Regents Item

THE STATE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT / THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK / ALBANY, NY 12234

TO:	Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee
FROM:	Johanna Duncan-Poitier
SUBJECT:	P-16 Implementation and Evaluation of the Regents Teaching Policy: Second Annual Report on Teacher Supply and Demand
DATE:	March 9, 2007
STRATEGIC GOAL:	Goal 3
AUTHORIZATION(S):

SUMMARY

Issue for Discussion

What does the data on teacher supply and demand reveal about teacher shortages? What strategies should be used to eliminate those shortages and ensure that all students have certified and highly qualified teachers?

Reason(s) for Consideration

Review of policy.

Proposed Handling

This item will come before the Higher Education and Professional Practice Committee for discussion at its March 2007 meeting.

Procedural History

In May 2006, the Regents discussed the first annual report on teacher supply and demand that was based on data from 2004-2005 and preliminary data from 2005-2006 from the New York City Department of Education. This report is based on complete, final 2005-2006 data.

Background Information

In 1996, the Regents Task Force on Teaching was convened to recommend policies that would ensure that all teachers had the knowledge and skills they needed to help all students meet State Learning Standards. The Task Force’s recommendations were adopted as the Regents 1998 teaching policy, Teaching to Higher Standards: New York’s Commitment.

Teaching to Higher Standards called for ongoing evaluations of the 1998 policy changes, including evaluations to “assure that New York has enough qualified teachers statewide.” As part of ongoing evaluations, several reports on teacher quality have been issued recently.

§ The May 2006 first-of-its-kind annual report on teacher supply and demand detailed data on shortages of certified teachers by subject area, region and Big Five City.

§ The revised teacher quality plan submitted to the U.S. Department of Education in September 2006 pursuant to federal law detailed data on the percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers in school year 2004-2005.

§ A January 2007 report provided data on the percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers in school year 2005-2006.

§ A February 2007 report presented data on the projected shortages of teachers for students with disabilities in grades 10 through 12.

The attached Second Annual Report on Teacher Supply and Demand in New York State in 2005-2006 includes multiple indicators of teacher shortages. Compared to the first annual report, this report has some new definitions suggested by teacher educators that yield more accurate estimates of teacher supply and more regional data to support planning by regional partnerships of P-12 schools and institutions of higher education. It also has new indicators of future demand for new teachers based on the needs of the field and feedback from the Board of Regents.

The attached report does not contain the comprehensive list of all the approaches underway to address teacher shortages since those approaches have been described in earlier reports and in three aligned plans that are being implemented by the Regents and the Department with partners in the P-16 education community and others. The three plans are:

§ Statewide Plan for Higher Education (July 2005);

§ New York State’s Plan to Enhance Teacher Quality (September 2006);

§ P-16 Education: A Plan for Action (November 2006)

Each plan has both short-term and long-term approaches to meeting the need for certified and highly qualified teachers. Short-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

§ a retirement bill to bring retired teachers back to the classroom in shortage areas for a limited time;

§ financial incentives for teacher recruitment and retention in shortage areas, through Teachers of Tomorrow, the Teacher Opportunity Corps, federal loan forgiveness and other funding sources;

§ increased opportunities for alternative teacher preparation in shortage areas with transitional, internship and supplementary certificates and with innovative teacher recruitment, such as the IBM initiative with industry partners;

§ technical assistance for teacher recruitment and retention in high-need, low-performing districts; and

§ review of teacher certification requirements to find opportunities to add flexibility without compromising quality and to increase the supply of teachers in shortage areas.

Long-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

§ reports, interactive data tools and technical assistance to support teacher workforce planning by regional partnerships of P-12 districts and higher education;

§ external research on the effectiveness of teacher preparation and teacher certification as part of the ongoing evaluation of the Regents 1998 policy, and use of research findings to inform policy change;

§ new teacher preparation programs and teacher certification pathways for teaching assistants and paraprofessionals in high-need communities with teacher shortages; and

§ Planting the Seed, a multimedia approach to recruit teachers and licensed professionals from high-need, underserved communities.

The data in this report supports statewide, regional and local planning to ensure that all students have certified and highly qualified teachers. In addition to the steps described in these plans, the Regents and the Department will implement new teacher quality initiatives that become law in response to proposals from the Governor and others.

Recommendation

Timetable for Implementation

Attachment

Second Annual Report:

Teacher Supply and Demand

in New York State in 2005-2006

The University of the State of New York

The New York State Education Department

Office of Higher Education

March 2007

Questions and comments about this report are welcomed at NCLBNYS@mail.nysed.gov.

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Regents of The University

Robert M. Bennett, Chancellor, B.A., M.S. .................................................................... Tonawanda

Adelaide L. Sanford, Vice Chancellor, B.A., M.A., P.D. ............................................ Hollis

Saul B. Cohen, B.A., M.A., Ph.D......................................................................................... New Rochelle

James C. Dawson, A.A., B.A., M.S., Ph.D. ....................................................................... Peru

Anthony S. Bottar, B.A., J.D. .......................................................................................... North Syracuse

Merryl H. Tisch, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ................................................................................... New York

Geraldine D. Chapey, B.A., M.A., Ed.D. ...................................................................... Belle Harbor

Arnold B. Gardner, B.A., LL.B....................................................................................... Buffalo

Harry Phillips, 3rd, B.A., M.S.F.S. ................................................................................... Hartsdale

Joseph E. Bowman, Jr., B.A., M.L.S., M.A., M.Ed., Ed.D............................................. Albany

James R. Tallon, Jr., B.A., M.A. ....................................................................................... Binghamton

Milton L. Cofield, B.S., M.B.A., Ph.D. ........................................................................... Rochester

John Brademas, B.A., Ph.D. .............................................................................................. New York

Roger B. Tilles, B.A., J.D....................................................................................................... Great Neck

Karen Brooks Hopkins, B.A., M.F.A............................................................................. Brooklyn

President of The University and Commissioner of Education

Richard P. Mills

Senior Deputy Commissioner of Education: P-16

Johanna Duncan-Poitier

Assistant Commissioner

Joseph P. Frey

Special Projects Coordinator

Nancy Willie-Schiff

Executive Summary

This second annual report on teacher supply and demand is part of the ongoing evaluation of the Regents 1998 teaching policy. It contains multiple indicators of teacher shortages in school year 2005-2006 for New York State as a whole and for the Big Five Cities, the Rest of State, 13 geographic regions and 18 subject areas.

§ Workforce: Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers. Federal law defines “highly qualified teachers” as teachers who have a bachelor’s or higher degree, meet State certification standards and have demonstrated that they know the subject(s) they teach. In 2005-2006, 5.5 percent of New York State’s classes in core academic subjects were taught by teachers who were not “highly qualified,” down from 7.9 percent in 2004-2005. However, high poverty schools still had a higher percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers than low poverty schools.

§ Workforce: Experienced Teachers. In 2005-2006, 5.1 percent of New York State’s full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching assignments were held by teachers with no prior teaching experience, compared to 4.8 percent in 2000-2001. New York City had 9.1 percent with no prior teaching experience, compared to 6.4 percent in 2000-2001. New York City’s 9.1 percent was nearly three times the rate of the Big Four Cities (3.0 percent) and other districts (3.4 percent) in 2005-2006.

§ Workforce: Teaching Assignments Held by Teachers without Appropriate Certification. In 2005-2006, 7 percent of New York State’s full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching assignments were held by teachers without appropriate certification, down from 8 percent in 2004-2005 and from the peak of 13 percent in 2001-2002. The percent varied by subject area and geographic region.

Subject Areas: New York State. Statewide, in 2005-2006, subject areas with 10 percent or more FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification included the arts, bilingual education, career and technical education, English as a second language, library and school media specialist and bilingual special education. Nearly all subjects in New York State had at least 5 percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification. The only subject areas below 5 percent, which were not shortage subjects, were elementary and early childhood general education and elementary and early childhood special education.

Geographic Regions. In 2005-2006, every region in New York State had a lower percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification than in 2000-2001. In 2005-2006, the percent exceeded 5 percent in three of the Big Five Cities: New York (15 percent, down from 27 percent in 2000-2001), Rochester (8 percent, down from 15 percent in 2000-2001) and Syracuse (9 percent, up from 7 percent in 2000-2001).

§ Supply of New Teachers: Program Completers and Certificates Issued to New Teachers. In 2005-2006, 24,300 certification candidates completed college teacher preparation programs, compared to 20,800 in 2004-2005, a one-year increase of 3,500 teacher candidates. In addition, more certificates were issued to new teachers (defined as teachers with no prior teaching experience in the prior 5 years) in 2005-2006 than in the prior year, with 20,600 issued via the College Recommended pathway and 10,200 via other pathways.

§ Demand for New Teachers: Vacancies. In 2005-2006, there were 11,200 FTE teaching assignments filled by teachers with no prior teaching experience, 5.1 percent of the total, and an indicator of vacancies (demand) for new teachers. Vacancies for new teachers rose in nearly every subject area between 2000-2001 and 2005-2006, with the largest increases in subjects such as the arts, English, English as a second language, mathematics, and elementary special education. Increased vacancies were due primarily to “baby boomers” aging out of the workforce.

§ Shortages and Surpluses: Certificates Issued to New Teachers per Vacancy for a New Teacher. In 2005-2006, New York City did not have enough new teachers to fill vacancies for new teachers in 10 subject areas. The Rest of State had enough teachers in every subject area, provided that all new teachers in the Rest of State were available to work wherever they were needed, which was unlikely to be the case. If the Individual Evaluation pathway to certification is eliminated in all subject areas in 2009 as planned and nothing else changes, there will be more shortages in every region of the State. In 2005-2006 there were statewide surpluses of new teachers in three subject areas: elementary and early childhood education; reading and literacy; and elementary and early childhood special education.

§ Future Demand for New Teachers. Demand for new teachers in 2005-2006 is a good indicator of future demand because “baby boomers” will continue to age out of the workforce for some time. In 2005-2006, 17 percent of the workforce was age 55 or older (an increase over 2000-2001) and another 26 percent were age 45 to 54. In addition, policies – such as Universal Pre-kindergarten, full-day kindergarten, longer high school enrollment for students who need more time to meet State Learning Standards and more intensive academic support services – will increase total demand for teachers. Improved retention of new teachers, due to first-year mentoring, could moderate demand for new teachers.

§ Meeting the Need. The Department is implementing three aligned plans (Statewide Plan for Higher Education; New York State’s Plan to Enhance Teacher Quality; and P-16 Education: A Plan for Action) to address gaps in teacher quality and increase the supply to meet demand. Each plan has both short-term and long-term approaches to meeting the need for certified and highly qualified teachers.

Short-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

o advocacy for a retirement bill to bring retired teachers back to the classroom in shortage areas for a limited time;

o financial incentives for teacher recruitment and retention in shortage areas, through Teachers of Tomorrow, the Teacher Opportunity Corps, federal loan forgiveness and other funding sources;

o increased opportunities for alternative teacher preparation in shortage areas with transitional, internship and supplementary certificates and with innovative teacher recruitment, such as the IBM initiative with industry partners;

o technical assistance for teacher recruitment and retention in high-need, low-performing districts; and

o a review of teacher certification to find opportunities to add flexibility without compromising quality and to increase the supply of teachers in shortage areas.

Long-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

reports, interactive data tools and technical assistance to support teacher workforce planning by regional partnerships of P-12 districts and higher education;

external research on the effectiveness of teacher preparation and teacher certification as part of the ongoing evaluation of the Regents 1998 policy, and use of research findings to inform policy change;

new teacher preparation programs and teacher certification pathways for teaching assistants and paraprofessionals in high-need communities with teacher shortages; and

Planting the Seed, a multimedia approach to recruit teachers and licensed professionals from high-need, underserved communities.

The Governor’s 2007-2008 Executive Budget and associated budget bills propose additional initiatives that would extend the three plans.

Data uses. The 2004-2005 data in the Department’s first annual teacher supply and demand report were well-received and are being used by the P-16 education community, which is anticipating this second annual report with more recent data. The 2005-2006 data in this second report will be shared with college presidents, deans and directors of teacher education programs, BOCES District Superintendents, School District Superintendents and regional partnerships of P-12 and higher education leaders. The data will also be posted online. The 2005-2006 data will be used to help individuals make career choices and to help regional and statewide leaders improve teacher recruitment and retention initiatives.

§ Individuals’ career decisions. The data will be used to inform college students about their chances of obtaining teaching jobs in specific subject areas and geographic regions. When used as part of high school and college advisement, the data will help encourage students to become teachers in subject areas where there are shortages and good chances for employment.

iii

§ Teacher workforce planning by regional partnerships. The data will be used by regional partnerships of teacher education institutions, school districts and BOCES to (1) identify immediate workforce needs and plan for alternative teacher preparation programs to meet them; and (2) identify longer term workforce needs and plan for recruitment of future teachers in shortage areas.

§ The Department’s funding allocations. The data in this report can assist the Department in targeting its discretionary funds, including Teachers of Tomorrow and NCLB Title II discretionary funds, to help address teacher shortages.

§ Regents policy decisions on certification requirements. The data in this report show the subject areas where revised supplementary certificate requirements could, without compromising quality, enable teachers to become certified in additional subject areas when they are certified in surplus subject areas and/or assigned to do out-of-field teaching. (Revised supplementary certificate requirements could help districts meet federal teacher quality requirements.)

§ Regents policy decisions on the teacher certification structure. The data in this report will assist the Department’s and Regents examination of the certification structure that took effect in February 2004. Work is currently underway to examine the certification structure in special education to ensure that the structure itself is not contributing to shortages of special education teachers in Grades 7-12. The Department will continue to examine other certification areas and propose adjustments to the structure as warranted.

§ Department’s future analysis of teacher supply and demand. The data in this report will guide analyses in future reports on teacher supply and demand as the Department tracks the impact of:

o the “aging out” of baby boomers in all subject areas;

o policies on universal Pre-Kindergarten; and

o policies that encourage class size reduction.

Part 2

Methodology

Multiple indicators were used to estimate teacher shortages in 2005-2006. Three indicators were based on the 2005-2006 public school workforce. Three others were based on the supply of new teachers in 2005-2006, demand for new teachers in 2005-2006 and comparisons of supply and demand.

Data sources. The New York State Education Department’s Basic Educational Data System (BEDS) Personnel Master File (PMF) was the source of teacher workforce data. BEDS workforce data were not available for 2002-2003 so that year is omitted from this report. The Department’s TEACH system was the source for teacher certification data.

Program completer data came from teacher preparation institutions by way of National Evaluation Systems, the contractor for New York State Teacher Certification Examinations.

Geographic regions. Geographic regions were defined to support regional planning. The counties in each region are shown in Appendix A.

Subject areas. Eighteen subject areas, listed in Appendix B, were used to classify both teaching assignments and certificates issued, more than in the 2006 report in order to provide more detailed information. The four special education subject areas used in this report, which are explained fully in Appendix B, include the following.

§ Special Education All Grades (Not Bilingual) includes assignments and certificate titles for specific disabilities (e.g., speech and language, hearing, sight) that were not subject to the 2004 reforms that added developmental levels to other special education certificates and were not included in the February 2007 Regents Item on shortages of special education teachers.

§ Special Education Elementary (Not Bilingual) includes assignments and certificates titles for Early Childhood and Childhood Education. These certificate titles were included in the February 2007 Regents Item.

§ Special Education Middle/Secondary (Not Bilingual) includes assignments and certificate titles for Middle Childhood and Adolescence Education. These certificate titles were included in the February 2007 Regents Item.

§ Special Education All Grades (Bilingual) includes assignments in special education delivered in bilingual format. There is no special education bilingual extension, so there is no certificate data for this subject area.

Workforce indicators of teacher shortages

Purposes. These indicators show what actually happened in the public school workforce as a result of both teacher shortages and administrative decisions about teaching assignments. Federal laws require workforce indicators to:

§ determine whether schools and districts are meeting federal teacher quality goals; and

§ identify subject areas that make teachers eligible for selected federal student aid benefits such as loan cancellation.

Definitions of shortages. For our purposes, workforce data indicates shortages when:

§ five percent or more of all classes in core academic subjects are not taught by highly qualified teachers (Workforce Indicator 1);

§ a higher than average percentage of full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching assignments are held by teachers with no prior teaching experience (Workforce Indicator 2); and

§ five percent or more of all FTE teaching assignments are held by teachers without appropriate certification for their assignments (Workforce Indicator 3).

The definition of FTE teaching assignments changed slightly since the 2006 report. In the earlier report, they included subject-specific non-teaching assignments such as department chairmanships or curriculum leaders. The 2007 report is limited to teaching assignments only.

To estimate shortages, it is better to count FTE teaching assignments than teachers because FTE assignments provide a way to measure out-of-field teaching done by certified teachers as part of their total teaching duties. Full-time equivalent (FTE) teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification include:

§ classes in approved “incidental” subjects, due to demonstrated shortages, as permitted by State regulation;

§ before September 1, 2005, classes taught by individuals with temporary or modified temporary licenses, as permitted by State regulation;

§ classes taught by uncertified charter school teachers, as permitted by State law;

§ classes taught by certified teachers doing out-of-field teaching beyond approved “incidental” teaching, due to shortages or administrative decisions;

§ classes taught by uncertified individuals serving as long-term substitutes, as permitted by State regulation; and

§ classes taught by uncertified individuals for unknown reasons.

Supply and demand indicators of teacher shortages and surpluses

Supply and demand indicators require estimates of teacher supply, estimates of demand for teachers and a method for comparing the two estimates. In this report, all estimates are limited to the supply of and demand for new teachers. These estimates ignore demand for experienced teachers that is met when experienced teachers transfer from one district to another or become certified in new subject areas.

Potential supply of new teachers. The potential supply of new teachers is measured as certificates issued to new teachers. (Supply and Demand Indicator 1)

§ Supply is “potential” because not all new teachers are available to work wherever they are needed.

§ “New teachers” are those who were not in New York State’s public school workforce during the five years prior to certification, a change from the 2006 teacher supply and demand report that yields better estimates of the supply of new teachers, especially in the subject area of Literacy.

§ Certificates issued to new teachers can be issued to candidates from one of three pathways:

- the College Recommended Pathway, which includes traditional, transitional and internship routes;

- the Individual Evaluation pathway, for candidates who complete educational requirements at multiple institutions or have a supplementary certificate; and

- the Interstate Reciprocity pathway for candidates certified in other states.

§ Supply is “placed” in geographic areas based on the mailing address in a teacher’s certification record and demand is “placed” in the same areas based on the locations of schools with vacancies for new teachers. Teachers’ mailing addresses are likely to be “home” addresses but there is no way to be sure. To the extent that they are “home” addresses, they are likely to indicate where teachers would be available to work because at least 85 percent of all teachers employed in New York State’s public schools teach within 40 miles of where they went to high school (Boyd, 2005).

Demand for new teachers. Demand for new teachers is measured as FTE teaching assignments held by teachers with no prior experience. These assignments represent vacancies filled by new teachers. (Supply and Demand Indicator 2)

Supply compared to demand. The indicator that compares supply and demand is a simple ratio representing the number of certificates issued to new teachers divided by the number of FTE vacancies for new teachers. (Supply and Demand Indicator 3) For this report:

§ a shortage occurs when there are fewer than 1.5 certificates issued to new teachers for each FTE vacancy for a new teacher;

§ a possible balance of supply and demand occurs when there are 1.6 to 3.0 certificates issued to new teachers for each FTE vacancy for a new teacher; and

§ a possible surplus occurs when there are 3.1 or more certificates to new teachers for each FTE vacancy for a new teacher.

A shortage is defined as fewer than 1.5 certificates issued to new teachers for each vacancy for a new teacher, rather than 1.0 certificate per vacancy, because some new teachers receive multiple certificates in the same year and one certificate does not necessarily equate to one teacher.

Part 3

Findings

Workforce Indicator 1

Percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers

New York State’s public schools reduced the percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers to 5.5 percent in 2005-2006, down from 7.9 percent in 2004-2005, a 2.4 percentage point improvement. In 2005-2006:

§ high poverty elementary schools had 8.1 percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers, down from 18.3 percent in 2004-2005, a 10.2 percentage point improvement; and

§ high poverty middle and secondary schools had 17.4 percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers, down from 19.7 percent in 2004-2005, a 2.3 percentage point improvement. (Figure 1)

Federal law defines low poverty and high poverty schools as the top and bottom one-fourth (quartiles) of schools when schools are sorted by their poverty level. Teachers in high poverty schools were identified as not highly qualified primarily because they did not have appropriate certification for their assignments.

For more detailed information about the subject areas and districts that had 5 percent or more of their core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers in 2005-2006, please refer to the tables in Appendix C of this report and to the January 2007 press release at http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts/press-release/20070108/home.htm.

Workforce Indicator 2

Percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers with no prior teaching experience

Federal law requires low-income and minority students to have teachers with the same qualifications and experience as other students. Teachers with no prior teaching experience are less likely than more experienced teachers to be effective at improving student achievement, and low-income and minority students are more likely than other students to have inexperienced teachers (Peske and Haycock, 2006).

The percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers with no prior teaching experience in New York State rose from 4.8 percent in 2000-2001 to 5.1 percent in 2005-2006, primarily because of New York City. New York City students were nearly three times as likely to have inexperienced teachers as students in the Big Four Cities or other regions. In 2005-2006, New York City had 9.1 percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers with no prior experience compared to 3.0 percent in the Big Four Cities and 3.4 percent in other regions of the State. (Figure 2)

Workforce Indicator 3

Percent of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification

New York State’s public schools reduced the percent of all FTE assignments (which includes core classes and non-core classes) taught by teachers without appropriate certification to 7 percent in 2005-2006, down from a peak of 13 percent in 2001-2002. (Figure 3) Multiple strategies account for this progress:

§ The Regents eliminated temporary licenses and modified temporary licenses as of September 2005.

§ The Regents established new pathways to certification to enable school districts to recruit career changers as new teachers.

§ The Regents required all first year teachers to receive mentoring to help them succeed and encourage them to remain in the classroom.

§ The Teachers of Tomorrow program and other State and federal programs provided resources to school districts for teacher recruitment and retention.

§ Federal teacher quality requirements and federal funding enhanced local and State efforts to recruit and retain teachers.

The percent of all FTE assignments (core and non-core) held by teachers without appropriate certification declined in all 18 subject areas in New York State between 2001-2002 and 2005-2006. (Data for 2002-2003 is omitted throughout this report because workforce data are not available for that year.) (Figure 4)

In the context of statewide progress, there was considerable variation among the large cities and the 13 regions of the State. (Figures 5-12)

§ New York City. New York City made progress in many subject areas between 2000-2001 and 2005-2006. However, 15 percent of all FTE teaching assignments were held by teachers without appropriate certification in 2005-2006. The least progress was made in Career and Technical Education and middle and secondary level Special Education. (Figures 5 and 6)

§ Big Four Cities. Each of the Big Four Cities had FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification in 2005-2006. Rochester and Syracuse had the largest percentages. (Figures 7 and 8)

§ Rest of State Excluding Big Four Cities. The Rest of State outside the Big Four Cities had lower percentages of FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification than the Four Big Cities and New York City. In 2005-2006, four subject areas still had 5 percent or more, an indicator of shortages. They were Bilingual Education, Special Education, Languages other than English (LOTE), Career and Technical Education (CTE) and English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). (Figures 9 and 10)

§ Thirteen Regions. Every region had some FTE teaching assignments held by teachers without appropriate certification in 2005-2006. New York City had 80 percent of all such assignments and the highest percentages of any region. (Figures 11 and 12)

Grey shading denotes subject areas without shortages as defined by this workforce indicator.

In addition to the aging of the teaching workforce, policies can increase demand for new teachers.

§ School enrollments. School enrolments will increase, even with no change in the school-aged population, if New York State adopts policies to support universal Pre-Kindergarten, full-day Kindergarten and longer high school programs for students who need more time to meet State Learning Standards, such as recently arrived immigrant students who are English Language Learners. If students become eligible to attend school for more years, total enrollment will increase and more teachers will be needed.

§ Fewer students per teacher. Schools’ efforts to meet each individual student’s learning needs – through class size reduction, Academic Intervention Services (AIS), Supplementary Educational Services (SES), Response to Intervention (RTI) and other diagnostic, tutoring and student support services – tend to reduce the ratio of students per teacher. When there are fewer students-per-teacher, total demand for teachers goes up, even with no change in the school-aged population.

There are some forces that could reduce demand for public school teachers. For example, resource constraints could limit the capacity of public schools to employ more teachers. Similarly, if public school enrollment declined because of population loss or alternate schooling models – such as home schooling, private schooling or online schooling – total demand for teachers would decline. Finally, if the Regents requirement for all districts to provide mentoring for every first year teacher reduced attrition among new teachers, demand for new teachers would decline, while the teaching workforce would remain the same size but have a higher percentage of experienced teachers.

On balance, the forces that would sustain or increase current demand for new teachers – driven by the age distribution of the public school workforce and by federal and State policy initiatives – appear to be stronger than the forces that would reduce demand for new teachers. If this is indeed the case, demand for new teachers will persist or rise.

Part 5

Meeting the Need

With partners in the P-16 education community and beyond, the Board of Regents and the State Education Department are implementing three aligned plans to assure that there are enough qualified teachers for all public schools. The plans were developed in consultation with schools, districts and the higher education community and are available online.

• July 2005 Statewide Plan for Higher Education http://www.highered.nysed.gov/Quality_Assurance/statewideplan/page1.htm

• September 2006 New York State’s Plan to Enhance Teacher Quality (approved by the U.S. Department of Education)

http://www.ed.gov/programs/teacherqual/hqtplans/index.html#ny

• November 2006 P-16 Education: A Plan for Action http://usny.nysed.gov/summit/p-16ed.htm#aims

Each plan has both short-term and long-term approaches to meeting the need for certified and highly qualified teachers. Short-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

• a retirement bill to bring retired teachers back to the classroom in shortage areas for a limited time;

• financial incentives for teacher recruitment and retention in shortage areas, through Teachers of Tomorrow, the Teacher Opportunity Corps, federal loan forgiveness and other funding sources;

• increased opportunities for alternative teacher preparation in shortage areas with transitional, internship and supplementary certificates and with innovative teacher recruitment, such as the IBM initiative with industry partners;

• technical assistance for teacher recruitment and retention in high-need, low-performing districts; and

• a review of teacher certification requirements to find opportunities to add flexibility without compromising quality and to increase the supply of teachers in shortage areas.

Long-term approaches include, but are not limited to:

• reports, interactive data tools and technical assistance to support teacher workforce planning by regional partnerships of P-12 districts and higher education;

• external research on the effectiveness of teacher preparation and teacher certification as part of the ongoing evaluation of the Regents 1998 policy, and use of research findings to inform policy change;

• new teacher preparation programs and teacher certification pathways for teaching assistants and paraprofessionals in high-need communities with teacher shortages; and

• Planting the Seed, a multimedia approach to recruit teachers and licensed professionals from high-need, underserved communities.

The Governor’s 2007-2008 Executive Budget and associated budget bills propose additional initiatives that would extend the three plans being implemented by the Board of Regents and the State Education Department. The Governor’s proposals include:

§ as part of a multi-year plan to increase school aid, a one-year increase in school aid of over $1.41 billion for school year 2007-2008 that would be available for strategies with demonstrable records of success and that would be linked to accountability for improved student achievement in Contracts for Excellence;

§ the continuation of $68 million of State support for programs to attract, retain and support teachers, with a requirement that the State Education Department assist school districts in developing incentives for highly trained teachers to work with low performing schools;

§ a 2007-2008 review of the means of expanding the availability of alternative teacher preparation programs in the future, while maintaining teacher quality, and the development of programs to assist in the expansion of alternative teacher preparation programs, including the development of experimental teacher preparation programs; and

§ math and science initiatives to increase the supply of qualified math and science teachers in schools across the State and recognize and reward talented middle school students in math and science.

The Governor’s proposals also call for the Board of Regents and State Education Department to examine the feasibility and costs of measuring and reporting on the effectiveness of teacher education programs and public school teachers.

Appendix A

Counties within Regions

Appendix B

Subject Areas

§ Teaching assignments and certificate titles were classified into 18 subject areas.

§ Some subject areas are composed of separate subjects that may have different shortage profiles than the subject area as a whole. For example, Table C-2 in this report shows different shortage profiles for the separate science subjects of biology, chemistry, earth science, physics and other sciences. Subject areas that contain multiple subjects are the Arts, Career and Technical Education, Elementary and Early Childhood Education, Languages Other Than English, Other Teaching, Sciences and each of the Special Education subject areas.

§ “Other teaching” includes assignments with multiple subjects (e.g., humanities), safety education, health education, alternative education in unspecified subjects, gifted and talented education and other assignments with unspecified subjects.

§ Data were not sufficiently aligned for supply and demand indicators in two of the four subject areas in special education.

Categories for Special Education Subject Areas

Table B-1 shows the four special education subject areas and their codes for this analysis.

Table B-2 shows how teaching and non-teaching assignments in special education in the 2005-2006 BEDS Personnel Master File were classified into the four special education subject areas for estimating shortages and vacancies for new teachers.

Table B-3 shows how certificates issued to new teachers in special education were classified into three of the four special education subject areas with codes 16 through 18. The fourth subject area, code 19, is not applicable because special education certificates and bilingual extensions are two separate credentials that are coded separately.

§ Table B-3 includes certificate titles that existed for many years and the new titles that took effect in 2004. The older titles would not have been issued in 2005-2006 but are shown for completeness.

§ Subject area 16 includes special education certificates for specific disabilities that were not adjusted for developmental levels in February 2004. These certificates were not included in the February 2007 report to the Board of Regents on shortages of special education teachers.

§ Subject areas with codes 17 and 18 were included in the February 2007 Regents Item on shortages of special education teachers because they are the subject areas with certificates at four specific developmental levels, with code 17 for Birth-Grade 2 and Grade 1-6 and with code 18 for Grade 5-9 and Grade 7-12.

§ Data on the supply of teachers for subject areas 17 and 18 in the February Regents Item and this report will not exactly match because the Regents Item defined teacher supply as all first level certificates issued (excluding permanent and professional certificates) and this report defines supply as all certificates of any level issued to new teachers who were not in the public school workforce in the prior five years. For 2005-2006, the Regents Item reported that 5,298 first-level certificates were issued in subject areas 17 and 18; in contrast, this report shows that 4,965 certificates were issued in subject areas 17 and 18 to new teachers.

Table B-1 Special Education Subject Areas and Their Codes
Subject Area Code	Subject Area Name
16	Special Education All Grades (Not Bilingual)
17	Special Education Elementary (Not Bilingual)
18	Special Education Middle/Secondary (Not Bilingual)
19	Special Education All Grades (Bilingual)

Table B-2 2005-2006 Special Education Teaching and Non-Teaching Assignments by Subject Area Code
Subject Area Code	Assignment Code	Assignment Name
16	1502	DIRECTOR/COORDINATOR SPEC EDUC
16	1504	ASST DIR/COORD OF SPECIAL ED
16	1505	SPECIAL ED-INSERVICE TRAINER
16	1506	SPECIAL EDUCATION SUPERVISOR
16	1507	SPEC ED-CHAIR-COMM ON SPEC ED
16	1508	SPEC ED-DEPT HEAD/CHAIRPERSON
16	1509	SPEC ED-ASST PRINCIPAL-NYC
16	1510	CHAIR/COMM-PRESCHOOL SPEC EDUC
16	1512	SCHOOL BASED SUPPORT TEAM-NYC
16	1514	EDUCATION EVALUATOR
16	1516	OTHER-NOT SPECIAL ED TEACHER
16	1599	SPECIAL EDUCATION ADMINISTRATOR
16	7727	SPEC ED HOME INSTRUCTION
16	7751	TCHR OF DEAF/HARD OF HEARING
16	7753	TCH OF BLIND/PARTIALLY SIGHTED
16	7755	TCH OF SPEECH/HEARING IMPAIRED
16	7799	SPECIAL EDUCATION
16	8616	ESL SPECIAL EDUCATION
17	7712	PRESCHOOL SPECIAL ED ITINERANT
17	7713	SPECIAL CLASS - PRESCHOOL
17	7715	RESOURCE ROOM- ELEMENTARY
17	7731	CONSULTANT TEACHER - ELEM
17	7761	SPECIAL CLASS - ELEM 15:1
17	7763	SPECIAL CLASS - ELEM 12:1 + 1
17	7765	SPECIAL CLASS - ELEM 8:1 + 1
17	7767	SPECIAL CLASS - ELEM 6:1 + 1
17	7769	SPECIAL CLASS -ELEM 12:1 + 3:1
18	7717	RESOURCE ROOM - MIDDLE/JR. HS
18	7719	RESOURCE ROOM - SENIOR HIGH
18	7733	CONSULTANT TEACHER-MIDDLE/JHS
18	7735	CONSULTANT TEACHER - HS
18	7771	SPECIAL CLASS(MIDDLE/JHS) 15:1
18	7773	SPEC CLASS-MIDDLE/JHS 12:1 + 1
18	7775	SPEC CLASS-MIDDLE/JHS 8:1 + 1
18	7777	SPEC CLASS (MIDDLE/JHS)6:1 + 1
18	7779	SPEC CLASS-MIDDLE/JHS 12:1+3:1
18	7781	SPECIAL CLASS (SR HS) 15:1
18	7783	SPECIAL CLASS (SR HS) 12:1+1
18	7785	SPECIAL CLASS (SR HS) 8:1+1
18	7787	SPECIAL CLASS (SR HS) 6:1+1
18	7789	SPECIAL CLASS (SR HS) 12:1+3:1
18	7914	SPECIAL EDUCATION WORK STUDY
19	5616	CHINESE BILINGUAL SPECIAL ED
19	5622	SPANISH BILINGUAL SPECIAL ED
19	5628	HAITIAN-CREOLE BILN SPECIAL ED
19	5634	KOREAN BILING SPEC ED
19	5640	VIETNAMESE BILING SPEC ED
19	5652	RUSSIAN BILINGUAL SPECIAL ED
19	5697	OTHER BILINGUAL SPECIAL ED

Table B-3 Special Education Certificate Titles from All Years by Subject Area Code
Subject Area Code	Certificate Title Code	Certificate Title
16	9100	PHYS HAND-ORTHO EXT
16	9017	DEAF & HARD OF HEARIN
16	9021	SPCH & LANG DISABLED
16	9171	SEVERE/MULT DIS ANNO
16	9018	BLIND & VIS IMPAIRED
16	9070	LEARNING DISABILITIES
16	9060	EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED
16	9052	PERCEPTIONALLY HANDIC
16	9040	BLIND
16	9030	DEAF
16	9990	SOCE- SPEC ED
16	9080	MULTIPLY HANDICAPPED
16	9090	MENTALLY RETARDED EXT
16	9160	SP CLASSES ORTHO/SIM.
16	9130	DEAF CHILD/YTH EXT
16	9120	BLIND CHILD/YTH EXT
16	9112	SIGHT SAVING CLASS
16	9150	DEAF AND HEAR IMPRD
16	9140	BLIND AND PART SIGHTE
16	9010	SPECIAL EDUCATION
16	9020	SPEECH & HEARING HAND
16	6026	DEPT HEAD SPEECH HRG
16	1134	COORD SPEC HELP CTR
16	1135	COORD TCHR SP ED
16	1132	COORD SPECIAL CLASS
16	9050	BLIND & VIS. HAND
16	9041	SUPERVISOR OF BLIND
16	102	COORD CLIN SERV SP ED
16	1196	DIR SPECIAL EDUCATION
16	9012	ADM ASST SPECIAL ED
16	9011	SUPV SPECIAL EDUCATION
17	9014	SWD 1-6
17	9013	SWD B-2
18	9045	SWD ASL 7-12
18	9022	SWD BIOLOGY 5-9
18	9023	SWD CANTONESE 5-9
18	9024	SWD CHEMISTRY 5-9
18	9025	SWD CHINESE 5-9
18	9026	SWD ENG LANG ARTS 5-9
18	9027	SWD EARTH SCIENCE 5-9
18	9028	SWD FRENCH 5-9
18	9029	SWD GERMAN 5-9
18	9015	SWD MID CHILDHOOD 5-9
18	9054	SWD FRENCH 7-12
18	9055	SWD GERMAN 7-12
18	9056	SWD GREEK 7-12
18	9057	SWD HEBREW 7-12
18	9053	SWD EARTH SCIENCE 7-12
18	9059	SWD JAPANESE 7-12
18	9019	SWD ASL 5-9
18	9061	SWD LATIN 7-12
18	9062	SWD MANDARIN 7-12
18	9063	SWD MATHEMATICS 7-12
18	9064	SWD PHYSICS 7-12
18	9065	SWD RUSSIAN 7-12
18	9066	SWD SOC STUDIES 7-12
18	9067	SWD SPANISH 7-12
18	9068	SWD URDU 7-12
18	9058	SWD ITALIAN 7-12
18	9048	SWD CHEMISTRY 7-12
18	9044	SWD URDU 5-9
18	9043	SWD SPANISH 5-9
18	9047	SWD CANTONESE 7-12
18	9042	SWD SOC STUDIES 5-9
18	9031	SWD GREEK 5-9
18	9033	SWD ITALIAN 5-9
18	9046	SWD BIOLOGY 7-12
18	9034	SWD JAPANESE 5-9
18	9035	SWD LATIN 5-9
18	9036	SWD MANDARIN 5-9
18	9037	SWD MATHEMATICS 5-9
18	9049	SWD CHINESE 7-12
18	9039	SWD RUSSIAN 5-9
18	9038	SWD PHYSICS 5-9
18	9032	SWD HEBREW 5-9
18	9051	SWD ENG LANG ARTS 7-12
Subject Area Code 19 No certificate title could be associated with Subject Area Code 19, Special Education All Grades (Bilingual), because the bilingual credential is an extension that must be added to a base special education certificate and is not identified as a special education bilingual extension.

Appendix C

Percent of Core Classes

Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers in 2005-2006

The three tables in this appendix show the percent of core classes not taught by highly qualified teachers in 2005-2006 for New York State, New York City, each of the Big Four Cities and each of New York State’s standard Need / Resource Capacity Categories of districts.

The tables were originally issued in a January 2007 Regents Item on meeting federal teacher quality goals and in a January 2007 press release available at http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/irts/press-release/20070108/home.htm.

The tables are included in this appendix because they contain a workforce indicator of teacher supply and demand that could have significant consequences for school districts by the end of school year 2006-2007, when the U.S. Department of Education requires all core classes to be taught by highly qualified teachers. The tables also provide more detailed information about core classes in the sciences and special education than other data presented in this report.

Table C-1

All Subject Areas in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers

Table C-2

Science Subjects in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers

Table C-3

“Special Classes” for Students with Disabilities in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers

Table C-1 All Subject Areas in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers
Core Subject Areas	New York State – All Public Schools	Need/Resource Capacity (N/RC) Categories									Charters, BOCES & State Schools
		High N/RC Districts							Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
		New York City	Buffalo	Rochester	Syracuse	Yonkers	Urban/ Suburban Districts	Rural Districts	Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
Elementary (one or more subjects)	3.1	6.4	0.8	6.0	7.4	0.2	1.5	0.8	0.9	0.8	17.3
Arts	7.8	30.8	0.7	9.4	9.1	1.4	2.2	2.0	1.7	1.7	27.0
English	4.9	13.3	0.8	7.1	8.8	0.0	2.4	1.7	1.4	1.2	9.0
Languages Other Than English	8.7	17.4	12.9	21.5	48.3	0.0	7.0	9.4	5.1	4.5	44.7
Mathematics	5.7	15.2	1.4	17.2	7.3	1.7	2.3	2.3	1.5	0.9	12.1
Reading	4.7	18.2	1.8	44.9	16.1	0.0	1.5	2.9	1.7	0.6	10.2
Science	8.0	20.3	9.8	16.0	9.7	1.7	3.0	3.4	1.9	1.7	17.9
Social Studies (including civics and government, economics, geography & history)	3.9	9.9	1.0	8.0	3.3	0.0	1.7	1.7	1.2	1.3	13.8
All other core assignments (multiple subjects, unspecified subjects, etc.)	9.0	20.1	5.9	16.2	13.4	0.5	3.7	3.5	2.5	2.6	7.1
Total	5.5	13.0	2.8	10.6	10.6	0.6	2.4	2.2	1.6	1.5	13.3
NOTE Core classes in “other core subjects” are in multiple core subjects or unspecified subjects in Career and Technical Education (CTE), special education or bilingual education.

Table C-2 Science Subjects in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers
Science Subject	New York State – All Public Schools	Need/Resource Capacity Categories									Charters, BOCES and State Schools
		High N/RC Districts							Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
		New York City	Buffalo	Rochester	Syracuse	Yonkers	Urban/ Suburban Districts	Rural Districts	Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
Biology	6.2	14.4	5.5	8.5	4.3	3.3	2.6	2.5	1.7	1.2	9.4
Chemistry	7.0	20.4	32.1	7.3	14.8	0.0	2.7	2.9	2.3	1.4	17.6
Earth Science	15.6	51.8	22.4	21.7	13.3	6.5	5.0	5.9	3.8	2.5	17.0
Physics	10.2	28.6	6.1	11.5	28.6	0.0	2.2	11.8	4.3	3.6	11.1
Other Sciences	6.8	16.5	2.1	21.3	10.1	0.0	2.7	2.2	1.0	1.4	22.6
Total	8.0	20.3	9.8	16.0	9.7	1.7	3.0	3.4	1.9	1.7	17.9
NOTE “Other sciences” includes general science, life science, and physical science as well as science electives such as astronomy.

Table C-3 “Special Classes” for Students with Disabilities in 2005-2006: Percent of Core Classes Not Taught by Highly Qualified Teachers
Class Level for Special Classes for Students with Disabilities in Core Subjects	New York State – All Public Schools	Need/Resource Capacity (N/RC)Categories									Charters, BOCES and State Schools
		High N/RC Districts							Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
		New York City	Buffalo	Rochester	Syracuse	Yonkers	Urban/ Suburban Districts	Rural Districts	Average N/RC Districts	Low N/RC Districts
Elementary	7.9	14.0	7.7	12.1	8.9	0.0	3.3	3.5	1.5	1.6	3.0
Middle/secondary	10.3	24.6	3.8	15.2	15.4	0.3	2.5	2.7	2.5	5.3	3.1
Other	1.7	2.9	0.6	7.4	3.5	0.0	1.3	0.2	0.8	1.7	3.3
Total	8.2	19.0	3.8	13.4	10.6	0.2	2.4	2.4	1.9	3.6	3.2
NOTES Elementary assignments are special classes in Grades K-6 or special classes in which all students are eligible to take the New York State Alternate Assessment. Middle/secondary assignments are special classes in Grades 7-12.