The Education Gadfly Weekly

edited by George C. Leef, The American Council of Trustees and Alumni
June 2002

The American Council of Trustees and Alumni published, and George C. Leef edited, this nice collection of ten essays on teacher education. Weighing in at 100 (small) pages, it gathers together some thoughtful papers that had previously appeared elsewhere as well as several original contributions. If you're interested in the reform of teacher education, you are apt to pick up some insights and ideas here. Not available online, but free copies are available by calling 202-467-6787.

American Youth Policy Forum
December 12, 2001

Based on a colloquium held last year, this report looks at what standards-based education means for young people who have left mainstream education. It addresses these questions:

• What are the implications (for assessment, curriculum, drop-out rates, graduation rates, and postsecondary entrance) of standards-based approaches (including the new GED) for alternative education programs and out-of-school youth?
  
• Should alternative school curricula be aligned with state academic standards?
  
• What support do alternative education settings need in order to incorporate standards of learning into their pedagogical approaches?
  
• Are students who participate in "alternative" educational programs being further marginalized if they are merely being prepared for the GED or other credentials that are not linked to state standards?
  

The most interesting part of the report deals with the issue of recent changes in the GED. As readers of the Gadfly know, research suggests that earning a GED brings few of the benefits of earning a proper high school diploma. In fact, GED critics urge policymakers to move away from the idea that it's comparable to a high school diploma. (For an example, see http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=73#1045.) Some 800,000 people take the GED each year. Are they being short-changed? This is an important question, considering that, over the past 25 years, the number of young adults who have gotten their diploma through the GED program has risen from less than 3 percent to 12 percent. You'll find this report at http://www.nyec.org/PolicyForum%202001Proceedings.pdf.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
October 2002

Here are 190 pages of useful data on higher education, prepared by Patrick Callan's National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Consisting primarily of two-page state-specific data spreads, it provides some hard information on the K-12 system's success in preparing kids for college, including course-taking patterns and NAEP results, as well as information on college participation, affordability, completion and a crude stab at calculating the benefits therefrom. Unusual for such reports, it also confers letter grades on states in six categories and compares how they fared in 2002 with their marks two years earlier. Then there are some "league tables" comparing states with each other. With interest mounting in reauthorization of the Higher Education Act and with more states fussing over "K-16" systems that would seamlessly integrate primary-secondary with higher education, you may find this volume worth having on your shelf. Find out more at http://measuringup.highereducation.org/.

Achieve, Inc.
Summer 2002

You may be drowning in policy guidance from sundry organizations regarding the implementation of NCLB. Now Achieve has weighed in with a useful 14-page "policy brief" offering welcome tips and state examples under six broad headings (e.g. "building a coherent testing program," "targeting responses to help more low-performing schools succeed"). There may be nothing here that's entirely new to you but it's valuable to have these pointers and illustrations drawn together so lucidly. You can find it on the web at http://www.achieve.org/dstore.nsf/Lookup/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges/$file/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges.pdf.

Statement of Cornelia M. Ashby
October 2002

In testimony before a House subcommittee, Cornelia Ashby, director of the General Accounting Office's (GAO) education division, said that teacher education programs are taking advantage of the Department of Education's broad definitions of "graduate" and "pass rate" to escape the accountability provisions of the 1998 Higher Education Act (HEA). According to Ashby, education schools in some states are reporting inflated pass rates of up to 100 percent on teacher licensure exams by not counting as "graduates" those students who had completed all required coursework but failed the subsequent exam. The GAO also looked at the ways in which institutions and states have creatively interpreted the terms "waiver" and "alternative route to certification." Overall, the GAO deemed the information collected and reported under HEA's accountability provisions of inaccurate and inadequate to assess the quality of teacher training programs and the qualifications of current teachers. The GAO was also asked to evaluate whether the Teacher Quality Enhancement grants awarded under Title II of the HEA have improved the quality of teaching. GAO found that most of these grants are being used to reform certification requirements, to provide professional development to current teachers, and to recruit new teachers to the profession, but that it's too soon to know whether these programs are having any positive effect on teacher quality. For more, see http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03197t.pdf.

Paul Barton, Educational Testing Service
September 2002

You may have trouble picturing the Educational Testing Service in the guise of Frederick Jackson Turner, but this 24 page policy paper by the astonishingly prolific Paul Barton does pose an interesting question: should America be worried by the fact that, while we've been fussing with education quality over the past quarter century, the QUANTITY of education received by Americans, taken as a whole and averaged across groups, has leveled off for the first time in our history? He shows that neither high school nor college completion rates have risen in decades and asks whether this is a problem that should concern us. He clearly thinks it is and should. So do I, considering how many other lands now surpass us in college enrollment and completion rates. The policy steps Barton urges do not involve any weakening of the effort to boost academic standards. One must wonder, though, whether his readers will maintain the same degree of attention to education quality while devising ways of tackling the problem of quantity. What we don't need is renewed growth in meaningless diplomas and degrees. We may even have to face a period in which those rates decline a bit as they come to mean more than they recently have. In any case, this important tradeoff will be clearer to you if you make the acquaintance of Barton's provocative argument. You can find it at http://www.ets.org/research/pic/frontier.pdf. For a look at how Massachusetts is handling this painful tradeoff, see "State predicts drop in graduates," by Michele Kurtz and Anand Vaishnav, The Boston Globe, October 10, 2002, http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/283/metro/State_predicts_drop_in_graduates+.shtml.

Dana Markow and Marc Scheer, MetLife
2002

Insurance giant MetLife has for nineteen years sponsored an annual survey of American teachers and students. This year's report focuses on student life in school, at home, and in the community. Gleaned from the responses of a large sample of public school students and their teachers in grades 7-12, this 213-page report reveals students' thoughts on success, sleep habits, dropping out, and reading, as well as teachers' views on communicating with students and parents, working in low-income schools, the difference between new and veteran educators, and much more. The bulk of the report is made up of graphs, pie charts, and tables supporting its rather bland findings: Students who perform well spend more time in the library, participate more frequently in sports, drama, music and other activities, get enough sleep and exercise, eat breakfast, and communicate with their parents more frequently, whereas low-achievers are more likely to consider dropping out of school, to lack a quiet place to do their homework, to report that their parents do not know what is going on in their lives, and to describe their home life as unhappy. Notably, neither the majority of students nor teachers says their school does an extremely good job of preparing students for college, getting a good job, learning how to learn, being a good citizen and getting along with others. And teachers whose schools have more than two-thirds low-income students are less likely to think their schools are doing a good job than teachers elsewhere. The report also produces some interesting contradictions. Two-thirds of teachers, for example, believe that more parent involvement would be helpful in improving student achievement, but less than one-fifth of them express a desire for more frequent parent-teacher communication. To learn more, see www.metlife.com/WPSAssets/11738669411033654558V1FBook%20v.3.pdf.

The Gadfly has buzzed repeatedly about pending legislation to reorganize the federal government's education research, statistics, assessment and evaluation functions. This week, the U.S. Senate put the finishing legislative touches on H.R. 3801, the "Education Sciences Reform Act of 2002." (It followed an interesting parliamentary course, with the final version being worked out between staff negotiators for the two houses before the Senate even passed it.) No doubt a high-visibility signing ceremony lies ahead at the White House.

This bill contains some good news for those (ourselves included) who have been concerned about the precarious independence of the federal statistics and National Assessment functions. Though there are still ambiguous spots where the director of the new Institute of Education Sciences - the umbrella organization that replaces the extant Office of Educational Research and Improvement - may be able to meddle and mold what goes on in the statistics and NAEP domains (via his control of peer review and publication review procedures and such like), the bill also gives some needed protections to the Commissioner of Education Statistics and the National Assessment Governing Board. It does not, however, tidy up the latter's longstanding statutory problems and, in the end, is only a little bit better than current law for NAEP and NCES.

Perhaps the most important thing the bill does is shift responsibility for program evaluation from the Secretary's office to the new Institute. However, one of the negotiators' last decisions placed that key function in the same sub-unit as the regional labs and the ERIC clearinghouses, a schizophrenic bureaucratic creation called the National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. (If this were a restaurant, it would probably specialize in salsa and cheesecake.) It's hard to imagine how this can work well.

In the end, Congress surrendered to the existing labs, the university-based research centers, the ERIC clearinghouses, and a motley crew of regional technical assistance centers. Which is to say, those who have been eating the research shop's lunch these past several decades will continue to do so. That leaves very little loose change for "real" research, despite much fancy language in this bill about scientifically based research. While the Institute director (who will be Russ Whitehurst for the foreseeable future) and its new National Board for Education Sciences will no doubt have big and probably good ideas about important directions for education research, it's far from clear that they'll have either the resources or the bureaucratic running room to implement them.

Progress in Washington is usually measured in inches. This time you need a microscope to see it.

The standards committee of the Ohio Board of Education has approved a new set of science standards that includes a compromise over how to teach evolution in the state's schools, one that will please creationists more than scientists. According to the revised standards, students should be able to "describe how scientists today continue to investigate and critically analyze aspects of evolutionary theory." The full state board will vote on the standards in December. "Panel approves science guidelines," by Scott Stephens, The Plain Dealer (Cleveland), October 15, 2002

A long article by Diana Schemo in Monday's New York Times outlined some of the ways in which the No Child Left Behind Act is being weakened or skirted by federal, state, and local officials. Several states are moving to ease their standards for academic proficiency to ensure that more children are able to reach them. Principals are not sending letters alerting parents if their children's teachers are not "highly qualified" (while the definition of "highly qualified" is itself being questioned). Many districts are not offering children in failing schools the option to transfer to better schools. (Perhaps in response to this last problem, the U.S. Department of Education this week announced a $600,000 grant to the Black Alliance for Educational Options to develop a public information campaign to reach parents about the choices available to them under the No Child Left Behind Act.) "Law overhauling school standards seen as skirted," by Diana Schemo, The New York Times, October 15, 2002 and "Education Department, BAEO form partnership to reach parents about landmark No Child Left Behind Act," press release, US Department of Education, October 15, 2002

Earlier this week, the California Network of Educational Charters (CANEC) unveiled a new accreditation program in an attempt to introduce a measure of self-evaluation and
-regulation among the network's 300 charter schools. The unprecedented program - which will be piloted by a dozen schools this year, with over 100 expected to participate next year - comes in response to recent press about a handful of "bad apple" charter schools that hurts public opinion about all charter schools and prompted California lawmakers to impose new regulations on them. CANEC will work in conjunction with the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, the primary accreditation organization for public and private schools in the western U.S., to evaluate the schools and offer a seal of approval to those that pass. "Charter schools try self-regulation," by Suzanne Pardington, Contra Costa Times, October 15, 2002

On Saturday, Diane Ravitch challenged chancellor Joel Klein to "bust the monopoly" of New York City's mammoth school system, noting that Klein has thus far dismissed the idea of school choice despite his reputation as a trustbuster. Writing in the New York Daily News, Ravitch urged the former businessman to "begin a revolution" by doing everything in his power to support charters, noting that like a company, if a charter school fails its customers, it loses its charter and closes. "Bust the Monopoly," by Diane Ravitch, New York Daily News, October 12, 2002

P.S. Perhaps Chancellor Klein was persuaded. On Wednesday, he endorsed the creation of more charter schools to stir innovation in the New York City public school system and provide more options to parents. See "Klein touts charter schools," by Carl Campanile, New York Post, October 17, 2002

Everyone agrees that the weak performance of U.S. urban education poses a national crisis. Far too many low income and minority youngsters attend bad schools where they learn too little, are sometimes in danger and are understandably inclined to drop out.

Yet not everyone appreciates the contribution that charter schools can make to easing the urban-education crisis. To the contrary. In hundreds of American cities, school leaders shun the charter option and, in many of these places, have joined the crusade to stamp it out.

Yet charter schools contribute in three ways to the reform of urban education.

First and most obviously, they provide viable educational alternatives - one might even say refuges - for children otherwise trapped in bad public schools and unable to afford private schools. For example, Boston's Academy of the Pacific Rim charter school is the third-highest-scoring secondary school in the city on the 8th grade state proficiency tests - and the two schools ahead of it are selective-admission "exam schools."

The right of low-income children to attend charters in place of chronically underperforming public schools is codified in the No Child Left Behind Act. It was also recognized by the U.S. Supreme Court in the recent Cleveland voucher case. And we know that most charters are disproportionately attended by poor and minority youngsters.

Second, the competition posed by charter schools may stimulate improvement in the regular public school system. We know that monopolies are loath to change and that competition is good for them and their clients. By making them more consumer-sensitive, it causes them to become more productive and effective. Kenneth Wong and Caroline Hoxby are but two of the scholars who find that charters tend to induce positive change in public school systems, and that the more there are, the more competition is triggered and the more improvement results. Dayton, Ohio is but one of the places where we can see this happening today.

Third, foresighted urban school systems can harness the charter option as a source of innovation and opportunity for themselves. Because charters are free from some of the regulatory and collective bargaining constraints that retard change in large school systems, they can do things differently. Because they're new schools, they are not burdened with the habits and traditions of old ones. Some school systems have recognized this window and have created charter or near-charter schools as a way of diversifying their education offerings and, sometimes, as a sort of lab in which new approaches can be tried and worthy experiments undertaken - experiments that, if successful, may be infused into the larger school system.

The first and second of these connections - the creation of viable alternatives for children and the salubrious effects of competition - are unwelcome to most urban school systems. They may be good for students, families and communities, but they're painful from the standpoint of school systems, which instead take steps to prevent or minimize them. That is the normal reaction of any monopoly to the onset of competition. It fears loss of market share so it strikes back.

We've seen plenty of that across America as school-system leaders join the army that's trying to halt the charter movement. Perhaps this is best analogized to a child's reaction to the pediatrician's syringe: it's good for you even though it hurts. The injection may cause you to hate the doctor but it also makes you get well. There is mounting research evidence that charter schools are in fact offering education havens for children and parents, places that are small, safe and personal, and often (though not always) places where greater academic gains are being made than in conventional public schools. There is also mounting evidence that the presence of competition stimulates positive change in traditional school systems. The problem is that, because school systems don't like to change, they deny that charters are good for them even when it's true.

I watch these developments with particular care in Ohio, a state with as violent an anti-charter backlash as anywhere in the land - and where urban education is as much in need of reforming as anywhere in the land. The Buckeye State has seen its full measure of negative reactions by school system leaders to connections #1 and #2, even though they may be doing great good for children. What we have not yet seen much of in Ohio is connection #3, the deliberate use of the charter opportunity by school systems themselves as a way to create alternatives, innovate and pioneer.

Some occurred in Cincinnati, where former Superintendent Steve Adamowski spearheaded the creation of several charters within the system. There is a lone example in Dayton, the promising "World of Wonder" conversion charter school. But not much else. Mention charter schools to most Ohio superintendents and school board members and they see red.

Look further afield, however, and we can see urban districts exploiting the charter opportunity. Houston (which just won the first Broad Foundation prize for progress in urban education) has developed dozens of charters within the system and proudly describes this arrangement as follows: "In keeping with its commitment to offering the young people of Houston the best possible education, HISD initiated a system of highly successful charter schools. They range from full-fledged, separate campuses to specialized 'school-within-a-school' programs. Each targets particular learning needs and offers unique instructional opportunities, including dual-language primary learning and multicultural studies. HISD charter schools offer students new approaches to education, yet they benefit from the considerable support services that HISD can supply (online at http://dept.houstonisd.org/charterschools)."

Chicago's public schools have cooperated in creating the maximum number of charters permitted under Illinois law. Tampa and Miami are making imaginative use of the charter option as part of their overall education plans and view charters as legitimate alternatives for families. (See, for example, http://choice.dadeschools.net/Charter/index.html.)

Boston has developed its own charter-like "pilot schools" and Superintendent Tom Payzant has told his team that charters are there to stay and they'd best learn to compete successfully with them. A dozen imaginative charter schools have been started in Oakland as part of a purposeful education reform strategy spearheaded by Mayor (and former California governor) Jerry Brown. San Diego superintendent Alan Bersin has made charters a purposeful part of his own education reform efforts, including a semi-charter conversion high school designed to function under the district umbrella. Colorado Springs has similarly figured out how to use its state's charter law to advance some of the system's own education reform ideas. (You can access the charter school websites through the school system's site. Go to http://www.cssd11.k12.co.us/schools/community_prep.htm, for example, and see a photo of Colorado Springs superintendent Norman Ridder speaking at the graduation of Community Prep Charter School.)

In sum, there is no necessary conflict between charter schools and urban school reform. To the contrary, they can be complementary. A number of American cities are proving it. What is needed to make it work that way is the will, the vision and the leadership. What's needed, above all, is a focus on the interests of children rather than adults.

The current issue of Phi Delta Kappan contains both a screed by the infamous Alfie Kohn on the subject of corporate involvement in education and the latest of Gerald Bracey's annual rants about who he likes and who he doesn't like in American education. Just about everyone who wants to boost standards or foster choice manages to land in the latter category. Though the Kappan occasionally publishes worthwhile stuff (including, once in a while, our own), too often it affords a vivid display of one reason that education reform in America is so difficult: because so many people who write for the field's better known magazines aren't really reform-minded at all. "The 500-Pound Gorilla," by Alfie Kohn, and "The 12th Bracey Report on the Condition of Public Education," by Gerald Bracey, Phi Delta Kappan, October 2002 (not available online, though you can view the table of contents at http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/ktoc.htm)

Writing this time in Educational Leadership, Diane Ravitch offers seven lessons for educators in the aftermath of September 11th. The first of these: it's okay to be patriotic. Ravitch reminds educators that their task "remains the same as it has been for many years: to prepare the students in our charge to sustain our democratic institutions and ideals." Without a solid grounding in critical subjects like American and world history and geography, she argues, our students will not understand the context of the "wanton acts of evil" they witnessed in the terrorist attacks, and will not be able to safeguard our liberty and champion our tradition of freedom. "September 11: Seven Lessons for the Schools," by Diane Ravitch, Educational Leadership, October 2002

No states have voucher initiatives on the ballot this November, but a range of other education issues will be presented directly to voters this fall in different states. A California initiative would force the state to spend more money on before- and after-school programs, a Florida initiative would limit class size, and ballot initiatives in Colorado and Massachusetts would replace bilingual education with English immersion classes. For more see "Education Initiatives Take New Approach," by Pamela Prah, Stateline.org, October 11, 2002.

Achieve, Inc.
Summer 2002

You may be drowning in policy guidance from sundry organizations regarding the implementation of NCLB. Now Achieve has weighed in with a useful 14-page "policy brief" offering welcome tips and state examples under six broad headings (e.g. "building a coherent testing program," "targeting responses to help more low-performing schools succeed"). There may be nothing here that's entirely new to you but it's valuable to have these pointers and illustrations drawn together so lucidly. You can find it on the web at http://www.achieve.org/dstore.nsf/Lookup/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges/$file/PolicyBrief-MeetingChallenges.pdf.

American Youth Policy Forum
December 12, 2001

Based on a colloquium held last year, this report looks at what standards-based education means for young people who have left mainstream education. It addresses these questions:

• What are the implications (for assessment, curriculum, drop-out rates, graduation rates, and postsecondary entrance) of standards-based approaches (including the new GED) for alternative education programs and out-of-school youth?
  
• Should alternative school curricula be aligned with state academic standards?
  
• What support do alternative education settings need in order to incorporate standards of learning into their pedagogical approaches?
  
• Are students who participate in "alternative" educational programs being further marginalized if they are merely being prepared for the GED or other credentials that are not linked to state standards?
  

The most interesting part of the report deals with the issue of recent changes in the GED. As readers of the Gadfly know, research suggests that earning a GED brings few of the benefits of earning a proper high school diploma. In fact, GED critics urge policymakers to move away from the idea that it's comparable to a high school diploma. (For an example, see http://www.edexcellence.net/gadfly/issue.cfm?issue=73#1045.) Some 800,000 people take the GED each year. Are they being short-changed? This is an important question, considering that, over the past 25 years, the number of young adults who have gotten their diploma through the GED program has risen from less than 3 percent to 12 percent. You'll find this report at http://www.nyec.org/PolicyForum%202001Proceedings.pdf.

Dana Markow and Marc Scheer, MetLife
2002

Insurance giant MetLife has for nineteen years sponsored an annual survey of American teachers and students. This year's report focuses on student life in school, at home, and in the community. Gleaned from the responses of a large sample of public school students and their teachers in grades 7-12, this 213-page report reveals students' thoughts on success, sleep habits, dropping out, and reading, as well as teachers' views on communicating with students and parents, working in low-income schools, the difference between new and veteran educators, and much more. The bulk of the report is made up of graphs, pie charts, and tables supporting its rather bland findings: Students who perform well spend more time in the library, participate more frequently in sports, drama, music and other activities, get enough sleep and exercise, eat breakfast, and communicate with their parents more frequently, whereas low-achievers are more likely to consider dropping out of school, to lack a quiet place to do their homework, to report that their parents do not know what is going on in their lives, and to describe their home life as unhappy. Notably, neither the majority of students nor teachers says their school does an extremely good job of preparing students for college, getting a good job, learning how to learn, being a good citizen and getting along with others. And teachers whose schools have more than two-thirds low-income students are less likely to think their schools are doing a good job than teachers elsewhere. The report also produces some interesting contradictions. Two-thirds of teachers, for example, believe that more parent involvement would be helpful in improving student achievement, but less than one-fifth of them express a desire for more frequent parent-teacher communication. To learn more, see www.metlife.com/WPSAssets/11738669411033654558V1FBook%20v.3.pdf.

edited by George C. Leef, The American Council of Trustees and Alumni
June 2002

The American Council of Trustees and Alumni published, and George C. Leef edited, this nice collection of ten essays on teacher education. Weighing in at 100 (small) pages, it gathers together some thoughtful papers that had previously appeared elsewhere as well as several original contributions. If you're interested in the reform of teacher education, you are apt to pick up some insights and ideas here. Not available online, but free copies are available by calling 202-467-6787.

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education
October 2002

Here are 190 pages of useful data on higher education, prepared by Patrick Callan's National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Consisting primarily of two-page state-specific data spreads, it provides some hard information on the K-12 system's success in preparing kids for college, including course-taking patterns and NAEP results, as well as information on college participation, affordability, completion and a crude stab at calculating the benefits therefrom. Unusual for such reports, it also confers letter grades on states in six categories and compares how they fared in 2002 with their marks two years earlier. Then there are some "league tables" comparing states with each other. With interest mounting in reauthorization of the Higher Education Act and with more states fussing over "K-16" systems that would seamlessly integrate primary-secondary with higher education, you may find this volume worth having on your shelf. Find out more at http://measuringup.highereducation.org/.

Paul Barton, Educational Testing Service
September 2002

You may have trouble picturing the Educational Testing Service in the guise of Frederick Jackson Turner, but this 24 page policy paper by the astonishingly prolific Paul Barton does pose an interesting question: should America be worried by the fact that, while we've been fussing with education quality over the past quarter century, the QUANTITY of education received by Americans, taken as a whole and averaged across groups, has leveled off for the first time in our history? He shows that neither high school nor college completion rates have risen in decades and asks whether this is a problem that should concern us. He clearly thinks it is and should. So do I, considering how many other lands now surpass us in college enrollment and completion rates. The policy steps Barton urges do not involve any weakening of the effort to boost academic standards. One must wonder, though, whether his readers will maintain the same degree of attention to education quality while devising ways of tackling the problem of quantity. What we don't need is renewed growth in meaningless diplomas and degrees. We may even have to face a period in which those rates decline a bit as they come to mean more than they recently have. In any case, this important tradeoff will be clearer to you if you make the acquaintance of Barton's provocative argument. You can find it at http://www.ets.org/research/pic/frontier.pdf. For a look at how Massachusetts is handling this painful tradeoff, see "State predicts drop in graduates," by Michele Kurtz and Anand Vaishnav, The Boston Globe, October 10, 2002, http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/283/metro/State_predicts_drop_in_graduates+.shtml.

Statement of Cornelia M. Ashby
October 2002

In testimony before a House subcommittee, Cornelia Ashby, director of the General Accounting Office's (GAO) education division, said that teacher education programs are taking advantage of the Department of Education's broad definitions of "graduate" and "pass rate" to escape the accountability provisions of the 1998 Higher Education Act (HEA). According to Ashby, education schools in some states are reporting inflated pass rates of up to 100 percent on teacher licensure exams by not counting as "graduates" those students who had completed all required coursework but failed the subsequent exam. The GAO also looked at the ways in which institutions and states have creatively interpreted the terms "waiver" and "alternative route to certification." Overall, the GAO deemed the information collected and reported under HEA's accountability provisions of inaccurate and inadequate to assess the quality of teacher training programs and the qualifications of current teachers. The GAO was also asked to evaluate whether the Teacher Quality Enhancement grants awarded under Title II of the HEA have improved the quality of teaching. GAO found that most of these grants are being used to reform certification requirements, to provide professional development to current teachers, and to recruit new teachers to the profession, but that it's too soon to know whether these programs are having any positive effect on teacher quality. For more, see http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d03197t.pdf.