State Certification Standards for Teachers of Learning Disabled Students

Abstract

Given the current concern about the quality of educational programs, as reflected by the many highly publicized task force and commission reports, it seems timely to systematically examine the standards by which teachers in the field of learning disabilities (LD) become certified by state agencies. Indeed, it is ultimately by these standards that our discipline officially confers the status of professional on those individuals who complete prescribed teacher training programs. The broad issue of professional standards in special education has been addressed in recent articles (e.g., Heller, 1983; Heller & Ridenhour, 1983; Lilly, 1983; Maple, 1983). In a position paper on the preparation of professional personnel in learning disabilities (1982), the National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities pointed out that the goals of accrediting, certifying, or licensing agencies often differ from those of institutions of higher education and may exert negative influences on curriculum and policy in teacher preparation programs. Ideally, state agency certification requirements should be consistent with the highest level of standards maintained in teacher training programs within a given state (Leigh, 1980). In reality, however, prospective teachers often circumvent attempts by universities to establish higher standards by obtaining certification directly from state certification agencies that do not apply comparably high standards. In other cases, on the other hand, personnel preparation programs are forced to adopt higher training standards in order to comply with certification criteria imposed by state agencies. In a national survey, Adelman and Taylor (1985) asked prominent LD professionals to identify the most significant and fundamental issues and/or problems facing the field of learning disabilities in the next decade. Not surprisingly, the need to adopt higher standards for preparing LD practitioners was cited as one of the main concerns. The authors reported that the major training-related issue mentioned by respondents wa the debate concerning categorical vs. generic training and certification of LD teachers. Based upon a recognition of the above concerns, and in accordance with its stated purpose of promoting higher standards for professional practice, the Council for Learning Disabilities (CLD) conducted a survey of state certification standards for LD teachers in the United States. The purpose of the present article is to report the resul s of this study and to briefly discuss them in relation to LD state certification requirements.