does teacher preparation matter for beginning teachers in

ARC, none), thereby precluding analyses of amount of preparation by type. As observed by Sindelar
et al. (2004) and Brownell et al. (2004), the intensity of teacher preparation has been shown
in other research to produce effective teachers regardless of whether preparation was obtained by
traditional or ARC programs.
Thus, a high percentage of beginning SETs and GETs completed extensive and often costly
(in time and resources) preparation in pedagogy and supervised teaching. It is therefore worth
knowing whether different amounts of preparation (i.e., extensive, some, or none) yield more
qualified teachers.
Do Teacher Qualifications Vary by Amount of Teacher Preparation?
Certification in Main Teaching Assignment. As seen in Table 1, 75.2% of beginning SETs
with extensive preparation in pedagogy and supervised teaching were fully certified in their main
teaching assignment, a level dramatically higher than for SETs with only some preparation
(33.0%) and SETs without preparation (14.2%). These differences demonstrate the effectiveness
of extensive teacher preparation in producing SETs who meet state standards for full certification/licensure,
and the ineffectiveness of lesser amounts of preparation. Compared with beginning
SETs, the fully-certified percentages for beginning GETs were higher for all three amounts
of teacher preparation. The lower percentage of fully-certified SETs than GETs persisted during
the 1990s (Boe & Cook, in press). It is one index of the greater shortage of qualified SETs.
In- and out-of-field teaching assignment. Beginning SETs with extensive teacher preparation
in pedagogy and supervised teaching were more likely to secure in-field teaching assignments
(44.0%) than those who with only some preparation (26.2%) or those who were not prepared
(5.5%) (see Table 1). These in-field percentages are much lower than seen for beginning GETs.
One reason for the much lower in-field percentage of extensively prepared SETs than GETs is
that 37% of extensively prepared first-time SETs did not have degree majors in special education.
Instead, they had degrees in general education or in academic disciplines (and only about
25% of these were fully certified in their main teaching assignment in special education) (Boe &
Cook, in press). The lack of degree majors in special education is another index of the shortage
of qualified teachers for positions in this field.
Degree major field. As also shown in Table 1, 66.5% of beginning SETs with extensive
preparation in pedagogy and supervised teaching majored in special education, while 21.7% majored
in general education (i.e., these were out-of-field). These percentages of education majors
11