This article is based on a study of the 2001-2002 teacher licensure requirements in all 50 states in the United States. For the study, data were collected on whether states require licensure candidates to pass tests of basic skills, subject matter knowledge, and/or pedagogical knowledge; and whether states use performance assessments in making professional licensure decisions. The main objectives of this article are to examine the extent to which states implemented performance assessments for use in making professional licensure decisions as of 2001-2002, to consider differences among various types of assessments and different ways in which they are used, and to explore challenges to their use in licensure decisions. Despite the promise of these new assessments, few states have implemented them due to concerns about costs; the need to establish evidence related to validity, reliability, and fairness; and the assessments' potential effects on teacher supply.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (1999). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2.
Association of Mexican-American Educators v. California, 937 F. Supp. 1397 (N.C. Cal. 1996), aff'd, 183 F.3d 1055 (9th Cir. 1999).
3.
Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (1999). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Committee on Developments in the Science of Learning, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
4.
Coleman, J. S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfeld, F. D., et al. (1966). Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
5.
Collins, K. M., Schutz, A. M., & Moss, P. A. (1997). INTASC candidate interviews: A summary report. Unpublished manuscript, Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium.
6.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a National Commission report. Educational Researcher, 27(1), 5-15.
7.
Darling-Hammond, L., Berry, B., & Thoreson, A. (2001). Does teacher certification matter? Evaluating the evidence. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23(1), 57-77.
8.
Darling-Hammond, L., Wise, A. E., & Klein, S. P. (1995). A license to teach: Building a profession for 21 st-century schools. Boulder, CO: Westview.
9.
Dwyer, C. A. (1994). Development of the knowledge base for the Praxis III classroom performance assessments assessment criteria. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
10.
Ehrenberg, R. G., & Brewer, D. J. (1995). Did teachers' verbal ability and race matter in the 1960s? Coleman revisited. Economics of Education Review, 14(1), 1-21.
11.
Fennema, E., Carpenter, T. P., Franke, M. L., Levi, L., Jacobs, V. R., & Empson, S. B. (1996). A longitudinal study of learning to use children's thinking in mathematics instruction. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 27(4), 403-434.
12.
Ferguson, R. F. (1991). Paying for public education: New evidence on how and why money matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 28(2): 465-498.
13.
Floden, R. E., & Klinzing, H. G. (1990). What can research on teacher thinking contribute to teacher preparation? A second opinion. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 15-20.
14.
Goertz, M. E., & Pitcher, B. (1985). The impact of NTE use by states on teacher selection. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
15.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (1997). Evaluating the effect of teacher degree level on educational performance. In W. J. Fowler (Ed.), Developments in school finance, 1996 (pp. 197-210). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
16.
Goldhaber, D. D., & Brewer, D. J. (2000). Does teacher certification matter? High school teacher certification status and student achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2), 129-146.
17.
Graham, P. A. (1987). Black teachers: A drastically scarce resource. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(8), 598-605.
18.
Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New York: Teachers College Press.
19.
Haertel, E. H. (1991). New forms of teacher assessment. In G. Grant (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 17, 3-29.
20.
Haney, W., Madaus, G., & Kreitzer, A. (1987). Charms talismanic: Testing teachers for the improvement of American education. In E. Z. Rothkopf (Ed.), Review of Research in Education, 14, 169-238.
21.
Hanushek, E. A. (1992). The trade-off between child quantity and quality. Journal of Political Economy, 100(1), 84-117.
22.
Ingersoll, R. M. (1999). Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the organization of schools (a CTP working paper). Seattle, WA: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
23.
Klein, S. P. (1998). Standards for teacher tests. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 12(2), 123-138.
24.
Kuligowski, B., Holdzkom, D., & French, R. (1993). Teacher performance evaluation in the southeastern states: Forms and functions. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 1, 335-358.
25.
Livingston, S. (1993). Inter-assessor consistency of the Praxis III classroom performance assessment: Spring 1992 preliminary version. Unpublished report, Educational Testing Service, Princeton, NJ.
26.
Melnick, S., & Pullin, D. (2000). Can you take dictation? Prescribing teacher quality through testing. Journal of Teacher Education, 51(4), 262-275.
27.
Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational Researcher, 18(2), 5-11.
28.
Mitchell, K. J., Robinson, D. Z., Plake, B. S., & Knowles, K. T. (Eds.). (2001). Testing teacher candidates: The role of licensure tests in improving teacher quality. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
29.
Monk, D. H., & King, J. A. (1994). Multilevel teacher resource effects in pupil performance in secondary mathematics and science: The case of teacher subject matter preparation. In R. G. Ehrenberg (Ed.), Choices and consequences: Contemporary policy issues in education. (pp. 29-58). Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
30.
Moss, P. A. (1998a). Response to Porter, Odden, and Youngs. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
31.
Moss, P. A. (1998b). Rethinking validity in the assessment of teaching. In N. Lyons & G. Grant (Eds.), With portfolio in hand: Portfolios in teaching and teacher education (pp. 202-219). New York: Teachers College Press.
32.
Pecheone, R. L., & Stansbury, K. (1996). Connecting teacher assessment and school reform. Elementary School Journal, 97(2), 163-177.
33.
Porter, A. C., Youngs, P., & Odden, A. (2001). Advances in teacher assessment and their uses. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (4th ed., pp. 259-297). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
34.
Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and learning to think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
35.
Rowan, B., Chiang, F., & Miller, R. J. (1997). Using research on employees' performance to study the effects of teachers on students' achievement. Sociology of Education, 70(4), 256-284.
36.
Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57(1), 1-22.
37.
Smith, I. L., Miller, M. C., & Joy, J. (1988). A case study of the impact of performance-based testing on the supply of minority teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 39(4), 45-53.
38.
Wayne, A. J., & Youngs, P. (in press). Teacher characteristics and student achievement gains: A review. Review of Educational Research.
