Good afternoon Chairman McKeon, Ranking Member Kildee, Congressman Owens and members of the Subcommittee.

Thank you for the opportunity to discuss the pending reauthorization of the Higher Education Act and to offer our ideas on how the legislation can strengthen our ongoing efforts to attract, prepare, and retain high quality teachers in our schools.

To help our children reach higher levels of achievement, the New York City Department of Education (the Department) is working to ensure that every classroom is staffed with a highly qualified, well-supported teacher.

The Department currently employs almost 80,000 teachers in our 1,219 schools. Traditionally, the City has not been able to hire enough certified teachers to meet our needs. However, we undertook an aggressive strategy over the past few years to improve our recruitment practices and hire more certified teachers. We did so knowing that this is essential to providing students with the instructional expertise necessary for them to meet New York State’s nationally-recognized high standards. With this in mind, we set a goal of hiring only certified teachers for positions in elementary schools, social studies, and English for the current year. I am proud to say that we accomplished this intermediary goal and moved forward in our efforts to meet new State regulations requiring all teachers in our schools be certified by September 2003. Certified teachers made up 86% of the 8,300 new teachers hired in September 2002. We were also able to satisfy the new No Child Left Behind (NCLB) requirement to hire only highly qualified teachers in our Title I schools. Last September, I attended a forum at the White House on NCLB implementation where President Bush highlighted the City’s efforts to meet new teacher quality requirements included in the law.

Despite our recent progress, the mission of securing high quality teachers for all of our classrooms remains a significant and constant challenge to our system, especially in light of the new State certification requirement for this fall. My office is working tirelessly to recruit 11,000 highly qualified teachers by this September, in light of projections that as many as 4,000 currently uncertified teachers will fail to meet the State requirement for certification and must be replaced. While this year’s overall hiring number is substantial, it is no anomaly as the system has filled an average of 9,000 teaching positions annually over the past five years.

Unfortunately, the supply of new teachers in New York State is not keeping pace with the demand. New York State colleges and universities are not producing enough teaching candidates in the areas of math, science, bilingual, and special education — disciplines in which the City desperately needs qualified teachers for the upcoming year and the foreseeable future. For example, New York State does not currently certify enough math teachers to ease the statewide shortage. In fact, the City could hire every newly certified math teacher in New York State and still not fill its 1,000 expected vacancies.

Given this reality and our commitment to improving teacher quality, the Department has worked aggressively to broaden the pool of qualified individuals who want to become teachers. The Center for Recruitment and Professional Development was created in 2000 to build the Department’s capacity to meet the increasing demand for certified teachers and develop creative means to attract them to New York City schools. The efforts of the Center have increased the percentage of newly hired teachers with appropriate State certification from 43% in September 2000 to 86% in September 2002.

This increase can be attributed to a number of proactive initiatives launched by the Department, such as the establishment of the New York City Teaching Fellows program, an increase in internationally recruited teachers, a new teachers’ contract offering more competitive salaries, an aggressive advertisement campaign, numerous job fairs, and targeted placement centers for low-performing schools and hard-to-staff districts. There also has been a closer working relationship with colleges and universities to funnel a greater number of traditionally prepared teachers to New York City schools.

A common misconception is that districts are so desperate for teachers that we will hire "any warm body" to teach our children. I assure you that in New York City, nothing could be further from the truth. I would like to take a moment to highlight some of the successful components of our recruitment and preparation strategies and how they are improving teacher quality in New York City.

Created in 2000, the Teaching Fellows program addresses the fact that the traditional teacher preparation pipeline is not producing a sufficient quantity of qualified teachers for our district. The Department, in collaboration with partnering Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) in the City, tailored the Fellows program specifically to equip teachers with the skills, clinical experience and support needed to teach and succeed in urban schools. The program seeks to encourage talented and highly qualified professionals from other walks of life who want to make a difference in our City to become teachers — particularly in our lowest performing schools that are hard to staff and in most need of exceptional teachers.

The application process is rigorous and competitive to ensure that selected Fellows are of the highest quality. For the upcoming school year, the Department received almost 20,000 applications, from which 3,000 candidates were selected to begin the program next month. Prospective applicants must have received a minimum undergraduate GPA of 3.0 and demonstrated excellence in previous endeavors. Among the most attended undergraduate institutions by the 2002-03 class of Fellows were Brown, Columbia, Cornell, and NYU. Our current Fellows include former doctors, lawyers, Wall Street financiers, judges, and advertising executives.

Fellows matriculate in an accelerated and specially designed Master’s Degree program paid for by the Department and offered at different college campuses. The most unique feature of the program is that it was developed in collaboration with IHEs and tailored specifically around the needs of our teachers and school system.

The curriculum follows the rigorous content and certification standards set by New York State while also providing practical, classroom-based examples and instruction. What teachers learn and do in their preparation courses can be applied the next day in their classrooms.

Left unsupported, far too many new teachers in urban schools leave the profession. Therefore, the Fellows program seeks to increase retention rates by better equipping teachers with the skills and support needed to become lifelong successful professionals. A critical component of the program is enhanced professional development and mentoring. The Fellows program addresses the challenge of supporting these new instructors by pairing each Fellow with a mentor teacher who often works within the same school, grade or subject area. Mentors observe and provide feedback on classroom instruction and serve as an important resource to Fellows.

The Fellows program continues to exceed expectations. Preliminary evidence suggests that the program is meeting the goal of recruiting, training, and retaining high quality teachers in some of the City's most challenged schools. Since the program's inception in 2000, 3,300 Fellows have entered the program and 2,800 are still teaching in these hard-to-staff locations. Of the class that will begin teaching in September 2003, 400 will be placed as math teachers, 500 as special education teachers, and 200 as bilingual/ESL teachers. These new teachers will bring a fresh perspective and enthusiasm to some of our lowest-achieving schools.

Over the last three years, we have also embarked on an ambitious effort to recruit teachers from other countries in order to help fill vacancies in our shortage areas. We have recruited throughout Canada, Austria, England, Ireland, Guyana, Jamaica, the Dominican Republic, Spain, the Philippines and Puerto Rico. These teachers are credentialed in their respective countries and have met the State’s requirements for provisional certification. Over the last two years, a total of 1,077 international teachers were hired. Approximately 91% remain teaching in our system after one year. For this upcoming school year, we have hired approximately 800 international teachers from 10 countries.

Just last week, Chancellor Joel I. Klein announced two new programs to recruit teachers for our schools. The Call Back to Teaching Program is designed to attract over 300 experienced teachers back into public school classrooms. The Excelsior Teacher Initiative is designed to attract 500 math, science and special education teachers to high need schools. These initiatives build on the success of the International and Alternative Certification Pathway to Teaching Programs and are new components of the Department’s overall strategy to recruit 11,000 highly qualified teachers for New York City schools by September. The new programs will further supplement our existing teacher preparation and recruitment efforts.

We have been fortunate in New York City to work with outstanding and cooperative local universities on developing enhanced preparation programs to improve teacher quality in our schools. However, we can accelerate our progress if Congress recognizes the primacy of high poverty school districts in this effort and updates the way Title II of the Higher Education Act currently allocates funds. Such recognition would offer greater resources to districts that have the highest concentrations of low-income students and the greatest need for highly qualified teachers. Our recommendations are also aligned with Congress' goal of increasing the overall supply of highly qualified teachers.

The primary goal of our district is improved and sustained student achievement. A prerequisite for meeting this expectation is placing a highly qualified teacher in each of our classrooms. Because NCLB holds us accountable for student performance, we need to play a lead role in programs that train and prepare the teachers who serve our students.

To this end, we recommend amending Title II of the Higher Education Act to allow 40% of funds under this section to be allocated to partnerships between "high need local education agencies (LEAs)" and IHEs, with LEAs as the lead applicant and fiscal agent. This change would allow districts to have greater command over the design and implementation of teacher preparation and retention programs that best suit their unique needs. Giving us this capacity would encourage the development and implementation of district-administered programs, such as the Fellows program, that we know will attract, prepare, and retain greater numbers of highly qualified teachers.

In addition, 40% of the funds authorized under Title II should be allocated to partnerships between a "high need LEA" and IHEs, with the latter as the lead applicant and the fiscal agent. As the largest customer for teachers in the nation, we need greater input and control over what the current market produces. Our collaboration in these partnerships will improve existing preservice teacher preparation programs, and will ultimately increase the supply of high quality teachers for poor school districts.

Finally, because teacher recruitment is a critical issue for needy districts already at a competitive disadvantage with our suburban counterparts, we recommend that the current 10% authorized for recruitment purposes be raised to 20%. Because recruiting qualified teachers in poor school districts is an ongoing challenge that threatens student achievement, high need LEAs should be the lead applicant and the fiscal agent for these grants. Even with traditional pipelines and our alternative pathways, the Department expends tremendous time and money recruiting teachers.

Perhaps most importantly, the revisions just outlined will miss their mark unless the targeting of funds in the existing Higher Education Act is better focused. Currently, a partnering district must be a "high need LEA". However, the existing definition allows districts to qualify if only one school has 50% or more of its students eligible for free and reduced price lunch. This broad definition undermines the law’s intent by making almost any district eligible at the expense of those truly in need. For example, in New York State the White Plains Schools District’s average per pupil expenditure (APPE) is $16,178, yet it qualifies as a high need LEA because exactly one of its schools meets the current definition. While New York City also qualifies, as 899 of its 1,219 schools enroll 50% or more children eligible for free and reduced price lunch, its APPE is considerably less at $8,934. In order to better target Title II resources, we recommend defining a "high need LEA" as a district that serves at least 10,000 or 30% of children from families below the poverty line.

We also recommend that Congress assist districts like New York by creating incentives to teach in high poverty schools. The current student loan forgiveness program, which cancels up to $5,000 in exchange for teaching five years in a high poverty school district, is a good start. However, in order to attract highly qualified teachers to New York City’s most challenged schools, the incentive must be increased. We support loan forgiveness up to $17,500 for five consecutive years of service. Furthermore, we encourage targeting forgiveness only to teachers in districts with at least 25% Census poverty or in a school with 60% of its students eligible for free or reduced price lunch. If we do not target this incentive to the neediest schools and districts, we will be even less competitive with our more affluent neighbors that already have a tremendous hiring advantage.

I would like to share one additional concern with the Committee. Many prospective teachers are questioning their entry into this profession as they see districts across the nation eliminating teaching positions in order to meet budget cuts. New York State is still struggling to overcome the effects of the 2001 terrorist attacks and the national economic slowdown. As a result, the Department’s budget will be cut by $178 million in the upcoming school year. While our current budget situation is dire, our cuts thus far have not included any teaching positions. However, districts in many states across the nation have not been as fortunate, and the sagging economy does threaten the long-term viability of our recruitment and training efforts. In light of the national economic slowdown, it is imperative that Congress makes federal education funding a priority so that schools — particularly those with high concentrations of poverty — have the resources needed to educate our children to high standards. Revising the Higher Education Act in the ways suggested in my testimony and increasing its authorization will increase the supply of highly qualified teachers, particularly in low-income districts. Congress should also fully fund Titles I and II of NCLB in order to help stabilize school districts during our current austerity. Collectively, these actions will enhance our efforts to meet new NCLB requirements that focus on student achievement and teacher quality.

I welcome any questions that members of the Subcommittee may have in regard to my testimony.