does teacher preparation matter for beginning teachers in

ABSTRACT
The current USDOE emphasis on the preparation of teachers in content knowledge, as opposed
to pedagogy or teaching practicums, represents a major policy issue concerning how best
to produce and certify a sufficient supply of qualified teachers. Accordingly, the purpose of this
research was to investigate a wide range of outcomes for beginning teachers in relation to
amount of teacher preparation—extensive, some, and no preparation.
Specifically, we used recent national data from the Schools and Staffing Survey to perform
several analyses of special education teachers (SETs) and general education teachers (GETs) in
their first five years of employment in public schools. One analysis quantified the numbers of
these beginning teachers with each of the three amounts of teacher preparation, and three analyses
investigated the effects of teacher preparation on teacher qualification variables, job placement
variables, and dimensions of how well beginning teachers were prepared for their assignments.
Results indicated that a substantial majority (83%) of beginning SETs nationally completed
extensive teacher preparation while 12% completed only some preparation and another 6% did
not complete any preparation. These percentages were similar for GETs. Completing extensive
teacher preparation matters a great deal to both SETs and GETs in attaining two key teacher
qualifications (full certification and in-field teaching assignments), while those completing only
some preparation were seriously disadvantaged in both respects. Similarly, completing extensive
teacher preparation matters considerably in the hiring of beginning SETs and GETs into schools
in which teachers prefer to practice. Beginning teachers who completed only some preparation or
have no preparation were disadvantaged in this respect.
Four teacher qualification variables (amount of teacher certification, in- vs. out-of-field degree
major, full vs. part certification, and degree major in education vs. major in other field) were
used in multivariate analyses to predict teacher reports of being well prepared to teach in terms
of subject matter and four pedagogical skills. With respect to being well prepared to teach subject
matter, extensive teacher preparation mattered most for beginning SETs while having an infield
teaching assignment mattered most for GETs. With respect to being well prepared in four
pedagogical skills, completing extensive teacher preparation mattered a great deal for both SETs
and GETs, while completing only some teacher preparation mattered little.
Thus, when it comes to the two central components of the definition of a highly qualified
teacher (full certification and subject matter expertise) in the No Child Left Behind Act, completing
extensive teacher preparation matters a great deal in preparing qualified beginning SETs and
GETs. Programs offering extensive teacher preparation (predominantly traditional universitybased
degree programs) also produce qualified teachers in much greater numbers than programs
offering lesser amounts of preparation—a major benefit to the field in light of dire shortages of
qualified SETs and in selected fields of general education. In view of the effectiveness programs
offering extensive teacher preparation (mainly traditional programs) in producing large numbers
of graduates to address teacher shortages, it is counterproductive of Federal policy to focus on
the promotion of alternative route programs at the expense of traditional programs.
ii