"2) Yes, once you receive the professional credential you will be eligible for full QTS." Don't know how to quote sorry...
The above is not necessarily true. I did Teach Now last year, am now fully qualified in D.C., applied for QTS, and got an email stating that I am not eligible for QTS if I could not prove that I did my student teaching at a school within the US by providing a letter from that school. So, if you do Teacher Ready and you did your student teaching outside the US, you will not be eligible for QTS. Really really sucked to find that out.
Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
Reply
@s0830887
which did you do Teach Now or Teach Ready?
No it is true, your case is very, very atypical, aside from my own experience and those of others Ive mentored, there are plenty of contributors on this forum who didnt have to provide any documentation about their field experience and were granted QTS as a matter of process.
which did you do Teach Now or Teach Ready?
No it is true, your case is very, very atypical, aside from my own experience and those of others Ive mentored, there are plenty of contributors on this forum who didnt have to provide any documentation about their field experience and were granted QTS as a matter of process.
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
I did Teach Now, as I said in my previous comment. This is not atypical; as per the email text that I copied and pasted below, it is the current standard. My guess it that it is a new criteria as before I enrolled I read about folks from Teach Now getting QTS without issue. I know in the U.S. many states are grappling with reciprocity standards for alternative pathways and passing all sorts of new laws.
"To make your application complete, please provide us with the following additional document/s:
· Evidence of completing your Teach Now program in the United States.
This evidence could be a letter from the school where you did your practicum.
Please note that Teach Now programs undertaken in other countries are not eligible for QTS.
This is because the legislation from which we award QTS to Overseas Trained Teachers requires you to have undertaken teacher training in the United States.
Please note the letter must be dated within the last 3 months."
"To make your application complete, please provide us with the following additional document/s:
· Evidence of completing your Teach Now program in the United States.
This evidence could be a letter from the school where you did your practicum.
Please note that Teach Now programs undertaken in other countries are not eligible for QTS.
This is because the legislation from which we award QTS to Overseas Trained Teachers requires you to have undertaken teacher training in the United States.
Please note the letter must be dated within the last 3 months."
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
s0830887,
Thanks for the info. That is very disheartening to hear. I still think TR was the best option for me in my situation; however, the ability to obtain QTS was a major selling point. I'd be interested to hear of any other recent Teacher Ready or Teach Now graduates who have applied for QTS.
Thanks for the info. That is very disheartening to hear. I still think TR was the best option for me in my situation; however, the ability to obtain QTS was a major selling point. I'd be interested to hear of any other recent Teacher Ready or Teach Now graduates who have applied for QTS.
Reply
@s0830887
You stated Teach Now and Teach Ready in your previous post.
Yes it is atypical. There is no new guidance (I mean its possible that there could be new guidance right now, that isnt generally known, but as of January 2019 there wasnt).
This policy as written in the email has been the standard for a while actually, theres nothing new about the legislation, its been a couple several years since the OTT legislation was released, QTS is available to ITs trained in the US. Teach Now is a US training program. The TCL (TRA) is requiring evidence that you completed a US EPP/ITT program, because QTS isnt available to a IT that receives a DC credential by some other form of reciprocity (its why PGCEi candidates have to use the CT too MS process of reciprocity to get it, and even then there have been really experienced ITs who got a provisional credential from CT and used that for QTS).
This would have been and has been an easy fix, requiring little more than an extra letter from Teach Now and possibly one from the DC OSSE. Its only one possible way of providing evidence of completing the Teach Now program in the United States.
Yes, in the U.S. many states are grappling with reciprocity standards for skills based and assessment based pathways (and theres still issues with academic pathways) but this is nothing new in the last 20 years.
However even assuming this is correct and it really is a new policy and guideline (this happens, and its why the standard guidelines of choosing a reputable, accredited IS for your field experience), its not a door in the face, it just extends the need for a two step reciprocity system. Do Teach Now, get DC standard credential, then transition that credential to one of the states such as MS or FL, etc. and apply for QTS or wait a couple of years (2-3 years) teaching in IE and transition too one of the states such as CA, HI, NJ, etc. and then apply for QTS. Assuming your claim is true, the new state credential doesnt trigger the extra requirement.
This will happen eventually, and I wrote about it in the past, there was an organization that was going to set up shop in the UK to provide QTS by means of training DT candidates in the UK in UK DSs, providing them DC certification and then being eligible for QTS without completing induction as a way of circumventing the TCL (TRA) induction requirement and process. However, when actually true and actual guidance is published this will not be an insurmountable barrier, and Teach Now still provides a full professional grade DC teaching credential.
I may have to revisit this and possibly soon, you could have been the first reported casualty, but nothing coming out of the TCL/TRA is any indication this is a change in legislation or even official guidance. The mutual recognition application is still the same and the requirement is still only identity, degree and credential as far as supporting documents are concerned.
You stated Teach Now and Teach Ready in your previous post.
Yes it is atypical. There is no new guidance (I mean its possible that there could be new guidance right now, that isnt generally known, but as of January 2019 there wasnt).
This policy as written in the email has been the standard for a while actually, theres nothing new about the legislation, its been a couple several years since the OTT legislation was released, QTS is available to ITs trained in the US. Teach Now is a US training program. The TCL (TRA) is requiring evidence that you completed a US EPP/ITT program, because QTS isnt available to a IT that receives a DC credential by some other form of reciprocity (its why PGCEi candidates have to use the CT too MS process of reciprocity to get it, and even then there have been really experienced ITs who got a provisional credential from CT and used that for QTS).
This would have been and has been an easy fix, requiring little more than an extra letter from Teach Now and possibly one from the DC OSSE. Its only one possible way of providing evidence of completing the Teach Now program in the United States.
Yes, in the U.S. many states are grappling with reciprocity standards for skills based and assessment based pathways (and theres still issues with academic pathways) but this is nothing new in the last 20 years.
However even assuming this is correct and it really is a new policy and guideline (this happens, and its why the standard guidelines of choosing a reputable, accredited IS for your field experience), its not a door in the face, it just extends the need for a two step reciprocity system. Do Teach Now, get DC standard credential, then transition that credential to one of the states such as MS or FL, etc. and apply for QTS or wait a couple of years (2-3 years) teaching in IE and transition too one of the states such as CA, HI, NJ, etc. and then apply for QTS. Assuming your claim is true, the new state credential doesnt trigger the extra requirement.
This will happen eventually, and I wrote about it in the past, there was an organization that was going to set up shop in the UK to provide QTS by means of training DT candidates in the UK in UK DSs, providing them DC certification and then being eligible for QTS without completing induction as a way of circumventing the TCL (TRA) induction requirement and process. However, when actually true and actual guidance is published this will not be an insurmountable barrier, and Teach Now still provides a full professional grade DC teaching credential.
I may have to revisit this and possibly soon, you could have been the first reported casualty, but nothing coming out of the TCL/TRA is any indication this is a change in legislation or even official guidance. The mutual recognition application is still the same and the requirement is still only identity, degree and credential as far as supporting documents are concerned.
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
PsyGuy,
Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding your point. Your suspicion is that evidence was requested due to the fact that his credential was from D.C.? Since one potential pathway you mentioned was transitioning the credential to FL, would that mean that a FL credential is unlikely to encounter the same questioning?
Please correct me if I'm misunderstanding your point. Your suspicion is that evidence was requested due to the fact that his credential was from D.C.? Since one potential pathway you mentioned was transitioning the credential to FL, would that mean that a FL credential is unlikely to encounter the same questioning?
Reply
@SideOut
Long Answer....
DC was moved to the top of the region/territory list on the QTS application sometime back in DEC/JAN. The last IT I worked with back in January 2019 that had gone through Teach Now and did their field work in an IS (not DODEA) didnt have a problem, an extra letter from Teach Now was all that was needed. The IS was regionally accredited and delivered a US curriculum, nothing special. However, as I wrote in the past this was eventually going to become a problem. DC (and to an extent Teach Now) was the global clearing house for US credentials. DC used to give a credential to anyone who came with a credential, you could take a PGCEi and get a Regular type II DC (professional grade) credential, you could then use that to get QTS. You could bring a Masters from an EE country and get the professional credential, you could do a lot. Then DC changed that, because it wasnt really their intent and it was taking a lot of resources vetting all these different certificates, but they were the nations capital, and the home to a lot of foreign diplomats who had spouses who wanted to do some teaching, and so the OSSE had a process that resulted in a little bit of work, that became this big global clearing house, and it really wasnt that big it just became a lot more work than what it was intended for. Now the TCL/TRA has the same problem, England is hurting for certain DTs, parliament gave them a tool to get foreign DTs into classrooms when asked, and like every system it was manipulated, but like every successful system eventually evolved to address those manipulations, thats what were seeing now. The business venture described above (whereby local local British candidates would complete the DC US credentialing program, receive the DC OSSE professional credential and then use that to obtain QTS without induction) was a surprise to the Dfe and while it was denied from a business standpoint, there wasnt a tool that would have prohibited the granting of QTS under those conditions. What it really came down to was their interpretation that trained "in" the US meant actually physically "in the US" and not simply "by" or "through" the US. This was going to happen, the Dfe doesnt want to lose control of regulating and directing the training and preparation of its DTs, While it wouldnt have shut down the traditional NQT -> Induction -> Full QTS pathway it would have been a very attractive alternative (and really its an issue at looking how Induction has worked).
All of this is reactionary, and I cant find any new legislation or formal guidance, so if its accurate and this is the way going forward then there is a policy or an internal memo that if an applicant selects US and then DC then the credentialing officer is/may be looking closer at the application and possibly sending an email for clarification under the interpretation that trained in the USA means that field experience was completed in the USA.This is going to just get more complicated going forward meaning:
- How is the TCL/TRA going to monitor ITs who do a intra-reciprocity two step? DC too FL or MS, etc. Even foreigners could do the DC too MA (Initial) credential immediately, and over time with 2-3 years of teaching experience a number of other states NJ, CA, HI, etc. become available, and then use those credentials to apply for QTS.
Of course the direction this is going and its going to happen, is that the TCL/TRA will require a letter from all applicants with US credentials confirming that field experience took place in a US DS/IS.
- ISs that have a collaboration agreement (sister/brother DS) in the US have the principal of the US DS write a letter, or just provide the senior leadership at the IS with some letterhead or maybe just a template and write their own letters would those be satisfactory? Is the IS just a satellite or branch campus of the US DS, would that be acceptable and if not how is the TCL/TRA going to police and enforce it?
- An IS that contracts with a US DS for issuance of its diplomas and/or SLL curriculum be similarly acceptable as above? Teach Now has been involved and focused in growing this avenue of 'International Preparation' for some time now, they arent going to give it up. DC simply doesnt have the market for them to exist or grow to any scale without it.
- How do US embassy ISs fit into this? Passed that how do the few ISs that have a US non-profit-charity organization in the US (so they can contribute to Social Security, etc) effect this. The IS just writes a letter using its US based charity address and thats it?
- How are the various "virtual" DSs going to work, is "in the US" mean the IT/DT or the IS/DS or the Students? How does the TCL/TRA police and enforce this?
- Going rogue, the TCL/TRA standard is a letter. Whats it take to print your own letterhead and self certify your own field experience. Even doing it legitimately, anyone can create a "school" USD$100 to incorporate (Acme AS) in the US, an IRS EIN (and non-profit status), a domain address and web site, then a corporate seal and some stationary, somewhere around USD$200 would get it all done.
- A lot of this is going to depend on what Teach Now does and the direction they go, but they could easily create their own DS and then contract for placements in foreign ISs. They could do a lot of things.
- If the TCL/TRA really wanted to address their real issue they could simply require a passport as the only acceptable verification of identity. US/CAN/AUS passport and credential heres your QTS, reject everyone else for OTT.
So why all this preamble to what is really a simple question? One of the key differences between DC and FL, is that DC issues credentials to foreigners, do the Teach Ready Program as a foreigner and you wont get the FL Professional (Professional grade) credential, all you will get is a Letter of Completion/Eligibility which means very little (nothing). The Dfe doesnt really care what and how Americans get their credentials (as long as its a regulating authorities credential), what they care about is everyone else (especially Brits) using DC for a US credential and getting their (QTS) credential.
Short Answer..
I dont know of anything happening at the TCL/TRA or with the Dfe in regards to FL, and havent anywhere in the past either (unlike DC), FL and Teach Ready is probably safe for the time being. The TCL/TRA doesnt really care about Americans getting the professional FL credential and extending QTS, for that matter they dont really care where the field work is done (even OS), they just dont want their process and system circumvented by locals.
Long Answer....
DC was moved to the top of the region/territory list on the QTS application sometime back in DEC/JAN. The last IT I worked with back in January 2019 that had gone through Teach Now and did their field work in an IS (not DODEA) didnt have a problem, an extra letter from Teach Now was all that was needed. The IS was regionally accredited and delivered a US curriculum, nothing special. However, as I wrote in the past this was eventually going to become a problem. DC (and to an extent Teach Now) was the global clearing house for US credentials. DC used to give a credential to anyone who came with a credential, you could take a PGCEi and get a Regular type II DC (professional grade) credential, you could then use that to get QTS. You could bring a Masters from an EE country and get the professional credential, you could do a lot. Then DC changed that, because it wasnt really their intent and it was taking a lot of resources vetting all these different certificates, but they were the nations capital, and the home to a lot of foreign diplomats who had spouses who wanted to do some teaching, and so the OSSE had a process that resulted in a little bit of work, that became this big global clearing house, and it really wasnt that big it just became a lot more work than what it was intended for. Now the TCL/TRA has the same problem, England is hurting for certain DTs, parliament gave them a tool to get foreign DTs into classrooms when asked, and like every system it was manipulated, but like every successful system eventually evolved to address those manipulations, thats what were seeing now. The business venture described above (whereby local local British candidates would complete the DC US credentialing program, receive the DC OSSE professional credential and then use that to obtain QTS without induction) was a surprise to the Dfe and while it was denied from a business standpoint, there wasnt a tool that would have prohibited the granting of QTS under those conditions. What it really came down to was their interpretation that trained "in" the US meant actually physically "in the US" and not simply "by" or "through" the US. This was going to happen, the Dfe doesnt want to lose control of regulating and directing the training and preparation of its DTs, While it wouldnt have shut down the traditional NQT -> Induction -> Full QTS pathway it would have been a very attractive alternative (and really its an issue at looking how Induction has worked).
All of this is reactionary, and I cant find any new legislation or formal guidance, so if its accurate and this is the way going forward then there is a policy or an internal memo that if an applicant selects US and then DC then the credentialing officer is/may be looking closer at the application and possibly sending an email for clarification under the interpretation that trained in the USA means that field experience was completed in the USA.This is going to just get more complicated going forward meaning:
- How is the TCL/TRA going to monitor ITs who do a intra-reciprocity two step? DC too FL or MS, etc. Even foreigners could do the DC too MA (Initial) credential immediately, and over time with 2-3 years of teaching experience a number of other states NJ, CA, HI, etc. become available, and then use those credentials to apply for QTS.
Of course the direction this is going and its going to happen, is that the TCL/TRA will require a letter from all applicants with US credentials confirming that field experience took place in a US DS/IS.
- ISs that have a collaboration agreement (sister/brother DS) in the US have the principal of the US DS write a letter, or just provide the senior leadership at the IS with some letterhead or maybe just a template and write their own letters would those be satisfactory? Is the IS just a satellite or branch campus of the US DS, would that be acceptable and if not how is the TCL/TRA going to police and enforce it?
- An IS that contracts with a US DS for issuance of its diplomas and/or SLL curriculum be similarly acceptable as above? Teach Now has been involved and focused in growing this avenue of 'International Preparation' for some time now, they arent going to give it up. DC simply doesnt have the market for them to exist or grow to any scale without it.
- How do US embassy ISs fit into this? Passed that how do the few ISs that have a US non-profit-charity organization in the US (so they can contribute to Social Security, etc) effect this. The IS just writes a letter using its US based charity address and thats it?
- How are the various "virtual" DSs going to work, is "in the US" mean the IT/DT or the IS/DS or the Students? How does the TCL/TRA police and enforce this?
- Going rogue, the TCL/TRA standard is a letter. Whats it take to print your own letterhead and self certify your own field experience. Even doing it legitimately, anyone can create a "school" USD$100 to incorporate (Acme AS) in the US, an IRS EIN (and non-profit status), a domain address and web site, then a corporate seal and some stationary, somewhere around USD$200 would get it all done.
- A lot of this is going to depend on what Teach Now does and the direction they go, but they could easily create their own DS and then contract for placements in foreign ISs. They could do a lot of things.
- If the TCL/TRA really wanted to address their real issue they could simply require a passport as the only acceptable verification of identity. US/CAN/AUS passport and credential heres your QTS, reject everyone else for OTT.
So why all this preamble to what is really a simple question? One of the key differences between DC and FL, is that DC issues credentials to foreigners, do the Teach Ready Program as a foreigner and you wont get the FL Professional (Professional grade) credential, all you will get is a Letter of Completion/Eligibility which means very little (nothing). The Dfe doesnt really care what and how Americans get their credentials (as long as its a regulating authorities credential), what they care about is everyone else (especially Brits) using DC for a US credential and getting their (QTS) credential.
Short Answer..
I dont know of anything happening at the TCL/TRA or with the Dfe in regards to FL, and havent anywhere in the past either (unlike DC), FL and Teach Ready is probably safe for the time being. The TCL/TRA doesnt really care about Americans getting the professional FL credential and extending QTS, for that matter they dont really care where the field work is done (even OS), they just dont want their process and system circumvented by locals.
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
Interesting. Maybe some day I can transfer my license to another state and try again for QTS. My partner is Scottish and if we ever decide to relocate there permanently, my certification not transferring will be an issue so glad to hear there may be a way around it.
It was especially interesting that the email specified requirements not for D.C. licenses, but for the Teach Now program. My money is on an internal memo.
It was especially interesting that the email specified requirements not for D.C. licenses, but for the Teach Now program. My money is on an internal memo.
Reply
@s0830887
Absolutely, credentialing officer sees DC, so memo directive is look specifically at training provider, and if its Teach Now, look at nationality and if non-American, send a letter requiring confirmation of "in US" field experience.
Could be a bit of subterfuge is all that is required, instead of putting "Teach Now" for training provider use one of the other 15 OSSE EPP/ITT providers, of which 10 of them are Unis (one of which is Teach Nows Educator School of Education, though thats likely to have the same issue in the near future, as being another name for Teach Now). Your entire problem could have been rectified by simply listing "University of the District of Columbia" as the training provider, then it doesnt matter who you are, it doesnt trigger the closer scrutiny, theres no standard requirement at this time to include evidence from the actual training provider, just identification, and the DC credential. You dont have to upload degrees or transcripts.
I wouldnt put coin on it, but if its a memo, its an unofficial one, and is more likely a verbal instruction everyone took a note on, rather than a document or an email that was circulated.
Absolutely, credentialing officer sees DC, so memo directive is look specifically at training provider, and if its Teach Now, look at nationality and if non-American, send a letter requiring confirmation of "in US" field experience.
Could be a bit of subterfuge is all that is required, instead of putting "Teach Now" for training provider use one of the other 15 OSSE EPP/ITT providers, of which 10 of them are Unis (one of which is Teach Nows Educator School of Education, though thats likely to have the same issue in the near future, as being another name for Teach Now). Your entire problem could have been rectified by simply listing "University of the District of Columbia" as the training provider, then it doesnt matter who you are, it doesnt trigger the closer scrutiny, theres no standard requirement at this time to include evidence from the actual training provider, just identification, and the DC credential. You dont have to upload degrees or transcripts.
I wouldnt put coin on it, but if its a memo, its an unofficial one, and is more likely a verbal instruction everyone took a note on, rather than a document or an email that was circulated.
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
Hi all,
I'm finally getting around to applying for my QTS based on your helpful advice in this thread. However, I am stuck....
In the QTS application, it asks for the "Title of [your teacher] Qualification." I am not sure what to put here, as there is nothing listed on the FL state teaching license to this effect, nor on the TeacherReady certificate, nor the UWF competency 2 certificate, nor on the UWF transcript. If we were in the UK, this would be a PGCE, but in the US, we do not have an equivalent - nor was this a bachelors or masters, etc.
For those who have completed this, what did you put the the "Title of Qualification"?
Thank you!
I'm finally getting around to applying for my QTS based on your helpful advice in this thread. However, I am stuck....
In the QTS application, it asks for the "Title of [your teacher] Qualification." I am not sure what to put here, as there is nothing listed on the FL state teaching license to this effect, nor on the TeacherReady certificate, nor the UWF competency 2 certificate, nor on the UWF transcript. If we were in the UK, this would be a PGCE, but in the US, we do not have an equivalent - nor was this a bachelors or masters, etc.
For those who have completed this, what did you put the the "Title of Qualification"?
Thank you!
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
Thank you @psyguy for your extremely prompt response! Much appreciated!
Re: Questions Regarding Teacher Ready Program
Hey @Psyguy
I’ve spoken to you in another thread about the teach now - DC - QTS pathway. You mentioned that this pathway might be closing now. Do you have any new information?
Thanks!
I’ve spoken to you in another thread about the teach now - DC - QTS pathway. You mentioned that this pathway might be closing now. Do you have any new information?
Thanks!
Reply
@Will402
Definitely closing in the future, and Teach Now will have a similar issue as their 5 days of field experience isnt sufficient for QTS even with the professional grade credential from FL.
What s going to happen in the future is one of to things either 1) QTS applicants will have to upload an additional verification that they completed field experience in the representative country which is the more likely course or 2) OTTs that receive QTS will be considered NQTs and ill have to complete induction to obtain full QTS.
Definitely closing in the future, and Teach Now will have a similar issue as their 5 days of field experience isnt sufficient for QTS even with the professional grade credential from FL.
What s going to happen in the future is one of to things either 1) QTS applicants will have to upload an additional verification that they completed field experience in the representative country which is the more likely course or 2) OTTs that receive QTS will be considered NQTs and ill have to complete induction to obtain full QTS.