Report on Maryland Teacher Quality

We reproduce here the National Council on Teacher Quality’s critical report on Maryland’s teacher recruitment practices

National Council on Teacher Quality
2010
State Teacher
Policy Yearbook
Blueprint
for Change in
Maryland
Acknowledgments
stat Es
State education agencies remain our most important partners in this effort, and their extensive
experience has helped to ensure the factual accuracy of the final product. Although this
year’s Blueprint for Change did not require the extensive review typically required of states,
we still wanted to make sure that states’ perspectives were represented. As such, each state
received a draft of the policy updates we identified this year. We would like to thank all of
the states for graciously reviewing and responding to our drafts.
Funders
The primary funders for the 2010 Yearbook were:
n Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation n The George Gund Foundation
n Carnegie Corporation of New York n The Joyce Foundation
n Gleason Family Foundation
The National Council on Teacher Quality does not accept any direct funding from the
federal government.
STAFF
Sandi Jacobs, Project Director
Sarah Brody, Project Assistant
Kelli M. Rosen, Lead Researcher
Trisha M. Madden, Pension Researcher
nctq board of directors
Stacey Boyd n Chester E. Finn, Jr. n Ira Fishman n Marti Watson Garlett n Henry L. Johnson
Donald N. Langenberg n Clara M. Lovett n Barbara O’Brien n Carol G. Peck n John Winn
Kate Walsh, President
Thank you to Bryan Gunning and the team at CPS Inc. for their design of the 2010
Blueprint for Change. Thanks also to Colleen Hale and Jeff Hale of EFA Solutions for the
original Yearbook design and ongoing technical support.
About the Yearbook
The 2010 Blueprint for Change is the National Council on Teacher Quality’s fourth annual review of state
laws, rules and regulations that govern the teaching profession. This year’s Yearbook takes a different
approach than our past editions, as it is designed as a companion to the 2009 State Teacher Policy Yearbook,
NCTQ’s most recent comprehensive report on state teacher policies.
The comprehensive Yearbook, a 52-volume state-by-state analysis produced biennially, examines the alignment
of states’ teacher policies with goals to improve teacher quality. The 2009 report, which addressed key
policy areas such as teacher preparation, evaluation, alternative certification and compensation, found that
states had much work to do to ensure that every child has an effective teacher. Next year we will once again
conduct a comprehensive goal-by-goal analysis of all aspects of states’ teacher policies.
In 2010, an interim year, we set out to help states prioritize among the many areas of teacher policy in need
of reform. With so much to be done, state policymakers may be nonplussed about where to begin. The 2010
Yearbook offers each state an individualized blueprint, identifying state policies most in need of attention.
Although based on our 2009 analyses, this edition also updates states’ progress in the last year, a year that
saw many states make significant policy changes, largely spurred by the Race to the Top competition. Rather
than grade states, the 2010 Blueprint for Change stands as a supplement to the 2009 comprehensive report,
updating states’ positive and negative progress on Yearbook goals and specifying actions that could lead to
stronger policies for particular topics such as teacher evaluation, tenure rules and dismissal policies.
As is our practice, in addition to a national summary report, we have customized this year’s Blueprint for
Change so that each state has its own edition highlighting its progress toward specific Yearbook goals.
Each report also contains charts and graphs showing how the state performed compared
to other states. In addition, we point to states that are leading
the way in areas requiring the most critical attention across
the country.
We hope that this year’s Blueprint for Change serves as an important
guide for governors, state school chiefs, school boards, legislatures and
the many advocates seeking reform. Individual state and national versions
of the 2010 Blueprint for Change, as well as the 2009 State Teacher
Policy Yearbook—including rationales and supporting research for our
policy goals—are available at www.nctq.org/stpy.

NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 3
The 2009 State Teacher Policy Yearbook provided a comprehensive review of states’ policies that impact the teaching profession.
As a companion to last year’s comprehensive state-by-state analysis, the 2010 edition provides each state with an
individualized “Blueprint for Change,” building off last year’s Yearbook goals and recommendations.
State teacher policy addresses a great many areas, including teacher preparation, certification, evaluation and compensation.
With so many moving parts, it may be difficult for states to find a starting point on the road to reform. To this end, the following
brief provides a state-specific roadmap, organized in three main sections.
■■ Section 1 identifies policy concerns that need critical attention, the areas of highest priority for state policymakers.
■■ Section 2 outlines “low-hanging fruit,” policy changes that can be implemented in relatively short order.
■■ Section 3 offers a short discussion of some longer-term systemic issues that states need to make sure stay on the radar.
Area 1: Delivering Well Prepared Teachers DArea
2: Expanding the Teaching Pool C+
Area 3: Identifying Effective Teachers DArea
4: Retaining Effective Teachers CArea
5: Exiting Ineffective Teachers F
D
Blueprint for Change in Maryland
Current Status of Maryland’s Teacher Policy
In the 2009 State Teacher Policy Yearbook, Maryland had the following grades:
Overall Grade
2010 Policy Update:
In the last year, many states made significant changes to their teacher policies, spurred in many cases by the Race
to the Top competition. Based on a review of state legislation, rules and regulations, NCTQ has identified the following
recent policy changes in Maryland:
Teacher Evaluation:
According to the Education Reform Act of 2010, student growth must account for a significant portion of a
teacher’s performance evaluation and must be one of the multiple measures used. No single criterion is allowed
to count for more than 35 percent of the total performance evaluation. Draft regulations by the State Board of
Education limit any single component of student growth, such as standardized test scores, to 35 percent, but other
measures of student progress are added for a total of 50 percent. Although a legislative committee has recommended
that the state reject student growth counting for half of teacher evaluations, the State Board seems on
track to finalize the regulations.
H.B. 1263
4 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
Maryland Response to Policy Update:
States were asked to review NCTQ’s identified updates and also to comment on policy changes that have
occurred in the last year, other pending changes or teacher quality in the state more generally.
Maryland was helpful in providing NCTQ with additional information about recent policy changes. The state
added that its probationary period for teachers covers a period of three years from the date of employment and
consists of a one-year employment contract that may be renewed by the county board. If the probationary period
is extended, a mentor is assigned and the teacher is evaluated at the end of the third year based on established
performance evaluation criteria.
Tenure:
The probationary period before teachers are awarded tenure has been extended from two to three years.
Annotated Code of Maryland 6-202(b)(1)
State Data System:
Maryland now has a unique statewide student identifier that connects student data across key databases across
years. The state also has the ability to match individual students’ test records from year to year to measure academic
growth, and it now assigns unique teacher identifiers.
www.dataqualitycampaign.org
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 5
Section 1: Critical Attention Areas
This section identifies the highest priority areas as states work to advance teacher quality.
These are the policy issues that should be at the top of the list for state policymakers. While
other states need also to address middle school teacher preparation and expanding the teacher
pipeline through alternative certification, Maryland should turn its immediate attention to the
following seven issues.
1. ENSURE that TEACHEr EVALUATIONS
ASSESS EFFECTIVENESS IN THE
CLASSROOM:
The purpose of teachers’ formal evaluations should be
to determine whether or not the teachers are effective
in the classroom. To achieve this purpose, evaluations
must be based primarily
on teachers’ impact on
students. While it is certainly
appropriate also to
include subjective factors,
such as classroom observations,
Maryland should
strengthen its recently
passed legislation that
requires a significant portion
of a teacher’s evaluation
score to be based on
student achievement measures, and enact its Board’s
proposed regulations that make objective evidence of
student learning—including but not limited to standardized
test scores—the preponderant criterion of its
teacher evaluations. This would also serve to codify the
evaluation parameters articulated in Maryland’s winning
Race to the Top proposal.
2. CONNECT TENURE DECISIONS TO
TEACHER EFFECTIVENESS:
The point at which a teacher’s probationary period ends,
commonly referred to as tenure, should be a significant
milestone. Although the awarding of tenure is a local
decision, state policy should reflect the fact that tenure
should only be awarded to teachers who have consistently
demonstrated their effectiveness. Maryland should
require a clear process, such as a hearing, for districts
to use when considering whether a teacher advances
from probationary to permanent status. Such a process
would ensure that the
local district reviews the
teacher’s performance
before making a determination.
Maryland should
also ensure that evidence
of effectiveness is the
preponderant criterion for
making tenure decisions. In
addition, the state’s recent
policy change extending
the probationary period to three years still does not allow
for the accumulation of sufficient data on teacher performance
to support meaningful tenure decisions. Further
extending the probationary period––ideally to five years–
–would prevent effective teachers from being unfairly
denied tenure based on too little data and ineffective
teachers from being granted tenure prematurely.
In addition, Maryland should reconsider its mandate for
licensure advancement of either a master’s degree or
ample amounts of coursework, which seems in essence
to require an advanced degree to reach the Advanced
Certificate, as research is conclusive and emphatic that
master’s degrees do not have any significant correlation
to classroom performance.
Critical Attention: Maryland policies that need
to better connect to teacher effectiveness
Evaluation is a critical
attention area in
42 states.
States on the right track
include Colorado, Louisiana
and Rhode Island.
Tenure is a critical
attention area in
46 states.
States on the right track
include Colorado, Delaware
and Rhode Island.
6 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
Dismissal is a critical
attention area in
46 states.
States on the right track
include Oklahoma and
Rhode Island.
3. PREVENT INEFFECTIVE TEACHERS
FROM REMAINING IN THE
CLASSROOM INDEFINITELY:
Although Maryland has
taken steps to improve
its evaluation system, the
state’s current process for
terminating ineffective
teachers may undermine
those efforts. Maryland
should explicitly make
teacher ineffectiveness
grounds for dismissal so
that districts do not feel
they lack the legal basis for terminating consistently
poor performers, and it should steer clear of euphemistic
terms that are ambiguous at best and may be interpreted
as concerning dereliction of duty rather than
ineffectiveness. In Maryland, the process is the same
regardless of the grounds for dismissal, which include
immorality, misconduct, insubordination, incompetency
and willful neglect of duty.
Nonprobationary teachers who are dismissed for any
grounds, including ineffectiveness, are entitled to due
process. However, cases that drag on for years drain
resources from school districts and create a disincentive
for districts to attempt to terminate poor performers.
Therefore, the state must ensure that the opportunity
to appeal occurs only once and only at the district
level and involves only adjudicators with educational
expertise.
1 The District of Columbia has no state-level policy, but District
of Columbia Public Schools requires that student academic
achievement count for 50% of evaluation score.
2 Legislation articulates that student growth must account for
a significant portion of evaluations, with no single criterion
counting for more than 35% of the total performance
evaluation. However, the State Board is on track to finalize
regulations that limit any single component of student growth,
such as standardized test scores, to 35%, but add other
measures of student progress for a total of 50%.
Figure 1
Is classroom effectiveness
considered in teacher
evaluations and tenure
decisions?
Evaluations include student
achievement data
Evidence of student learning is
the preponderant criterion in
teacher evaluations
Evidence of student learning
is the preponderant
criterion in tenure decisions
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia1
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland 2
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
16 10 4
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 7
4. ENSURE that ELEMENTARY TEACHERS
KNOW THE SCIENCE OF READING:
Although Maryland requires that its teacher preparation
programs provide teacher candidates with training
in the science of reading,
the state should also
require an assessment
prior to certification that
tests whether teachers
indeed possess the requisite
knowledge in scientifically
based reading
instruction. Ideally this
would be a stand-alone
test (such as the excellent
assessments required
by Massachusetts, Connecticut and Virginia), but if it
were combined with general pedagogy or elementary
content, the state should require a separate subscore
for the science of reading.
5. ENSURE that ELEMENTARY TEACHERS
KNOW ELEMENTARY CONTENT MATH:
Aspiring elementary teachers must begin to acquire a
deep conceptual knowledge of the mathematics they
will teach, moving well beyond mere procedural understanding.
Leading mathematicians and math educators
have found that elementary teachers are not well served
by mathematics courses designed for a general audience
and that methods courses do not provide sufficient content
preparation. Maryland should specifically articulate
that preparation programs deliver mathematics content
geared to the explicit needs of elementary teachers,
including coursework in
foundations, algebra and
geometry, with some statistics.
The state should
also adopt a rigorous
mathematics assessment,
such as the one required
by Massachusetts. At
the very least, Maryland
should consider requiring
a mathematics subscore
on its general content knowledge test, not only to
ensure that teacher candidates have minimum mathematics
knowledge but also to allow them to test out of
coursework requirements.
Critical Attention: Maryland policies that fail
to ensure that teachers are well prepared
Preparation to teach
reading is a critical
attention area in
43 states.
States on the right track
include Connecticut,
Massachusetts and Virginia.
Preparation to teach
mathematics is a critical
attention area in
49 states.
A state on the right track
is Massachusetts.
8 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
Figure 2
Do states ensure that
teachers are well
prepared?
Ensures elementary teachers
know the science of reading
Ensures elementary teachers
know elementary content math
Differentiates preparation
between elementary and
middle school teachers
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California 1
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida 2
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
6 2 29
1 Although California has a standalone test of reading
pedagogy, the ability of this test to screen out candidates
who do not know the science of reading has been questioned.
2 Florida’s licensure test for elementary teachers includes a
strong focus on the science of reading but does not report a
separate subscore for this content.
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 9
6. CLOSE LICENSURE LOOPHOLES TO
ENSURE THAT TEACHERS KNOW THE
CONTENT THEY TEACH:
All students are entitled to teachers who know the subject
matter they are teaching. Permitting individuals
who have not yet passed state licensing tests to teach
neglects the needs of students, instead extending personal
consideration to adults who may not be able to
meet minimal state standards. Licensing tests are an
important minimum benchmark in the profession, and
states that allow teachers to postpone passing these
tests are abandoning one
of the basic responsibilities
of licensure.
Maryland should ensure
that all teachers pass all
required subject-matter
licensure tests before
they enter the classroom
so that students will not
be at risk of having teachers
who lack sufficient or
appropriate content-area knowledge. The state allows
teachers who have not met licensure requirements
to teach under a conditional certificate, which is valid
for two years. If conditional or provisional licenses are
deemed necessary, then Maryland should only issue
them under limited and exceptional circumstances and
for no longer than a period of one year.
7. ENSURE THAT ELEMENTARY
CONTENT TESTS ADEQUATELY
ASSESS CONTENT KNOWLEDGE IN
EACH SUBJECT AREA:
Although Maryland requires that all new elementary
teachers must pass a Praxis II general subject-matter
test, this assessment does not report teacher performance
in each subject area, meaning that it may be
possible to pass the test and still fail some subject areas.
The state should require separate passing scores for each
area because without them it is impossible to measure
knowledge of individual subjects, especially given the
state’s current low passing score for the elementary
content test. According
to published test data,
Maryland has set its passing
score for this test so
far below the mean, the
average score of all test
takers, that it is questionable
whether this assessment
is indeed providing
any assurance of content
knowledge.
Critical Attention: Maryland policies
that license teachers who may lack
subject-matter knowledge
Licensure loopholes are a
critical attention area in
34 states.
States on the right track
include Mississippi, Nevada
and New Jersey.
Elementary licensure
tests are a critical
attention area in
50 states.
A state on the right track
is Massachusetts.
10 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
1 Data not available for Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina,
Oregon, and Washington. Montana does not require a content test.
Colorado cut score is for Praxis II, not PLACE.
Massachusetts
Alabama
Alaska
Idaho
Maryland
Mississippi
Nebraska
Nevada
New Jersey
North Dakota
Ohio
South Dakota
Tennessee
Virginia
West Virginia
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Hawaii
Indiana
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Missouri
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Arkansas
Iowa
Oklahoma
Pennsylvania
Figure 3
Where do states set the passing score on
elementary content licensure tests?1
50th Percentile
State sets
passing score
at the mean
(average score of
all test takers)
State sets score well
below mean
(at or near one standard deviation
~16th percentile)
State sets score far
below mean
(at or near two standard deviations
~2nd percentile)
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 11
Section 2: Low-Hanging Fruit
This section highlights areas where a small adjustment would result in significantly stronger
policy. Unlike the more complex topics identified in Section 1, the issues listed in this section
represent low-hanging fruit, policies that can be addressed in relatively short order.
1. ENSURE THAT UNDERGRADUATE
TEACHER PREPARATION PROGRAMS
ADMIT CANDIDATES WHO ARE
PREPARED TO DO COLLEGE-LEVEL WORK:
Basic skills tests were initially intended as a minimal
screening mechanism for teacher preparation programs,
to be used at the point of admission to ensure
that programs do not admit anyone who is not prepared
to do college-level work. Admitting prospective
teachers that have not passed basic skills tests—the
current generation of which generally assess only middle
school level skills—may result in programs devoting
already limited time to basic skills remediation
rather than preparation for the classroom. At present,
Maryland does not require aspiring teachers to pass a
basic skills test as a criterion for admission to teacher
preparation programs, instead delaying the requirement
until teacher candidates are ready to apply for
licensure. The state should adjust the timing of its basic
skills test, requiring that teacher candidates pass the
test, or demonstrate equivalent performance on a college
entrance exam such as the SAT or ACT, as a condition
of admission to a teacher preparation program.
12 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
2. ENSURE THAT SPECIAL EDUCATION
TEACHERS ARE ADEQUATELY
PREPARED TO TEACH
SUBJECT MATTER:
To allow special education students the opportunity
to reach their academic potential, special education
teachers should be well trained in subject matter. As a
first step toward ensuring requisite content knowledge,
Maryland should require that elementary special education
candidates pass the same Praxis II subject-area test
as other elementary teachers.
3. STRENGTHEN TEACHER
PREPARATION PROGRAM
ACCOUNTABILITY:
As part of its successful Race to the Top application,
Maryland has commendably made objective outcomes
a central component of its teacher preparation program
approval process. However, the state should codify these
requirements so that they continue to be in effect even
when the four-year grant period has expired.
4. ENSURE THAT OUT-OF-STATE
TEACHERS MEET THE STATE’S
TESTING REQUIREMENTS:
Maryland should uphold its standards for all teachers
and insist that out-of-state teachers meet its own
licensure test requirements. While it is important not
to create unnecessary obstacles for teachers seeking
reciprocal licensure in a new state, testing requirements
can provide an important safeguard. Particularly
given the variance of the passing scores required on
licensure tests, states must not assume that a teacher
that passed another state’s test would meet its passing
score as well. Maryland takes considerable risk by
granting a waiver for its licensing tests to any out-ofstate
teacher who has two years of teaching experience.
The state should not provide any waivers of its
teacher tests unless an applicant can provide evidence
of a passing score under its own standards. The negative
impact on student learning stemming from a
teacher’s inadequate subject-matter knowledge is not
mitigated by a teacher’s having recent experience.
5. REPORT SCHOOL-LEVEL DATA TO
SUPPORT THE EQUITABLE
DISTRIBUTION OF TEACHERS:
Maryland currently publicly reports the percentage of
highly qualified teachers at the school level, but it only
reports district-level data on the percentage of teachers
by years of experience. In order to promote the
equitable distribution of teacher talent among schools
within districts, these data should also be reported at
the individual school level.
6. ENSURE THAT STRUGGLING
TEACHERS RECEIVE SUPPORT:
Maryland should adopt a policy whereby all teachers
that receive a single unsatisfactory evaluation are
placed on a structured improvement plan, regardless of
whether or not they have tenure. These plans should
focus on performance areas that directly connect to
student learning and should list noted deficiencies,
define specific action steps necessary to address these
deficiencies and describe how and when progress will
be measured. Consequences for continued poor performance
should also be articulated.
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 13
Section 3: Systemic Issues
This section discusses some of the longer-term systemic issues related to teacher quality that
states also need to address. While these may not be “front-burner” issues in many states, they
are important to an overall reform agenda.
The critical relationship between teacher quality and
student achievement has been well established, and
ensuring that all students have teachers with the knowledge
and skills to support their academic success has
become a national priority. Yet the policy framework
that governs the teaching profession in most states is
almost entirely disconnected from teacher effectiveness.
Although states largely control how teachers are
evaluated, licensed and compensated, teacher effectiveness
in terms of student learning has not been a
central component in these policies.
Fortunately, this is starting to change. Fifteen states,
including Maryland, have made progress in their
requirements for teacher evaluation in the last year
alone.1 As evaluation ratings become more meaningful,
states should plan to connect teacher evaluation
to an overall system of performance management. The
current siloed approach, with virtually no connection
between meaningful evidence of teacher performance
and the awarding of tenure and professional licensure,
1. Performance Management
needs a fundamental overhaul. These elements must
not be thought of as isolated and discrete, but as part
of a comprehensive performance system. This system
should also include compensation strategies as well as
new teacher support and ongoing professional development,
creating a coordinated and aligned set of
teacher policies.
Meaningful evaluation is at the center of a performance
management system. Maryland has taken some steps
to improve its teacher evaluations. As the state continues
to move forward, it should keep in mind the larger
goal of creating a performance management system.
A successful performance management system—one
that gives educators the tools they need to be effective,
supports their development, rewards their accomplishments
and holds them accountable for results—
is essential to the fundamental goal of all education
reform: eliminating achievement gaps and ensuring
that all students achieve to their highest potential.
1 Includes changes to state policies regulating the frequency of evaluations
for probationary and nonprobationary teachers as well as requirements that
teacher evaluations consider classroom effectiveness.
14 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
2. Pension Reform
State pension systems are in need of a fundamental
overhaul. In an era when retirement benefits have been
shrinking across industries and professions, teachers’
generous pensions remain fixed. In fact, nearly all
states, including Maryland, continue to provide teachers
with a defined benefit pension system, an expensive
and inflexible model that neither reflects the realities
of the modern workforce nor provides equitable
benefits to all teachers.
The current model greatly disadvantages teachers who
move from one state to another, career switchers who
enter teaching and those who teach for fewer than 20
years. For these reasons alone, reform is needed. But
the dubious financial health of states’ pension systems
makes this an area
in need of urgent attention.
Some systems carry
high levels of unfunded
liabilities, with no strategy
to pay these liabilities
down in a reasonable
period, as defined
by standard accounting
practices. According to
Maryland’s 2009 actuarial report, its system was only
66 percent funded, significantly below recommended
benchmarks.1 When funding cannot keep up with
promised benefits, a new approach is clearly needed.
And changes must be made immediately to alter the
long-term outlook for the state, as it is exceedingly difficult
to reduce promised benefits once a teacher is
a member of the system––regardless of whether the
state can afford them.
Systemic reform should lead to the development of a
financially sustainable, equitable pension system that
includes the following:
■■ The option of a fully portable pension system as
teachers’ primary pension plan, either through a
defined contribution plan or a defined benefit plan
that is formatted similar to a cash balance plan2
■■ Reasonable district and teacher contribution rates
■■ Vesting for teachers no later than the third year of
employment
■■ Purchase of time in a defined benefit plan for
unlimited previous teaching experience at the time
of employment, as well as for all official leaves of
absence, such as maternity and paternity leave
■■ The option in a defined benefit plan of a lump-sum
rollover to a personal retirement account upon
employment termination, which includes teacher
contributions and all accrued interest at a fair
interest rate
■■ Funds contributed by the employer included in
withdrawals due to employment termination
■■ A neutral formula for determining pension benefits,
regardless of years worked (eliminating any
multiplier that increases with years of service or
longevity bonuses)3
■■ Eligibility for retirement benefits based solely on
age, not years of service, in order to avoid disincentives
for effective teachers to continue working
until conventional retirement age.
$562,307
Amount Maryland pays for
each teacher that retires
at an early age with
unreduced benefits until that
teacher reaches age 654
1 Public Fund Survey, http://www.publicfundsurvey.org/www/publicfundsurvey/
actuarialfundinglevels.asp.
2 A cash balance pension plan is a benefit plan in which participants, and their
employers if they choose, periodically contribute a predetermined rate to
employees’ individual pension accounts. These contributions grow at a guaranteed
rate. Upon retirement or withdrawal, the participant may receive the
full account balance in one lump sum, so long as the benefits are fully vested.
(Based on Economic Research Institute, http://www.eridlc.com/resources/
index.cfm?fuseaction=resource.glossary)
3 The formula may include years of service (i.e., years of service x final average
salary x benefit multiplier), but other aspects of the benefit calculation, such as
the multiplier, should not be dependent on years of service.
4 Calculations are based on a teacher who starts teaching at age 22, earns a
starting salary of $35,000 that increases 3 percent per year, and retires at the
age when he or she is first eligible for unreduced benefits. Calculations use
the state’s benefit formula for new hires, exclude cost of living increases, and
base the final average salary on the highest three years. Age 65 is the youngest
eligibility age for unreduced Social Security benefits.
NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
: 15
3. Certification of Special Education Teachers
States’ requirements for the preparation of special
education teachers are one of the most neglected and
dysfunctional areas of teacher policy. The low expectations
for what special education teachers should know
stand in stark contradiction to state and federal expectations
that special education students should meet
the same high standards as other students.
Maryland, like most states, sets an exceedingly low
bar for the content knowledge that special education
teachers must have. The state does not require
that elementary special education teachers take any
subject-matter coursework or demonstrate content
knowledge on a subject-matter test. Further, although
secondary special education teachers must be highly
qualified in every subject they will teach, the state
does not require that teacher preparation programs
graduate teachers who are highly qualified in any core
academic areas.
Maryland is commended for distinguishing between
elementary and secondary special education licenses
and for not allowing a generic K-12 special education
license, ubiquitous in many states. However, ensuring
that all special education teachers are well prepared
and know all the subject matter they will be expected
to teach requires significant changes to the state’s certification
process.
16 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
Figure 4
Do states distinguish
between elementary
and secondary special
education teachers?
Offers only a K-12 certification
Offers K-12 and grade-specific
certification(s)
Does not offer a K-12
certification
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania1
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
22 17 12
1 New policy goes into effect January 1, 2013.

18 : NCTQ State teacher policy yearbook 2010
blueprint for change in Maryland
National Council on Teacher Quality
1420 New York Avenue, NW • Washington, DC 20005
Tel: 202-393-0020 Fax: 202-393-0095 Web: www.nctq.org
NCTQ is available to work with individual states to improve teacher policies.
For more information, please contact:
Sandi Jacobs
Vice President
sjacobs@nctq.org
202-393-0020

Posted in: Blog