It is amazing to have a focus on ensuring that not only is there better pay but also a focus on working conditions across the education continuum. I am a bit perplexed by one statement that is made: “The employer refrains from the use of selection criteria that are unrelated to effective preparation for the role and skills needed to succeed, including educational requirements, licensure, or other legal requirements.” Of course, the intent is to ensure that the selection criteria do not have any negative bias unrelated to effective preparation. There is also research as it relates to the racial disparities in licensure examinations. However, I am wondering whether within this statement there can still be the acceptance, irrespective of intentionality, of lowering the bar of those who enter the classroom—lessening the professionalization of the field. I may be thinking too analytical here. Thoughts?
Point of clarification: Recently, states have provided the option for there to me emergency authorizations during the pandemic. The State of Florida also recently allowed military members with 4+ years of service to begin teaching. The question becomes whether this statement can either be misconstrued or flipped on its head, even with the wide acceptance that preparation is necessary to enter the classroom.
News: As part of the Biden-Harris Administration’s Good Jobs Initiative, ED & the U.S. Department of Labor are announcing new funding & resources to expand pathways into teaching, increase pay, and strengthen working conditions across the entire education workforce. https://lnkd.in/ed3zj9Em