agreements in those states. 

Transition to Teaching is based on a number of proven methods 

and protocols. Teachers must have strong, in-depth backgrounds in 

the subject areas, so a bachelor’s degree or higher in math and 

science. And because we believe that IBMers need to learn a crafted skill as well as classroom management, we reimburse their tuition costs for education preparation. So, that could be classes. It 

could be a leave of absence to do student teaching. And we give 

each participant up to $15,000 to enable that. 

We know it is essential for individuals to have real K-12 classroom experience, to observe good teaching and to practice good 

teaching before they are responsible for a classroom. In our experience at least three challenges must be addressed in order to attract 

math and science professionals to education, and to prepare them 

to become exemplary teachers. 

We would encourage policy leaders to focus on first the development of standards for both the pedagogical and instructional skills. 

Second, assurances that teacher candidates are placed in supportive practice environments under qualified instructors. And 

third, that systems will be developed to provide new teachers with 

mentoring and peer support during at least the first 2 years of 

their practice. 

Many degree programs in education still do not meet this criteria. Often they do not give credit for career acquired competencies. They end up teaching—treating experienced professionals the same way they treat first-year college students. We 

clearly need to develop streamlined programs that provide second 

year teachers with effective and efficient means for entering the 

profession. 

IBM’s Transition to Teaching is one such effort. Thus far 31 

IBMers have completed the program, left the company as fully accredited teachers and have taken math and science teaching positions across the nation. The retention rate for the second career 

STEM teachers is very high. They tell us that they love being able 

to help math and science come alive in the classroom through real 

life application. 

But we know that a single program cannot compensate for national shortage of STEM teachers. If an additional 25 large companies established programs similar to Transition to Teaching, their 

combined efforts could provide a substantial number of new math 

and science teachers. 

In parallel with addressing the STEM teacher shortage, broader 

corporate participation in teacher transition programs would help 

raise the reputation of teaching as a desirable career. However, the 

private sector alone cannot solve this problem. School districts will 

have to change the way they recruit, place and supervise teachers 

to retain the best professionals. 

Feedback from participants and their supervisors is terrific. The 

net is the model is working. 
11 

In summary, to attract new talent to the teaching profession, we 

must take steps to open to qualified people at all stages of their 

working lives. This will require public-private partnerships that enable the recruitment of new members into the profession throughout their careers. 

We should give professionals in many industries the opportunity 

to develop transferrable skills as part of their preparation to become teachers. Only in this way will we facilitate faster movement 

into the profession for those with the training, dedication and expertise that America desperately needs in our classrooms. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. And I look 

forward to taking your questions. 

[The statement of Ms. Banta follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Maura Banta, Director of Citizenship 

Initiatives in Education, IBM Corp. 

Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member Kildee and committee members, I am Maura 

Banta from the IBM Corporation. Thank you for inviting me to testify about IBM’s 

Transition to Teaching Program. I helped to design the program and have managed 

it since it’s inception in 2006. My plan is to share with you our experiences and, 

more importantly, why we think Transition to Teaching is a model that many companies could use to help students develop science, math, engineering and technology 

skills. 

I want to thank the Committee for taking the time to engage in thoughtful discussion about how we might attract more experienced professionals to move into the 

classroom to share their applied knowledge and experiences with students. 

Over the last 20 years, IBM has been one of the leading corporate contributors 

of cash, technology and information technology services to non-profit organizations 

and educational institutions across the U.S. and around the world. We have learned 

that our most effective grants and partnerships are those that focus on IBM’s 

unique offerings—not only our software, hardware and technical services, but the 

talent of IBMers. We are most successful when we design initiatives to bring the 

skills and experience of our employees into the classroom so they can interact directly with students, teachers and administrators to provide what we call ‘‘smarter 

education.’’ 

I don’t need to review the growing body of research that shows the disconnect between twenty-first century labor market needs and employment opportunities and 

the shortage of high school graduates prepared for STEM careers. We all know that 

the U.S. is falling well behind other countries in the number and proportion of high 

school graduates who intend to pursue STEM careers. The relatively small number 

of students who eventually complete their post-secondary education in STEM fields 

further increases our competitive disadvantage in a global economy. 

Clearly, our continued economic growth will require a base of scientists, engineers, and the next generation of innovators. To have the pipeline of science and 

engineering talent that we will need, we must focus on STEM education beginning 

at the elementary school level. Then, we must ensure that students in middle and 

high school are exposed to educational experiences that will stoke their enthusiasm 

for math, science, and problem solving. We also must maintain high academic 

standards, and provide students with the rigorous training they will need for the 

successful pursuit of scientific and technical degrees in college. 

Beyond basic math and science, students also will need a range of workplace competencies—including the social skills to work in diverse, multi-disciplinary and global teams; the communication skills to work with customers, clients and co-workers; 

the ability to be inquisitive and analytical, and to recognize patterns when confronted with large amounts of information; and the adaptability to cope with ambiguity as leaders and innovators. 

This is a very tall order. And while there are many components to effective school 

improvement, one critical factor is staffing our schools with excellent math and 

science teachers—teachers who have the content expertise, real-world experience, 

and working understanding of problem-based learning and the pedagogic practice to 

launch the next generation of innovators. 

In 2006 IBM launched Transition to Teaching, our own initiative to address the 

K-12 STEM pipeline issues by facilitating retiring IBMers’ moving into science and 

math education as a way of helping to encourage young people to enter STEM ca-
12 

reers. This is just part of our portfolio of education initiatives including those aimed 

at bolstering early childhood education, strengthening middle school math skills, 

and designing an innovative grades 9-14 school model that confers both the high 

school diploma and a no-cost Associate’s degree in Technology. 

For the IBM Transition to Teaching program, we decided to leverage our greatest 

asset—IBM employees. Of course, many IBMers have backgrounds in math and 

science, whether they are currently working in software development, research, consulting or management. IBMers also are great volunteers. 

Our research shows that most IBMers volunteer in schools—whether teaching 

hands-on science classes during National Engineers Week, serving as one of our 

6,000 eMentors who provide online academic assistance to students, leading afterschool programs for middle school students, or discussing STEM opportunities on 

Career Days. IBMers also run EX.I.T.E. camps—which stands for Exploring Interests in Technology and Engineering—for middle school girls to encourage them to 

pursue math and science careers. These IBMers tell us repeatedly that they have 

a passion for education, for helping young people, and for giving back to their communities. 

At the same time that we are seeing a national decline in math, science and engineering education and competency, we also are witnessing another trend—the 

graying of the American labor force. With a large number of employees approaching 

the traditional age for retirement, but eager to continue contributing in their communities, IBM is reaching out to mature, experienced members of our workforce 

who are interested in a second career in teaching. 

Many long-term IBM employees are already thinking about teaching as a second 

career. Others have the exact background and skills needed to strengthen STEM 

education in our schools, and we want to introduce them to the idea of teaching. 

We want to encourage all IBMers who are ready for their next challenge to help 

address the national teacher shortage in math and science. 

More than 120 of our most experienced employees have participated in the Transition to Teaching program. Each person chosen for the program is a math or science 

professional with at least one degree in a STEM field. The applicants are mature 

accomplished professionals with a variety of IBM experiences. Most program participants have engineering backgrounds, but participants come from all parts of IBM’s 

business. These IBMers also have extensive experience working with children, volunteering in one of IBM’s many after-school programs, and with weekend and summer programs in their communities. As part of Transition to Teaching, they participate in a range of teacher certification programs—depending on their expertise, 

prior course work, and the specific licensing requirements and available graduate 

programs in their states. 

Transition to Teaching is based on a number of proven methods and protocols. 

Teachers must have strong, in-depth backgrounds in their subject areas. We focus 

on IBMers who have Bachelor’s degrees or higher in a math or science discipline. 

Because we believe that IBMers need to learn the craft and skill of teaching, classroom management, and instructional practice to be effective educators, we reimburse their tuition costs for education preparation. IBM provides stipends of up to 

$15,000 so those who are transitioning to teaching can take leaves of absence— 

while maintaining their benefits—to do student or practice teaching for up to one 

year. It is absolutely essential for individuals to have real-life K-12 classroom experience—to observe good teaching, and then practice good teaching, before taking responsibility for a class of children. 

In our experience, at least three challenges must be addressed in order to attract 

math and science professionals to education, and prepare them to become exemplary 

teachers. We would encourage policy leaders to focus on: 

1. The development of standards for the pedagogic and instructional skills and 

knowledge required and focus only on those education courses that are necessary 

for teacher certification. 

2. Assurances that teaching candidates are placed in supportive practice environments under qualified instructors. 

3. Systems that will provide new teachers with mentoring and peer support during their first two years to ensure that they are able to provide the highest quality 

education to their students. 

Many degree programs in education still do not meet these criteria. First, too 

many programs include coursework that is neither relevant nor helpful to new 

teachers, while not providing enough practical, hands-on experience. Degree programs do not always give credit for career-acquired competencies, and often treat 

experienced professionals the same way they treat first-year college students. We 

clearly need to develop streamlined programs that provide second-career teachers 

with efficient and effective means for entering the profession. 
13 

IBM’s Transition to Teaching is one such effort. Thus far, 31 IBMers have completed the program, left the company as fully certified teachers, and taken math and 

science teaching positions throughout the nation. The retention rate for these second-career STEM teachers is very high. They tell us that they love being able to 

help math and science come alive in the classroom through real-life applications. 

But we know that a single Transition to Teaching program cannot compensate for 

the national shortage of STEM teachers. 

If an additional 25 large companies established programs similar to Transition 

Teaching, their combined efforts could provide a substantial number of new math 

and science teachers. In parallel with addressing the STEM teacher shortage, broader corporate participation in teacher transition programs could help raise the reputation of teaching as a desirable career. However, the private sector alone cannot 

solve this problem. It will take improvements in teacher training and professional 

development programs in every school district. In addition, school districts will have 

to change the way they recruit, place and supervise teachers to retain the best professionals. 

In the meantime, both new teachers and their principals are commenting on the 

success of the IBM Transition to Teaching program: 

‘‘This is my dream! To become a math teacher.’’—Gary, who teaches 8th grade 

math in New York 

And from a principal who supervises a Transition to Teaching graduate: ‘‘Jennifer 

has had an outstanding beginning as a teacher. Her experience as a mother and 

a former manager has enabled [her] to nurture and advance middle school students 

at this critical crossroad. She is exuberant and enthusiastic about math, and makes 

it come alive for her students. Undoubtedly, her professionalism comes from her 

IBM background, and her enthusiasm is contagious. I am very grateful that IBM’s 

Transition to Teaching Program helped to add Jen to our team.’’ 

Transition to Teaching participants achieve their career aspirations while making 

significant contributions. IBM’s preparation, financing, and benefits support 

smoothes the transition. The program also benefits IBM by enhancing the company’s ability to recruit and retain top talent, and by reinforcing IBM’s reputation 

for outstanding corporate citizenship. And in the long term, IBM’s investment in 

Transition to Teaching strengthens our nation’s economic competitiveness by helping to ensure a full pipeline of emerging STEM professionals. 

IBM has shared the Transition to Teaching model with several companies that 

have replicated its principles. We also have worked with the State of California 

EnCorps STEM teacher transition and training program to share our best practices. 

Meanwhile, IBM continues to seek opportunities to influence other companies to embrace and deploy the Transition to Teaching model. 

To attract new talent to the teaching profession, we must take steps to open it 

to qualified persons at all stages of their working lives. This will require public-private partnerships that enable the recruitment of new members of the profession 

throughout their careers. We should give professionals in many industries the opportunity to develop transferrable skills as part of their preparation to become 

teachers. Only in this way will we facilitate faster movement into the profession for 

those with the training, dedication and expertise that America desperately needs in 

its classrooms. 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony about the IBM Transition to 

Teaching model. I look forward to fielding questions on this important topic. 

IBM and STEM education 

Improving public schools around the world continues to be one of IBM’s top social 

priorities. Through strategic initiatives, we’re helping solve education’s toughest 

problems with solutions that draw on advanced information technologies and the 

best minds IBM can apply. Because our efforts are focused on preparing the next 

generation of leaders and workers who will lead in the Innovation economy, a number of our projects focus on science, technology, engineering and math education. 

Transition to Teaching 

IBM’s Transition to Teaching program is helping address the critical shortage of 

math and science teachers by leveraging the brains and backgrounds of some of its 

most experienced employees. Through Transition to Teaching, IBM is enabling its 

employees to become fully accredited teachers in their local communities when they 

choose to leave the company, providing tuition reimbursements up to $15,000, stipends during student teaching, and online mentoring and other support services in 

conjunction with colleges, universities and school districts. Transition to Teaching 

has 104 participants with 28 teachers at 24 sites. 
14 

Teachers TryScience (www.teacherstryscience.org) 

Teachers TryScience, a collaboration between the New York Hall of Science, 

teachengineering.org, and IBM, is a site for teachers. Through Teachers TryScience, 

middle school teachers can improve their instruction of project-based learning, with 

a focus on engineering/design. Teachers are able to search for standards-based lessons that are linked to online professional development resources that will help 

them effectively implement lessons in the classroom. The site also provides social 

networking tools to enable educators to comment on and rate the lessons and professional development resources; submit their own teaching materials; and engage in 

focused discussions on relevant topics. 

TryScience (www.tryscience.org) 

TryScience, a collaboration of the New York Hall of Science, IBM, and the more 

than 600 member institutions of the Association of Science-Technology Centers, 

opens a world of science and discovery to students, who otherwise would have no 

access to the best museums around the globe. The site, which is available in nine 

languages, provides interactive exhibits, multimedia adventures, and live camera 

‘‘field trips.’’ TryScience also provides hands-on science projects that children, parents, and teachers can do at home or in school. A special view for teachers, compiled 

by the National Science Teachers Association Webwatchers’ Team, correlates many 

of the TryScience experiments with National Science Education Standards and 

SciLinks codes. 

MentorPlace (www.mentorplace.org) 

Through MentorPlace, IBM employees around the world are providing students 

with online academic assistance and career counseling, while letting them know 

that adults do care about their issues and concerns. The program provides a meaningful and convenient way for IBM employees to volunteer their time and talents 

in schools. IBM works with teachers to determine what activities they would like 

their students to work on with their mentors. Activities cover all core academic 

areas, including science, engineering and math. Traditional mentoring conversations 

also take place. More than 6,000 IBMers in more than 35 countries are currently 

participating in the program. 

On Demand Community 

On Demand Community is a first-of-its kind initiative to encourage and sustain 

corporate philanthropy through volunteerism by arming employees and retirees with 

a rich set of IBM technology tools targeted for schools and nonprofit organizations. 

It sets a new standard for corporate volunteerism by combining the strengths and 

skills of our people with the power of innovative technologies and solutions. Participating members are able to magnify the impact of their volunteerism through IBM 

Community Grants, a new global program that provides cash and equipment grant 

awards to the schools and not-for-profit organizations where they volunteer. 

On Demand Community offers IBMers with volunteer solutions that enable them 

to share their enthusiasm for math and science with students and introduce them 

to the range of exciting, profitable careers in engineering and IT. Presentations include: Encourage math and science education; Preparing for an IT career, Game Tomorrow, and Lego Robotics. 

IBM Technology Camps 

IBM’s Technology Camps around the world are designed to foster a new generation of scientists and engineers and encourage the thousands of young people who 

have participated in these programs to pursue careers in math, science and engineering. There number of jobs requiring math is exploding and is a tremendous opportunity for future careers. From video games and virtual worlds to electronic 

healthcare records and congestion traffic systems, math is making them go. From 

May—November, programs are held across the United States, Asia, Latin America, 

Europe and Africa for middle school age girls taking part in IBM’s EX.I.T.E. (EXploring Interests in Technology and Engineering) Camps; boys and girls involved in 

the company’s IGN.I.T.E. (IGNiting Interesting in Technology and Engineering) programs, and People with Disabilities participating in IBM’s S.T.E.M. (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) Entry Point workshops. 

Under the Microscope 

IBM has designed a dynamic social networking site for the Feminist Press called 

Under the Microscope (underthemicroscope.com) to encourage women and girls’ interest in science, math and technology. The site: collects stories and lessons from 

technical women, highlighting those experiences that were turning points for success and helpful advice for the difficult times; encourages teenagers to share their 
15 

stories, concerns and ideas with their peers and mentors; enables technical women 

to network with one another; feature blogs from experts and successful career 

women on topics such as the environment, alternative fuel resources, nutrition/ 

health, career development, events, medical discoveries; and publishes noteworthy 

and interesting news from around the world. 

Computer Science Curriculum (www.ibm.com/university) and (csta.acm.org) 

IBM and the Computer Science Teachers Association are providing free access to 

computer science resources for high school teachers. Resources include basic programming and web design principles that teachers can incorporate into computer 

science, math and science classes. 

The resources also include a professional development module focused on projectbased learning that is designed to help teachers improve their own instructional 

strategies. 

TryEngineering (www.tryscience.org) 

IBM is the technology partner of TryEngineering, a web site owned by IEEE. Designed to appeal to a wide range of audiences, TryEngineering.org, aims to inform 

teachers, school counselors, parents, and students about engineering and what engineers do through a web site that combines interactive activities with valuable information on careers in engineering. 

Pathways in Technology Early College High School (P–TECH) 

In September 2011, the New York City Department of Education, The City University of New York (CUNY), New York City College of Technology (‘‘City Tech’’) 

and the IBM Corporation opened Pathways in Technology Early College High School 

(P-TECH)—an innovative public school spanning grades 9-14. P-TECH’s mission is 

to provide students with a personalized pathway towards mastery of the skills and 

knowledge that they will need to make the transition from education to industry. 

P-TECH students will graduate with a no-cost associate degree, and will be positioned to secure entry-level positions in the highly competitive Information Technology field(s) and/or complete their studies in a four-year higher education institution. 

P-TECH opened in Brooklyn, New York with 104 students in the ninth grade, and 

will add a grade each year for six years. Students come from all boroughs of the 

city, but predominantly from the surrounding neighborhoods. They were not 

screened for admission, and no tests were required. However, students did have to 

demonstrate their interest in P-TECH by attending a school fair or a parent meeting. P-TECH is 67 percent male and 33 percent female, and many of the students 

will be the first in their families to earn a postsecondary degree. 

P-TECH was never planned as a single or charter school serving a small number 

of fortunate students. The broader goal always has been to apply the knowledge and 

experiences developed in this pilot school to serve as a model for use by other traditional high schools in New York City, nationally and globally. P-TECH is designed 

to be the first in a series of similar institutions, and an exemplar of how K-12 

schools, higher education institutions and public/private partnerships can substantially raise graduation rates, prepare greater numbers of students to fill good paying 

jobs in the IT or other fields, and enable more students to successfully pursue postsecondary education. 

Components of the P-TECH Program 

P-TECH provides students with a school-college-career continuum that helps them 

understand the direct links between what they are learning today and the worlds 

of college and work. The school’s rigorous program is designed to inspire students 

to focus and strive. While P-TECH is a comprehensive school with a number of significant elements, the following provides a brief overview of the core components of 

the program. 

Focus on Early College: Student learning is focused from grade nine on, through 

a six-year scope and sequence of high school and college coursework to ensure that 

students will earn an Associate in Applied Science degree in either Computer 

Science Technology or Electromechanical Engineering Technology, awarded by New 

York City College of Technology at CUNY, the school’s lead college partner. The curriculum is also aligned with the Common Core standards as the foundation for 

learning in college, particularly higher education institutions with strong math, 

science and engineering programs. As part of creating the early college culture, students immediately participate in other aspects of the college environment, engaging 

with college faculty and students. 

Focus on Careers: Students participate in an ongoing, sequenced Workplace 

Learning curriculum informed by current and future industry standards that in-
16 

cludes career goals, mentoring, guest speakers, workplace visits and internships. 

Minimum requirements for entry-level IT jobs, as provided by IBM and other industry partners, have been mapped to the curriculum and are serving as academic 

benchmarks and targets. A coalition of industry advisors is assuring that the program aligns with industry needs as the IT field evolves. To serve as an added incentive to students, IBM also is making graduates first in line for entry-level jobs— 

thereby strengthening the continuum from school to college and career. 

Focus on Personal Pathways: Each student moves through a personalized academic pathway that is closely monitored by his or her teachers and advisors, based 

on their individual needs and performance. While the school meets all state mandates for regents and courses, the pace at which the student moves through the high 

school and associate degree requirements is personalized, and the requirements sequences are intricately intertwined. While all students are expected to meet high 

school requirements and earn their associate degree in six years, some may proceed 

at an accelerated pace to earn their associate degree in a shorter time. 

Extended Learning Time: In addition to extending college level coursework into 

what has conventionally been the high school years, the school day and year also 

are being extended beyond the traditional schedule to include even more individual 

support for students. 

Specialized Staffing: In order to ensure that the model is adequately supported, 

both the college and industry partners have provided a full-time position to the 

school: an Early College Liaison and an Industry Liaison. These positions work directly with the leadership, staff and students. In this way the model is continually 

monitored to ensure effective practice. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you, Ms. Banta. 

Now, for Ms. Brown, who has lost her voice. I know there are 

many in this room that would wish her ailment on me. But it is 

not going to happen so I am sorry. So, Mr. Ayers is going to read 

your testimony. You have 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF CYNTHIA G. BROWN, VICE PRESIDENT FOR 

EDUCATION POLICY, CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS 

Mr. AYERS. Thank you, Chairman Hunter and Ranking Member 

Kildee for inviting my boss Cynthia Brown to testify on the value 

of alternative teacher certification. We at CAPAF believe that 

teacher effectiveness is critical to the success of education reform, 

which is why forward-thinking leaders are focused on reforming 

teacher certification. 

Adding urgency is a growing consensus that the supply of new 

teachers is not meeting the demand, particularly for hard-to-staff 

schools and subjects. Alternative certification is a promising strategy for addressing that need. Yet we need to institute policies that 

ensure the programs are high quality. 

To be sure, the same needs are true for traditional teacher preparation. The overwhelming majority of teachers continue to be 

trained by traditional programs which must also be reformed. Until 

our country becomes far more selective in recruiting, training and 

retaining top tier teachers, student achievement will continue to 

lag. 

We would like to make three key points in our testimony today. 

First, teacher policy must focus on effectiveness more than qualifications, which frees us from some of the unproductive debates 

about alternative certification. Two, high quality certification is a 

promising strategy for increasing the supply of effective teachers, 

and much can be done to promote higher quality. Three, federal 

and state policies should be put in place to expand the pipeline of 
17 

talented teachers through robust alternative and traditional preparation. 

To that end, we would recommend that Congress focus on three 

main policy levers. And we will elaborate more later. First, revise 

the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to focus on teacher 

effectiveness through the use of comprehensive teacher evaluations. 

Two, fund the development and expansion of high quality alternative certification programs, similar to the way Congress does 

with high quality charter schools. And three, increase accountability for all teacher training programs, alternative and traditional, so that outcomes improve and limited resources are spent 

wisely. 

We would like to expand briefly on each of these points. First of 

all, teacher policy must focus on effectiveness. We know that inputs 

like credentials, certification, licensure, master’s degrees do not 

necessarily predict solidly how well teachers will help students 

learn. So, it is time for policymakers to stop relying on these proxies and start insisting that states and schools and school districts 

use direct measures of effectiveness to assess teacher performance. 

We know that high quality alternative certification is a promising strategy. Alternative certification generally targets applicants 

who already have an undergraduate degree and then streamline 

their coursework. 

We know that some of these candidates are working in hard-tostaff schools or subjects, so as long as the programs are high quality this is a worthwhile strategy. Thus, policymakers should keep 

several things in mind as they seek to improve alternative certification programs. 

One is to minimize the burden placed on participants. States 

should ensure that alternative certification programs are affordable 

to a wide range of non-traditional candidates by requiring only that 

coursework and learning experiences that are essential. 

Two is to be selective in recruitment. Across the board the bar 

to entry is far too low actually. 

Three, frequently assess. Teacher candidates currently get infrequent feedback on their progress and need ongoing information to 

help them improve and to control for quality. 

Four is to provide mentoring and induction alternatively to certify teachers with condensed training could benefit even more from 

these comprehensive induction programs. 

Five is to strengthen accountability programs to be judged by the 

performance of their graduates. And states could use that data to 

improve, reward or close programs. 

Six is to allow multiple providers for preparation and certification. Nonprofits, charter schools and school districts should all be 

allowed to be providers, as long as they produce effective teachers. 

In terms of federal policy CAPAF recommends that Congress 

take the following steps to improve teacher training, both for traditional and alternative preparation programs. 

One is to revise ESEA to focus on teacher effectiveness more 

than on qualifications. Congress should require states to adopt 

comprehensive evaluation systems that inform professional development and personnel decisions. Title II of ESEA is ripe for an 
18 

overhaul. Title II funds could be used to tighten up teacher training based on the results of teacher evaluations. 

Second, we encourage Congress to fund the development and expansion of high quality alternative certification programs, similar 

to the way Congress does with charter schools. Congress should authorize a competitive state grant program for increasing high quality alternative certification programs conditioned on the implementation of policies that ensure quality. 

The program can take a tiered funding approach similar to the 

way that ESEA does. Programs showing the greatest evidence 

would receive larger amounts of funding. Those with less evidence, 

but promise, could receive less funding for startup. 

Three, we recommend that you increase accountability for all 

teacher training programs. Congress should require states to measure the effectiveness of their teachers, link the data to training programs and use that information to reward, improve or shut down 

preparation programs regardless of their route. We believe effectiveness data should include impact on student achievement, but 

also persistence rates for up to 5 years and feedback surveys from 

teachers and school districts. 

Our current teacher policies at all levels, federal, state and local 

are inadequate for the demands we are placing on schools. We 

must improve the supply and effectiveness of teachers if we are to 

raise standards, turn around low-performing schools, increase innovation and remain internationally competitive. 

We thank the subcommittee for taking on this important issue, 

and focusing attention on improving the teacher pipeline, particularly for our nation’s high-need schools. 

[The statement of Ms. Brown follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Cynthia G. Brown, Vice President for 

Education Policy, Center for American Progress Action Fund 

Thank you, Chairman Hunter and Ranking Member Kildee, for inviting me to testify on the value of alternative teacher certification programs. My name is Cynthia 

Brown, Vice President for Education Policy at the Center for American Progress Action Fund. 

Teacher effectiveness is critical to the success of education reform efforts, which 

is why forward-thinking leaders are focused on reforming teacher certification. Adding urgency to the effort is a growing consensus that the supply of new teachers 

isn’t meeting the demand, particularly for subject shortage areas and hard-to-staff 

schools. Alternative certification programs are a promising strategy for addressing 

that necessity. Yet, to realize the benefits of these programs, we need to institute 

policies that ensure the programs are high-quality, innovative, and effective. To be 

sure, the same needs are true for traditional teacher preparation. The overwhelming 

majority of teachers continue to be trained by traditional programs, which must also 

be reformed.1 Until our country becomes far more selective in recruiting, training, 

and retaining top-tier teachers, student achievement will continue to lag. 

I want to make three key points in my testimony today— 

1. Teacher policy must focus on teacher effectiveness more than on qualifications, 

which frees us from some of the unproductive debates around alternative certification. 

2. High-quality alternative certification is a promising strategy for increasing the 

supply of effective teachers, and much can be done to promote higher quality. 

3. Federal and state policies should be put in place to expand the pipeline of talented teachers through robust alternative certification and traditional preparation 

programs. 

To that end, I would recommend that Congress focus on three main policy levers 

to improve the supply of effective teachers— 

1. Revise the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to focus on teacher effectiveness through the use of comprehensive evaluation systems. 
19 

2. Fund the development and expansion of high-quality alternative certification 

programs, similar to the way Congress funds high-quality charter schools. 

3. Increase accountability for all teacher training programs—alternative and traditional—so that outcomes improve and limited resources are spent wisely. 

I would now like to expand on each of these points. 

Teacher policy must focus on teacher effectiveness more than on qualifications. 

For too long our nation has assumed that teachers who obtain state certification are 

fit to teach, and that most would eventually excel in the classroom after gaining 

some experience. But research proved us wrong. Inputs and credentials like certification, licensure, master’s degrees, experience, or teacher preparation coursework 

are not solid predictors of how well teachers will help students learn.2 Some inputs 

like subject matter knowledge do matter, especially in the upper grades.3 But it is 

time for policymakers to stop relying wholly on proxies and to start insisting that 

states and school districts use outputs—direct measures of effectiveness—to assess 

teacher performance and improve teaching and learning. 

Pioneering states have begun to do this. In 2011, 26 states used student achievement measures as part of their evaluation systems.4 When combined with other evidence of effective teaching, states are beginning to develop fair, comprehensive, and 

reliable systems of evaluation. 

This is the right move to make, and federal policy should follow suit. It is fine 

to set a minimum bar to enter the classroom, such as requiring a college degree, 

subject matter competency, and some form of training.5 But we should not pretend 

that this is a ceiling. It is a floor. If we focus on teacher effectiveness, that will free 

us from some of the interminable debates on the best route to preparing and certifying teachers. What matters most is how well teachers do in the classroom, not 

how they arrived there. 

High-quality alternative certification is a promising strategy for increasing the 

supply of effective teachers for high-need schools, subjects, and areas. The overwhelming majority of teacher graduates (79 percent in 2010) 6 take a traditional 

path into teaching. That means they graduate from college, take a specified set of 

education courses, complete a practice teaching component, and pass an exam in 

order to obtain a certificate. Some states require them to earn an advanced certificate once they have taught for several years. 

Alternative certification, by contrast, generally targets applicants who already 

have an undergraduate degree but need education coursework to meet state certification requirements. So alternative certification programs streamline or condense 

those requirements. For example, they may require shorter but more intensive practice teaching assignments or more targeted, practical coursework. And usually 

teachers in alternative certification programs assume duties in a classroom while 

they complete their program. However, they like all other teachers, earn certification. They just do it in a different way.7

The first alternative certification programs began in the early 1980s, the most notable of which was the New Jersey Provisional Teacher Program begun in 1985.8

In 2010 (the most recent year with available data), 45 states plus DC approved 

some type of alternate route, and 21 percent of teacher graduates came from an alternative certification program.9 Alternate routes have often been used to recruit 

candidates that would otherwise not enter teaching—candidates who are older and/ 

or have knowledge of hard-to-staff subjects like math or science—and to recruit 

teachers for working in high-need schools and areas. Some programs, like the New 

York City Teaching Fellows, were created to replace teachers who had emergency 

credentials.10

Research shows that graduates of alternative certification programs, on average, 

perform at the same level as traditionally prepared teachers who work in similar 

schools.11 There are some low-performing alternate routes for sure, and there are 

some that outshine traditional programs. But on average, teachers perform about 

the same. So, it is important to remember that the goal of alternate routes is to 

increase the supply of teachers by drawing from a different, sometimes larger pool 

of candidates than the traditional brick-and-mortar university. And evidence shows 

that many alternatively certified teachers do work in high-need schools or subjects.12 Thus, as long as the programs are high-quality, they are legitimate and 

worthwhile approaches to improving teacher supply. 

Several policies could be put in place to expand the pipeline of talented teachers 

through robust alternative certification programs. Policymakers at the federal and 

state level should keep several things in mind as they take steps to improve the 

effectiveness of alternative certification programs— 

1. Minimize the burden placed on program participants. States should ensure that 

alternative certification programs are affordable to a wide range of nontraditional 

candidates by strategically requiring only coursework and learning experiences that 
20 

are essential. States can do this by defining what competencies teachers must obtain, rather than credit hours they must earn. The best programs select candidates 

who have already mastered their content area and only need training in teaching 

methods, and they minimize burden to entry in order to attract the largest possible 

pool.13

2. Ensure alternative certification programs are high-quality. Given the unevenness in quality and content of alternative certification programs,14 several things 

could be done to strengthen their quality and rigor— 

Be selective in recruitment. Across the board, the bar to entry is far too low. The 

best programs require a high minimum GPA and strong subject matter knowledge 

to participate. Relatedly, states should set higher cut scores for passing licensure 

or certification exams. Current pass rates on state certification exams are almost 

100 percent and tell us little about how teachers will perform in the classroom.15

Frequently assess. Teacher candidates currently get infrequent feedback on their 

progress. Alternative certification could be strengthened by ensuring trainees get 

frequent, diagnostic, performance-based feedback throughout their training and into 

their first years of teaching. 25 states and 180 preparation programs have joined 

the Teacher Performance Assessment (TPA) Consortium, which has created a subject-specific, performance-based assessment for pre-service teacher candidates, centered on student learning.16 A reliable, valid system of performance assessments 

based on common standards would provide consistency in measuring teacher effectiveness, track teacher progress, flag areas of need, and create a continuum of performance throughout a teacher’s career.17 It would also provide rich information for 

improving preparation programs and holding them more accountable. 

Provide mentoring and induction. Many new teachers are left to sink or swim 

once in the classroom. Alternatively certified teachers with shortened or condensed 

training could benefit even more from high-quality induction programs that have 

been shown to improve retention, teaching practice, and student achievement.18 A 

2007 study by the New Teacher Center also found that every $1.00 invested in induction yields $1.66 in returns.19

Strengthen accountability. Programs should be judged by the performance of their 

graduates, not on their path to get teachers into schools. States could enhance alternative route programs substantially by creating and using robust data systems that 

measure teacher effectiveness, as well as retention rates, where teachers are placed, 

and feedback from districts and schools on how well the candidates perform.20

States could then use that data to inform the improvement, reward, or closure of 

alternative certification programs. Feedback data will help ensure that alternative 

certification programs are meeting the needs of the schools that hire them. 

3. Invest in innovation and growth. Alternative certification programs are sometimes stifled by political opposition, limited resources, or fallout from poor results. 

To encourage innovation and growth, policymakers can take several steps— 

Strengthen accountability. As I just mentioned, policymakers would be wise to 

focus limited resources on programs that work and close those programs that do not. 

Allow multiple providers of preparation and certification. Restricting preparation 

and certification to universities and states artificially constricts the teacher pipeline. 

Nonprofits, charter schools, and school districts can and should be providers as long 

as they produce effective candidates. 

Invest in high-quality programs. States and the federal government should identify and expand effective programs. At the same time, they should invest in promising programs and require them to demonstrate results to receive continued funding. 

As Members of Congress I know you are, of course, interested in what the federal 

government specifically can do to promote teacher effectiveness. CAPAF recommends that Congress take the following steps to improve teacher training overall, 

both for traditional and alternative preparation programs— 

1. Revise the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) to focus on teacher effectiveness, more than on teacher qualifications. We cannot know how well our 

preparation programs train teachers if we do not know how teachers perform in the 

classroom. Thus, Congress should require states to adopt comprehensive evaluation 

systems as a condition of receiving Title II funds. Title II is ripe for an overhaul. 

The current program, which funds teacher and principal training, is a grab bag of 

allowable uses that have not proven effective. Most states and districts spend this 

money on professional development and class-size reduction that have not shown 

substantial results.21

Evaluation systems should measure and improve the impact teachers make on 

student learning. Performance should be measured in multiple, objective, and valid 

ways that at least include measures of student achievement, classroom observations, 

and student feedback. Title II funds could then be used to tighten up professional 
21 

development based on the results of evaluations. Groundbreaking work by the Gates 

Foundation’s Measures of Effective Teaching Project has involved over 3,000 teachers in seven large districts.22 The project has shown how observations and feedback 

can accurately identify quality teaching and can be used alongside measures of student learning. We as a nation must shift the conversation toward measuring, rewarding, and improving teacher effectiveness, more than their qualifications, both 

during and after teacher training. 

2. Fund the development and expansion of high-quality alternative certification 

programs, similar to the way Congress funds high-quality charter schools. There is 

a shortage of high-quality teacher candidates for our country’s high-need schools. 

Thus, Congress should authorize competitive state grants for increasing high-quality 

alternative certification programs, conditioned on the implementation of policies 

that ensure quality. Congress does something similar now with the Replication and 

Expansion grants in the Charter School Program. The Replication and Expansion 

grants have funded 250 new high-quality charter schools in 17 states in just two 

years.23 Congress could provide similar competitive grants to fund high-quality alternative certification programs. The program could take a tiered-funding approach 

similar to the Investing in Innovation Fund. That is, programs showing the greatest 

evidence would receive larger amounts of funding to support expansion, while those 

with less evidence but showing promise would receive less funding for start-up purposes. Low-performing programs would lose funding. Using a pay-for-success approach, some programs might receive small initial funding that would only continue 

or grow as programs demonstrate success. This would help ensure that limited federal resources are spent wisely. 

3. Increase accountability for all teacher training programs—alternative and traditional. Current accountability for teacher training is woefully inadequate. Rarely 

do programs measure the impact of their graduates on student learning (only 28 

states do so), where graduates teach, or how long they remain. The most common 

criteria programs use are inputs with little or no correlation to outcomes—like accreditation status, pass rates on notoriously weak certification exams, or program 

completion rates. Some programs even use criteria like student-faculty ratios, minimum hours devoted to student teaching, or adherence to state reporting requirements.24 These are hardly outcomes-based indicators that measure the effectiveness 

of preparation programs. 

Thus, Congress should require states to measure the effectiveness of teachers, 

link the data to training programs, and use the information to reward, improve, or 

shut down teacher preparation programs, regardless of their route. We believe effectiveness data should include impact on student achievement, persistence rates for 

up to 5 years, and feedback surveys from teachers and their employers (i.e., school 

districts). This requires robust data systems that include information from state 

education, labor department (or state insurance department), university, and school 

district data systems.25 But measuring and reporting data is only one step. Acting 

on that data is the next step. States should annually identify and reward high-performing programs, provide guidance for improving low-performing programs, and 

eventually close chronically underperforming programs. In order to be fair and rigorous, such accountability should apply to all training programs in the state, including traditional and alternative programs. 

There is leverage to accomplish this. Currently the Higher Education Act (HEA) 

requires states to assess the performance of teacher preparation programs and to 

identify and assist low-performing programs. But unfortunately, only 38 states identified low-performing programs in 2010, the most recent year with available data. 

Out of over 2,000 programs nationwide, a mere 38 (or less than 2 percent) were 

flagged as low-performing or at-risk of being low-performing. Fifteen were located 

in Texas alone.26 The upcoming reauthorization of both ESEA and HEA will be ripe 

opportunities to strengthen accountability for teacher training. 

Our current teacher policies at all levels—federal, state, and local—are inadequate for the demands we are placing on schools. We must improve the supply and 

effectiveness of teachers if we are to raise standards, turn around low-performing 

schools, increase innovation, and remain internationally competitive. High-quality 

alternative certification programs are a promising strategy to help improve the supply of teachers. With smart reforms and targeted investment they can be expanded 

to increase the pool of talented teachers. But they must also be accompanied by 

overall reforms to traditional preparation and state and district policies that impact 

hiring and placement, evaluation, career advancement, professional development, 

and personnel decisions. 

I thank the Subcommittee for taking on this important issue and focusing attention on improving the teacher pipeline, particularly for our nation’s high-need 

schools and areas. 
22 

ENDNOTES

1 U.S. Department of Education, Office of Postsecondary Education, ‘‘Preparing and 

Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers: The Secretary’s Eighth Report on Teacher Quality; Based 

on Data Provided for 2008, 2009 and 2010,’’ (Washington, DC: Author, 2011), available at 

http://www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/teachprep/2011-title2report.pdf, accessed July 18, 

2012. 2For a review of this research see National Council on Teacher Quality, ‘‘Increasing the Odds: 

How Good Policies Can Yield Better Teachers,’’ (Washington, DC: Author, 2004). For more recent evidence, see Raegen Miller and Marguerite Roza, ‘‘The Sheepskin Effect and Student 

Achievement,’’ (Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2012), available at http:// 

www.americanprogress.org/issues/2012/07/sheepskin—effect.html, accessed on July 19, 2012. 

See also Charles Clotfelter, Helen Ladd, and Jacob Vigdor, ‘‘Teacher Credentials and Student 

Achievement in High School: A Cross-subject Analysis with Fixed Effects,’’ (Washington, DC: 

Urban Institute, 2007); Dan Goldhaber, ‘‘Everyone’s Doing It, But What Does Teacher Testing 

Tell Us About Teacher Effectiveness?’’ (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 2006); Tom Kane and 

Douglas Staiger, ‘‘Using Imperfect Information to Identify Effective Teachers.’’ (Unpublished 

Paper. Los Angeles: School of Public Affairs, University of California—Los Angeles, 2005); Eric 

Hanushek, John Kain, and Steven Rivkin, ‘‘Teachers, Schools, and Academic Achievement. 

Econometrica 73 (2): 2005. 3 B. Chaney, ‘‘Student Outcomes and the Professional Preparation of 8th Grade Teachers’’ 

NSF/NELS (Rockville, 1995); Brian Rowan, Fang-Shen Chiang, and Robert J. Miller, ‘‘Using Research on Employees’ Performance to Study the Effects of Teachers on Students’ Achievement,’’ 

Sociology of Education 70 (4) (1997): 256-284; Dan D. Goldhaber and Dominic J. Brewer, ‘‘Why 

Don’t Schools and Teachers Seem to Matter? Assessing the Impact of Unobservable on Educational Productivity,’’ Journal of Human Resources 32 (1996): 503-523; Dan D. Goldhaber and 

Dominic J. Brewer, ‘‘Does Teacher Certification Matter? High School Certification Status and 

Student Achievement,’’ Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22 (2) (2000): 129-145; Harold Wenglinsky,’’How Teaching Matters: Bringing the Classroom Back Into Discussions of 

Teacher Quality,’’ Educational Testing Service (Princeton, NJ: 2000). 4 National Council on Teacher Quality, 2011 State Teacher Policy Yearbook (Washington, DC: 

Author, 2011), available at http://www.nctq.org/stpy11/reports/stpy11—national—report.pdf, 

accessed on July 19, 2012. 5See Ulrich Boser and Robin Chait, ‘‘Advancing Teacher and Principal Effectiveness: Four 

Recommendations for Reforming the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,’’ (Washington, 

DC: Center for American Progress, 2011), available at http://www.nctq.org/stpy11/reports/ 

stpy11—national—report.pdf, accessed July 19, 2012. 6 U.S. Department of Education, ‘‘Preparing and Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers.’’ 

7Daniel C. Humphrey and Marjorie E. Wechsler, ‘‘Insights into Alternative Certification: Initial Findings from a National Study,’’ (Arlington, VA: SRI International, 2005), available at 

http://www.teach-now.org/RESEARCH%20ABOUT%20ALTERNATE%20ROUTES.pdf, 

accessed July 18, 2012. 8 Emily Feistritzer and Charlene K. Haar, ‘‘Research on Alternate Routes Education Research’’ 

(Washington, DC: National Center for Alternative Certification, 2010), available at http:// 

www.teach-now.org/RESEARCH%20ABOUT%20ALTERNATE%20ROUTES.pdf, accessed July 

18, 2012. 9Only North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oregon, and Wyoming reported approving no alternative preparation programs in 2010. See U.S. Department of Education, ‘‘Preparing and 

Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers.’’ 10Donald Boyd, Pamela Grossman, Hamilton Lankford, Susanna Loeb, and James Wyckoff, 

‘‘How Changes in Entry Requirements Alter the Teacher Workforce and Affect Student Achievement’’ (Teacher Policy Research, November 2005), available at http:// 

www.teacherpolicyresearch.org/portals/1/pdfs/how—changes—in—entry—requirements—alter— 

the—teacher—workforce.pdf, accessed on July 18, 2012. 11David Gatlin, ‘‘Thinking Outside the University: Innovation in Alternative Certification,’’ 

(Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2008); Donald Boyd, et. al, ‘‘How Changes in 

Entry Requirements Alter the Teacher Workforce and Affect Student Achievement’’; Tim Sass, 

‘‘Certification Requirements and Teacher Quality: A Comparison of Alternative Routes to Teaching,’’ December 12, 2011, available at http://www.learningfront.com/Media/Alternative—Certification—and—Teacher—Quality—11.pdf, accessed on July 18, 2012; Marilyn Cochran-Smith 

and Kenneth M. Zeichner, eds., Studying Teacher Education: The Report of the AERA Panel 

on Research and Teacher Education (Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, 2005). 12 Emily Feistritzer and Charlene K. Haar, ‘‘Research on Alternate Routes Education Research.’’ 13See Robin Chait and Michele McLaughlin, ‘‘Realizing the Promise: How State Policy Can 

Support Alternative Certification Programs,’’ (Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 

2009). 14Susan Moore Johnson, Sarah E. Birkeland, and Heather G. Peske, ‘‘A Difficult Balance: Incentives and Quality Control in Alternative Certification Programs’’ (Cambridge, MA: Harvard 

Project on the Next Generation of Teachers, 2005), available at http://www.gse.harvard.edu/ 

?ngt/Balance.pdf, accessed on July 18, 2012; Daniel Humphrey and Marjorie Wechsler, ‘‘Insights into Alternative Certification.’’ 15 96 percent of teacher candidates graduating from traditional preparation programs passed 

their certification or licensure exam in the 2008-09 school year, the most recent year of available 

data. 97 percent of graduates from alternative preparation programs passed their exams in 

2008-09. See U.S. Department of Education, ‘‘Preparing and Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers.’’ 
23 

16Teacher Performance Assessment Consortium, available at http://aacte.org/Programs/ 

Teacher-Performance-Assessment-Consortium-TPAC/teacher-performance-assessment-consortium.html, accessed on July 20, 2012. 17See Linda Darling-Hammond, ‘‘Evaluating Teacher Effectiveness: How Teacher Performance 

Assessments Can Measure and Improve Teaching,’’ (Washington, DC: Center for American 

Progress, 2010). 18See New Teacher Center, ‘‘New Teacher Support Pays Off: A Return on Investment for Educators and Kids,’’ (Santa Cruz, CA: Author, 2009), available at http:// 

www.newteachercenter.org/sites/default/files/ntc/main/resources/BRF— 

NewTeacherSupportPaysOff-AReturnonInvestment.pdf, accessed on July 19, 2012. 19 Anthony Villar and Michael Strong, ‘‘Is Mentoring Worth the Money? A Benefit-Cost Analysis and Five-Year Rate of Return of a Comprehensive Mentoring Program for Beginning Teachers,’’ in ERS Spectrum, Vol. 25, No. 3, November 2007. 20See Ed Crowe, ‘‘Measuring What Matters: A Stronger Accountability Model for Teacher 

Education,’’ (Washington, DC: Center for American Progress, 2010), available at http:// 

www.americanprogress.org/issues/2010/07/teacher—accountability.html, accessed on July 19, 

2012. 21 Robin Chait and Raegen Miller, ‘‘Ineffective Uses of Title II ESEA Funds,’’ (Washington, 

DC: Center for American Progress, 2010), available at http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/ 

2009/08/pdf/titleII—brief.pdf, accessed July 20, 2012. 22Measures of Effective Teaching Project, available at http://www.metproject.org/, accessed 

July 19, 2012. 23 Charter Schools Program Grants for Replication and Expansion of High-quality Charter 

Schools, available at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/charter-rehqcs/index.html, accessed July 

20, 2012. 24 U.S. Department of Education, ‘‘Preparing and Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers.’’ 25 Ed Crowe, ‘‘Measuring What Matters.’’ 26 U.S. Department of Education, ‘‘Preparing and Credentialing the Nation’s Teachers.’’ 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you, Ms. Brown through Mr. Ayers. 

And Mr. Andrew, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF SETH ANDREW, FOUNDER AND 

SUPERINTENDENT, DEMOCRACY PREP PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

Mr. ANDREW. Thank you, Chairman Hunter, Ranking Member 

Kildee and members of the committee. Thank you for inviting us 

to speak here today about what we believe is one of the most significant challenges facing our democracy, recruiting a new generation of excellent teachers and leaders. 

My name is Seth Andrew and I am the founder and superintendent of Democracy Prep Public Schools, a district of public 

charter schools in Harlem, New York. We educate 2,000 students 

from grades K through 12 for success in the college of their choice 

and a life of active citizenship. 

Our scholars consistently outperform even wealthy Westchester 

County on high stakes regions exams. And just last week our first 

turnaround school, Harlem Prep was recognized for having the single highest literacy growth of any school in the entire state of New 

York. 

I have a few of our amazingly hardworking scholars here. I am 

grateful to Jamie and Michael and Omar for joining me and giving 

me support. And they have helped to make Democracy Prep the 

highest performing management organization in New York City. 

When I was their age I served as a congressional page. I was actually here and Congressman Kildee was on my page board in fact. 

And at the time I thought of ways that you could find bipartisan 

solutions to our profound educational problems. And today I think 

you have before this committee exactly that. 

3989 and 3990 represent some of the best leverage opportunities 

to change federal education policy to increase the high quality of 

teachers by removing unproductive barriers to entry. We must level 

the playing field so that all excellent potential teachers, whether 
24 

traditionally certified, alternatively certified or wholly uncertified 

are able to teach the scholars who need the most, scholars like 

mine. 

Some believe that our scholars are in fact the hardest to educate 

because our schools are all Title I schools. We are 100 percent African American and Latino. Twenty-two percent of our students 

enter with special needs and IEPs. Twelve percent of our students 

enter with English language learner status. 

However working at Democracy Prep now 100 percent of our 

scholars are becoming prepared for college so they can change the 

world; and fundamentally we believe that the success of great 

schools like Democracy Prep is mostly a function of which adults 

are in our buildings, not which kids are in our buildings. 

We hope to see the success we have had replicated, and we have 

opened our doors to researchers from universities, think tanks, 

both conservative and liberal. And they found the same thing. The 

Democracy Prep model is affordable, replicable and sustainable 

over time. 

So, what is our secret? There is no secret. Our five core principles can be adopted by every school in America. We have more 

time, a longer school day, week and year. We have increased rigor, 

college prep for all scholars. We have a strong school culture; we 

are safe and supportive and joyous and disciplined. We use data in 

a robust way by offering frequent quantitative feedback to our 

teachers, scholars and parents. 

But most of all, the single most important thing of our success 

is our talent. In fact, the talent is what makes Democracy Prep 

great more than anything else. We lose high quality potential 

teachers from the applicant pool when we have provisions in place 

like HQT. And in fact, the people that were hurting are not those 

potential applicants, but the scholars most in need of excellent 

teachers. 

So, instead of trying to reform existing certification and HQT 

regulations, we need policymakers to relinquish this power to the 

leaders closest to the students: principals; principals who are in the 

best position to evaluate teacher candidates for their students. 

Principals in turn should be held to an extremely high standard of 

accountability for student outcomes. 

Last year across the Democracy Prep district only 18 percent of 

our teachers were traditionally certified. Fifty-two percent were 

certified through a non-traditional route such as Teach for America, TNTP or the Match Teacher Residency in Massachusetts. And 

30 percent of our teachers were wholly uncertified. 

Despite this, each of our schools continued to post dramatic academic gains across all grade levels and all subjects. Quite clearly 

our students did not suffer on account of their teachers lacking traditional HQT credentials that currently guide federal policy. In 

fact, we believe that an HQT and traditional certification is inversely related with teacher quality on the whole. 

The HQT standard practice places illogical restrictions on the talent pool. Under current policy, even if we could successfully use the 

House process to house all of the members of this committee, it is 

unlikely that I could hire any of you to teach physics or chemistry 
25 

at Democracy Prep because we have reached the 30 percent threshold allowed under New York State for uncertified teachers. 

And even in my own case, despite the successes I have had as 

a special education teacher and special education administrator 

over more than a decade, I am still ineligible to teach in most 

schools in America because of certification rules in HQT. 

This issue is not about traditional school districts versus public 

schools. In fact, ensuring that all principals have the laws in place 

so they can recruit the best and brightest teachers regardless of 

their route to certification would benefit all public schools as it already does for private schools. We need to encourage potential 

teachers by lowering the barriers to entry and making the process 

simpler for prospective educators and for career-switching teachers 

to be even considered for a teaching job. 

Please understand, this does not mean that everyone can, should 

or be able to teach. Whether they are hired should be based on how 

suited their skills, knowledge and disposition is for any given 

school or role. High-performing schools like mine, if we were empowered to create our own residency based certification programs, 

I believe that could dramatically accelerate both the achievement 

gap closing work we do at Democracy Prep and attract stronger 

candidates to education and the pool as a whole. 

So, in summary, we believe that 3989 and 3990 would improve 

the well-intentioned but ill-conceived HQT standards. And we believe that policies that prioritize the credentials of adults over the 

needs of students are fundamentally backwards. 

Instead, we believe we need to roll out the welcome mat to all 

potentially excellent teachers in America, including the members of 

this esteemed committee if you would like to apply, and encourage 

you to enter the profession of teaching, while holding leaders accountable for the value-added outcomes of our scholars instead of 

merely the graduate school credits and inputs currently required 

under HQT. 

Thank you so much for having me here today and I welcome any 

questions. 

[The statement of Mr. Andrew follows:] 
26 
27 
28 
29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 
37 
38 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Andrew. 

Thank you, panel, for being here with us. I have got a very simple question. You all seem to agree that there are other routes to 

becoming a teacher besides the one set forth in federal policy. So, 

what is the problem? I am actually curious. What happened in the 

first place to make—to make it so you could not do what you are 

talking about doing? 

Why is there a 30 percent threshold in New York? I am just curious, Mr. Andrew. Why is there a 30 percent threshold in New 

York? 
39 

Mr. ANDREW. So, I am not a legislator and I cannot tell you the 

legislative intent—— 

Chairman HUNTER. That is why we expect honesty out of you. 

Mr. ANDREW. But I can tell you that the New York State charter 

law puts the cap at 30 percent of uncertified teachers, and actually 

only five uncertified teachers per school. And so we maximize that 

limit every single year to find the best and the brightest. 

An amazing statistic this year is that Democracy Prep Public 

Schools had 10,000 people apply for teaching roles at the organization for only 200 teaching spots. So, we do not have a problem of 

quantity in and of itself. 

We have a problem of quality. And we need to find more quality 

people coming into the profession. And we need to be agnostic 

about how they got there. We need to be looking for the best and 

then recruiting and selecting the best and then retain them all the 

time. 

Chairman HUNTER. Let me interrupt you. Who do you think is 

most qualified to make that quality decision? 

Mr. ANDREW. I believe a principal is. A principal is the person 

in a building who knows the classroom, knows the students and 

knows the families. And that is the person who is most accountable 

for the value-added results of their scholars. 

Chairman HUNTER. Let me ask you this. I think it was you, Ms. 

Mulhern, that mentioned the same statistic that I mentioned, that 

there was no statistical difference at all between an alternative 

route credential teacher and a standard route credential teacher. 

Why are things how they are? Does that make sense? 

Ms. MULHERN. I think in general I think what you heard is a 

sort of consensus to shift to focus on effectiveness. So, that is what 

we see time and again is that qualifications do not tell you very 

much. And it is very hard to see who is going to be effective in the 

classroom until people start teaching. 

That does not mean that how you recruit teachers and select 

teachers does not matter. It does. It is just a limited ability to sort 

of say who is going to have that positive impact on student achievement. And so what we feel very strongly is sort of given that finding we should be focused very much on supporting teachers in the 

classroom, training them rigorously, but then also very much holding ourselves accountable. 

So, as a preparation program we feel very strongly about the 

quality of teacher we produce and holding ourselves accountable for 

that, the impact that they have. So, I think that is sort of an important shift that needs to happen overall is the shift from focused 

on sort of paper qualification to the actual outcome. 

Chairman HUNTER. Let me ask you this. If you will have some 

argue that you are not qualified to teach until you are fully certified to teach. So, how do you counter the argument? And can you 

point to specific results from your program which contradict the 

claim that you have to be a fully certified teacher in order to be 

able to be effective with kids in the classroom? 

Ms. MULHERN. Sure. So, as I shared in my testimony, we have 

been recruiting and training teachers in Louisiana and New York 

as some of our longest standing programs. 
40 

And what we have seen in Louisiana is that our teachers are exceeding the results that are gotten by a whole range of preparation 

programs. And sort of the same in New York that the introduction 

of our Teaching Fellows program there has really been instrumental to diminishing the gap in both performance and just in general background of access to high quality teachers there. 

I think what we really focus on is first having a very rigorous 

screen up front. So, really looking up the attitudes, the skills, the 

expertise needed to be successful. We think about that in a couple 

of ways. 

First, it is what does it take to be a successful professional in 

general, sort of focus on achievement, real sort of commitment to 

learning by all kids? We also really push that folks have a real content expert so they really know and understand math if they are 

going to teach math for example. 

And then as we begin our pre-service training program, we do a 

couple of things. We focus very specifically on a set of skills that 

we think are essential to launching very successfully in the classroom. So, we really focus with our teachers on how they manage 

time, how they engage students. In particular are core skills that 

we think new teachers need. 

And then what I think makes our program unique is that before 

the end of pre service training we assess our teachers for their 

mastery of those skills. And teachers who have not demonstrated 

mastery do not move into the classroom in the fall. So, I think that 

is something that makes us unique that at each point in time we 

are really looking at quality and then holding ourselves accountable for teachers’ ability to meet that bar. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you. 

And I am out of time. I would like to yield to Mr. Kildee, ranking 

member from Michigan. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

First of all, a statement; I am leaving Congress this year after 

36 years of service. It is the longest job I have ever held. I taught 

school for 12 years. But I am encouraged by the fact that we have 

in this committee some great people on both sides of the aisle. I 

am going to just mention one. 

Judy Biggert has shown great love, great knowledge and great 

support for education, a real depth of all three of those. Both here 

in Washington, D.C., but also back in Illinois where she served in 

the Illinois House of Representatives. 

And it is a pleasure to have her here in this group because we 

kind of like one another. We disagree on certain things. But we all 

like education. And frankly, we like one another. We get along 

quite well, very well here. And Judy Biggert is an example of that. 

I just wanted to mention that. 

Mr. Andrew, Mr. Banta, and Ms. Mulhern or anyone else, many 

alternative route programs prepare teachers for shortage areas 

such as special education. Special educators require extensive preparation to learn both content and strategies for intervention. 

When I taught we were not doing much at all in special education. I would try to devise on my own ways. What can those who 

are involved in teacher preparation either through the traditional 
41 

route or other routes do to help those who will maybe be involved 

in special education? We will start with Mr. Andrew. 

Mr. ANDREW. Well, thank you, Ranking Member Kildee. This is 

very important to my own history. So, I have a learning disability 

and went through the New York City Public Schools with an IEP. 

And so from K to 12 finding great special education teachers is 

hard. And you needed to find somebody who really understood 

what dysgraphia was and how to work with it and how to handle 

that. 

So, it is a thing very near and dear to my heart. And when I became interested in teaching after both my bachelor’s and master’s 

degree in education, but not in a teaching program, I actually still 

was not certified to teach. And so I was able to enter TNTP in Massachusetts at the time to get my alternative certification in special 

education. And that is the route that brought me into special education and also gave me that commitment to continue that work 

when I opened Democracy Prep to serve a disproportionately high 

number of special needs kids. 

So, the question really is not exclusively about pre service training. It is also training in service. So, at Democracy Prep we provide 

our teachers with about 300 hours every year of high quality professional development over the course of the year, the course of the 

summer to make sure they are continuing to grow in their skillset 

and develop new skills and new tools. 

That is especially important for special education teachers who 

are serving some of our most challenging students, and the ones 

who do not fit into the box very easily. And so you have to try different strategies and new out-of-the-box strategies for them. And I 

think actually having alternatively certified teachers and even 

uncertified teachers to provide services for students who think differently and behave differently and act differently is a very good 

way to get the right people with the kids that need the most. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you very much. 

Ms. Banta? 

Ms. BANTA. Well, I think Mr. Andrew answered the question 

very well. I think it is really what happens once they are in the 

classroom. At the IBM program, as I mentioned, it’s focused on 

STEM teachers. But whether you are a STEM teacher, French 

teacher or art teacher, the—also focusing on children with special 

needs both in your preparation and then what happens in the 

classroom is critical. 

And I think in my own state, in fact I do not think. I know in 

my own state there is such an increased focus on this, as well as 

the need of English language learners, that we are getting much 

better than we were—than we did years ago. I hope you are going 

to go back into teaching when you leave Washington. 

Mr. KILDEE. Well, that is an alternative I am considering if 

somebody will hire me. 

Mr. ANDREW. Come to Harlem. We will have you. 

Ms. BANTA. I am bidding in Massachusetts. 

Mr. KILDEE. Ms. Mulhern? 

Ms. MULHERN. So, when our teachers enter the classroom they 

enroll in TNTP Academy, which is our certification program that 

is a curriculum that is designed to both teach our teachers as well 
42 

as really embed them in the content that they are teaching. So, 

they are taught by existing teachers who are particularly high performing. And so we really focus the way we train our teachers embedded within content. 

So, for our special education teachers there are core things, as 

has been said, that you need to be able to do for all students like 

planning, assessment and all of those sorts of pre key skills, and 

really as you think about instruction. But I think that what makes 

it unique is that we embed our instructors in that content and really embed our seminars organized around how do you teach special 

education, how do you teach math to them? We try to bring the two 

together in how we train teachers after the school year starts. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you very much. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HUNTER. I would like to thank the ranking member. 

I would now like to recognize the chairman of the full committee, 

Mr. Kline, for 5 minutes. 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to the panel for 

being here. Great testimony today; sounds like we are largely in almost violent agreement today. That does not always happen here. 

I am struck. I thought for many years that we have somehow 

been missing the boat in the so-called traditional role of getting 

certified teachers because it always seemed to me it would be so 

much better if you had someone who had a deep understanding 

and a love of mathematics, for example, and wanted to share that, 

than a certified teacher who did not really much care or like math 

and had no ability to share that love. 

So, I find it not surprising, but terrifically interesting when you 

look at Democracy Prep, for example, where you have 30 percent 

of your teachers are wholly uncertified and 52 percent had alternative certification through Teach for America or TNTP. And yet 

you are having these fantastic results. 

Wonderful scholars, some of which you brought today. And thank 

you for doing that. And in fact, your testimony here today and your 

success makes me wonder if we should not go back to the speaker 

and bring the page program back. It seems to have been worked 

out pretty well for you. 

So, let—I do not know. Ms. Mulhern, you talked about how you 

are making sure that your teachers are going to actually be able 

to perform. But clearly we have some really diverse groups of students that are everywhere. Students with special needs, and Mr. 

Andrew talked about that and his own challenges. 

A lot of English language learners. I know in Minnesota we have 

in some school districts students with—they have over 20 different 

languages that they are trying to deal with. How do you specifically 

prepare your teachers to deal with that? 

Ms. MULHERN. Sure. It starts with a couple of things. First during the pre-service we focus very hard on practicing. So, we focus 

on being able to engage students, which is at the core of being able 

to teach. And is equally applicable for all kids and especially important for special needs kids as well. 

So, we work very hard at sort of deep practice at a set of techniques with our teachers, and just repeat and repeat and repeat because what we have found, as is true of much in life that practice 
43 

makes perfect. So, we really bring that approach to training during 

the summer in getting our teachers ready. 

During the school year very much focused on the content piece 

is what we find as being able to be very effective is really knowing 

content very well. And that is critical to being able to reach out, 

in particular to special needs populations as well. 

So, we again we match teachers who are in our training with 

content experts as their trainers. And then we have a pretty intensive coaching model throughout the year where our teachers are 

working with coaches, and where our coaches are both observing 

the progress that they are making as well as giving them feedback. 

So, we work very closely to make sure that our teachers have the 

ability to take feedback and very rapidly put that into the field 

with their students so that what we really are looking for is ability 

to rapidly sort of get off to a very quick start and then improve 

very quickly based on feedback. 

And then the last piece that we do to sort of really focus in here 

is that we both hold ourselves accountable as a program and also 

hold our teachers accountable. So, we look and observe our teachers regularly on a set of skills that we think are essential, especially being able to engage students and be able to work with diverse needs of students. And so our teachers know that they are 

going to be held accountable for them. And that is something that 

we, when we are conducting our observations, look at very closely. 

Mr. KLINE. What does hold accountable mean? 

Ms. MULHERN. So, one of the unique things about our program 

is that given that we are a—we do certify our teachers at the end 

of our training is that we are able to use our certification as truly 

a high bar. So, we are able to see actual performance before we 

give people a certificate, meaning before they are able to then continue teaching for a career in the classroom. 

And so we use what we call the Assessment of Classroom Effectiveness to measure our teachers’ impact at the end of the first 

year of teaching. And only teachers who meet our bar are recommended for certification. 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you. 

I see my time is about to expire. I yield back. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the chairman. 

I would like to recognize Mr. Scott for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I thank the witnesses for their information. We all want better 

teachers. And it has always occurred to me that if you want a better quality workforce one way to do it is to pay them more and the 

problem could probably cure itself if we had the salaries commensurate with what we are looking for. 

Ms. Banta, one of the things that I did not hear from your testimony is what happens to the IBM employees who start teaching. 

What happens to their salary when they take a teaching job? 

Ms. BANTA. Thank you for the question. They become classroom 

teachers of record. So, they officially separate from the IBM Company. If they are doing their student teaching we continue to pay 

their health benefits. Therein lies the crux. So, they might be moving from an engineering job to a $40,000 a year salary. 

Mr. SCOTT. And what does the engineering job pay? 
44 

Ms. BANTA. It depends. It could be anywhere between $60,000, 

$80,000. It could be more than that. 

Mr. SCOTT. So, we expect $60,000 employees to work for $40,000 

and think we are going to solve the problem? 

Ms. BANTA. We think that it is—teaching is a vocation, that it 

is not for everyone, and that you have to be at a certain point in 

your life when you decide to have a second career in teaching. We 

developed Transition to Teaching because we had a number of employees and focus groups telling us they wanted a second career in 

teaching. 

So, they had thought about this. And we decided that this was 

the best contribution we could make by enabling them while they 

were still at IBM to become certified, or allowing them to leave and 

use an alternative route to certification. 

Mr. SCOTT. Do you think that you might not have had the problem if the school system was paying the $60,000 that you were paying them? 

Ms. BANTA. I think you are referring to the big study Tough 

Choices. And if I had my way, we would pay a lot more in the front 

end and less in the back end and we might change the face of 

teaching. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. Ayers, did I hear you say that there might not be enough 

barriers to teach certification? 

Mr. ANDREW. No. I believe we need to reduce the barriers to 

entry to the profession of teaching. And the reason is because there 

are great teachers who are not coming into the profession when 

they should. And it is not exclusively about money. 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, Mr. Ayers, I think I was quoting—— 

Mr. ANDREW. Oh, I am sorry. 

Mr. SCOTT [continuing]. Mr. Ayers in saying that. What are the 

courses in process of certification and the traditional route that is 

not necessary? 

Ms. BROWN. Well—I am going to try and answer. We do not have 

a very good system of traditional education of teachers. It is done 

through big public universities. And generally speaking they do not 

have tough admission standards into who they let into the study 

for teaching. So, that you have a very uneven quality of teacher 

preparation programs. 

And you often—sometimes you have people who spend their 

whole teacher preparation program in a school of education with 

not very much content education. This then becomes problematic 

when you are asking people to go teach in science and math and 

they have not been properly prepared. 

Mr. SCOTT. Well, you could have somebody who knows math very 

well but just does not know how to teach. How hard is it to learn 

how to teach? 

Ms. BROWN. It is—that is a skill also, and so that is what these 

programs are doing, working with people who have the content expertise and helping them get the instructional strategies to help 

them be effective in transmitting their strong knowledge. 

Mr. SCOTT. Now, if you are teaching—if you are teaching middle 

school math does it make much difference whether you have a 
45 

bachelor’s degree in math or a master’s or a Ph.D? Or is it more 

important that you know how to teach? 

Ms. BROWN. I will ask these educators. 

Ms. MULHERN. So, what the research shows is that how you 

enter the profession does not impact effectiveness overall. So, what 

we know from sort of the big picture studies is that there is not 

an outcome difference there. I think clearly teaching skills are incredibly important. 

So, we spent a lot of time building our selection process looking 

at what we think are the traits that make successful. We spend a 

lot of time before they enter the classroom training them on what 

we think are foundational teaching skills, and then a lot of time 

coaching once they are in the classroom. So, they are equally important and essential. But that sort of ability to know who is going 

to be able to bring those two things together, which are the keys 

to learning—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Is there a difference—— 

Ms. MULHERN [continuing]. Is something that you cannot—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Is there a difference in effectiveness depending on 

what kind of population you are teaching? 

Ms. MULHERN. Not based on the research we have seen. When 

you look across the board at different demographic data that 

same—— 

Mr. SCOTT. A good teacher is a good teacher. 

Ms. MULHERN. That is right. 

Mr. SCOTT. Is that consistent with all of the witnesses? 

Ms. BROWN. Yes. That has been confirmed by recent research. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you, Mr. Scott. 

Mr. PETRi is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. And thank you all for your testimony. I 

cannot help but reflect that this problem of credentialism is not restricted to the teaching profession. I think there was a recent study 

that over the last 50 years, dozens if not hundreds of professions 

have suddenly required standards and certification of one kind or 

another to do beautician work or you name it. 

Almost every group seems to want to form an association, and 

then the association lobbies state legislators to restrict access to 

that in hopes of raising the pay, and hopefully improving the quality of service to the public. At least that is the argument that is 

usually made. 

But in your—all your testimony indicates that credentialism in 

and of itself is not the answer, as best as I can tell; that we really 

need to be focusing more on outcomes and trying to have a more 

dynamic system. What can we do at the federal level to deal with 

this I guess basic human instinct to band together and to restrict 

access to your profession? 

It is not just the teacher organizations who I am sure are lobbying often at the state level. What is it really we can do on this? 

We did—we have a program that encourages charter schools nationwide. But then that as it goes through the state legislature gets 

tacked onto it various riders. 

Should we be partnering with the teachers organizations more in 

trying to get them to take the lead? Individual teachers really do 
46 

like continuous improvement and advising and in-school training 

once they are credentialed. But a lot of able people do not want to 

go through the credentialing process. And it really does affect who 

gets into the profession. 

That is sort of an open-ended question. What we can do about 

this most of the action is at the state level. And even if we do come 

up with regulations, might it not be taken over by the people who 

we are trying to—who put in the closed system that we are trying 

to open up? Does anyone have any—— 

Mr. ANDREW. I will just say that one of the big ideas, and charter 

schools have been mentioned a number of times, about charter 

schools is that it is a small percentage of the total number of 

schools and students in the country. But the concept behind charter schools is to trade autonomy for accountability, and to hold the 

schools and school leaders like me accountable for results and outcomes, but give us the autonomy to make decisions about who we 

have in the building, who we let go, the processes. 

In fact I was going to tell Mr. Scott that we start our salaries 

at $65,000. That is a starting lead teacher salary at Democracy 

Prep. Our highest paid teachers can make more than six figures 

after just 5 years. So, what that means is that we are recruiting 

the best. But I have the autonomy to set those policies that are 

right for my schools and my students in Harlem, which may be different from those across the country. And so the tradeoff of autonomy for accountability is one that I hope you find central. 

And the second idea is at the federal level, when you look for reform, you are very often going to miss the mark because it is just 

not what is happening in real schools and real classrooms. And so 

instead of reforming, I would hope that the committee and others 

look to relinquish; to relinquish those powers, those decisions to 

schools, school leaders, states, districts, LEAs to make the decisions closer to the children instead of in Washington. 

Ms. BROWN. You have been taking some actions. What you need 

to do is make HQT a minimum and instead focus on teacher evaluations as a part of the accountability system that is built into 

ESEA once you reauthorize it. And these are important conversations. You do not have to be terribly descriptive about it, but you 

do need to—the federal government sending a message about the 

importance of looking at outcomes is powerful. And you are starting to see that change. 

Indeed, the unions are talking about evaluations and about professional development based on evaluation results. So, I think—I 

think the federal government can have a huge influence without 

being stifling in the way Mr. Andrew outlined. 

Ms. BANTA. I would just add that at 50,000 feet you can continue 

to honor the profession. It is the profession that creates every other 

profession. So, making it more fluid to get into it, particularly as 

a mature adult would be helpful; and recognizing and having firsthand knowledge of TNTP, Teach for America, Mr. Andrew’s models, those are all important things the federal government can do. 

Mr. PETRI. Thank you. 

Chairman HUNTER. I thank the gentleman. 

I recognize my friend and colleague from San Diego, Mrs. Davis, 

for 5 minutes. 
47 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

It is good to have all of you here. In many ways I think what 

you are talking about is raising the bar and lowering the barriers 

all at the same time. So, that is a challenge that we have to face. 

One of the things that you have not spoken about, with the exception of Mr. Andrew as the superintendent, is I am not sure that 

there is a federal role in terms of setting standards for principals, 

for instructional leaders. But in everything that you have spoken 

about, and certainly when we talk about teacher evaluations, which 

I believe are critically important if they are done right with the 

right kind of input from teachers. 

How do you get to that, because a lot of principals come out of 

the teaching profession, but not all? That does not necessarily 

make for the best instructional leader in all cases. How can we do 

something about that? Or is there a federal role at all? 

I think what you are saying is you want to in some ways get out 

of the way, not try and necessarily be reforming it. But in your experience, how do we get to that place? Because as I go around, and 

having been on a school board for a number of years in San Diego 

and continue to go to schools, when I see change at a school, I see 

some great teachers. But it is that instructional leader that has 

really made the tremendous difference. 

So, where does that fit into what you are talking about? And particularly from a federal role, because what we are trying to do is 

obviously spread out—spread out the opportunities across the country really to scale up to the kind of basic I think qualifications and 

programs that make difference. Help me out there. 

Ms. MULHERN. I think that you can start by focusing on effectiveness as sort of the crucial set of information that we need to know 

at every level. So that is why we focus on it at our programs. But 

I think it would be great if many more programs were sort of 

equally measuring their outcomes, and really at the individual 

teacher level, both using that information so that they can hold 

themselves accountable. But also so that it is really used in a developmental way with teachers so that they are getting that feedback. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Is there a federal role in that in terms of providing 

a platform for that kind of—— 

Ms. MULHERN. I think they are sort of setting the standard 

there, right. So many states as a result of federal studies have implemented teacher evaluation systems. So, I think that is sort of an 

analogous role where many states have now adopted state evaluation systems that are creating this kind of focus on effectiveness 

and that kind of information at the individual teacher level so that 

you can both help teachers develop and also obviously hold folks accountable for outcomes for kids. 

I think that that has sort of been a good template for the federal 

role. And as you think about sort of the preparation end of it, you 

could have a similar role where you really focus on the outcomes 

and say we are going to hold programs accountable to the outcomes 

that they are achieving. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 
48 

Ms. BROWN. You also need to emphasize principal evaluations. 

Principals make a huge difference as you said. Now, in the school 

improvement—— 

Mrs. DAVIS. That is part of—I know in our legislation it certainly 

included principals. But again that is’t going anywhere—— 

Ms. BROWN. Well, it is very important the evaluation of principals to be really strongly emphasized. First of all, it sends a bad 

message to teachers if they are the only ones being evaluated and 

their principals are able to go forward without any consequences 

for you know ineffective behavior and leadership. On the SIG program you do have some of that, the School Improvement Program 

where principals are removed in some cases. 

But there needs to be more incentive for looking at the qualities 

of principals. Principals need to be held accountable for how their 

whole school does, and that means responsibility for all their teachers. 

Mr. ANDREW. As a principal I think that the best principals want 

to be held accountable for the performance of their students and 

the value added performance of their teachers and students. And 

so we need to build in incentives at the federal level to make the 

best teacher training and principal training programs supported 

and grown. So, what we saw with i3 and in race to the top were 

the incentives were in place for similar programs. 

I did a leadership training program called Building Excellent 

Schools, which is a phenomenal leadership training program that 

got me ready to be a principal after having taught. And it was the 

thing that transformed me into a good leader. 

We need federal incentives to help create more programs like 

that without, as you say—you know we need to raise the bar and 

lower the barriers at the same time. And I think creating the incentives without putting the onerous burden on the inputs is the 

best way to create that balance. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you. 

If I have just another—I guess I do not have another moment. 

Okay. Maybe there will be another round. Thank you. 

Chairman HUNTER. You really do not. Thank you, Mrs. Davis. 

I would like to recognize Mrs. Biggert for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. I thank the chairman. And I certainly thank my 

good friend and colleague for his kind words. We have worked a lot 

together and I know that we are all going to miss him if we are 

still here in the next term because he has been such a part of this 

committee and is an important part of this committee, and has 

given such value to the committee. 

So, I thank you. And now I have to live up to this by asking a 

good question. It is hard to do. 

You know I think that education certainly is the most important 

role that we have, and that is to provide education to these kids 

so that all of our problems, our challenges could—a lot could be alleviated if everybody really got a good education and could work to 

be successful. 

And I think that we are seeing a change, I think across the country in looking at this. I know the sciences were ranked what, 28th 

in the world. I think Finland is number one. And we just have to 

change that if we are going to compete in this global economy. 
49 

And I think that some of the schools, for example there is Aurora 

University of Illinois that has really developed a program for 

STEM. And they have two things that they have developed and one 

is traditional post baccalaureate certification only program for elementary and middle and high school teachers who want to—they 

have already received the bachelor’s degree, but they want to improve themselves in another subject area. 

And so they can take 32 credit hours of classes to complete. And 

that takes two summers plus one full year. And they meet at night 

once a year so that they can continue teaching but get that. 

And second, probably more important to this discussion is a content based master’s degree program in STEM. And this requires 40 

credit hours to complete. And they partner with local research facilities like Argonne, National Lab, Fermilab, Caterpillar a company, and then another Packer Engineering company to provide 

real life experiences and application of various STEM subject matters. And I think this is so important whether it is a traditional 

or whether it is an alternative and how much this clinical experience that everybody has too. 

And I know that you had—there are a couple questions on retention. Ms. Banta, I think you talked about—you mentioned the retention, but you did not talk about how—what are the numbers in 

that with your 31—well, maybe it is only the 31 former employees 

that are still there. 

Ms. BANTA. We expect another 12 to enter the classroom in September. And we have lost two teachers. And in both cases it was 

because the jobs were eliminated. There are some states, believe it 

or not, who do not need STEM teachers. Vermont is a good example. They have a glut of math teachers. So, I am learning a lot 

about supply and demand managing this program. 

Again, the feedback both from the teachers and from the principals is just over the top. It is just—you know they are applying 

all of what they learned at IBM as managers, as parents in their 

content field. They are excited about it. They are energetic. Some 

of these folks are as young as 31 or 32 because they have only been 

with IBM 10 years or more. Others are closer to 60, and there is 

really no difference in terms of their performance in the classroom. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Has anybody seen the urban teacher resident 

model that has been put into the traditional—— 

Ms. BANTA. Like the Boston Plan for Excellence, BPE. I am actually on the board of the Boston Plan and I love that model or I 

would not be on their board. And they—actually one of my IBM executives went through BTR training to be a math teacher in Boston. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. So, again, that is a year-long program—— 

Ms. BANTA. It is terrific, yes. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. And so this can be really either in the traditional 

or in the alternative too. 

Ms. BANTA. Most of them use the alternative pathway because 

they find that being treated like a first—you know, an 18-year-old 

is too hard. Those that take 3 or 4 years to get certified will take 

different courses. But especially in places like Texas they use alternative certifications, same in North Carolina. And many of them 
50 

use a program that you described, a MAT, a 1-year master’s after 

their baccalaureate. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. And you think that, Ms. Mulhern, that there really is adequate clinical practice which is critical for teacher preparation? 

Ms. MULHERN. I do. And I also think to the retention question 

what we see in our programs is that our retention looks as good 

as sort of the national urban average, and by 3 years we are actually outperforming it in terms of who stays. And what we find is 

it is pretty critical to not be that as a single number. And that is 

why we sort of have this certification screen where we hold ourselves accountable. Because what we really want is the right teacher staying. And so we focus very hard at that. 

So, both at the end of our pre service training we screen our 

teachers to make sure they are meeting our bar and then again at 

the end of the first year because obviously retention is just a single 

number and it is about holding onto the right folks and we try to 

do that at both those points. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentlelady. 

Ms. WOOLSEy is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And thank 

you to this, our panel of witnesses. We obviously are all on the 

same song sheet with this one. 

I want to tell a story when we are talking about bringing mature, 

experienced teachers—experienced professionals in business teaching profession. And it is personal. 

I have been here 20 years. So, it has been at least 20 years, probably 25 years ago. And I was the human resources director for a 

high tech company that started with eight people. I was number 

six, and we had 800 eventually before I left. So, I did a lot of management training and bringing people along. And I knew my subject. 

So, two of our schools, one was a community college and the 

other was a university, asked me to come and do guest—not guest 

speaking, but guest classes for a whole class. Well, I was very good 

on the platform. I knew my subject. But I did not know how to 

teach, and I did not know how to write a test. 

I would write tests where yes and no on a—are true and false 

on a true and false question were both right. Yes. I mean that— 

and not one, but two on one test. I mean only Lynn Woolsey could 

do such a thing. But it was true. I did—nobody had taught me and 

I tried. I was working hard at doing this right. 

I did not hurt my students because they were adult students in 

the first place, and they were not all afraid to challenge me on this, 

and we fixed it of course. But there is something about bringing an 

expert into a classroom no matter how they—good they are in their 

subject that has—there has—they have to learn how to teach and 

how to evaluate and how to reward. Because otherwise just bring 

them in to be the, you know experts. That is good, but the rest of 

it is important also. 

So, that was this whole story about STEM program. I am the author of Go Girl. Before we even started talking about STEM I had 

brought Go Girl here to the House because I wanted girls who were 
51 

not—were dropping out of math and science classes to get involved 

and stay involved after the 6th and 7th grade, and their parents. 

So, we put a lot of energy into that. And I would get on the elevator and particularly my Republican friends would all call out ‘‘go 

girl’’ the minute they would see me. But I loved it. I knew they got 

the deal. 

Well, now I have expanded that to girls and underserved populations. So, I really want to talk to you about, Ms. Banta, about 

who—what happens and who suffers when we do not put that 

extra energy into our young people. Because it is chicken and egg; 

we cannot have good instructors if we do not—teachers if we do not 

have students interested in the first place. So, where are we going 

to go with that? It just seems like a closed circle and I am worried 

about it. 

Ms. BANTA. Sure. So, we worry about it a lot as a company as 

well. And we are very excited when a lot of our Transition to 

Teaching participants are women, women of color who have STEM 

backgrounds and make it come alive. And you are absolutely right. 

They need to learn the pedagogy of how to teach. 

We run camps at IBM for middle school girls in math and 

science, that we have lots of mentoring relationships. So, we really 

try to encourage young women. I would be the first to admit I 

failed with my own daughter. She was good in math. I had her on 

the right track. And then English and Spanish grabbed her head. 

But I totally agree with you. When we are very focused both in 

the young females and communities of color to try and make sure 

more students stay that way. We really believe it is tied to relevancy. If they can see why it is important to understand algebra, 

if they can see physics in practice, they are going to get excited 

about it. So, put the relevancy back in education. You will have 

more children—— 

Ms. WOOLSEY. And from relevancy into these video games because girls are just not that interested in cutting somebody’s head 

off. 

Ms. BANTA. That is true. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. And having competition. So, we need to get there 

with that also, and bringing parents along. I mean, there are generations of parents who would not know to support their daughter 

or their son in this field. Are you doing anything about that? 

Ms. BANTA. Well, we try and spread the message that it is not 

for other people’s children; that all parents need to be focused on 

their children staying with STEM disciplines. And we involve them 

in the camps. But there is not a particular effort—— 

Ms. WOOLSEY. Well, that is an effort. Thank you very much. 

Ms. BANTA. Thank you. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentlelady. 

And I would like to recognize Mrs. Roby for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. ROBY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize for my 

less than graceful entry this morning. 

I appreciate you all being here very much and all of your testimony about this issue today. And Mr. Andrew, if you can just highlight for us the Highly Qualified Teacher provision that we are 

working under, under the current law under No Child Left Behind. 
52 

Talk to me about how that equates to measurable effectiveness in 

the classroom. 

Mr. ANDREW. So, we believe that HQT is, if anything inversely 

related to high quality in the classroom. So, what we are looking 

for is outcomes in the classrooms of our teachers and of the student 

performance. And so HQT is really not a factor in the way that we 

select, recruit, retain teachers at all. It only becomes a barrier for 

us and a bureaucratic hurdle we have to face. 

So, one of the things that we hope is that in the future we will 

be able to select from a wide pool of candidates and then go 

through an incredibly rigorous screening process before they even 

get in front of a student for a sample lesson. And that process includes interviews and activities and a sample lesson is the sort of 

culmination where we think somebody is ready to handle being in 

front of our teacher—our students. 

Many of those teachers are not in fact at the time meeting HQT 

definition. Then we have to go through a process, the House process to identify whether or not they actually are HQT and what 

caused them to get there. So, really for school leaders it becomes 

more of a burden than a benefit. 

Mrs. ROBY. Thank you for that. And it was brought to my attention in preparing for this hearing today about in Montgomery, Alabama where I am from we have recently—the Board of Education 

has approved a contract with Teach for America. And it has been 

highly successful in other areas of the state. And over the next 3 

years there will be 45 teachers brought to work in our school system. 

And you know in our school system in Montgomery County this 

could prove to be highly beneficial in certain schools within that 

district. And so I just want to again—I know we have kind of 

touched on it. But if you could—and this is for any of you, be very 

specific about you know is there evidence that shows that teachers 

that have gone through these alternative certification process or 

routes are less effective in producing positive outcomes. 

Anybody can answer that or all of you. 

Ms. MULHERN. Based on the evidence—— 

Mrs. ROBY. A resounding no. 

Ms. MULHERN. I think in our programs what we see is that our 

teachers are able to meet or exceed that standard in the programs 

that we are running. So, we do not see evidence of that. And to 

your question about HQT, I think what is essential is that alternative route programs are able to continue and also really be measured by the outcomes that they achieve. 

Mrs. ROBY. And is there any—I mean, on the flip side of that 

point, is there evidence that shows that teachers that have gone 

the traditional certification process are more effective? 

Ms. MULHERN. What we see in the evidence is that often they 

sort of produce equal outcomes. And so overall what I think you 

have heard sort of a theme here today is that we should not be focused on one versus the other, but on the outcomes that they are 

getting. And so really focusing on what the programs are getting, 

those outcomes are doing well and sort of using that as a basis for 

building the field. 
53 

Ms. BROWN. The truth is that—the truth of the matter is traditional programs and alternative certification programs are very uneven in quality. And that is why we need to move to a system of 

judging the quality of preparation programs, whether they are traditional or alternative. Some are great. Some are—those that are 

not good should either be forced to improve or shut down. 

Ms. BANTA. I would just add that in both cases participants 

should be encouraged to spend time in the schools of today. Some 

of them, they think they want to go into teaching; they are 18 

years old. But they really should not go into teaching. Some of 

them are 40 years old and they think they remember what school 

was like and they probably should not go into teaching either. So, 

we really emphasize spending time in schools before you choose either route. 

Mrs. ROBY. Well, thank you again for being here. 

And Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentlelady. 

I would like to recognize Mrs. Davis again. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate that. 

It would be difficult for me to sit here and have this wonderful 

group without asking you a little bit about National Board Certification. And having worked with that over the years I know obviously we are talking about teachers that have already been in the 

classroom. They cannot go for that unless they have been teaching 

for at least 3 years. 

But what I have seen is that there are ways in schools, and I 

have seen this in San Diego State University and National University in San Diego where they try and embed the program for National Board Certification into early training of teachers so that 

there is kind of an expectation and a rigor and a way of sort of 

evaluating your progress and then being able to get that certification if in fact teachers wish to do that. 

It seems to me what we are trying to do is find some way, and 

again not necessarily relinquishing the federal role, but to try and 

have a standard out there that states can look to or localities can 

look to. Could you—without necessarily evaluating the program per 

se. I am just wondering what your thoughts are about that, and if 

in some way that provides a model for the country or we could use 

some of the ways in which teachers move forward with National 

Board Certification to have a greater role, I guess, in trying to establish what is it that good teaching really looks like. 

Ms. BROWN. What we really need to do is to build a system of 

career ladders for teachers, increasing responsibilities for those 

who are most effective. And having a National Board Certification—Shaw was a teacher—is a master teacher, is very effective. 

And it becomes a credential then for school districts to use when 

they decide that they want to set up career ladders with differential pay. Teachers who take additional responsibilities should be 

paid more. But you want to make sure they are effective, and I 

think the National Board provides a good standard. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Anybody else want to—any other observations? No. 

Ms. BANTA. I think you make a very good point. That is what we 

are trying to do. We are not trying to be Washington heavy, but 

we do need to come up with some standards. You can either start 
54 

with the evaluation part or the standards, but the two are—they 

are linked. 

And you made a lot of points in your previous comments about 

the role of the leader, of the principal and how critical that is. I 

totally agree that unless we really have some models for—we have 

standards for principals and we have models for evaluation then 

everyone is going to roll it on their own. And they may roll a good 

model, and they may not. So, I—— 

Ms. BROWN. The other thing is that you have taken action to 

simulate this kind of change into career ladders with the Teacher 

Incentive Fund, the Teacher Leader Incentive Fund, which will 

incentivize school districts to move to new ways to setting up their 

human resource around teaching and principals. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Unfortunately, as you know, at some levels, while 

they had provided some incentives, monetary incentives in many 

cases, budget constraints that means that you pull those out. But 

what I have found is that even absent the monetary incentives that 

it is still something that people want to do, that teachers want to 

do. And I think it is partly because it gives them an opportunity 

to play another role at that particular school. 

That does not mean that 100 percent can play it well, even 

among their colleagues. But I have been a big supporter and I 

know that it is not a panacea either. But I think we need to try 

and at least look to something that has been tried throughout the 

country, and has had some really good and positive results in 

terms of outcomes for children, not necessarily the outcomes for the 

adults. 

Ms. BROWN. There have been a few disappointments. Not enough 

of the board certified teachers going into the most challenging 

schools. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Right. 

Ms. BROWN. And that is where we need our most talented teachers. And if there is a way to help support the board to direct teachers in that way, I mean that would be a big benefit for the kids 

that need the most help. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. I agree with that, and it has been coupled with 

legislation but not necessarily always moving forward. 

Thank you very much. Appreciate it. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentleady. 

Mrs. Foxx is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank all 

of the panel for being here today. And I agree with Congresswoman 

Davis, having observed a lot about the National Board Certification 

process in North Carolina. I think we have the second highest 

number of teachers who have gotten National Board Certification. 

And I think it has been a good program. And I think a lot more 

research needs to be done in what has worked, where those folks 

go, how they use their talent. 

It seems to me that it is asking a lot though sometimes of them 

to take on additional challenges in terms of going into the most difficult schools because they have gotten a lot of preparation, worked 

very hard and want to be able to use all of their skills as best they 

can. And they do not always get the best support in those schools. 
55 

Mr. Andrew, I would like to bring up an issue we talk about a 

good bit here, and that is the disagreement about who should be 

responsible for education policy, the federal government or the 

states and the school districts. 

Could you give us your opinion on the federal Highly Qualified 

Teacher provisions? And what value or bearing do they have on the 

effectiveness of a teacher in the classroom? Do you think that most 

states or districts are equipped to make decisions about teacher 

qualifications, licensure and certification for entry into the classroom? 

Mr. ANDREW. So, I think with the right structure of accountability for principals then the incentives are properly aligned to 

have a principal identify the highest quality teacher be agnostic to 

the route of certification. And so if we had the authority as a public 

charter school district to certify our own teachers, then certification 

might mean something to me. But until we can be confident that 

the actual piece of paper that it is written on is worth value to our 

students, then it does not impact. 

I have a couple of my students with me and we were on the train 

on the way down. And I was thinking about Representative 

Woolsey’s comment. I asked my students a little bit about their favorite teachers. And Jamie said, oh Ms. Hurlihy. She is a 10th 

grade chemistry teacher at Democracy Prep. And she is wholly 

uncertified. 

She does not have a piece of paper that says that she is a great 

chemistry teacher. And yet she is one of the best chemistry teachers and has led to some of the highest performing results in the 

state of New York on the chemistry reagents exam. 

And so what I am looking for is excellence in outcomes, not in 

inputs. And so in finding people like Ms. Hurlihy who are just spectacular, we are able then to put the best people in front of the students like my guys in Harlem. 

Mrs. FOXX. Great perspective. I have always said that in any elementary school you could ask almost all the second graders and 

they could tell you who the best teachers are in the school. The 

word gets around pretty quickly as to who the good teachers are. 

You do not need tremendously elaborate evaluations. The kids will 

tell you right away who the best teachers are. So, thank you for 

confirming something that I have said. 

Ms. Banta, would you tell us what you think is the role of the 

private sector in providing alternative certification routes for teachers and strengthening the teacher profession? Say a little bit more 

about the unique contributions that the private sector can make in 

getting the best teachers into the classroom. 

Ms. BANTA. Well, in my testimony I talked about the IBM program, and I thank you for the question. I am very serious that we 

need help getting more companies to use the model. IBM’s program 

is small. If 25 large other companies emulated it, adapted it to 

their specific needs, we would get a lot—many more STEM teachers into the classroom. 

We would also be saying to our employees teaching is a very important profession. We value teachers because they are the stewards of the next generation. So, creating models is important. Sharing what you know, helping the profession to be more fluid. Points 
56 

I am probably repeating a little bit, but I think those are roles that 

the private sector can play. 

Mrs. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Chairman HUNTER. I thank the gentlelady. 

And for the last question, Mrs. Biggert is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Talking about education again and how important it is, you know 

when we had Sputnik, the Soviet Sputnik and we went after 

science because we are a very competitive nation I think. What— 

let us say somebody came to you and said what can we do to create 

an environment like Sputnik or a Nation at Risk to really focus all 

our attention on education? What kind of program would you want 

to do? I mean, how can we get back this—this is what we are going 

to work on? 

Mr. ANDREW. So, I will tell you just a little bit about our high 

school because it is inspired in part based on the experience I had 

teaching in Korea. 

In Korea teachers are thought of as nation builders. This is the 

country with some of the highest performing public schools and is 

a country that just 50, 60 years ago came out of poverty and colonialism and has turned that around through high quality public 

schools. But the foundations were based in respect for teachers and 

high—holding them at the highest esteem. 

The idea that effort equals success and that the harder our scholars and teachers work the more successful they will be. And that 

education is the highest value. And that if you have discretionary 

income, if you are committed to this idea that you will be able to 

in fact take education at the highest value for whatever you may 

have. 

And so we have tried to imbue those values into our school in 

New York and had great results. And I think that what we are seeing right now across the world is that the respect for teachers as 

a profession at some of the highest performing countries is much 

higher. So, we need to really elevate the profession to the incredible people—and honor the incredible people that have chosen this 

line of work. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. And how do you do that, besides emulate everything that you are doing in Brooklyn. 

Mr. ANDREW. No, we are not perfect by any means. We have a 

long way to go. 

And the ideas that I talk about, you know when you think about 

in Korea they are nation builders, we talk about being Democracy 

builders. And so we actually create an organization for our parents 

to become Democracy builders and to help to organize our parents 

so that they can become more engaged in our civic life and in our 

Democracy. 

But at the end of the day, the quality of our public schools, and 

especially our lowest performing public schools, by raising the bar 

and lowering the barriers to the highest quality public schools, that 

is going to change the trajectory. When Jamie and Omar and Michael finish college and go out to change the world, they will be the 

next generation that fights hard in the same way that the Sputnik 

generation did. 
57 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. Anyone else? 

Ms. BROWN. You know one of the things that is not discussed a 

lot is that in South Korea, in Finland, in Singapore, they are much 

more selective about who they let into teaching. And so—and those 

teachers get very good preparation and very good acculturation and 

become a part of the mission of nation building. 

As you said, we need to do—I believe we need to start holding 

our preparation programs accountable for the products they 

produce. When you start doing that, they will start being more selective about who they let in. 

Whether it is the traditional programs or alternative certification 

programs, they are very—TNTP, you heard her describe is very selective about who they let into the program. Drew is very selective 

about who you hire. And we just—we have just sort of been—you 

say if you want to be a teacher you can be a teacher in this country, no matter what your skill or training. And these other countries are not like that. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Well, is not it true, though that and I know that 

I think Mr. Ayers you talked about the fact that it is not all about 

money. But when you have got somebody, let us say an engineer 

who comes out of college, probably got debt. And maybe you think 

well teaching would be really good. But offered a job at a lot higher—in another—in a private sector than teaching; makes it really 

hard, does not it, to get you know what we would call the best and 

the brightest. 

Unless, unless there was you know this esteem that teachers 

were held in. And I think that that is something that we really 

need to change because they are the ones that are going to solve 

these problems. 

Ms. BROWN. But beginning salaries varies very widely across the 

country. In many urban and fairly affluent suburban districts 

starting salaries are quite good. Maybe not quite competitive with 

engineers, but for someone who is serious about teaching and in 

places like D.C. and some other places you can move up the career—up the salary chain much faster than you can in other places 

where salaries move in lockstep every few—based on years of service and credentials. 

The irony is if you look at some of the high performing states in 

other parts of the country; say the Plains, say Vermont, say New 

Hampshire, say Maine. Ironically, teachers are not paid as well in 

those places. But they are probably held in high esteem. And you 

have—you do not have problems getting teachers in the Plains 

states. It is a culture. There is respect for teaching and learning. 

It is hard to generalize about this. And I think it is very important that we set up incentives for systems to change where they 

are not getting effective results. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. I yield back. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentlelady. 

Ms. Woolsey is recognized for the really last, last question. 

Ms. WOOLSEY. All right. Thank you. And it will be short. 

Mr. Andrews—Mr. Andrew, Jamie, Omar and Michael—are 

they—is Jamie a female? 

Mr. ANDREW. She is. 
58 

Ms. WOOLSEY. I want to thank you for including such a—are 

those the three you are referring to right there? Well, you are 

beautiful. Thank you for being so inclusive. And you have set an 

example for exactly how we need to talk about the young people 

of our future. 

And because you are the future of this nation. And thank you 

very much for what you are doing. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HUNTER. Now I would like to recognize Mrs. Foxx for 

30 seconds. Once you open the door. 

Mrs. FOXX. This is not a question, but it is very relevant to what 

we are talking about today. I have had a program in my office since 

my second year in Congress that I call the Teacher in Congress 

program. And I invite teachers from across my district to apply to 

come to Washington for 10 days. We pay them a very modest stipend and they shadow me and attend functions here, spend some 

time at the Library of Congress, the Historian’s Office. 

And my teacher in Congress, one of my teachers in Congress is 

here today, Tommy McKnight from Alleghany County. He is from 

my smallest county, Mr. Chairman. But I have to say, that county 

and the teachers there do so many extra things with their students. It is absolutely amazing the energy that exists in that little 

county and the effort that they put into working with their students and giving them lots of opportunities. 

And Tommy is the first one from Alleghany County to be—I have 

12 counties—to be in the program. And I just wanted to recognize 

him. He told me after spending the day with me yesterday he had 

no trouble going to sleep last night. But he has been here for the 

hearing today, and I am delighted we had a hearing he could participate in and hear these great witnesses. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank the gentlelady. 

I would like to thank the whole panel. This has been an extremely interesting discussion. I think it was beneficial for everybody. 

Mr. Andrew, we could close here. You know we always ask 

kids—I ask my kids and kids come into the office and they say 

what would you like to tell your congressman. I do not think anybody here is your congressman in particular, but if you want to 

come up and tell us what you think. We would like to close with 

who this matters. 

Ms. MCCOY. You want me to say what I think on the topic? 

Chairman HUNTER. Yes. 

Ms. MCCOY. Okay. Sorry. 

Well, hi. My name is Jamie and I am an upcoming senior, and 

I feel that when—I feel that the message that Mr. Andrew is trying 

to present is not that certified teachers are not capable of teaching 

well, but there are also alternative certified teachers and 

uncertified teachers who are also teachers who can teach well—can 

also teach well. 

And an example would be our chemistry teacher, Ms. Hurlihy, 

who is from London and I love her accent by the way. But she is 

a real—a rigorous teacher. She is a teacher that she brings passion 

because she is so passionate about chemistry and she wanted to 
59 

study chemistry more in depth that she brought that into the classroom. It almost makes you feel like a chemist when she is teaching 

you. 

And this is an uncertified teacher. And who knows that if I was 

in public school and I would not be able to have such a wonderful 

uncertified teacher teaching me. I do not think I would have been 

as successful as I was in chemistry. 

I did not imagine myself understanding chemistry the way I did 

and visioning atoms and distilling water and realizing that water— 

that salt cannot—salt is soluble. Like things like that. And I think 

that would be beneficial you know if other schools were able to 

have such like autonomy that Mr. Andrew has. 

Chairman HUNTER. Thank you, Jamie. And you have already 

passed my level of chemistry. I did not know that salt was soluble. 

Omar, Michael, anything you would like to add? 

Mr. CUMMINGS. I—sorry. My name is Michael Cummings. I am 

also an upcoming senior at Democracy Prep Charter School. And 

I feel the same way. 

I think that autonomy is something very important in schools. 

And I think that if you have—if teachers, or if principals I guess 

from this discussion, if principals were able to have the autonomy 

to choose what type of teacher that they allow to teach in their 

building and teach their students, then we could have—then students would be able to benefit from that. 

But as well teachers who were not able to teach before would be 

able to teach and they could bring like so much more to the classroom because someone who, like for instance, Ms. Hurlihy or my 

Korean teacher, Ms. Lee, she is someone who went to school to be 

a librarian and instead she ended up teaching me Korean for the 

last 2 years. And so now I will know Korean from someone who 

otherwise if she was not able to teach she would have been a librarian and I would not know Korean. 

So, I mean she is given an opportunity. I am given an opportunity. And I think it is just beneficial to everyone. And I cannot 

see why not. So. 

Chairman HUNTER. Very well said. 

Mr. CUMMINGS. Thank you. 

Mr. TAVERAS. Well, my name is Omar, first. 

Chairman HUNTER. Omar. Okay. 

Mr. TAVERAS. Yes. Well, I believe that uncertified teachers—I 

think most of them are pretty good because they are like mostly 

passionate in what they are doing. And that kind of like motivates 

kids like me to do better in school because when you see somebody 

that loves something so much it makes you want to like it too in 

a way. 

But, what was I going to say? 

Chairman HUNTER. Sounds good to me. Sometimes shorter is 

better. 

With that, I would like to recognize Mr. Kildee for any closing 

remarks he may have. 

Mr. KILDEE. Well, I really cannot top that. That was, Mr. Chairman, a very novel and very effective way I think to close the hearing. 
60 

You are what education is all about, which is why we work at 

it. And I just—I just cannot top that. Thanks a lot. Thank you 

very, very much. 

Chairman HUNTER. And there being no further business, the 

subcommittee stands adjourned. 

[Questions submitted for the record and their responses follow:] 
61 

Mr. Andrew’s Response to Questions Submitted for the Record 

What is the biggest obstacle states and school districts face in addressing teacher 

shortages and other related issues? How do alternative certification routes help, and 

are these teachers making a difference in the classroom? 

The single largest challenge we face as a network, and that I face as a Superintendent, is finding, training, and sustaining amazing teachers and leaders. The 

success of great schools like Democracy Prep is mostly a function of which adults 

they have in their buildings, not which kids they have in their buildings. 

Unfortunately, most districts, states and the federal government continue to use 

a course-based certification model with a lock-step seniority pay system that deters 

the best and the brightest teachers from entering—and remaining in—the profession. The HQT standard places the illogical restriction on the talent pool that my 

principals are permitted to access and unnecessarily hamstrings our search for the 
62 

amazing teachers that our students need. Under current HQT policy, it is a remarkable indicator that I could not likely hire any members of this committee to teach 

history or civics at Democracy Prep even with the benefit of the exemption of the 

New York State Charter Law. Because I have already reached my 30% threshold 

of ‘‘uncertified’’ teachers, I cannot even use the HOUSSE provisions under HQT to 

make you eligible to teach at Democracy Prep. 

The issue is not about traditional district schools versus public charter schools. 

Ensuring that all principals, Local Education Authorities (LEAs), State Education 

Authorities (SEAs) have the laws, regulations, and tools in place they need to recruit the best and the brightest teachers regardless of their route to certification is 

a public education national challenge for all our schools. This is true regardless of 

whether they are traditional district, magnet, or public charter schools. However, in 

most states the situation is even more dire for traditional school districts, which 

aren’t afforded the same flexibility as public charter districts like mine. Traditional 

districts are forced to turn away thousands of great candidates for teaching that 

charter districts are able to interview and hire. When we lose high quality potential 

teachers from the applicant pool, the people we hurt most of all are our children 

most in need of an excellent teacher. 

At Democracy Prep, for approximately 100 teaching positions available in our district last year, we received nearly 10,000 applicants. If we were to have used a strict 

HQT or certification standard, we would have had to eliminate nearly two-thirds of 

those applicants upon initial screening. Instead, we reviewed all of the applicants 

for the best potential fit through a rigorous screening process that includes a resume review, a phone interview, an in-person interview, a sample lesson, a feedback 

loop, a second sample lesson when necessary, and reference checks. Then and only 

then, would we begin to discuss with a candidate their certification status and HQT. 

If high-performing Local Education Authority (LEAs) were empowered to create 

our own residency-based ‘‘certification’’ programs based on outcomes, not inputs, I 

believe that we could dramatically accelerate the achievement-gap closing work of 

Democracy Prep to attract more and stronger candidates to the field of education. 

Our professional development program includes more than 300 hours each year of 

direct in-service training for all teachers, targeted to their specific areas of need. 

This approach would be far more valuable and effective in credentialing teachers 

than an online master’s degree that serves the current HQT route for many teachers 

each year. Approved school-based certification programs based out of the LEA would 

have a major impact on our ability to recruit, support, and retain great teachers for 

the profession. 

Is there any evidence that teachers who have gone through alternative certification 

routes are less effective in producing positive outcomes for all students, including students with disabilities, English Learners, or other students with unique needs? Conversely, is there any evidence that teachers who have gone through traditional certification routes are more effective educators? 

As a public charter school district, we have been fortunate enough to have some 

flexibility from the Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) rules under New York State 

law. State law has relinquished to us the ability to create our own recruitment, compensation, hiring, evaluation, and retention systems at Democracy Prep. 

In spite of the high percentage of teachers at Democracy Prep who have no teaching certification, or have received certification through alternative pathways, Democracy Prep Public Schools operate the highest growth middle schools in the city, 

and our first turnaround elementary school, Harlem Prep, was recognized for having 

the single highest growth of any school in literacy in the entire State of New York, 

and the highest combined math and literacy proficiency growth in New York City. 

At the high school level, our scholars consistently outperform the wealthiest students in New York State, Westchester County, on the high-stakes Regents examinations. 

Indeed, Harlem Prep Charter School has become one of the single most impressive 

and exciting indicators of what is possible for America’s lowest performing public 

schools. In less then one year, the teachers and leaders at Harlem Prep accomplished a challenge that many believed to be insurmountable for low-performing students: substantial turnaround in just 10 months. New York State ELA and Math 

Exam results released recently show Harlem Prep’s students improving tremendously. Harlem Day was the lowest performing school in Harlem, and yet last year 

overall proficiency scores by 34% in ELA and 28% in math and beating the district 

in every subject and grade level tested. 

According to research conducted by Dr. Roland Fryer, Director of the Education 

Innovation Laboratory (EdLabs) at Harvard University, the percentage of teachers 

who have obtained a Master’s Degree or higher has increased from 27% in 1971 to 
63 

61% in 2006. This increase is largely due to local state and federal policy that places 

inordinate emphasis on such credentialing. One might expect that this increase in 

the relative education level of each teacher would translate to a commensurate increase in student achievement. And yet, as we all well know, student achievement 

scores in reading remained stagnant for 9, 13, and 17 year-old students across that 

entire timespan. In fact, a multi-year study of New York City charter schools conducted by EdLabs revealed teacher certification to play a statistically negligible role 

in determining student performance. 

Our own experience at Democracy Prep has confirmed this data. In fact, we believe that traditional HQT designation and certification may in fact be inversely related with teacher quality on the whole. Last year across our district, only 18% of 

teachers possessed traditional certification. 52% were certified through a non-traditional route, such as TFA, TNTP, or the MATCH Teacher Residency, and 30% were 

wholly uncertified. Despite this, each of our schools continued to post dramatic gains 

in student proficiency levels across all grade levels and all subjects. Quite clearly, 

our students did not suffer on account of their teachers lacking the traditional HQT 

credentials that currently guide federal policy. 
64 
65 

Ms. Mulhern’s Response to Questions Submitted for the Record 

Is there any evidence that teachers who have gone through alternative certification 

routes are less effective in producing outcomes for all students, including students 

with disabilities, English Learners, or other students with unique needs? Conversely, 

is there any evidence that teachers who have gone through traditional certification 

routes are more effective educators? 

Rigorous research proves that teachers certified through alternate routes are as 

effective as traditionally certified teachers. 

• A 2009 nationwide, randomized study commissioned by the U.S. Department of 

Education found that, ‘‘There was no statistically significant difference in performance between students of alternative route to certification teachers and those of traditional route to certification teachers’’ (Constantine et al., 2009). 
66 

• A 2005 comprehensive study on teacher education research published by the 

American Educational Research Association found that, ‘‘there were no differences 

between alternatively and traditionally certified teachers in terms of teacher efficacy 

or in teaching competence as measured by classroom observations’’ (Cochran-Smith 

and Zeichner, 2005). 

• A 2006 study examining the effectiveness of teachers entering New York City 

classrooms found that, ‘‘On average, the certification status of a teacher has at most 

small impacts on student test performance,’’ and suggests that ‘‘classroom performance during the first two years, rather than certification status, is a more reliable 

indicator of a teacher’s future effectiveness.’’ (Kane et al., 2006). 

The best alternate route to certification programs are producing teachers who are 

more effective than other teachers. 

• A 2009 analysis that compared educational outcomes in states with ‘‘genuine’’ 

alternative certification against those that have it in name only found that, ‘‘Students attending schools in states with genuine alternative certification gained more 

on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) between 2003 and 

2007 than did students in the other states. The finding holds, even when one adjusts for changes in the ethnic composition, free-lunch eligibility, class size, and education expenditures for each state’’ (Nadler and Peterson, 2009). 

• A 2010 study by the state of Louisiana found that new teachers trained by 

TNTP’s alternative certification program outperform both new and experienced 

teachers in raising student achievement in 4 of 5 subjects studied. Over the past 

3 years, the program has earned more top ratings for effectiveness than any other 

program in the state, including university providers (Gansle, Noell, Knox, and 

Schafer, 2010). 

• According to the Tennessee State Board of Education’s 2010 report card, Teach 

For America trains the most effective teachers of any of Tennessee’s 42 colleges of 

education and teacher preparation providers. TFA teachers achieved the highest 

student scores among new teachers in reading, science and social studies. 

What is the biggest obstacle states and school districts face in addressing teacher 

shortages and other related issues? How do alternative certification routes help, and 

are these teachers making a difference in the classroom? 

When school districts face teacher shortages, several obstacles must be addressed 

to successfully recruit teachers. First, certification requirements can deter otherwise 

qualified and eager candidates from entering the field. For example, every year only 

14,000 math majors graduate from college but more than 120,000 engineering and 

computer science majors complete their degrees. Yet, in many states, an experienced 

engineer without a math major cannot teach 7th grade geometry (National Center 

for Education Statistics). These barriers to entry limit the pool of potential teachers 

in our highest need subjects. In addition, high certification costs can also discourage 

applicants who are interested in changing fields but are concerned by the costs of 

licensure. Finally, there is insufficient focus on the effectiveness of teachers produced by preparation programs. 

Decades of research show that nothing schools can do for students matters more 

than giving them great teachers. And the difference between a great teacher and 

an ineffective teacher can be up to a full year’s worth of learning for students. Research shows that highly effective teachers have a lifelong impact on students, 

boosting college attendance and future earnings (Chetty, Friedman and Rockoff, 

2012). 

NCLB made a well-intentioned effort to ensure that every child was taught by a 

‘‘highly qualified’’ teacher. But ‘‘qualified’’ does not always equal ‘‘effective.’’ The true 

measure of a teacher is her ability to advance student learning. To promote real 

equality in education, policymakers should shift focus to accurately measuring and 

responding strategically to differences in teacher effectiveness. Among other things, 

this means: 

• Replacing the current ‘‘Highly Qualified Teacher’’ definition with a new definition of an ‘‘Effective Teacher’’ that is based primarily in terms of the teacher’s impact on student academic growth; require that states increase the percentage of effective teachers and decrease the percentage of ineffective teachers in Title I 

schools. 

• Supporting the development and implementation of evaluation systems that 

produce legitimate information about teacher effectiveness based on multiple measures of performance including student academic growth, and require states to meaningfully differentiate teachers according to effectiveness. 

• Encouraging states to tie evaluation data to critical decisions such as how 

teachers are hired, developed, paid and retained. 
67 

• Encouraging states to assess the effectiveness of their teacher preparation programs, including how their new teachers perform once in the classroom. 

Currently, alternate route programs play a critical role in providing all students 

with effective teachers. All 50 states and the District of Columbia have at least 

some type of alternate route to teacher certification. Sixty thousand teachers were 

enrolled in alternative certification programs in 2010, and nationally about four out 

of 10 new public school teachers hired since 2005 came through alternative teacherpreparation programs (Feistritzer, 2011). In many states, alternative routes are providing a critical mass of teachers, including: 

• Florida and Texas hire more than 50% of their teachers from alternative paths 

each year 

• California, Georgia and New Jersey hire more than 40% of their teachers are 

from alternative paths. 

• Mississippi hires more than one third of teachers from alternative pathways 

Alternatively certified teachers are meeting a critical need in schools across the 

country. 

• They are an increasingly important source of new teacher talent. Twenty to 

thirty percent of all new teachers hired annually are trained by alternate route programs (National Research Council, 2010). 

• They bring effective teachers into the classroom who would have otherwise 

never considered the profession. 54% of people who came to teaching from another 

profession say they would not have become teachers if an alternate route had not 

been available. (Feistritzer, 2005) 

• They produce significant numbers of teachers for math and science classrooms, 

where schools face chronic shortages of teachers. In Texas, for example, nearly 40% 

of individuals obtaining secondary mathematics certification and about 55% of individuals obtaining secondary science certification came through alternative certification programs in 2007. In contrast, about 20% in math and 8% in science came 

through traditional programs (Fuller, 2009). 

• They increase the diversity of the teacher workforce. In 2004, only 14.1 percent 

of the nation’s teachers were African American or Hispanic. (Nadler and Peterson 

2009) Approximately 32 percent of alternate route teachers are non-White, compared to just 11 percent of the overall teaching population (Feistritzer, 2005). 

• They are helping cities like New York improve educational equity. A 2007 study 

by the Urban Institute found that alternative certification programs serving New 

York City—in particular TFA and the NYC Teaching Fellows Program—were responsible for a ‘‘remarkable narrowing’’ of the gap in teacher qualifications between 

low- and high-poverty schools between 2000 and 2005 (Boyd et al., 2007). As a result, more than 9,100 NYC Teaching Fellows—11 percent of New York’s teaching 

force—work in the city’s schools and account for more than half of New York’s annual hires in math and special education. 

REFERENCES

1. Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., Rockoff, J. and Wyckoff, J. (2007). ‘‘The Narrowing Gap 

in Teacher Qualifications and its Implications for Student Achievement.’’ National Center for 

Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research (CALDER), The Urban Institute. 

2. Chetty, R., Friedman, J., & Rockoff, J. (2012). The Long-Term Impacts of Teachers: Teacher 

Value-Added and Student Outcomes in Adulthood. NBER Working Paper #17699. Cambridge, 

MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. 

3. Cochran-Smith, Marilyn, and Zeichner, Kenneth M. (2005). ‘‘Studying Teacher Education: 

The Report of the AERA Panel on Research and Teacher Education.’’ American Educational Research Association. Routledge, Inc. (663). 

4. Constantine, Jill; Player, Daniel; Silva, Tim; Hallgren, Kristin; Grider, Mary; Deke, John; 

and Warne, Elizabeth (2009). ‘‘An Evaluation of Teachers Trained Through Different Routes to 

Certification.’’ Institute for Education Sciences, National Center for Education Evaluation and 

Regional Assistance, U.S. Department of Education. 

5. Feistritzer, C.E. (2005). ‘‘Profile of Alternate Route Teachers.’’ National Center for Education Information. 

6. Feistritzer, C. E. (2007). ‘‘Alternative Teacher Certification: A State-by-State Analysis.’’ National Center for Education Information. 

7. Feistritzer, C.E. (2011). ‘‘Profile of Teachers in the U.S. 2011.’’ National Center for Education Information. 

8. Fuller, E. (2009). ‘‘Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers in Texas: Supply, Demand, 

and Quality.’’ The University of Texas at Austin. 

9. Gansle, Kristin A., Noell, George H., Knox, R. Maria and Schafer, Michael J. (2010). ‘‘Value 

Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation in Louisiana: 2005-2006 to 2008-2009.’’ Louisiana 

State University. 

10. Kane, T.J., Rockoff, J.E., and Staiger, D.O. (2006). ‘‘What Does Certification Tell Us About 

Teacher Effectiveness? Evidence from New York City.’’ National Bureau of Economic Research, 

Working Paper 12155. 
68 

11. Nadler, Daniel and Peterson, Paul (2009). ‘‘What Happens When States Have Genuine Alternative Certification?’’ Education Next, Winter 2009. Vol. 9, No. 1. 

12. National Center for Education Statistics, 2006. 

13. Noell, George H.; Porter, Bethany A.; Patt, R. Maria; and Dahir, Amanda (2008). Value 

Added Assessment of Teacher Preparation in Louisiana: 2007-2008 (Year 5). Department of Psychology, Louisiana State University. 

14. National Research Council, Committee on the Study of Teacher Preparation Programs in 

the United States (2010). ‘‘Preparing Teachers: Building Evidence for Sound Policy.’’ National 

Academy of Sciences. 

15. ‘‘Report Card on the Effectiveness of Teacher Training Programs.’’ Tennessee State Board 

of Education and Tennessee Higher Education Commission. December, 2010. 

[Whereupon, at 11:37 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ