According to OSPI, “The Professional Certificate (ProCert) is designed to help teachers demonstrate they have a positive impact on student learning. It is an individualized, classroom-based process that focuses on increased skills to impact student learning rather than credits. ProCert expectations apply state-wide, focus on student learning, and emphasize closing the achievement gap and reaching student learning goals. It is fully aligned with Washington’s expectations for K-12 student learning. Through ProCert, teachers demonstrate their competency in the 3 standards of Professional Certification: Effective Teaching, Professional Development, and Professional Contributions.” http://www.k12.wa.us/certification/Teacher/procert-program.aspx
Beginning in 2001, new Washington teachers have had to complete the ProCert program (or National Boards) to be able to apply for continuing certificate. Isn’t a university-educated and trained teacher “professional” enough? Isn’t holding a Washington state certificate “certificated” enough?
I
do not understand why the universities do not see this as a slap in the
face. If the state feels that our university programs are not properly
preparing their students for teaching, then OSPI needs to work more
closely with the universities to rectify the situation in their
undergraduate programs.
In
the meantime, young teachers barely earn enough money to survive; they
are hard up to find money to take an additional thirteen to seventeen
credits. Teaching is very time consuming (summer vacation is really
just comp time for all of the weekends we spend grading papers), and
forcing our neophytes to find the time and money to take these classes
and put together extensive portfolios is unjustifiable and unfair. With
so many demands, no wonder we have 50% of new teachers leaving the
profession within the first five years.
Boeing,
Paccar, and other major industries have education programs through
which they will pay for classes and credits for their employees –
especially if the courses are required for the job. It just makes sense. You
would think that with the universities being state sponsored, they
would be able to come up with a similar deal. At least the cost of
credits could be highly discounted for young teachers.
Unfortunately,
none of the young teachers I know who have completed their ProCert have
found it to be a valuable experience. Most see it as busy work that
takes up valuable time that could be better spent in their classrooms.
Additional training, targeted to the specific needs of schools and
districts is constantly being offered to young teachers. This seems to
be much better use of what little professional development time our
neophytes have.
I am currently doing my procert. I have a masters degree in teaching and feel I am doing it all over again. The amount of time and money it takes is taking away from my family and my classroom. It is stressful busy work with all sorts of ridiculous guidelines. With the impending shortage of teachers I find it hard to believe this system is still in place. If I didn’t need the job and love the kids so much I would be done.
It depends on the needed certification. There are institutions that accept the program.
It is true. Boeing has a world class internship programs for flight attendants, stewards and pilots. Best part is if you’re stint was excellent, you can get employed.
It is true. Boeing has a world class internship programs for flight attendants, stewards and pilots. Best part is if you’re stint was excellent, you can get employed.
Thanks for sharing your story, Lisa. It makes me sad that your experience seems to be the rule, rather than the exception.
I have just finished my ProCert which is now fewer credits, but hours and hours of work over 7 months to complete a portfolio to prove I am able to do the job that I am already doing. I was able to obtain and keep the job because I am college educated, certified, and annually favorably evaluated by an administrator. My state, however, with the help of universities has decided that a portfolio better shows what I’m capable of.
For the past seven months I have juggled my full-time job, my home life with two teens, and my portfolio work. My job quality suffered, my home life suffered, and my health followed suit. This is terrible modeling for new teachers who need to understand how to balance the demands of a teaching job with downtime that is good for their health. I’ve been in education since 1990, but due to lack of experience in Washington State, I ended up in the ProCert program.
After spending more than $2400 to do this online since I have no time to sit in a class, my “professor” knew very little about the details of the portfolio and repeatedly answered my questions by telling me to look “in the handbook.” Self-completion should be an option if WA state is going to continue to require the portfolio.
I’m certainly not a better teacher thanks to the ProCert.
L.E. I am sorry that you had that experience in Washington. It is tough being a strong teacher with a previous existence and have to “start from the beginning”. Your experience is one shared by many. Is there a solution? Not yet. The Pro Cert is set up for new teachers as a way to continue their professional development between their Bachelor’s and Master’s. Pro Cert is designed after NBPTS and while I am a huge proponent of NBPTS, I am not so much in favor of Pro Cert for all teachers as it does amount to “busy work” for many. In addition, there is not consistency in how the universities conduct and evaluate Pro Cert so the system is flawed. Again, it is too bad that your experience was such. As a teacher in Washington state, I would have liked to have another great teacher in our schools.
If you are interested in Tom’s view on how appropriate the Master’s Degree is, https://www.storiesfromschool.org/2009/01/in-defence-of-the-masters-degree.html
My husband and I moved from another state to teach in Seattle, only to move back when we found out that our masters degrees were not sufficient to teach in Washington. When we were told we would have to enroll in the ProCert program, pay more money, and do more busy-work for something similar to our graduate degrees, we left the state. Other people in our schools did the same thing. All I can say is that is was the best decision I ever made! Good riddance Washington with your awful traffic, high cost of living and Pro-Cert! I am appreciated, have received numerous awards in my current district and was selected to participate in a district-paid administrative degree program. Apparently, Washington state must have such a huge surplus of excellent teachers that they can afford to drive away good educators with this program.
Hi, Bob,
NCATE accreditation doesn’t play into the ProCert program. ALL new teachers have to play, no matter where they received their education.
I actually have no problem with objective third-party assessments. In fact, I strongly support teacher competency tests for both pedagogy and content area. I just think that external validation can be done in a less cumbersome, less burdonsome, and less expensive manner that doesn’t push young teachers out of the profession.
Two thoughts come to mind as I read your post.
First, NCATE accredited teacher prep programs have some comparability across programs and institutions. Non-NCATE accredited programs do not have the same seal or appearance of meeting the same standards, irrespective of the degree awarded, courses completed successfully, etc.
Second, completing an objective 3rd party test meets part of the same external validity assurance as NCATE accreditation.
Hope this helps to clarify why a some argue for teachers to demonstrate more than taking courses and earning degrees that allow people to hold teaching certificates.
Another issue is that both a masters degree and National Board Certification automatically move someone up on the pay scale. ProCert does not in any real or immediate way impact a teacher’s pay. So let’s recap: it costs thousands of dollars, tends to be a lot of busy work, and has no financial benefit. Hmmm…
Great post Kim, and timely too. I have many friends in this situation, and a number of them with masters who now have to get a procert which they will find out is not too unlike their masters.
The ProCert, itself, is not a bad idea in a strong supporting system for professional education. However, it follows the current educational practice of “Let’s put a rule or process or test out there to make our schools better” rather than making the schools better. I have not figured out how the mentality of DO THIS OR ELSE will make success happen, but then again, I am not in business with total control over my resources.
Another problem is that the ProCert is taught in so many different ways among the universities and the expectations are so varied, that there is no way to attest to its success. It is not a researched, valid program. It is a step down version of the NBPTS process and built off of the NBPTS process. However, whereas the NBPTS process is valid and has consistency, ProCert does not.
ProCert could be useful for new teachers. It could be useful for keeping teachers in the teaching process–that thing that helps them through the tough times, helps them to reflect on their practices. However, it is not that yet.
In a strong professional development system, it would go something like this:
Bachelors with long teaching internship (more than a quarter/semester)
Teach while working on ProCert (classes paid for or a reimbursement for completion, stipend)
Teach
Masters
Teach
National Board Certification
Something like that.
“Isn’t a university-educated and trained teacher “professional” enough? Isn’t holding a Washington state certificate “certificated” enough?”
Yes, but it isn’t bureaucratic enough. There’s gotta be some papers to push if you’re in Olympia. They can’t focus on the homeless or those without insurance. There’s no paper trail.