Having all the nation鈥檚 teachers meet the definition of being 鈥渉ighly qualified鈥� is an admirable goal, but the No Child Left Behind Act鈥檚 current teacher-quality provisions make it hard to retain well-trained teachers, especially in schools serving poor and minority children, witnesses said last week in California at the first hearing called by an independent panel working to improve the law.
鈥淭his isn鈥檛 about money, this is about how we treat the people who do the work,鈥� said Don Iglesias, the superintendent of the 32,000-student San Jose Unified School District. Teachers are working hard, he added during the hearing that was also webcast, but especially in low-performing schools, they are not receiving recognition for their efforts to improve performance.
Those thoughts were echoed by Pixie Hayward-Schickele, a 2nd grade teacher from the 35,000-student West Contra Costa Unified district and the chairwoman of the California Teachers Association鈥檚 working group on the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. She testified that the No Child Left Behind law, the 4-year-old overhaul of the ESEA, has taken the joy out of teaching with its emphasis on reading and math and its testing mandates.
鈥淲e are shortchanging the children most in need of a broad educational opportunity,鈥� she charged.
Calls for Flexibility
Last week鈥檚 event鈥攁t California State Polytechnic University in Pomona鈥攚as the first in a series of five hearings to be held by the Commission on No Child Left Behind. Co-chaired by former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Tommy G. Thompson and former Georgia Gov. Roy E. Barnes, the bipartisan commission is analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of the federal law, which is due to come up for reauthorization next year.
The panel, which includes 13 other members from the fields of education, business, and civil rights, will make recommendations on how to improve the law and on its impact on closing various achievement gaps.
At the gathering, Mr. Barnes, a Democrat, said the commission was still in the information-gathering phase and didn鈥檛 have any preconceived conclusions about recommendations.
Housed at the Washington-based Aspen Institute, the commission is supported by several private philanthropies, including the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, and the Carnegie Corporation of New York.
The first hearing focused on the law鈥檚 effects on teacher quality, recruitment, and retention鈥攁 timely topic, because all teachers are required to meet the definition of 鈥渉ighly qualified鈥� by the end of this school year.
The discussion also focused on how poor and minority children are often taught by inexperienced teachers who don鈥檛 have the skills necessary to raise achievement.
Gavin Payne, the chief deputy superintendent for the California education department, told the commissioners that although the state has made progress in meeting the teacher-quality requirements under the law, it won鈥檛 be able to meet the goal if hiring incentives鈥攕uch as college-loan forgiveness and 鈥渟igning鈥� bonuses鈥攁ren鈥檛 provided at the local, state, and federal levels.
鈥淚f Congress and the federal government want better results, they must be willing to pay for their expectations,鈥� Mr. Payne said.
He also recommended that the federal government 鈥渃ontinue on the course鈥� of providing states with flexibility in how they meet the requirements of the law.
Hundreds of Requirements
And those requirements are numerous. The federal Department of Education quietly posted a report on its Web site late last month showing that the law contains more than 580 compliance requirements鈥攕tatements that contain words such as 鈥渟hall,鈥� 鈥渨ill鈥� or 鈥渕ust,鈥� according to Helen Lew, the assistant inspector general for audit services at the department.
School districts and even the department itself are ignoring some of those rules, and roughly 15 percent of the requirements aren鈥檛 even included in NCLB monitoring guides, says her report, which was submitted to Henry L. Johnson, the department鈥檚 assistant secretary for elementary and secondary education.
The report gives some weight to arguments by some states, such as Connecticut, that the law contains too many unfunded mandates.
Ms. Lew reviewed monitoring guides and state enforcement reports. She recommended that the department investigate whether some of the requirements could be dropped during the reauthorization process.
In a response to the inspector general鈥檚 office, however, Assistant Secretary Johnson said he disagreed with the report. 鈥淎 review of monitoring documents,鈥� he wrote, 鈥渋s not an appropriate way to determine the usefulness of individual statutory provisions,鈥� according to the report.
At last week鈥檚 hearing, one speaker also made the point that states have been dragging their feet on complying with the law and trying to water down the teacher-quality provisions as much as possible.
鈥淚n the absence of consistent oversight, states seize the opportunity to ignore the legislative intent鈥� of Congress, said Russlynn Ali, the executive director of the Education Trust-West in Oakland, Calif. Like its Washington counterpart, the group, which promotes standards-based education for poor and minority students, supports the NCLB law.
Ms. Ali added that federal funds, including those for professional development in schools serving poor and minority children, are not being targeted correctly.
Neither 鈥渟tates nor the federal government have lived up to their responsibilities,鈥� she contended.
Other suggestions made at the hearing included improving mentoring programs for teachers during their first couple of years on the job, or screening out those who don鈥檛 meet expectations after a probationary period.
Written comments are also being accepted by the commission through its Web site, .
