[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 49 (Friday, April 26, 2002)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E630]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E630]]
NATIONAL BOARD-CERTIFIED TEACHERS IN LOW-PERFORMING SCHOOLS ACT OF 2002

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. SUSAN DAVIS

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 25, 2002

  Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, I am proud today to introduce 
the National Board-Certified Teacher in Low-Performing Schools Act of 
2002.
  Helping low-achieving students improve their academic performance has 
been called the most vital need for our country's future. How do we 
make this happen? Many studies have shown that the single most critical 
component for a child is the quality of each teacher.
  The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, H.R. 1, known as the No 
Child Left Behind Act of 2001, calls for making sure that a well-
qualified, credentialed teacher is in every classroom. This is a 
sentiment that has universal agreement, but making it happen will 
require a wide spectrum of approaches and strong federal support for a 
variety of strategies.
  I applaud the portions of that bill that add support to programs like 
the Troops-to-Teachers program, which seeks to recruit mid-career 
individuals particularly with expertise in science, math, and 
technology. This program, as an example, provides monetary support for 
a fast-track into the classroom with some professional development 
support and with a rapid time-line for giving these new teachers the 
teaching skills to become credentialed.
  But whether one is considering a troop recruit or a teacher recruited 
straight out of university, most of them end up as new, untested 
teachers in low-income, low-performing schools. Yet, these are the very 
schools where we need to assign our most skilled and experienced 
teachers. While new teachers may develop the skills to become experts, 
each needs the coaching and modeling of experienced professionals.
  I am happy to report that in California we instituted a peer-coaching 
program for teachers in their probationary years. But we also 
recognized the need to identify and reward our most accomplished 
teachers and encourage them to request assignments in our lowest 
performing schools.
  To accomplish this we did two things. One was to identify that an 
independent evaluation system for teacher quality is the National Board 
for Professional Teaching Standards. It uses a rigorous, standards-
based classroom teaching evaluation and testing program carried out 
over a year of teaching through which teachers can become certified. It 
is so challenging that only about half of all candidates receive 
certification in the first year. Because we could identify these as 
exceptionally accomplished teachers, in California we reward each 
successful candidate with a $10,000 merit award. One result of this 
recognition has been that in each successive year the number of 
California candidates has doubled.
  In addition, the state gives an annual $5,000 pay incentive for four 
years to each National Board Certified Teacher who will seek assignment 
to a low-performing school.
  I propose to build on this method of providing incentives to urge 
these highly accomplished teachers to provide not only their fine 
teaching skills but also their availability as peers for the many new 
teachers assigned to these schools. I believe that both beginning 
teachers and experienced teachers grow in their teaching skills and can 
be inspired to accept the challenge of the certification process if 
they have the opportunity to work as a peer with a National Board 
Certified Teacher. Many teachers who have become certified report that 
the process itself improves their skills, as they must prepare 
standards-based, self-reflective portfolios of their teaching practices 
to submit for evaluation.
  Therefore, I propose a pilot program for five years to pay up to 100 
National Board Certified Teachers, each of whom is teaching in a low-
income, low-performing school, $5,000 per year to act as a resident 
facilitator to introduce the members of the faculty to the National 
Board evaluation program. As a teacher must have taught for three years 
before applying for Board certification, the five-year period is needed 
to allow time for new teachers to be exposed to the process through the 
outreach program initiated by the facilitator.
  The responsibilities of the facilitator would be to promote peer 
teacher participation and to work with the National Board for 
Professional Teaching Standards to recommend ways to encourage teachers 
to aspire to Board certification.
  The facilitator would also receive a $1,000 bonus stipend for each 
teacher who completes the process for becoming Board-certified at the 
school for which the recipient is the resident facilitator.
  I believe that this pilot program can be a triple winner. The 
children of the low performing school have another teacher who has been 
certified as being a highly accomplished teacher. The faculty of that 
school has a peer teacher with identifiable teaching skills as a 
resource. And the school may grow its own new crop of National Board 
Certified Teachers thus changing the image of being a low-performing 
school to having pride in being a school with a highly-skilled faculty.

                          ____________________