"; ?> NACCTEP: Monthly Brief

Volume 1, Issue 1
January, 2004

Inside this issue:

Penalize Diversity?
Education Bill
Quality Counts
Quick Links
Keeping Good
Smarthinking
State by State
Nation’s Report Card
Educational Practices



This Policy Brief is developed by the National Center for Teacher Education of the Maricopa Community Colleges.

Please direct any comments or submissions to:
Dr. Cheri St. Arnauld
Executive Director,
National Association of Community College Teacher Education Programs/ National Director of Teacher Education Programs

2411 W. 14th Street
Tempe, AZ 85281
Phone: 480.731.8726
Fax: 480.731.8786
Welcome to the First Monthly Publication of the Policy Brief.

The purpose of this brief is to provide a resource for teacher education professionals, administrators and students, from which teacher preparation, recruitment, retention and renewal programs and policies can be developed. As a service to the members of the National Association of Community College Teacher Education Programs, this document synthesizes the most up-to-date national information specifically affecting current teacher education initiatives. The Policy Brief is developed by the National Center for Teacher Education of the Maricopa Community Colleges.

Penalizing Diverse Schools?

The purpose of the No Child Left Behind Act is to raise student achievement, nationwide. To accomplish this goal, the act requires various student sub-groups to be tested and display progress in every school across the nation. In demographically diverse schools, local educators must assess the performance of several sub-groups: each ethnic group, students with limited English, those with disabilities and children from low-income families.

According to a new study, thousands of schools in California are falling short of the No Child Left Behind standards. This is not due to low achievement, but rather because their student diversity triggers federal sanctions more readily than less diverse schools.

The study found that the percentage of schools that met their Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) goals were indirectly correlated to the number of student subgroups they were comprised of. In other words, the more diverse the school, the less likely they were to meet their AYP goals. Additionally, schools that served lower income families and their children, on average, were less likely to achieve their AYP growth targets.

Failing just one of approximately 20 separate targets brings federal sanctions, from allowing parents to choose another school, to replacing school staff if performance does not improve.

These findings could have huge impacts on the already heated issues surrounding the No Child Left Behind Act. Download the complete study as an pdf.


Senate Democrats Introduce Higher Education Bill

On October 28, Democratic senators on t he Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee introduced S. 1793, a bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA) of 1965. The bill, dubbed the College Quality, Affordability, and Diversity Improvement Act of 2003, represents the first major step toward HEA reauthorization on the Senate side.

Schools of education have much at stake in the reauthorization. For example, Tit le II of S. 1793 offers new initiatives and funding aimed at improving the Teacher Quality Enhancement program. Funding for state and partnership grants would grow to $300 million. Other competitive awards would provide support for mentoring programs, housing incentives for teachers in certain communities, partnerships between community colleges and 4-year institutions, training for paraprofessionals to become teachers, and a leadership development program for principals and superintendents. Preparing Tomorrow’s Teachers to Use Technology is also reauthorized under this title.

The state grant program is amended to better articulate links between teacher preparation programs and the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, and collaboration between schools of education and local districts is encouraged.

The bill, dubbed the College Quality, Affordability, and Diversity Improvement Act of 2003, represents the first major step toward HEA reauthorization on the Senate side.

The partnership grant program is redesigned to improve preparation and induction programs through enhanced clinical experiences, better professional development opportunities, and paid internships for students who have already completed a 4-year degree. Language calls for only the “highest performing” education schools in a state— those with at least 80% of their graduates having passed states’ tests—to be eligible to compete for this funding. In all, authorized spending on Title II would grow to $650 million. Beyond the new competitive grant programs, S. 1793 also includes the targeted, enhanced loan-forgiveness bill adopted by the House of Representatives earlier this year.

Rules regarding teacher quality and other accountability measures are also modified in this bill. S. 1793 calls on colleges and universities to report the percentage of teaching candidates who pass each of the states’ tests, rather than program completers recommended for licensure. States would then rank teacher preparation programs according to these scores.

States would be required t o collect data from institutions on placement, faculty, and tracking of graduates. Colleges would also have t o report the number of students in their programs, hours of supervised “ practice teaching,” and the faculty-student ratio in practice teaching. Unlike the approach favored in t he House of Representatives, however, the proposed Senate language moves away from holding education schools accountable for the success of their graduates in raising K-12 test scores.

The Senate Democratic proposal would also f und a 2-year study of teacher education, administered by the National Academy of Sciences, to develop a suggested core curriculum in pedagogy for schools of education in areas such as learning, human development, assessment, teaching strategies, and reading instruction. Previously, Senate action had been limited to a single oversight hearing. The House of Representatives, in contrast , has nearly completed its work on the legislation dividing it into four separate parts and tackling all but the largest — student financial aid—this year. The completed reauthorization of HEA is not anticipated until the 109th Congress.

Reprinted with Permission from AACTE; BRIEFS, [December 8, 2003].