I’ve read SB1042 over and over again, likewise the accompanying Fact Sheet, and I keep coming to the same conclusion. Every media report I’ve read about the teacher certification law is wrong except mine. That sounds like the ravings of an egomaniac, I know, but until someone shows me I’m wrong, I’m sticking to my reading of the new law.
Here’s what the new certification rules say as I read them. If you have a baccalaureate degree and nothing more, you can teach at a public middle or high school in a subject relevant to your content area. Even if you don’t have a baccalaureate degree, you can teach if you’ve previously taught three years in an accredited postsecondary institution or if you’ve worked in a relevant field for five years. If you meet any of the three criteria—any of them—you qualify for a Subject Matter Expert Standard Teaching Certificate and can jump right into the classroom. You’ll never be required to take an education course, and you’ll never have to take a professional knowledge proficiency exam, ever. The only other thing you’ll need is a fingerprint clearance card.
That’s it. That’s all you need to start teaching. A bachelor’s degree in a field taught in 6th through 12th grade. Or three years teaching in an accredited post-high school setting. Or five years working in a relevant field. Any of the three will do. The earlier version of the law, which applied only to teachers in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields, said you had to have both a bachelor’s and three years of post-high school teaching experience to qualify for a specialized teaching certificate. The new version applies to all 6th through 12th grade subjects, and it says either of those will do, then it adds five years of work experience as a third option.
All other media reports I’ve read say you need a bachelor’s degree plus teaching or work experience to qualify. Uh uh. It’s not both/and. It’s either/or. To me, the law is clear as day, and it sets the bar for teaching far lower than other media reports have stated. If I’ve got it wrong, I’m fine with that. But until someone can show me the error of my ways, I’m going to continue to believe I’ve read the bill more carefully, and more accurately, than other people who’ve written about it.
At the bottom of this post is the relevant portion of the bill so you can read it yourself. But first, a few more observations about the wording and meaning of the law.
The law says you need a bachelor’s, master’s or doctoral degree to teach. Unless someone skips over the bachelor’s and goes straight to the higher degrees, mentioning the other two degrees is unnecessary. A bachelor’s is all you need.
Since the law says all you need to teach is a bachelor’s degree in a field taught in middle or high school, there’s no need to add the parts about postsecondary teaching experience or work experience unless the purpose of those passages is to include people who don’t meet the degree requirement. Otherwise, the other two qualifications are redundant. If you can teach with nothing but a bachelor’s without postsecondary teaching or relevant work experience, why add those two categories? The only reasonable explanation is that a degree isn’t necessary if you meet either of the other two qualifications. Since it’s possible to teach at some postsecondary institutions or work in related fields without a bachelor’s if an employer sees fit to hire you, that gives public middle and high schools the right to hire teachers without a degree from a four year college. Actually, the law can be taken further. If you meet either of the other two qualifications, you can teach even if you’ve never taken a college course in your life. Hell, you don’t even need to be a high school graduate. Just read the law.
Here’s the relevant passage of SB1042. If you read the bill online, you’ll see it’s marked up with some passages from the earlier version crossed out and new passages in all caps, but I’m giving you a clean version of the new rules.
A person is eligible for a Subject Matter Expert Standard teaching certificate pursuant to this subdivision if the person obtains a valid fingerprint clearance card that is issued pursuant to Title 41, Chapter 12, Article 3.1 and meets any of the following requirements:
(i) Has taught courses relevant to a content area or subject matter for the last two consecutive years and for a total of at least three years at one or more regionally or nationally accredited public or private postsecondary institutions. A person shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement by providing the state board with written proof of employment for specific durations from one or more qualifying postsecondary institutions.
(ii) Has either a baccalaureate degree, a master’s degree or a doctoral degree in a specific subject area that is directly relevant to a content area or subject matter in public schools.
(iii) Demonstrates expertise through relevant work experience of at least five years in a field that is relevant to a content area or subject matter taught in public schools. A person shall demonstrate compliance with this requirement by providing the state board with written proof of employment.
This article appears in May 11-17, 2017.
It’s you.
Just wondering how this will impact school accreditation standings, especially at the high school level when students are filling out those college applications. Have not seen any discussion about the his at all.
It’s a common sense law. That in itself explains why libby Safier is against it.
We need teachers with real world experience, not professional teachers. This is especially true at the high school level.
Anything that breaks the stranglehold of the union/educational establishment and associated group think can’t be too bad. From what I’ve seen an educational degree doesn’t do much to make you a better teacher than other relevant life experience and/or education.
I wonder what the criteria are for firing them (or any teacher) if they’re found to be incompetent?
you are spot on. the relevant word is “or.”
What’s deeply disturbing to me is that there is no regard for the the fact that teachers need to be skilled in education, not only their subject matter expertise.
What is going to happen when schools lose their accreditation and no Arizona high school graduates will be admitted to college? Does the governor even know anything about this small roadblock? Apparently not.
You are completely right. The relevant sentence in the bill is “…meets ANY of the following requirements:”
In the course of earning an undergraduate and two graduate degrees, I was subjected to far too many professors and teaching assistants who had no idea how to teach, so I had to teach myself. At the university level, instructors don’t need any teaching credentials other than a bachelor’s degree. That’s bad enough, don’t subject early learners to such a low standard!
It amuses me immensely to think that some people think they can just walk in off the street and start teaching. These new “certified” teachers are in for a very, very, very rude awakening.
As someone who was convinced that Trump was conspiring with Russians last Augustand talking about itI can relate to the slightly embarrassing position of calling everyone else wrong, and that nagging feeling of self doubt. But the operative word in graf one is “any” and your reading is certainly correct. The other reporting deserves a correction.
The net effect is that Arizona has decided to conduct an uncontrolled experiment in using trainers as teachers. Unfortunately, this may not prepare students for future learning. You only need to ask yourself how many terrible corporate trainers have wasted your time to know this is a risky plan. Or just count how many were good. That’s a lot quicker.
Don’t worry about the colleges. They will accept anybody with the ability to pay, especially if they pay with tax dollars. They have been accepting TUSD students that couldn’t read or write for years.
I want my surgeons to have real world experience, what’s with all of this schooling and expensive training? Why, my uncle could gut a fish in 30 second flat, filleted and ready for the grill. He’d a made a fine surgeon without all that fancy book lernin.
You are correct and the world is wrong. Again. Or sometimes.
I don’t join the comments section much, but I gotta say, I rarely get so many people saying I got it right. I know people will be all over me in the next post no matter what it is, but I’m going to enjoy this brief moment of positive vibes while it’s here.
Really?
Comments (269)
Somebody is all wet.
This is a boon to private religioous schools who now can claim publ;ic vouchers for tuition.
Must have been taught writing by one of those semi-qualified teachers.
Teacher need to know HOW to teach as well as knowing the subject matter.
We will have plenty of Ben Steins teaching the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act. Anyone? Anyone? You do realize that Charter and private religious schools, already can hire and many do, uncertified teachers. This means Jay Lawrence can go into a classroom, maybe 7th grade math, that would be a nice challenge.
The plan is to water down the quality of teaching to the point that all schools “fail.” Then corporate raiders can take them over, collect tax money and close them down and transfer their loot offshore. We can stop this now. Get out and vote!
I’m a school counselor with three graduate degrees and I support the law because it allows me to be more flexible within my school and provide more support to my students and the teachers with whom I work. Now, I can get certification to teach psychology or health courses ( have a M.S. in Counseling Psych and an MPH in Public Health) without having to go back to school to take additional coursework in teaching…. It allows my students to learn from an expert in the field (for example, right now our music teacher teaches health and our science teacher teaches psychology) which gives me more of a chance to make the information more useful, relevant, and even accurate for them.
Teaching does require a special set of skills and it is an important job, but it isn’t something that requires year of coursework at a college to get down. If you know the content, the rest you can master with practice and professional development courses provided through the district. Since teaching is a skills-based profession, there’s no point in requiring coursework in skills people have already mastered; allowing the districts to provide individualized support increases the potential for new people in the field to succeed without making entry so onerous that nobody wants to bother.