No abstract

It is a commonly understood problem in education that many highly qualified teachers tend to gravitate toward higher performing schools, including schools with lower minority enrollments and lower incidence of poverty. This article explores the distribution of a subset of teachers, namely, those who are National Board Certified. To what extent do these teachers' assignment choices mirror the pattern of their non-Board Certified colleagues and to what extent are they different? Part of a larger study of Board Certified Teachers in lower performing schools, the article examines the distribution of NBCTs in the six states with the largest number of them'California, Florida, Mississippi, North Carolina, Ohio, and South Carolina. The research finds that, with the exception of California, Board Certified Teachers are not equitably distributed across schools that serve different populations of students. In five of the six states examined, poor, minority, and lower performing students are far less likely to benefit from the teaching of an NBCT than are their more affluent, majority, higher performing peers. The article explores some possible explanations for the California distribution pattern as well as the kinds of incentives provided across the states for teachers to seek Board Certification and for those who earn it. The authors conclude with a rationale and a set of policy suggestions for realigning the distribution of NBCTs.

This paper is the culmination of a three-year study that sought to frame an initial answer to the question, "What are the circumstances and conditions under which National Board Certified teachers (NBCTs) can have a positive impact on low-performing schools?" The study, funded by Atlantic Philanthropies, was part of the National Board's more comprehensive effort to answer a number of research questions about the impacts of board certification and board certified teachers in schools and districts across the country.

Background Alternative teacher certification has become an increasingly popular strategy for addressing both teacher quality and teacher shortages. However, there is little agreement about what constitutes alternative certification, and there is little known about the types of programs that prepare highly qualified teachers. The debate over alternative certification has fueled a variety of assumptions about participants and programs that are based on opinion or the limited research base. Focus of Study Our research describes in detail seven programs to understand who participates in these programs and what learning opportunities the programs provide. We test proponents’ and opponents’ assumptions about alternative certification against national data and data from the seven programs. Research Design We employed multiple data collection activities at both the program and participant levels. We conducted case studies of seven alternative certification programs, including multiple interviews with key personnel and document reviews. We surveyed program participants twice—once at the beginning of their participation in the program, and again at the end of their first year of teaching. We also observed a sample of participants teaching and interviewed them both at the beginning and end of their first year of teaching. Findings We find that both sides of the debate fail to capture the variation in participants’ characteristics and their experience in the programs. Alternative certification program participants are a diverse group of individuals who defy generalization. In addition, we find a great deal of variation between and within alternative certification programs. In contrast to simplistic characterizations, we find teacher development in alternative certification to be a function of the interaction between the program as implemented, the school context in which participants are placed, and the participants’ backgrounds and previous teaching experiences. Conclusions We conclude by questioning the usefulness of comparing different alternative certification programs and instead suggest that a better unit of analysis would be a subgroup of individuals with similar backgrounds, school placements, and learning opportunities.