What is known about recruiting and retaining teachers for hard-to-staff-schools runs counter to many of the assumptions undergirding the teacher quality provisions of No Child Left Behind. Evidence regarding incentives, recruitment pathways, new teacher induction programs, and alternative routes shed considerable light on what needs to be done to ensure a "highly qualified" teacher for every student. Educators, armed with the right knowledge, can play an important role in getting both the funding and politics in place to create and support the policies and programs that can make a difference.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Archer, J. (2002, April 3). Research: Focusing in on teachers. Education Week, 21(29), 36-39.
2.
Allington, R. (2002, June). What I've learned about effective reading instruction from a decade of studying exemplary elementary classroom teachers. Phi Delta Kappan, 83(10), 740-747.
3.
Baines, L., McDowell, J., & Foulk, D. (2001). One step forward, three steps backward: Alternative certification programs in Texas, Georgia, and Florida. Educational Horizons, 80(1), 32-37.
4.
Ball, D. (2003). Mathematical proficiency for all students: Toward a strategic research and development program in mathematics education. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
5.
Berry, B. (2001). No shortcuts to preparing good teachers. Educational Leadership, 58(8), 32-36.
6.
Berry, B., Buxton,J. B., Darling-Hammond, L., & Hirsch, E. (2001). Crossstate analysis of NCTAF partner state status of teaching reports 1997-1999. Chapel Hill, NC: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
7.
Berry, B., Hopkins-Thompson, P., & Hoke, M. (2002). Assessing and supporting new teachers: Lessons from the Southeast. Chapel Hill, NC: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
8.
Berry, B., Hoke, M., & Hirsch, E. (in press). No Child Left Behind, "highly qualified" teachers, and the teaching profession: Lessons from the field. In R. Schwab & D. Moss (Eds.), Portrait of a profession: Teaching and teachers in the 21st century. Westport, CT: Prager Publishers.
9.
Berry, B., & Johnson, D. (in press). Understanding alternative certification: Lesson from NC Teach. Chapel Hill, NC: Southeast Center for Teaching Quality.
10.
Betts, J. R., Rueben, K. S., & Danenberg, A. (2000). Equal resources, equal outcomes? The distribution of school resources and student achievement in California. San Francisco: Public Policy Institute of California.
11.
Blair, J. (2001, February 21). Lawmakers plunge into teacher pay. Education Week, 20(23), 1-1, 16-16.
12.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff,J. (2003). The draw of home: How teacher preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools. Unpublished manuscript.
13.
Bransford,J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
14.
Carroll, S., Reichardt, R., & Guarino, C. (2000). The distribution of teachers among California's school districts and schools. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
15.
Clewell, B., & Villegas, A. (2001). Absence unexcused: Ending teacher shortages in high-need areas. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
16.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. (2002, January). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution of novice teachers. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association, Atlanta, GA.
17.
Clotfelter, C., Ladd, H., Vigdor, J., & Diaz, R. (2003, February). Do school accountability systems make it more difficult for low performing schools to attract and retain high quality teachers? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Economic Association, Washington, DC.
18.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Fries, M. K. (2001). Sticks, stones, and ideology: The discourse of reform in teacher education. Educational Researcher, 30(8), 3-15.
19.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1997). Doing what matters most. New York: National Commission for Teching and America's Future.
20.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000a). Teacher quality and student achievement: A review of state policy evidence. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 8(1).
21.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2000b). Solving the dilemmas of teacher supply, demand, and standards: How we can ensure a competent, caring, and qualified teacher for every child. New York: National Commission on Teaching & America's Future, Teachers College, Columbia University.
22.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2003). Keeping good teachers: Why it matters and what leaders can do. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 6-13.
23.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Sykes, G. (2003). Wanted: A national teacher supply policy for education: The right way to meet the "highly qualified teacher" challenge?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(33). Retrieved from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v1ln33
24.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Youngs, P. (2002). Defining "highly qualified teachers": What does "scientifically-based research" acutally tell us?Educational Researcher, 31(9), 13-25.
25.
Edwards, V. (Ed.). (2003). Quality counts 2003: "If I can't learn from you..." Ensuring a highly qualified teacher for every classroom [Special issue]. Education Week, 22(17).
26.
Feiman-Nemser, S. (2003). What new teachers need to learn. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 25-29.
27.
Feistritzer, C. E., & Chester, D. T. (2001). Alternative teacher certification: A stateby-state analysis. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Information.
28.
Ferguson, R. F. (1991). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 28(2), 465-498.
29.
Fordham Foundation. (1999). The teachers we want and how to get more of them: A manifesto. Washington, DC: Author.
30.
Fuller, E. (2000, April). Do properly certified teachers matter? Properly certified algebra teachers and Algebra I achievement in Texas. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
31.
Fuller, E., & Alexander, C. (2003). Teachers in Texas from different routes to certification: Who are they, where do they teach, and how long do they teach?Austin, TX: Texas State Board for Educator Certification.
32.
Fowler, R. C. (2003). The Massachusetts signing bonus program for new teachers: A model of teacher preparation worth copying?Education Policy Analysis Archives, 11(13). Retrieved May 16, 2003, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vllnl3
33.
Goe, L. (2002). Legislating equity: The distribution of emergency permit teachers in California. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 10(42). Retrieved November 8, 2002, from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/vlOn42
34.
Greenwald, R., Hedges, L., & Laine, R. D. (1996). The effect of school resources on student achievement. Review of Educational Research, 66(3), 361-396.
35.
Gruber, K.J., Wiley, S. D., Broughman, S. P., Strizek, G. A., & Burian-Fitzgerald, M. (2002). Schools and staffing survey, 1999-2000: Overview of the data for public, private, public charter, and Bureau of Indian Affairs elementary and secondary schools (Rep. No. NCES 2002-313). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
36.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2001). Why public schools lose teachers. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research
37.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). A different approach to solving the teacher shortage problem. CTP Teaching Quality Policy Briefs, 3.
38.
Johnson, S. M., & Birkeland, S. E. (2003). The schools that teachers choose. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 20-24.
39.
Kirby, S. N., Naftel, S., & Berends, M. (1999). Staffing at-risk school districts in Texas: Problems and prospects. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
40.
Kupermintz, H. (2003). Teacher effects and teacher effectiveness: A validity investigation of the Tennessee value added assessment system. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 25(3), 287-298.
41.
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wycoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban teachers: A descriptive analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
42.
Little, J. W. (1996, April). Organizing schools for teacher learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
43.
Mathis, W. J. (2003). No Child Left Behind: Costs and benefits. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(9), 679-686.
44.
McLaughlin, B. (1995). Fostering second language development in young children: Principles and practices. Washington, DC: National Center For Research On Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.
45.
Moir, E. (2003). Launching the next generation of teachers through quality induction. Santa Cruz, CA: New Teacher Center, University of California, Santa Cruz.
46.
Murnane, R. J., & Cohen, D. K. (1986). Merit pay and the evaluation problem: Why most merit pay plans fail and a few survive. Harvard Educational Review, 56(1), 1-17.
47.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2000). Progress through the teacher pipeline: 1992-93 college graduates and elementary/secondary school teaching as of 1997. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
48.
National Commission for Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for America 's future. New York: Author.
49.
National Education Commission on Time and Learning. (1994). Prisoners of time. Washington, DC: Author.
50.
Nelson, F. H., Drown, R., & Gould,J. C. (2002). Survey and analysis of teacher salary trends 2001. Washington, DC: American Federation of Teachers, AFL-CIO.
51.
Newmann, F. M. (Ed.). (1996). Authentic achievement: Restructuring schools for intellectual quality. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
52.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (H.R. 1), 107 Cong., 110 (2002) (enacted).
53.
Paccione, A. V., McWhorter, B. A., & Richburg, R. W. (2000). Ten years on the fast track: Effective teacher preparation for nontraditional candidates. In D. J. McIntyre & D. M. Byrd (Eds.), Research on effective models for teacher education (pp. 218-234). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
54.
Palinscar, A. (1984). Teaching reading as thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
55.
Podgursky, M. (2003). Fringe benefits. Education Next, 3(3), 71-78.
56.
Podgursky, M. (2001). Regulation versus markets: The case for greater flexibility in the market for public school teachers. In M. C. Wang & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Tomorrow's Teachers (pp. 117-148). Richmond, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
57.
Public Education Network & Education Week. (2003). Demanding quality public education in tough economic times: What voters want from elected leaders. Washington, DC: Author.
58.
Raymond, M., Fletcher, S., & Luque, J. (2001). Teach for America: An evaluation of teacher differences and student outcomes in Houston, Texas. Stanford, CA: The Hoover Institution, Center for Research on Education Outcomes.
59.
Reichardt, R. (2003). Alternative teacher education: Trends and implications in policies and practices. Boulder, CO: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education.
60.
Rothstein, R. (2002, September 25). Teacher shortages vanish when the price is right. The New York Times, p. B8-B8.
61.
Rowan, B. (1994). Comparing teachers' work with work in other occupations: Notes on the professional status of teaching. Educational Researcher, 23(6), 4-17.
62.
Sack, J. L. (2002). Revenue shortfall prompts big school cuts in California. Education Week, 21(21), 19-19.
63.
Sanders, W. L., & Rivers, J. C. (1996). Cumulative and residual effects of teachers on future student academic achievement. Knoxville, TN: University of Tennessee Value-Added Research and Assessment Center.
64.
Southeast Center for Teaching Quality. (2002). Recruiting teachers to hard-tostaff schools: Solutions for the Southeast & the nation. Chapel Hill, NC: Author.
65.
Southeast Center for Teaching Quality. (2003). Recruitment and retention strategies in a national and regional context. Chapel Hill, NC: Author.
66.
Smith, T. M., & Ingersoll, R. M. (2003, April). Reducing teacher turnover: Do induction and mentoring programs help? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Educational Research, Chicago, IL.
67.
SRI International. (2001). The status of the teaching profession 2000: An update to the teaching and California's Future Task Force. Santa Cruz, CA: The Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning.
68.
Teaching Commission. (2004). Teaching at risk: A call to action. New York: Author.
69.
U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Meeting the highly qualified teachers challenge: The Secretary's annual report on teacher quality. Washington, DC: Author.
70.
Wilson, S. M., Darling-Hammond, L., & Berry, B. (2001). Steady work: The story of Connecticut's school reform. American Educator, 34-39, 48-48.
71.
Wilson, S., & Floden, B. (2002). Addendum to Teacher preparation research: current knowledge, gaps, and recommendations (2001). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
72.
Yasin, S. (2000). More attention to language diversity needed in teacher preparation. American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education Briefs, 21(11), 1-1.
73.
Zeichner, K.xs M., & Schulte, A. K. (2001). What we know and don't know from peer-reviewed research about alternative teacher certification programs. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(4), 266-282.
