California, Texas and D.C. Are Tops in Teacher Diversity, Report Finds
California, Texas and Washington, D.C., lead the nation in teacher diversity, according to a recent report by the National Council on Teacher Quality.
While the nation's college-educated workforce overall is diversifying more quickly than the teaching pool, the NCTQ found that California, Texas, and Washington, D.C., are following the opposite trajectory. But the nonprofit questions some of the methods used to increase diversity, such as alternative pathways or lower standards for teacher certification, said Ron Noble, the council's chief of teacher preparation.
'We found that places like Texas are achieving [more teacher diversity], but with policies that have us concerned about the long-term health of the teacher pipeline,' Noble said. 'California and Washington, D.C., offer potential bright spots that might not have that same pitfall.'
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter
Related
NCTQ's report follows its December launch of a teacher diversity dashboard that tracks the racial makeup of U.S. educator corps from 2014 to 2022. Noble said the organization is focusing on educator workforce diversity because employing teachers of color improves academic, social, emotional and behavior outcomes for students.
'We really want states to be deliberate and intentional in — and careful how they go about — achieving the goal of a diverse workforce,' Noble said.
Teachers from historically disadvantaged groups in the U.S. make up nearly 23% of working-age adults with degrees but 21% of the teacher workforce, according to the dashboard.
In Texas, 35% of college-educated adults are from historically disadvantaged groups, compared with 43% of teachers. But researchers found that behind the high diversity number were flawed alternative certification programs and uncertified teachers — both of which became more common with educator shortages during the pandemic.
In the 2021-22 school year, 51% of Texas teachers completed alternative certification programs, compared with an average of 19% in other states, according to NCTQ. Alternative pathways are more diverse than traditional programs: One study found that Black Texas teachers were more than three times as likely to pursue alternative certification than a more common route like a bachelor's degree.
Related
Noble said researchers found that the majority of alternative programs in Texas are fully online and that graduates can become teachers with little to no classroom experience. A 2024 Texas Tech University study found that online alternative pathways have a higher turnover rate than other teacher preparation programs.
'They are thrown right into a high-stakes environment,' he said. 'It's not surprising that there are people leaving the profession.'
The number of uncertified teachers is also growing in Texas classrooms. Last year, state data reported that 34% of newly hired teachers in Texas were uncertified. The NCTQ report says racial demographics of uncertified teachers aren't tracked, making it hard for policymakers to understand the impact on the future diversity of the educator workforce.
In California, nearly 33% of the teachers come from historically disadvantaged groups, compared with 27% of college-educated adults.
The NCTQ report says California's effort to prioritize teacher diversity, invest in educator training and track industry data are reasons why diversity rates are higher than the norm. The state has invested more than $1 billion in recent years to strengthen the teacher workforce. Advocates have built a diversity road map and plan to launch a teacher training and retention dashboard later this year to track demographic and employment data.
NCTQ said in its report that California has lowered standards for teacher candidates to enter the profession. A bill that passed in June allows for a bachelor's degree in any subject to be the sole qualifier for admission into most teacher preparation programs.
NCTQ also cited Washington, D.C., for its high diversity rates, though its trendlines are not on the same trajectory as California's and Texas's. In 2022, 69% of educators came from historically disadvantaged groups, a drop from 77% in 2020. Adults with college degrees from these groups were reported at 35% in 2022.
'It would be easy to explain away D.C.'s teacher diversity by pointing out that it is a city, not a state, and cities are typically more diverse than states,' the report says. 'However, comparing D.C.'s teacher and student demographics to those in other large cities in the United States suggests D.C.'s approach to diversifying the teacher workforce is yielding results.'
The NCTQ report shows that the teacher workforce in Washington, D.C., more closely mirrored its student population than those of other districts of similar size and student demographics.
Related
About 87% of the district's student population are people of color, as is 74% of the teacher workforce. Researchers found that Atlanta Public Schools was the only demographically similar district that had a smaller student-to-teacher diversity gap.
The report credits consistent prioritization of educator diversity and innovative teacher preparation pathways for the high percentages in Washington, D.C. The region established 'Grow Your Own' preparation programs with university partners and has implemented a centralized hiring process that yields more diverse candidates.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
Texas Law Targets Education Emergency of Uncertified Teachers in the Classroom
Texas has a teacher problem that mirrors a national crisis: Too many classrooms are staffed by educators who haven't been properly prepared. About 1 in 8 teaching positions nationwide are unfilled or occupied by someone who is not fully certified. The numbers are starker in Texas, where one-third of teachers hired in the 2023-24 school year were unlicensed. This isn't just a staffing issue; it's an educational emergency that demands a fundamental shift in how America regards teaching as a profession. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Unlike other career paths, such as medicine, law or engineering, teaching has never been fully professionalized. It is possible for an individual to walk into a classroom with minimal training and be called a teacher. True professionalization of teaching would require significant changes to the system, which features a hodgepodge of quick certification programs and temporary credentials across different states. Instead, every teacher should be required to complete comprehensive preparation that includes professional practice with expert feedback. This preparation period would be both rigorous and standardized — similar to medical residencies or legal clerkships — ensuring that all new teachers enter classrooms with proven skills to go along with their good intentions. Professional teachers should also engage in continuous learning throughout their careers, which means regularly updating their skills and knowledge as new research emerges about effective educational methods. Schools should also offer clearer pathways for career advancement, making it easier for excellent teachers to take on leadership roles or mentor newcomers. Outstanding classroom teaching requires sophisticated leadership and communication skills that take years to develop. The relative lack of ongoing training and career development for teachers once they've entered the classroom has created a vicious cycle where underprepared educators struggle in classrooms and leave the profession quickly. This creates more vacancies to be filled by people who also haven't been sufficiently trained. Texas' House Bill 2, signed by Gov. Greg Abbott on June 4 and taking effect in the fall, attempts to break this cycle by setting specific limits on how many uncertified teachers districts can employ. Starting in the 2026-27 school year, no more than 20% of a district's teachers would be allowed to work without proper certification in core subjects. That percentage would drop each year until it reached just 5% by 2029-30. The law is a serious step toward treating teaching like the skilled profession it is. It was critically important that the bill be passed and signed, because the consequences of the current system are devastating for students. In Texas, having an unprepared teacher is equivalent to missing over one-third of the school year: research shows that Texas students taught by new, uncertified teachers lose about four months of learning in reading and three months in math. Meanwhile, students taught by teachers who recently completed Relay Graduate School of Education's rigorous preparation program gain an extra five months of progress in reading progress and three months in math. This is equivalent to gaining more than half a school year's worth of learning in both subjects. States facing similar shortages of qualified teachers in their classrooms should pay attention to Texas' experiment and consider their own approaches to professionalizing teaching. The stakes are too high to continue with quick fixes and emergency measures. Transforming teaching into a true profession would require a coordinated effort from multiple stakeholders. State governments must set and enforce rigorous certification standards while funding comprehensive preparation programs. School districts need to create supportive working environments that treat teachers as valuable professionals rather than interchangeable workers. Universities must redesign teacher preparation to emphasize practical skills and classroom experience. And the profession itself must embrace higher standards and accountability. Students deserve teachers who have been thoroughly prepared for the complex and important work of delivering a great education.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Coalition Hopes to ‘Accelerate' Career Training, Apprenticeships
Hoping to promote the growth of career training and apprenticeships, a coalition including five governors and major labor unions have come together to align career training and push for national policy change. The American Federation of Teachers, the nation's second-largest teachers union, and CareerWise USA, which runs apprenticeship programs for high-schoolers in five states, announced the Education and Apprenticeship Accelerator late last month. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter The International Union of Painters and Allied Trades and the governors of California, Colorado, Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania have also joined the coalition. Its goal is to improve and expand Career Technical Education (CTE) both in high schools and community colleges and create more student internships and apprenticeships where students are paid to both work and go to school. Only about 5% of high school students nationally have a chance at an internship or apprenticeship, estimates available show. AFT President Randi Weingarten said the union sees a need to shift away from the 'college for all' mindset of the last 20 years, and be a part of giving students other ways to prepare for work and life. 'Look how many kids we've seen in schools that feel totally at sea,' said Weingarten, who also called for changes in a May 6 New York Times opinion piece 'Stop Trying to Make Everyone Go to College.' Instead of working independently and sometimes at cross-purposes, which has kept the number of opportunities for students low, CareerWise founder Noel Ginsburg said the new partnership will help government, business and schools work together in support of training efforts. Challenges include aligning school and work schedules, finding transportation for students between work and school, giving students course credit for work-based learning and making sure students are working in fields that are hiring. Both Ginsburg and Weingarten said the states can serve as laboratories to find the right formulas to succeed, then the partnership can promote them and find a common plan that covers all states. 'This is intended to truly create…examples for the country in multiple states that can show how this matters,' Ginsburg said. 'We'll bring resources to it, both financial, technical and consulting, to enable these states to accelerate faster, to make this happen,' Ginsburg said. '(We'll) bring these systems together so that our gears aren't grinding, that they are connected and, in fact, we're moving forward.' Governors of the participating states echoed the call for improving training opportunities for students. Apprenticeships are common in Europe, with more than half of students in countries like Switzerland participating. Apprenticeships In the U.S. usually start after high school, instead of the equivalent of junior year in Europe, and have traditionally been in construction trades. But apprenticeships across the country have been growing in recent years and in other fields, particularly health care, information technology and advanced manufacturing. New U.S. Secretary of Education Linda McMahon has also voiced support of the Swiss apprenticeship system on social media, and has called for more CTE, apprenticeships and tuition assistance for career training. President Donald Trump signed an executive order in April calling for a million more apprenticeships. But the administration also shut down a Department of Labor advisory panel on apprenticeships that Ginsburg had a major role on and put a 'pause' May 29 on Job Corps, a training program for 25,000 young people a year, a decision that is being challenged in court.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Opinion: How Much More Positive Head Start Evidence Do We Need to Save It?
The Trump administration's first four months have been rough on U.S. children. They certainly don't deserve the punishment. From polarized and destabilizing politics to a global pandemic, increasing environmental pressures from climate change (and more), this cohort of children is coming of age in a particularly difficult moment. And yet, we have reached what is perhaps a zenith in Trump-era politics of disinvesting in children and families. The administration's response to America's youth crisis has been stunningly consistent: again and again, it has balanced occasional, vague promises to do something constructive to address child care costs or infertility challenges on the one hand with real and stunningly concrete attacks on children's well-being on the other. Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter Perhaps the most direct and comprehensive assault on children is coming through the administration's war on Head Start. At $12.3 billion last year, it's the federal government's largest-single investment in early learning, and it serves almost 800,000 children and families per year. Over its 60 years, Head Start has provided high-quality early learning as well as connecting around 40 million children and their families to comprehensive support services like health and dental care, nutrition and housing assistance. During the 2024 campaign, Donald Trump echoed the Heritage Foundation's Project 2025 playbook in calling for Head Start's elimination. This was hardly novel: though Head Start has long enjoyed bipartisan support, a subset of conservative researchers, activists and politicians have spent decades attacking the program. While the administration's chaotic first 100 days decimated portions of the federal government supporting health and well-being, its attacks on Head Start have been uniquely unpredictable. In January, as Elon Musk and his underlings at the Department of Government Efficiency hacked away at the federal civil service, Head Start providers across the country reported that they were unable to access their normally scheduled federal payments. This posed a particular challenge for Head Start center directors navigating the tight margins that define the early education market; hundreds of early care and learning centers warned that they were at risk of closure. Related Later in the spring, the administration abruptly pulled funding from regional Head Start centers that offer resources, support and oversight for Head Start providers. Several weeks ago, it appeared that the administration was preparing to act more decisively to abandon U.S. kids and families who depend on Head Start. On April 17, the Associated Press reported on leaked documents indicating that the Trump administration would erase Head Start funding in its forthcoming budget proposal. Once this hit the news, Head Start supporters mobilized to save the program, and the administration reversed course. While it appears that the administration isn't (yet) ready to deliver on this promised assault on children's well-being, it's worth reminding ourselves just what a stunning mistake it would be to reduce this particular investment in U.S. kids and families. Related Head Start has been studied many times, and the results are broadly positive. Research on it — and other early education programs — finds a relatively consistent pattern: Early education programs are reliably good for families and at preparing kids for kindergarten There's some waning of positive academic impacts as kids go through K-12 But the long-term impacts of early ed investments are generally positive. First, Head Start appears to be particularly effective at helping children from historically marginalized communities. Perhaps most importantly in the present political context, early education programs tend to promote better child development outcomes that create cost savings for school budgets. This mostly results from pre-K programs like Head Start reducing the likelihood that children will later require special education services or need to repeat a grade. For instance, economist Tim Bartik notes that studies show possible special education cost-savings of '23 to 86 percent.' Meanwhile, if a child repeats second (or any) grade, the public pays an additional year of per-pupil funding, and it also delays their entry into the workforce. As such, pre-K's ability to lower grade retention and keep students on track for college and career is a particularly efficient return on early education investments. Finally, early education programs like Head Start are a boon for working families because they help parents get back to work sooner after having a child. Most encouraging of all, Head Start appears to create some long-term positive effects. In 2022, researchers at the University of Notre Dame and Texas A&M found that the children of Head Start participants garnered benefits like higher high school graduation and college attainment rates, lower rates of teen pregnancy and reduced rates of interaction with the criminal justice system. For instance, critics often point to the federal Head Start Impact Study, which gathered data on programs in the early 2000s. It largely found that Head Start had positive initial effects on children's development, but that these effects 'faded out' as kids worked their way into the K–12 education system. But problems with the study's data prompted a field reassessment of its findings in the 2010s, with most researchers concluding that it meaningfully underestimated Head Start's benefits to children. This begs some critical questions about how the public should measure 'success' for Head Start. Begin here: nearly every study of nearly every early education investment shows that these programs are effective at getting kids ready for K–12 schooling. Put simply, pre-K appears to be good at getting kids 'pre'-pared for K(indergarten). Related The trouble is, political rhetoric about early education investments has sometimes presented them as an invulnerable 'inoculation' against all challenges that children may face later in life. This is the wrong way to think about whether early education investments 'work,' because it sets an impossible bar for success. Head Start — or pre-K programs more generally — cannot wholly blunt poverty, poor health or the impacts of low-quality K–12 classrooms. Indeed, even less rosy findings, like those in a recent study of Tennessee's public pre-K program, indicate a positive path forward for public early education investments. Initial studies of the program garnered headlines. While Tennessee pre-K attendees were generally more ready for kindergarten than their peers who did not attend the program, pre-K attendees scored worse on a range of metrics by the end of elementary school. This is concerning! But a more recent analysis of Tennessee's data found that pre-K's benefits were 'most likely to persist until 3rd grade among those students who went on to attend high quality schooling environments and were taught by highly effective teachers.' That is, Tennessee's pre-K programs succeeded at preparing children for kindergarten, and kids who went from those programs into higher-quality elementary classrooms continued to do better. In other words, if Head Start and other pre-K programs are measured as a one-time public investment that will solve all systemic inequities in American schools and society, they will inevitably appear to fail. But if they are measured against their ability to prepare children for elementary schools, it is clear that they are a success. Furthermore, this fairer definition of Head Start's effectiveness would allow policymakers to focus their attention on the necessary work of investing and improving K–12 schools so that they bolster children and families beyond the early years.
