This document has been formatted for printing from your browser from the Web site of the Illinois Association of School Boards.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE -- This document is © copyrighted by the Illinois Association of School Boards. IASB hereby grants to school districts and other Internet users the right to download, print and reproduce this document provided that (a) the Illinois Association of School Boards is noted as publisher and copyright holder of the document and (b) any reproductions of this document are disseminated without charge and not used for any commercial purpose.

Illinois School Board Journal
September/October 2003

Recertification:
Friend or foe to Illinois educators?

by Jama Wahl

Jama Wahl is a guidance counselor at Shepherd Middle School and LPDC chairperson in Ottawa Elementary School District 141.

Most school boards concentrating on the serious fiscal issues that confront schools in Illinois may not have paid much attention to another critical concern facing them: teacher recertification.

The new recertification process has the potential to dig deeply into the pockets of local districts, as well as derail positive school climate.

As chairperson for our Local Professional Development Committee (LPDC) since its inception, I have participated in focus groups, attended training sessions and shared my concerns with local, regional and state officials. A nagging question has always existed: Will the new process be a friend or foe to Illinois education?

Professional development for educators is not an issue. Educators have recognized the need for continuing education and pursued it because it was the appropriate and professional thing to do. Many did so at their own expense; others used funds or programs offered through their districts. Whether by graduate work or staff development, educators have made a good faith effort to stay current.

But the process, as it stands now, requires a teacher to submit a plan, "guesstimating" professional development activities for the next five years. Every time a teacher's circumstances or teaching assignment change, a new plan must be resubmitted and reviewed. The plan is reviewed by a group of peers, the LPDC.

Once the plan is approved, the teacher must participate in 120 hours of professional development over the next five years. Claims for credit, documenting these efforts, are then submitted to the LPDC for approval. Claims must reflect how this activity will affect one's teaching as it relates to the Illinois Learning Standards, and the education of regular and special needs students.

The Corey H ruling places an additional expectation on recertification. Corey H is the common reference for the lawsuit brought against Chicago Public Schools and the Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE). The lawsuit, filed on behalf of 53,000 students with disabilities, sought relief to have those special education students included in regular classrooms, rather than being removed to separate classrooms for instruction. As part of the settlement, guidelines now require 20 percent of staff development for each teacher to relate to special education for regular educators and 50 percent for special educators.

The Certificate Renewal Manual explaining the process is quite lengthy. Each district was given a few copies of the manual, but until recently, numerous teachers had to share the limited manuals available. Educators were expected to know the information in the manuals, but few had access to them.

Fortunately, information is now online at the ISBE Web page (http://www.isbe.state.il.us/recertification/default.htm), but this is two years after the process began. Also because of the Corey H ruling, the process continues to change, making manuals outdated.

When asked about the mountains of paperwork required by the process, neither the regional offices of education nor the ISBE wants to retain a copy of the plans. If no one wants a copy, why is this paperwork necessary?

The Illinois Manufacturers Association (IMA) has played a large role in designing the new process, pushing educators to be retrained to meet their standards. Since IMA members are not trained educators, I find it interesting that they feel at all qualified to tell the educational community how to be effective. I am sure they would not be willing to have the tables turned with educators developing expectations for their businesses.

Unfortunately, politics also has played a large part in the education of the children of Illinois. If as much time, money and energy were spent on finding a fair funding method for Illinois public schools as has been spent on the certification and recertification efforts, we might see improved educational efforts and results.

Contractual expectations

Many districts include expectations for professional development in their teacher contracts. Our district expectation has been in place since the 1980s. We could abandon our current requirement for the state expectation, but since our method of professional development is streamlined and efficient, moving to the far less effective mode is a poor choice.

If a district has a contractual agreement for professional development, a letter of assurance could be provided to the regional office and ISBE, exempting teachers within that district from the cumbersome recertification process. If a teacher moved to another district without a contractual expectation, it would be his or her responsibility to have kept a record of professional development activities.

I understand the reasoning to keep administrators out of the recertification process. However, by forcing peer review, a possibility exists for hostility. We faced this at the beginning of the process when no one had any idea how this was going to work. Hostility arose again as we explained the new, revised rulings regarding Corey H.

Is it fair and appropriate to have the rules continue to change? I think not. If the rules change, there should be a "grandfather" clause for those who have already completed claims for credit and received approval. The hostility and frustration caused by frequent changes in the process affects the school climate, which ultimately affects learning.

The new ruling says graduate work does not have to fall under the 20 percent or 50 percent expectation for staff development in the area of special education. My hunch is more people will do graduate work for their claims for credit simply because they will not have to redo forms or complete additional activities.

The resulting domino effect will take a toll on district finances. More individuals doing more graduate work will put more people further over on the salary scale, which puts more districts at a greater risk financially. How does the state propose to support this? How can local districts support this?

The LPDC's work falls outside the school day, without financial remuneration, and is clearly a breach of most, if not all, contractual agreements. Here is another example of a state-mandated procedure with no financial backing or support. It works, however cumbersome, demeaning or unfair, due to the dedication of educators who go above and beyond for their colleagues, students and the community.

Some might suggest that educators had a chance to voice their opinions at hearings, but few were present to make their voices known. We placed our faith in ISBE leaders, our lobbyists of the Illinois Education Association and the Illinois Federation of Teachers, as well as elected officials. It is possible we were not asked our opinion prior to such hearings or meetings. It is also possible that educators were too entrenched in teaching to take time to consider that their profession would not be treated with dignity and respect.

The Illinois Learning Standards are valuable and vital. If teachers were given time to evaluate curriculum based on these standards, rather than write recertification plans, rewrite plans, submit claims and resubmit claims, we might see that no child is left behind. However, we are spending precious time on the recertification process, taking time away from students. If the ultimate goal is to make classrooms stronger, the time and frustration connected to the recertification process has the potential to put this goal out of reach.

One can only hope that those wielding the political power to redesign, change or abate this recertification process can, and will, step forward to take a leadership role. If not, there will be critical financial consequences facing school boards throughout Illinois. The climate of public education in Illinois will spiral downward and children will be left behind.