Hello all!
Reading through the posts has been very informative. Thanks in advance to those of you sharing your wisdom.
I am currently on a break from work while raising young children; however, I am interested in returning to work in k-12 education in a year or so.
My background is that I have a BA in French and English (double majors) and an M.Ed from US institutions. I taught mostly developmental (aka remedial) English in the US community college system as well as some composition, French, and learning skills type courses at the community college and university levels in the US and abroad. Alas, most of my experience has been with 18+ learners, yet I have also taught some academic bridge programs to high school juniors and seniors. Additionally, I've worked with high school students as part of a few volunteer programs in conservation. I suppose I'm sharing all that to say that I am aware that tertiary and secondary education are two different ballgames.
My QUESTION primarily relates to earning a US state teaching certificate. I am currently living overseas, so I cannot complete a program in the US. What is the best way for me to earn a teaching certificate that will be recognized overseas? Is it possible to do so without a teaching practicum? or with a practicum overseas? I'm not really looking for a shortcut and realize that I'll have to start my new career at a less desirable school but do believe I would be hired as I've already been offered and declined a position without any sort of teaching certificate. I'm looking for the best way to become certified from abroad with minimal trips back to the US.
Thank you for any insight you have. I really appreciate it!
it2018
Moving from tertiary to secondary
Response
First, you could have just stated you recognize that secondary and tertiary are discreet fields of edu, instead of your examples because those environments where youve worked with secondary aged students arent indicative you understand the differences. FL though tends too be more congruent between K12/KS and tertiary/Uni.
Second, What do you mean by "best" fastest, least amount of work, cheapest, short term or long term, marketability/utility, recognized where?
What resources in regards to a classroom do you have?
Third, you are absolutely looking for a shortcut. Saying youre not might make you feel better and more virtuous, but youre looking for a shortcut.
Fourth, Yes, there are pathways that do not require field experience (practicum, internship, student teaching, clinical teaching, etc.). You stated US credential, so I will forgo the the PGCEi/CT/QTS route. You also stated your inability or lack of interest in doing field experience so I will forgo the skills based pathways such as Teach Now and Teach Ready.
This leaves you with two options. Either the MA (Massachusetts) provisional credential route or the UT (Utah) APT Lvl.1 route. Of the two the MA route will meet your goals better than the UT route. The UT route will require an application, a CRB and passage of one PRAXIS exam if you pursue Literature (English) or two exams (1 PRAXISand 1 ACTFL exam) if your pursue French. The Praxis is available globally, the ACTFL has less availability. The credential is renewable every three years.
The MA Provisional route will require an application and two exams, the appropriate MTEL subject matter exam and the communication literacy exam. The credential is valid for 5 years of work, but since you will never work in MA it will effectively be a lifetime credential. The MTEL exams are more difficult to schedule globally. The MA credential has the benefit that you can obtain multiple credentials in French and Literature and at multiple grade levels. You also will not have to undertake a CRB process of obtaining fingerprints for the MA route. The UT process is limited to a single credential, you would have to choose either elementary or secondary English or secondary French. You also will need to arrange for fingerprints to be taken locally. The UT pathway would also require renewal every three years and thus PD requirements. Neither credential can be standardized within the state without returning and teaching in the states, and neither credential is acceptable for QTS. You could eventually standardize either credential though HI (Hawaii) after three years and then using the HI credential for QTS and then either transitioning to the CA CLEAR credential (more work) or NJ Standard credentials. CA would require you to add an ESOL credential either as part of the MA route (requiring another MTEL exam) or after you obtained the HI Standard credential (requiring 2 PRAXIS exams). CA is the gold standard in AS curriculum, the 5 year CLEAR credential can be renewed indefinitely and requires no PD. The NJ Standard credential would require no further work and is a lifetime credential that neither requires renewal or PD.
Second, What do you mean by "best" fastest, least amount of work, cheapest, short term or long term, marketability/utility, recognized where?
What resources in regards to a classroom do you have?
Third, you are absolutely looking for a shortcut. Saying youre not might make you feel better and more virtuous, but youre looking for a shortcut.
Fourth, Yes, there are pathways that do not require field experience (practicum, internship, student teaching, clinical teaching, etc.). You stated US credential, so I will forgo the the PGCEi/CT/QTS route. You also stated your inability or lack of interest in doing field experience so I will forgo the skills based pathways such as Teach Now and Teach Ready.
This leaves you with two options. Either the MA (Massachusetts) provisional credential route or the UT (Utah) APT Lvl.1 route. Of the two the MA route will meet your goals better than the UT route. The UT route will require an application, a CRB and passage of one PRAXIS exam if you pursue Literature (English) or two exams (1 PRAXISand 1 ACTFL exam) if your pursue French. The Praxis is available globally, the ACTFL has less availability. The credential is renewable every three years.
The MA Provisional route will require an application and two exams, the appropriate MTEL subject matter exam and the communication literacy exam. The credential is valid for 5 years of work, but since you will never work in MA it will effectively be a lifetime credential. The MTEL exams are more difficult to schedule globally. The MA credential has the benefit that you can obtain multiple credentials in French and Literature and at multiple grade levels. You also will not have to undertake a CRB process of obtaining fingerprints for the MA route. The UT process is limited to a single credential, you would have to choose either elementary or secondary English or secondary French. You also will need to arrange for fingerprints to be taken locally. The UT pathway would also require renewal every three years and thus PD requirements. Neither credential can be standardized within the state without returning and teaching in the states, and neither credential is acceptable for QTS. You could eventually standardize either credential though HI (Hawaii) after three years and then using the HI credential for QTS and then either transitioning to the CA CLEAR credential (more work) or NJ Standard credentials. CA would require you to add an ESOL credential either as part of the MA route (requiring another MTEL exam) or after you obtained the HI Standard credential (requiring 2 PRAXIS exams). CA is the gold standard in AS curriculum, the 5 year CLEAR credential can be renewed indefinitely and requires no PD. The NJ Standard credential would require no further work and is a lifetime credential that neither requires renewal or PD.
-
iteach2018
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:40 pm
Re: Moving from tertiary to secondary
Thank you for your reply. I was speaking more to the differences in the student body than anything else. High school students are very different to college students in attitude and behavior.
I am not strictly uninterested in a teaching practicum as part of credentialing and don't foresee a problem setting one up where I am. By best, I mean a program that will prepare me in terms of the profession not the easiest, cheapest, or shortest route. Teach Now, Teach Ready, and Teacher Ready seem to be programs that pop up in discussion often. What I noticed is that the latter requires a shorter teaching practicum. Generally, do employers look at how exactly certification was obtained or just whether you have it?
I am not strictly uninterested in a teaching practicum as part of credentialing and don't foresee a problem setting one up where I am. By best, I mean a program that will prepare me in terms of the profession not the easiest, cheapest, or shortest route. Teach Now, Teach Ready, and Teacher Ready seem to be programs that pop up in discussion often. What I noticed is that the latter requires a shorter teaching practicum. Generally, do employers look at how exactly certification was obtained or just whether you have it?
Reply
@iteach2018
They can be, last year senior school students arent that different from first year Uni students, and Id rather have the senior students than the Uni students. Its not enough though to know or even appreciate that they are different, its the how and why that matters.
Teach Ready, and Teacher Ready are the exact same program, they are references for the same EPP/ITT provider.
The differences between skills based roues commonly discussed in IE, differ in their field work experience and access the IT has to a classroom. At one end of the scale you have PGCEi programs that require no field work at all, if you cant get access to a classroom thats your option. Teach Ready has 5 day field experience requirement, its a week, and its an easier sell to an IS to give you a classroom for a week compared to the alternative. That alternative is Teach Now, which has a 12 week field experience requirement, you essentially need an IS to appoint you to take advantage of that option (even if the appointment is a short term one). Both options have integrated observation hours as part of their programs.
None of the options, even academic pathway options will really prepare you for the role of a professional educator. Teaching is as much if not more craft than it is academics, and theory. There are a lot of different factors that contribute to this from the perspective that credentialing programs for the most part are focused on the DE environment, to the stark differences between scholar and practitioner (just as generals are made on the battle field not the war college, no amount of academic study is going to equal any amount of experience in the classroom); too differences in 'study' versus 'training'. Both Teach Now and Teach Ready use similar methods of delivery, its all digital, online content, thats CMI delivered. Teach Now uses a cohort, Teach Ready is self paced. Some ITs who are very disciplined learn very well this way, those that are less disciplined or less motivated can easily manipulate the program to get through it. Its almost impossible to fail, the goals of the instructional content is prepare you for the state mandated certification exam, which is the real gate keeper. Candidates report better preparation using exam study guides (such as for the PRAXIS) than anything they got from the course. While these exams are scored on various scales, it really comes down to pass and fail, and thats how the EPP/ITT providers are measured by the regulating authorities (the ratio of passes to attempts). Programs focused on passing the assessment (teach to the test) dont really prepare you for the classroom, the major contributing factor to your learning outcomes are vested mostly in your field experience placement the IS and to who your mentoring IT is. Some people get mentors who see your presence as an AT (Assistant Teacher or Aid) and if your not reducing their workload than your just a bother. Your mentor could be old school who sees no place for technology in the classroom and whos methodology is direct teach (chalk and talk, drill and kill) which would likely be the most recognizable to you as "lecturing". You could have a relatively new mentoring IT who is all about CMI and game/play based learning whos classroom is more a computer/technology lab, or an IS with a 1:1 tech program and most of the lessons involving a small amount of bridging and housekeeping tasks and the majority of the lessons involve students with headphones on their laptops or tablets, you spend most of the period just sitting and walking around the room. New ITs/DTS tend to pursue methodologies that they themselves were exposed to and worked with.
With an M.Ed and tertiary experience the entirety of the content provided by Teach Now and Teach Ready will either be repetitive or irrelevant to your experience (you will likely have to choose either Literature or French as an FL) as your initial training. Your experience in tertiary has probably already given you some basics of classroom management and curriculum organization. What you do will largely depend on what resources and method of delivery your IS has implemented. If you pursue French as an FL and your IS is largely digital technology thats what you will do, if its work books and texts than read and speak along is what youll do. If you choose Teach Ready you wont have the time to do much if anything that is PBL or Inquiry, and will mostly be following the mentoring ITs lesson plan and scope and sequence, you will effectively be a substitute/relief IT for the week. If you go through Teach Now you will have more time and freedom to do a project or inquiry driven lessons, but you could also spend 12 weeks just moving through the texts and pushing play on the recording. If you pursue Literature (English) again Teach Ready youll be doing whatever the literary piece is in the IS lexicon. You may luck out and have a supportive mentor and leadership and be able to design a lesson and work with Madam Bovary and exploring French literature. You could also be dumped into any number of lessons in the ISs scope and sequence. With Teach Now, you likely have an appointment and a classroom that you have freedom within the ISs curriculum to design and implement your own lessons. You could do what you want. In that aspect FL (French) is generally less constructed and prescribed than Literature. In FL though you generally have students scheduled by grade/year levels so you might have to do a lot more differentiation, or you might have mixed age classes. Either subject focus could find you with vastly different age groups.
Regardless, both programs are very likely to be little more than a hoop jumping exercise in persistence and commitment. It will mostly be uninspiring busy work.
For intern class ITs the pathway of the EPP/ITT program can be a deciding factor, however the general bar to entry in IE is two years post credentialing experience, which tends to 'field test by fire' the majority of DTs and ITs, if you dont run screaming from the room within two years youre probably made of the right stuff, and everything else can be trained and learned. If you cant cut those first couple of years you generally self select out of the profession. That process and experience generally equalizes the majority of ITs, at which point most recruiters/leadership in IE see a credential more as a check mark that your legal.
There does however exist a prejudice for some leadership against non-academic pathways a credential. Its pretty easy for a recruiter to figure out if you did your EPP/ITT program at a Uni it would be listed as an entry on your resume under education, an absence of such an entry is usually indicative of an IT who did their EPP/ITT program though a skills or assessment based pathway. This prejudice is in the minority however. For you it wont matter though as you have an M.Ed, they will assume and treat you as being academically prepared, even if your credential was obtained through another pathway.
It is for this reason I focused my earlier response on the assessment based pathways too a credential. The skills based pathways are several thousand in costs compared to several hundred for an assessment based pathway. You will likely learn and gain nothing significant for that increased cost, and will have paid significantly more financially as well as in time and personal resources that will result in a credential that provides you the same utility and legal entry into the profession. Whatever you know and can do in the classroom you obtained during your Masters program and practiced in tertiary education and your other experiences. You will have a M.Ed and a credential, that is all that will matter. No one will care what you did or how long your field experience was or if you even had one.
They can be, last year senior school students arent that different from first year Uni students, and Id rather have the senior students than the Uni students. Its not enough though to know or even appreciate that they are different, its the how and why that matters.
Teach Ready, and Teacher Ready are the exact same program, they are references for the same EPP/ITT provider.
The differences between skills based roues commonly discussed in IE, differ in their field work experience and access the IT has to a classroom. At one end of the scale you have PGCEi programs that require no field work at all, if you cant get access to a classroom thats your option. Teach Ready has 5 day field experience requirement, its a week, and its an easier sell to an IS to give you a classroom for a week compared to the alternative. That alternative is Teach Now, which has a 12 week field experience requirement, you essentially need an IS to appoint you to take advantage of that option (even if the appointment is a short term one). Both options have integrated observation hours as part of their programs.
None of the options, even academic pathway options will really prepare you for the role of a professional educator. Teaching is as much if not more craft than it is academics, and theory. There are a lot of different factors that contribute to this from the perspective that credentialing programs for the most part are focused on the DE environment, to the stark differences between scholar and practitioner (just as generals are made on the battle field not the war college, no amount of academic study is going to equal any amount of experience in the classroom); too differences in 'study' versus 'training'. Both Teach Now and Teach Ready use similar methods of delivery, its all digital, online content, thats CMI delivered. Teach Now uses a cohort, Teach Ready is self paced. Some ITs who are very disciplined learn very well this way, those that are less disciplined or less motivated can easily manipulate the program to get through it. Its almost impossible to fail, the goals of the instructional content is prepare you for the state mandated certification exam, which is the real gate keeper. Candidates report better preparation using exam study guides (such as for the PRAXIS) than anything they got from the course. While these exams are scored on various scales, it really comes down to pass and fail, and thats how the EPP/ITT providers are measured by the regulating authorities (the ratio of passes to attempts). Programs focused on passing the assessment (teach to the test) dont really prepare you for the classroom, the major contributing factor to your learning outcomes are vested mostly in your field experience placement the IS and to who your mentoring IT is. Some people get mentors who see your presence as an AT (Assistant Teacher or Aid) and if your not reducing their workload than your just a bother. Your mentor could be old school who sees no place for technology in the classroom and whos methodology is direct teach (chalk and talk, drill and kill) which would likely be the most recognizable to you as "lecturing". You could have a relatively new mentoring IT who is all about CMI and game/play based learning whos classroom is more a computer/technology lab, or an IS with a 1:1 tech program and most of the lessons involving a small amount of bridging and housekeeping tasks and the majority of the lessons involve students with headphones on their laptops or tablets, you spend most of the period just sitting and walking around the room. New ITs/DTS tend to pursue methodologies that they themselves were exposed to and worked with.
With an M.Ed and tertiary experience the entirety of the content provided by Teach Now and Teach Ready will either be repetitive or irrelevant to your experience (you will likely have to choose either Literature or French as an FL) as your initial training. Your experience in tertiary has probably already given you some basics of classroom management and curriculum organization. What you do will largely depend on what resources and method of delivery your IS has implemented. If you pursue French as an FL and your IS is largely digital technology thats what you will do, if its work books and texts than read and speak along is what youll do. If you choose Teach Ready you wont have the time to do much if anything that is PBL or Inquiry, and will mostly be following the mentoring ITs lesson plan and scope and sequence, you will effectively be a substitute/relief IT for the week. If you go through Teach Now you will have more time and freedom to do a project or inquiry driven lessons, but you could also spend 12 weeks just moving through the texts and pushing play on the recording. If you pursue Literature (English) again Teach Ready youll be doing whatever the literary piece is in the IS lexicon. You may luck out and have a supportive mentor and leadership and be able to design a lesson and work with Madam Bovary and exploring French literature. You could also be dumped into any number of lessons in the ISs scope and sequence. With Teach Now, you likely have an appointment and a classroom that you have freedom within the ISs curriculum to design and implement your own lessons. You could do what you want. In that aspect FL (French) is generally less constructed and prescribed than Literature. In FL though you generally have students scheduled by grade/year levels so you might have to do a lot more differentiation, or you might have mixed age classes. Either subject focus could find you with vastly different age groups.
Regardless, both programs are very likely to be little more than a hoop jumping exercise in persistence and commitment. It will mostly be uninspiring busy work.
For intern class ITs the pathway of the EPP/ITT program can be a deciding factor, however the general bar to entry in IE is two years post credentialing experience, which tends to 'field test by fire' the majority of DTs and ITs, if you dont run screaming from the room within two years youre probably made of the right stuff, and everything else can be trained and learned. If you cant cut those first couple of years you generally self select out of the profession. That process and experience generally equalizes the majority of ITs, at which point most recruiters/leadership in IE see a credential more as a check mark that your legal.
There does however exist a prejudice for some leadership against non-academic pathways a credential. Its pretty easy for a recruiter to figure out if you did your EPP/ITT program at a Uni it would be listed as an entry on your resume under education, an absence of such an entry is usually indicative of an IT who did their EPP/ITT program though a skills or assessment based pathway. This prejudice is in the minority however. For you it wont matter though as you have an M.Ed, they will assume and treat you as being academically prepared, even if your credential was obtained through another pathway.
It is for this reason I focused my earlier response on the assessment based pathways too a credential. The skills based pathways are several thousand in costs compared to several hundred for an assessment based pathway. You will likely learn and gain nothing significant for that increased cost, and will have paid significantly more financially as well as in time and personal resources that will result in a credential that provides you the same utility and legal entry into the profession. Whatever you know and can do in the classroom you obtained during your Masters program and practiced in tertiary education and your other experiences. You will have a M.Ed and a credential, that is all that will matter. No one will care what you did or how long your field experience was or if you even had one.
-
iteach2018
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Sun Jul 01, 2018 11:40 pm
Re: Moving from tertiary to secondary
First, I apologize for the extreme delay in my reply. I was away on holiday and have just managed to get back to business so to speak. I have read your lengthy reply and appreciate the time you must have spent. I will give this and your previous reply some thought in terms of assessment and skills-based pathways. You raise excellent points. The MA (as in the state) sounds promising as a matter of fact. I'll look more into that.
Thanks again!
Thanks again!