Alternative Certification Programs: Problems and Prospects

Abstract

Conventional wisdom holds that innovations in education are transitory and effect little if any enduring change in the structure and processes of schooling. American education during the last half century is replete with fads and fashions introduced with exuberant enthusiasm only to wither and die-either unremembered or unmourned. Such will be the case with many of the ideas associated with the reform movement of the 1980s. But one idea that has displayed robust growth and staying power is the alternative certification movement. Originally designed as a means of alleviating the teacher shortage by tapping into a new pool of midlife career changers, alternative certification programs (ACPs) now actively recruit retirees as well as recent college graduates. In 1984, eight states offered alternative routes to certification. By 1986, the number had jumped to twentythree (Feistritzer 1986). Another more recent survey by the National Center for Education Information (NCEI) indicated that thirty-three states currently conduct such programs (Feistritzer 1990). ACPs across the country tend to emulate no single model but rather reflect the wide diversity and distinctiveness indicative of their multiple purposes and goals. This variability complicates serious discourse when educators attempt to assess the positive and negative qualities of ACPs. When used as a generic umbrella term, alternative certification becomes increasingly amorphous and invites confusion. The debate over the validity and desirability of ACPs is hampered by several issues that obfuscate rather than clarify.