Keeping high quality teachers: it's difficult to argue against ensuring a "highly qualified" teacher in every classroom. But some legislators are worried that states won't be able to recruit and retain enough teachers to meet the requirements of the No Child Left Behind Act.

On her first day of summer break, Melissa Fine, a sixth grade teacher at Thunder Ridge Middle School in Aurora, Colo., found out that, despite 25 years of classroom experience and 11 years of teaching math and science to sixth graders, she is not considered "highly qualified."

Fine will need to complete 48 credits of math and science course work or pass state assessment tests by the 2005-2006 school year in order to meet the requirements of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act. She plans to retire soon, but not soon enough to avoid this requirement. "This is a real slap in my face," she says. "There's no consideration of my years of experience or how well my students perform. How in the world are we supposed to encourage good teachers to stay in the classroom if we're sending a message like this? We need to recruit and retain teachers, not drive them away."

NCLB requires that all teachers of core academic subjects be "highly qualified" in every subject they teach by 2005. Newly hired teachers already must satisfy this requirement if they work in schools receiving funding under Title I of the act.

Unfortunately, this federal mandate comes at a time when states are struggling to fund their current programs to find and keep teachers. Although it's difficult to argue against a "highly qualified" teacher in every classroom, some legislators are frustrated by the timing of the mandate and the added expenses they now face.

News reports in Idaho, Montana, Minnesota and California tell story after story of teachers who will be displaced as a result of federal policy changes and budget crunches. Rural states and urban centers are hit particularly hard by the new federal requirements. Idaho alone stands to lose about 600 teachers if they can't meet the federal requirements.

"There must he something that they can do to help us out of this situation," says Fine. "We need to consider years of experience and student achievement. We have to respect our teachers as professionals. There has to be a way around these obstacles or we're going to lose our best teachers out of sheer frustration."

THE RETENTION PROBLEM

Recent research confirms what common sense has told us for years: Students taught by exceptional teachers achieve at a higher level. Good teachers also are essential to closing the gap between low-income and minority students and others.

Experts, however, have warned lawmakers over the past decade that there is a shortage of good teachers, especially in poor, low-achieving and rural schools.

These schools have been forced to fill classrooms with emergency-credentialed teachers. The Vance County school system in North Carolina faces this situation, with an estimated 250 out of the system's 640 teaching positions to be filled before the school year begins. "It is absolutely impossible to meet those requirements in this county," says Norman Shearin, superintendent of schools for Vance County. "If you can't get a highly qualified teacher, what do you do? Send the kids home?"

Not only can't we find teachers for certain positions, we also don't keep the good teachers we already have. A report, "No Dream Denied: A Pledge to America's Children," from the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future (NCTAF) warns that the nation faces a severe teacher retention problem.

"The conventional wisdom is that we can't find enough good teachers," says NCTAF Executive Director Tom Carroll. "The truth is that we can't keep enough good teachers." NCTAF found that almost a third of new teachers leave the classroom after only three years, and nearly 50 percent leave after five years.

"It is as if we were pouring teachers into a bucket with a fist-sized hole in the bottom," Carroll says.

It's not a new problem. State legislators and education experts have struggled over the past decade to keep teachers in the classroom, but now NCLB has raised the stakes.

"In the long run, NCLB will mean more opportunities for new teaching grads because more teachers will be needed to cover all the subjects," says Nebraska Senator Pam Redfield. "It will create new jobs, but it will also create new expenses. School districts will have to fund more teaching positions."

WHAT EXPERTS ARE SAYING

States have a ways to go to ensure a highly qualified teacher in every classroom. Only 33 states and the District of Columbia require subject knowledge tests for teachers in order to earn a beginning license, according to Education Week. Even fewer require that middle or high school teachers have a major in the subjects they teach.

In its recent special report, "Quality Counts 2003: If I Can't Learn From You," Education Week graded states on what they were doing to attract, retain and support qualified teachers. It found that only Kentucky bars teaching outside one's field, as Kentucky defines the term. Only 10 more states even attempt to limit the number of out-of-field teachers.

Other research has uncovered similar information about the extent of the so-called "teaching gap." Richard M. Ingersoll at the University of Pennsylvania found that secondary students in very poor schools are twice as likely as those in wealthier districts (26 percent vs. 13 percent) to have a teacher who is not certified in the subject taught.

Ingersoll also found that more than half the students in high poverty middle schools take at least one class with a teacher who has not acquired even a minor in the subject he or she teaches.

"If states hope to close the achievement gap between minority and nonminority students and those from rich and poor families, they must first close the gap in access to skilled teachers," says Virginia B. Edwards, Education Week editor.

Former North Carolina Governor James Hunt, who now chairs the National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, says that lawmakers need to redouble efforts to "recruit, prepare, support and pay for quality teachers.

"In this new era of accountability, leaders will be judged by their commitment to education," Hunt says. "The passage of the No Child Left Behind Act was a clear expression of national will. Its goal to ensure that all children have an opportunity to learn--regardless of income, background or ethnic identity--cannot be achieved unless we assure that good teachers stay in the profession. The act is a pledge to America's children that we must keep."

TIMES HAVE CHANGED

There are plenty of ideas for recruiting and keeping teachers. Over the past decade legislators have created new policies that increase salaries, give signing bonuses, forgive loans, coax retirees back and mentor new teachers.

States spent significant sums of money on these programs--$217 million in 2001, according to an October 2002 National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE) report. Nineteen states and the District of Columbia reported to NASBE that they have at least one incentive program to recruit teachers.

Times, however, are not as good as they once were. Legislators are considering fewer bills than in previous years to help recruit and keep teachers. Twenty-eight states passed legislation in 2001, but only nine states passed such legislation in 2002. Numbers also are low for 2003. Many states have had to cut K-12 funding, and many districts are laying off and cutting benefits for teachers.

OPTIONS FOR STATE LAWMAKERS

State lawmakers have several ways to address the teacher gap. They might consider a task force or interim committee to examine the effectiveness of their incentive programs. Are the funds well spent? Is there a way to get more for the money?

NASBE's report says there is a "mismatch between the areas of greatest need and the target audience of most of the incentives."

Thirty-six states reported shortages in specific locations, but only four--Hawaii, Maryland, Mississippi and New York--had statewide incentives to recruit teachers to those areas. Thirty-five states reported a need for special education teachers, yet only Florida, Oklahoma, Vermont and the District of Columbia offered incentives for special education teachers. Of course, local districts can and do offer their own incentives.

Ohio has been successful with its Commission on Teaching Success. The governor appointed a diverse group of 46 in 2002 to look at teaching quality and make recommendations. It found that the state was losing 25 percent of its teachers in the first five years, as well as suffering shortages in certain areas of the state and in certain subjects. There was also a lack of diversity in many communities. The group made five recommendations to recruit and retain teachers and principals, including drafting a statewide recruitment plan. The commission also recommended supportive teaching and learning environments with time in the school day for ongoing professional development and collaborative planning.

Legislators were given a list of priorities to help them set the commission's package of improvements in motion.

Ohio Senator Robert Gardner served on the commission and recommends that other states put together a similar study panel to "discuss what should be done, not only to get a qualified teacher in front of every student, but also to get the word out that teaching is an honorable profession."

In spite of fiscal woes, other states have worked on policy to recruit and retain teachers during the 2003 session. Mississippi gave teachers a 6 percent pay raise. Alaska passed teacher housing incentives, including low-interest loans and no-down-payment plans. Tennessee called on its Board of Education to propose plans to recruit and keep highly qualified teachers.

Maryland and Indiana had similar bills that did not pass. But Indiana Representative Greg Porter, chair of the Education Committee, says it's important to try. "We must give education a boost because it is economic development. It addresses the achievement gap and cultural competency. If not, we lose all the way around."

FEDERAL ASSISTANCE AVAILABLE

There is money for teachers in the No Child Left Behind Act. School districts must spend at least S percent of the act's Title I funds for highly qualified teachers.

There was $2.85 billion under Title II, Part A, in 2002 to meet the requirements for teacher and principal training and recruitment. States will get an estimated $2.93 billion in 2003.

But 95 percent of these funds pass directly to school districts. Some view this as a windfall for districts at a time when states are struggling to find money for new, innovative recruitment and retention programs. Many policymakers are hoping that the money will be used to continue existing teacher programs or to create new ones that legislators otherwise would not have been able to fund. Colorado, for example, is using its federal money to establish a Web site where applicants can shop and apply for teaching vacancies with just a click of a button.

The U.S. Department of Education recently created a Teacher Assistance Corps, a team of education experts, researchers and practitioners to provide support to state officials as they carry out the teaching quality provisions of NCLB. State participation is voluntary.

There is still concern, however, that there won't be enough financial support from the feds to cover the true cost of getting a highly qualified teacher into every classroom.

"I am very concerned that No Child Left Behind will be a federal mandate without adequate funding," says South Dakota Representative Bill Thompson, a veteran teacher. "Our state is unique with the lowest average salary for teachers. Instead of being able to raise salaries to keep teachers, we may have to use the funding elsewhere."

Whether there is federal funding or not, lawmakers do agree on one thing: They must tackle the issue of teacher retention.

"We cannot hide from this," says Representative Porter. "It will be nipping at our heels. If we are going to continue to fight the battle, then maybe we can find the money. I'm not going to let the lack of money derail progress."

STATES DEFINE "HIGHLY QUALIFIED" TEACHER

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB) requires all teachers to be "highly qualified" by 2003-2006. But what exactly does that mean? And who determines the definition?

The good news is that states can define it themselves, within parameters set by the act.

At a minimum, the law requires all teachers of core academic areas--English, reading or language arts, mathematics, science, foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history and geography--to be fully licensed in the state where they teach, possess bachelor's degrees and demonstrate knowledge of the subject matter.

States are required to submit annual plans to the U.S. Department of Education that outline the steps they will take to ensure they meet this goal by 2005. The state plan must address how it will annually increase the number of highly qualified teachers and those receiving professional development. States can define what it means to be "highly qualified" and determine the steps a teacher must take to gain that designation.

Ten states--Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Maryland, Montana and Virginia--"appear to be on track" for defining highly qualified teachers, according to the Education Commission of the States. Another 21 "appear to be partially on track."

As states consider their definitions, however, education policy experts question whether they will be bold enough to set the bar higher than the minimum federal requirements. Before No Child Left Behind, some states were considering more rigorous teacher preparation and license requirements to improve quality. It is unclear whether states will use the federal requirements as a catalyst to further challenge teachers and drive up quality or struggle to meet even the minimum. States might not be in the mood to experiment with setting the bar higher, since failure to make progress toward a more demanding definition would be widely publicized under federal reporting requirements.

The 10 states that have defined highly qualified teachers appear to be taking a conservative approach, sticking close to the minimum requirements.

PROGRAMS THAT HELP FIND AND KEEP TEACHERS

Over the past decade legislators have created new policies that:

* Increase salaries and benefits.

* Offer loan forgiveness or scholarships.

* Allow retirees to "double dip" into retirement benefits and salary if they return to the classroom.

* Offer tax breaks or incentives.

* Create alternative certification programs and licensure reciprocity.

* Offer signing bonuses.

* Support beginning teachers through mentoring and induction programs.

* Offer high quality professional development and career advancement opportunities.

STATES FEAR LOSING PARAPROFESSIONALS

While states struggle to retain qualified teachers, they have managed to provide help by hiring paraprofessionals. These aides usually do not have formal teacher training or experience and earn minimal, if any, salary, but have a strong desire to help teachers manage their classrooms and help students learn.

Paraprofessionals work in computer labs, assist special education teachers or serve as interpreters for English language learners. Many teachers say they would not be as effective without their help.

Betty Ayers, a veteran special education teacher from Indiana, attributes much of her success to the work of her paraprofessionals. "They are a critical component in education. They spend one-on-one time with students and reinforce instruction in a way that teachers just can't because of large class size."

The federal No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 also recognizes the importance of paraprofessionals and requires them also to be "highly qualified." If schools take the federal money, their paraprofessionals must have completed two years of post-secondary schooling, obtained an associate's degree or higher or passed an assessment demonstrating their skills. Paraprofessionals must meet these requirements by the 2005-2006 school year.

This has legislators and teachers worried that they will lose these invaluable school staff members. It might be hard for some to become highly qualified because they cannot afford school on their minimal salaries, do not have access to post-secondary education in their rural communities or instead find other jobs. Or they may choose to attend school for a couple of more years to become a licensed teacher or work in another field altogether. "This is likely to have a severe impact on our rural state," says New Mexico Representative Rick Miera. "If we lose our education assistants, then we may lose our teachers. This is likely to change the whole atmosphere."

Ayers expresses similar concerns. "I am so afraid that this law will force my paraprofessionals to leave the classroom. I can't imagine what it will be like for my students if that happens."

Representative Miera is investigating what assistance his state can realistically afford to offer to paraprofessionals. He'd like to be able to reward them for experience and college courses taken. He also plans to work with the higher education community to solve the dilemma.

The Colorado General Assembly also is working with the higher education community and now requires community colleges to create paraprofessional preparation programs. Indiana legislators introduced a resolution urging Congress to grandfather in current paraprofessionals with 10 or more years of experience. California, New Jersey, North Carolina and Rhode Island also are considering legislation regarding teacher paraprofessionals.

Michelle Exstrom is an education specialist at NCSL.