This year, over 17,000 teaching credentials will be issued in California, not enough to fill about 25,000 vacancies.  In order to encourage more people to go into teaching, a new state law was passed in 2024 allowing anyone with a bachelor’s degree to get accepted into a teacher credential program.   It is no longer necessary to pass a test to assess a candidate’s basic knowledge of reading, writing and arithmetic.  It is no longer necessary to have a minimum 3.0 GPA.

California Commission on Teacher Credentialing’s Executive Director Mary Vixie Sandy said that “now is a great time for anyone with a qualifying bachelor’s degree” to become a teacher.

Why is allowing less qualified people into the profession viewed as a good thing?

Instead of fixing what ails the teaching profession, namely a lack of prestige, competitive salaries and support from administration and parents, the state is lowering the qualifications to attract more people into the classroom.  If anything, higher minimum requirements is the first step in ensuring only qualified people be allowed to teach.

If this approach were applied to the medical field, with an influx of doctors who could not otherwise meet basic requirements suddenly earning medical degrees, they’d be an uproar about health care.

For some reason, when it comes to education, there isn’t any pushback that more inexperienced, less academic people will be teaching young people.  But it gets worse.

To meet the demands of the teacher shortage, school districts are hiring people on an emergency credential that pays them a full salary without taking the two years of coursework and student teaching that traditional candidates complete.

Even those teachers who do the full credential coursework and earn a credential aren’t destined to be effective teachers.

I know this first-hand from my work as a university field supervisor who visits schools where the teachers in training work.  My job is to observe a candidate teach between three to six lessons over an 18-week semester, then evaluate their strengths and weaknesses.

More important than someone like me is the mentor teacher who observes the teacher candidate every day, reviewing their lessons and offering suggestions.   It’s crucial that the mentors are highly qualified.  Unfortunately, many are not. 

College credential programs don’t have the luxury of vetting mentors due to how few classroom teachers show interest in that role.   That’s because not enough excellent teachers are willing to hand over a couple of their classes to a novice.  Often, those who become mentors are those who are looking for a lighter workload.

That’s why the evaluation forms from the mentors may not be an accurate assessment of a student teacher’s abilities.  After all, how can an ineffective teacher help a young teacher be effective? 

I often find myself assigning higher marks for candidates based on the inflated evaluation of the mentors.  It is difficult for someone like me to hold higher standards since the mentor is seeing so much more of the candidate.  How can I justify lower marks when I’m only observing six lessons, while the mentor observes 90 lessons?

My job observing student teachers for the past four years is frequently disappointing and sometimes depressing.  Still, each semester I meet that one young teacher who has a knack for working with kids, a desire to help children with their academics and their lives.  That’s what keeps me going, a flame of faith that for some students, their future will be bright.