• Introduction
• Data and Methods
• Findings
• Discussion and Summary
• References

Over the last 15 years, interest in student performance and teacher qualifications has intensified among education policymakers and researchers. During this time period, research has accumulated that links student achievement to the qualifications of teachers (see Ferguson 1991, 1998; Goldhaber and Brewer 2000; Mayer, Mullens, and Moore 2000).¹ Two central measures of elementary and secondary teacher qualifications are teachers' postsecondary education and their certification. To understand how many students are taught by teachers lacking specified levels of training, efforts have focused on mismatches between teacher qualifications and their teaching assignments (National Commission on Teaching and America's Future 1996; Ingersoll 1999). Such mismatches are commonly referred to as "out-of-field" teaching. Mismatches might include, for example, teachers with a degree in English who are teaching classes in social science or, conversely, teachers with educational backgrounds in the social sciences who are assigned to teach classes in reading.

One of the main findings concerning teacher qualifications has been the relatively high incidence of teachers teaching subjects outside their areas of subject matter training and certification (see, e.g., Bobbitt and McMillen 1994; Ingersoll 1996, 1999, 2000; Neuschatz and McFarling 1999; Robinson 1985). Moreover, the incidence of out-of-field teaching has been shown to vary by subject and by grade level. Out-of-field teaching also has been shown to occur more often in the classrooms of low-income students (Ingersoll 1999).

A number of researchers have explored the hypothesis that teachers' knowledge and ability are associated with student learning in the classroom. One of the earliest studies in this area is the Equality of Educational Opportunity (EEO) survey (Coleman et al. 1966), which found a positive relationship between teachers' verbal abilities and pupil performance. Over the last decade, there has been an increased interest in this area. In a 1991 analysis of Texas school districts, Ferguson used measures of teacher literacy as an indicator of the quality of schooling to conclude that one-quarter to one-third of district variation in student test scores was associated with differences in the quality of schooling. A 1992 study (Hanushek, Gomes-Neto, and Harbison, as cited in Monk 1994) used measures of teachers' subject matter knowledge and student learning gains, and found a positive relationship between how much teachers knew about the subject taught and their students' learning gains in that subject. In a 1994 analysis of student performance and the science and mathematics subject matter preparation of their teachers, Monk reported a positive relationship between student gains in performance and the number of courses their teachers had taken in the subject taught. What is more, Monk also found that coursework in subject matter pedagogy (i.e., teaching methods) appears to contribute more to student performance than academic courses in the subject taught.

In more recent work, Goldhaber and Brewer's 1997 analysis of teachers' postsecondary degrees and students' mathematics performance found a positive relationship between these variables, with higher levels of performance among students whose teachers held a bachelor's or master's degree in mathematics than among students whose teachers were out-of-field. Then, in 2000, Goldhaber and Brewer examined data on the postsecondary degrees and certification status of teachers and their students' performance in mathematics and science. They observed a positive relationship between teachers' degrees and student performance in mathematics consistent with earlier findings.² They also found that students whose teachers were certified in mathematics but did not hold a postsecondary degree in mathematics did not perform as well as students whose teachers held a postsecondary degree in mathematics. These findings provide a foundation for further examinations of out-of-field teaching data.

The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) is a major source of data regarding teacher qualifications in the United States. The NCES Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) collects information on the educational backgrounds and professional credentials and teaching assignments of kindergarten through 12th-grade teachers in the United States. These data can be used to produce national estimates of out-of-field teaching by subject. SASS data are based on nationally representative samples of America's schools, districts, principals, and teachers. SASS data were collected most recently over the 1999–2000 school year.³

Out-of-field teaching has been defined by examining two elements of teachers' qualifications: state certification status and postsecondary education. At first glance, one might assume that state certification to teach a subject and grade level should provide a benchmark definition for in-field teaching. State credentials are typically based on postsecondary coursework in the field to be taught, as well as pedagogical coursework and student teaching with experienced teachers. However, since certification requirements vary considerably across states and over time, many analysts prefer to base their out-of-field measures on teachers' postsecondary education (Ravitch 1998). The complete report includes detailed data tables that can be used to examine out-of-field teaching based on postsecondary education and state certification, considered both separately and together.

Postsecondary education. Policymakers and researchers agree that teachers should have undergraduate or graduate coursework in the fields they teach, but opinions differ over how much coursework a teacher needs to complete. Some argue that teachers should earn a major in any subject they intend to teach (Ravitch 1998). Conversely, others argue that a minor in a field is sufficient (as described in Ingersoll 1999). As a result, this report includes data from all degrees attained at the bachelor's level or above for measures of major only and separately for measures of major or minor combined.⁴ Further, given the positive research findings of Monk (1994) for coursework in subject matter pedagogy, and of Goldhaber and Brewer (1997, 2000) for academic subject matter majors, both subject matter education and academic degrees are included.

Certification. To receive a "regular" or "standard" certificate for teaching a specific subject and grade level, all states require a bachelor's degree that includes subject matter as well as pedagogical studies; all but 10 states require basic skills tests in reading, mathematics, or general knowledge; and 31 states require subject matter exams (U.S. Department of Education 2002).⁵ Typically, states also provide novice teachers a "probationary" certificate that is based on the requirements of the standard certificate. Schools hiring and assigning teachers accept this certificate in lieu of the standard certificate with the expectation that teachers will earn the standard certificate in due time through full-time teaching in the school. This report combines data on probationary, standard, and advanced certificates in determining teacher certification status.⁶

Teacher qualification measures featured in this report. Those who argue that a major in the subject taught is the most appropriate measure of a teacher's qualifications might opt to exclude certification status or minors in the subjects taught from their analyses of in-field and out-of-field teaching. However, few would argue that teachers who have neither certification nor training in a subject are sufficiently equipped to teach in that subject. As a result, this report focuses on two measures:

• teachers without a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught; and
• teachers without a major and certification in the subject taught.

The SASS data provide the basis for analyzing out-of-field teaching in several different ways. For instance, one focus might be on teachers and the extent to which teachers are assigned to teach classes outside their areas of preparation. This information could provide answers to questions such as: How often are teachers assigned to teach classes outside the areas for which they have been trained? In what fields are teachers most often assigned to classes outside their areas of preparation? SASS data allow analyses of teachers' qualifications in their reported main assignment fields (the subjects in which they teach the most classes), as well as in each different subject that they teach.

Alternatively, the focus might be on the extent to which students are taught by out-of-field teachers. A focus on students could provide insight into the quality of instruction provided to students by answering questions such as: How often are students in U.S. classrooms exposed to instruction from teachers who do not have postsecondary training or certification in the subject area taught?

Four out-of-field teaching measures. Based on SASS data, four approaches to measuring out-of-field teaching can be used to address these questions: teachers out-of-field by main teaching assignments, teachers out-of-field by each subject taught, classes taught by out-of-field teachers, and students taught by out-of-field teachers. The focus of this report is on measuring students' exposure to out-of-field teachers; thus, this report focuses on the measure for students taught by out-of-field teachers. In addition, detailed tables for all four approaches are included in the complete report.

The out-of-field measure featured in this report: Students taught by out-of-field teachers. The measure for students taught by out-of-field teachers tracks the number of students taught by teachers who are in-field or out-of-field in a specific subject. The "students taught" measure provides the most targeted assessment of the extent to which students are exposed to underqualified teachers. This measure allows analysts to report the percentage of all students taught each subject by teachers who are teaching outside their areas of preparation.⁷

Differences in school and class organization at the elementary, middle, and high school levels require a separate consideration of out-of-field teaching by level of instruction. At the elementary level, the available data do not support estimates of the percentage of students taught by out-of-field teachers. However, data on the teacher-based measure of out-of-field teaching in the main assignment field are included in the complete report. Inasmuch as class rotations, or departmentalized instruction, are limited in the early grades, this measure provides a reasonable proxy of student exposure to teachers with different levels of qualifications.

Policymakers and researchers have increasingly examined the middle school grades as an important, separate level of instruction (see Alt, Choy, and Hammer 2000; Levine, McLaughlin, and Sietsema 1996; Lewis et al. 1999). For most students, the middle grades mark their first experiences with departmentalized instruction, in which students move between classrooms from teacher to teacher and subject to subject. Thus, the middle grades serve as an introduction to the secondary years of schooling. Previous research on out-of-field teaching has found substantial differences in the extent of out-of-field teaching between the middle grades and the high school grades. In particular, Ingersoll (1999) found higher rates of out-of-field teaching in the middle grades compared with the high school grades.

At the high school level, most teachers are assigned to subject-area departments and teach a single subject or several subjects to multiple classes throughout the school day. Although actual rates of out-of-field teaching are lower at the high school level than at the middle school level, the wide range of subjects and classes at the high school level makes the potential for out-of-field teaching high. Moreover, the instructional content at the high school level can extend well beyond the introductory level of content in a given subject area. Therefore, a teacher without adequate preparation in a specific subject area may have greater difficulty teaching the content effectively at the high school level than at the middle school level.

The course content and educational contexts are so different between the elementary, middle, and high school years that reporting them together would disguise important differences in out-of-field teaching. Thus, it is important to report out-of-field teaching estimates separately for all three levels.⁸ Teachers were categorized based on the range of grades taught and main assignment field. The elementary grades, K–4, include those teaching in these grades exclusively and those who teach some combination of grades K–9 with a main assignment field of elementary education or special education. The middle grades, 5–8, include those teaching some combination of grades K–9 with a main assignment field other than elementary education or special education and not teaching any grades higher than 9. The high school grades, 9–12, include those teaching grade 9 only and those teaching any grades 10 or higher.

This report includes SASS data collected from public school teachers over 4 school years (1987–88, 1990–91, 1993–94, and 1999–2000) that span a 13-year period.⁹ Although the data from the three earlier administrations of SASS have been published previously, there has been variability over time in different aspects of the definitions used. A portion of this variability has resulted from differences in the surveys used. These changes impact slightly the matches that are made between teachers' majors and minors and the subjects they teach. A larger source of variability has resulted from analysts' choices concerning the credentials used to match with subjects teachers teach, the teachers to include, and the definitions of grade ranges. Thus, in preparing the data for this analysis, considerable care was taken in developing a consistent set of definitions that were applied to the data from each administration of SASS to allow for an analysis of changes in these measures over the last 13 years.

The student-based measure of out-of-field teaching discussed here provides estimates of students' exposure to teachers with different levels of qualifications. The measure of students taught by teachers without a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught provides estimates of the percentage of students in each subject whose teachers lack the minimal level of qualifications deemed necessary for teaching a specific subject. The measure of students taught by teachers who do not have both a major and certification in the subject taught provides subject-specific estimates of the percentage of students whose teachers do not have the two credentials that are most likely to help their students excel. The data are presented separately for the middle grades and the high school grades. All data discussed in these findings are included in table 1.

Middle grades—5–8. In the middle grades for school year 1999–2000, between 11 and 22 percent of the students enrolled in English, mathematics, science, foreign language, social science, and the subfield of history were in classes led by teachers without a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught, compared to less than 5 percent of the middle-grade students in arts and music and in physical education/health education classes.¹⁰ In contrast, between 29 and 40 percent of the middle-grade students enrolled in biology/life science, physical science, or ESL/bilingual education classes had teachers who lacked a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught. Although there was a decrease between school years 1987–88 and 1999–2000 in the percentage of middle-grade students in physical education/health education classes that were led by teachers without any of these credentials, there was no measurable change between these school years in the percentage of middle-grade teachers lacking credentials in any of the other subjects examined.

High school grades—9–12. In the 1999–2000 school year, between 5 and 6 percent of the high school students enrolled in English, science, social science, arts and music, and physical education/health education classes; 9 percent of the high school students enrolled in mathematics classes; and 11 percent of the high school students enrolled in foreign language classes were in classes led by teachers without a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught. In contrast, 31 percent of the students in ESL/bilingual education classes had teachers who did not have a major, a minor, or certification in the field.

In some fields, teachers may have a general degree and certification or a degree and certification in one specific subfield. For example, data reported for the broad category of science include matches between teacher credentials in general science or any science subfield as legitimate. However, since teacher credentials in the specific subfield may be more important to student success in that subfield, where available, data are presented for subfields as well. When the specific subfields of social science and science are considered separately, between 8 and 10 percent of the high school students in history, chemistry, and biology/life science; 17 percent of the students in physics; and 36 percent of the students in geology/earth/space science were found to have had teachers who lacked credentials in the specific subfield taught in the 1999–2000 school year.

There were measurable decreases in the percentage of high school students enrolled in classes with teachers without the recognized credentials in a number of fields.¹¹ The percentage of high school students enrolled in classes with teachers without an in-field major, minor, or certification in English; mathematics; social science, including the subfield history; ESL/bilingual education; and science, including physical sciences (as a group) and the specific subfields of chemistry, geology/earth/space science, and physics, decreased between school years 1987–88 and 1999–2000. The only increase in high school students' exposure to teachers lacking the specified credentials occurred in arts and music, where, despite the increase, it remained the case in school year 1999–2000 that 95 percent of the high school students enrolled in arts and music classes were in classes led by teachers with at least one of these credentials in the specific area of arts and music taught.

Middle grades—5–8. In the 1999–2000 school year, at least two-thirds of the students in middle-grade mathematics classes (69 percent) and ESL/bilingual education classes (73 percent) had teachers who did not report a major and certification in the subject taught. Approximately 60 percent of the students in middle-grade English classes (58 percent), foreign language classes (61 percent), and science classes (57 percent) had a teacher who did not report a major and certification in the subject taught. By comparison, although the estimate for the specific subfield of biology/life science (64 percent) was similar to the percentage for all science classes, most students in middle-grade physical science classes (93 percent) had teachers who did not have certification along with a major in any of the physical sciences or in physical science education. About one-half of the students in middle-grade social science classes (51 percent) had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the field, but 71 percent of the students in middle-grade history classes had teachers who did not report having a major in history or world civilization and certification in the field.

In contrast, fewer students enrolled in classes in arts and music and in classes in physical education/health education had teachers who did not hold a major and certification in the field taught. Only 15 percent of the middle-grade students in arts and music classes had teachers who did not report a certification along with a major in their specific subfield, and only 19 percent of the middle-grade students in physical education/health education classes had teachers who did not have a certification and a major in a physical education or health education field.

Over the 13-year period from school year 1987–88 to school year 1999–2000, there were decreases in the percentage of middle-grade English teachers who did not hold certification and a major in the subject taught; however, in 1999–2000, it remained the case that 58 percent of middle-grade English students had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the field. For the other subjects examined, there were small apparent fluctuations over this time period, but there were no measurable differences over time. In both the 1987–88 and the 1999–2000 school year, approximately 70 percent of the middle-grade students in mathematics classes and 60 percent of the middle-grade students in science classes had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the subject taught. In contrast, only 15 to 22 percent of the middle-grade students in arts and music and in physical education/health education classes had teachers who had not majored and were not certified in their teaching field.

High school grades—9–12. In the 1999–2000 school year, one-third or fewer of the high school students in English, mathematics, science, social science, arts and music, and physical education/health education classes had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the subject taught. In contrast, 71 percent of the high school students in ESL/bilingual education classes had teachers who did not have a major and certification in ESL/bilingual education. And 48 percent of the students in foreign language classes had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the specific language taught.

Despite the relatively small amount of out-of-field teaching evident in the general fields of science and social science in school year 1999–2000, a different profile emerges when individual subfields are considered separately. Although 27 percent of the high school students in science classes had teachers without a major and certification in any field of science, the percentages were much higher for each specific subfield. Thus, 45 percent of high school students in biology/life science classes had teachers who did not have certification and a major in biology/life science. About 63 percent of the high school students in physical science classes had teachers who did not have certification and a major in some area of physical science. The percentages were similar for the subfields of chemistry (61 percent) and physics (67 percent), but higher for the subfield of geology/earth/space science, with about three-quarters of the students (79 percent) in high school geology/earth/space science enrolled in classes led by teachers without certification and a major in geology/earth/space science. Similarly, although 28 percent of high school students in social science classes had teachers without a social science major and certification of some type, 63 percent of the high school students in history classes did not have teachers with a major and certification in history or world civilization.

Although in school year 1999–2000 one-third or fewer of the high school students in English, mathematics, and social science classes had teachers who did not have a major and certification in the subject area taught, over the 13-year period from school year 1987–88 to school year 1999–2000 the percentage of students in classes led by teachers who did not have an in-field major and certification decreased in each of these fields. Similarly, there were decreases in the percentages of high school students in physics, physical science, ESL/bilingual education, and physical education/health education classes with teachers who did not have an in-field major and certification. The apparent decrease in the percentage of high school students in science classes was not significant. Although there was an increase for arts and music, 20 percent of the high school students enrolled in these classes had teachers without an in-field major and certification in the specific subfield taught in 1999–2000.¹²

The two measures of teacher qualifications featured in this report provide different perspectives on out-of-field teaching. Teachers who do not have a major, a minor, or certification in the subject taught can, most certainly, be classified as out-of-field teachers. In the middle grades in 1999–2000, some 11 to 14 percent of the students taking social science, history, and foreign languages, and 14 to 22 percent of the students taking English, mathematics, and science were in classes led by teachers without any of these credentials. In addition, approximately 30 to 40 percent of the middle-grade students in biology/life science, physical science, or ESL/bilingual education classes had teachers lacking these credentials.

In the high school grades in 1999–2000, between 5 and 10 percent of the students in classes in English, mathematics, science and the subfields of biology/life science and chemistry, social science and the subfield of history, arts and music, and physical education/heath education had teachers who were without a major, a minor, or certification in the field taught, and thus are considered out-of-field by this measure. Within the subfields of science, 17 percent of the high school students enrolled in physics and 36 percent of those enrolled in geology/earth/space science were in classes led by out-of-field teachers. In addition, 31 percent of the high school students enrolled in ESL/bilingual education classes had out-of-field teachers.

When the definition of out-of-field is expanded to include teachers who do not hold certification and a major in the subject taught, the amount of out-of-field teaching increases. With this measure, at a minimum 6 out of every 10 middle-grade students in classes in English; foreign languages; mathematics; science, including the subfields of biology/life science and physical science; history; and ESL/bilingual education were in classes led by out-of-field teachers in 1999–2000. The proportions were higher for some subjects, with 73 percent of the students enrolled in ESL/bilingual education classes, 69 percent of the middle-grade students enrolled in mathematics, 71 percent in history, and 93 percent of the students enrolled in physical science in classes led by teachers without majors and certification in these fields.

At the high school level in 1999–2000, at a minimum 6 out of every 10 students enrolled in physical science, including the subfields of chemistry, geology/earth/space science, and physics; history; and ESL/bilingual education classes had teachers who did not have certification and a major in the subject taught and thus are considered out-of-field by this measure. In addition, 45 percent of the high school students enrolled in biology/life science and approximately 30 percent of those enrolled in mathematics, English, and social science classes had out-of-field teachers using this measure.

A comparison between the experiences of students in the middle grades and those in the high school grades shows that there were relatively fewer teachers with certification and an in-field major in the middle grades than in the high school grades in English; mathematics; science, including the subfields of biology/life science and physical science; and social science over the 13-year period. That is to say, compared to the high school grades, higher percentages of students in the middle grades were in classes led by teachers who did not hold certification and a major in the subject taught. Similarly, higher percentages of students taking these subjects in the middle grades were in classes led by teachers without any of the recognized credentials. Whether it is because a general elementary certification or training is thought to be sufficient in the middle grades, or because teacher specialization in the middle grades has not caught up with the move toward changing classes in the middle grades, teachers who teach specific subjects in the middle grades are less likely to have the recognized credentials than their contemporaries teaching in the high school grades.

A comparison of the student experiences over the 1987–88 to 1999–2000 period shows that in the middle grades there were decreases in the percentages of students taught English by teachers who did not have certification and a major in the subject taught, and there was a decrease in the percentage of students in physical education/health education classes that were led by teachers without any of the recognized credentials (i.e., no major, minor, or certification). More changes were evident in the high school grades, where there were improvements evident in a number of fields—with decreases in the percentages of students taught by teachers who did not have both a major and a certification in the subject taught in English, mathematics, the science subfields of physical science and physics, social science, ESL/bilingual education, and physical education/health education. There was an increase in the percentage of high school students in arts and music classes with teachers without a major and certification in the specific subfield taught, but in 1999–2000 this only affected 20 percent of the students. Decreases were also evident in the percentages of students who were taught by teachers without any of the recognized credentials in English; mathematics; science and each of the subfields—physical science, chemistry, geology, and physics; social science and the subfield history; and ESL/bilingual education. The only increase in the high school grades was in arts and music, where the percentage of students taught by teachers without a major, a minor, or certification went from 3 percent in 1987–88 to 5 percent in 1999–2000.

There was one pattern that was similar across both the middle and high school grades: the arts and music teachers and the physical education/health education teachers were the most likely of all the subject matter teachers to have certification and a major in the subject taught. And in the middle grades these teachers were also the least likely to lack a major, a minor, or certification. Whether this is the result of the specific requirements to teach in these fields or a matter of supply and demand remains a topic for further study.

Alt, N., Choy, S.P., and Hammer, C.H. (2000). In the Middle: Characteristics of Public Schools With a Focus on Middle Schools (NCES 2000–312). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Bobbitt, S.A., and McMillen, M.M. (1994). Qualifications of the Public School Teacher Workforce: 1988 and 1991 (NCES 95–665). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E.Q., Hobson, C.J., McPartland, J., Mood, A.M., Weinfeld, F.D., and York, R.L. (1966). Equality of Educational Opportunity. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ferguson, R.F. (1991). Paying for Public Education: New Evidence on How and Why Money Matters. Harvard Journal on Legislation, 28(2): 465–498.

Ferguson, R.F. (1998). Can Schools Narrow the Black-White Test Score Gap? In C. Jencks and M. Phillips (Eds.), The Black-White Test Score Gap (pp. 318–374). Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution.

Goldhaber, D.D., and Brewer, D.J. (1997). Why Don't Schools and Teachers Seem to Matter? Assessing the Impact of Unobservables on Education. Journal of Human Resources, 32(3): 505–523.

Goldhaber, D.D., and Brewer, D.J. (2000). Does Teacher Certification Matter? High School Certification Status and Student Achievement. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 22(2): 129–145.

Hanushek, E.A. (1994). Money Might Matter Somewhere: A Response to Larry V. Hedges, Richard D. Laine, and Robert D. Greenwald. Educational Researcher, 23(4): 5–8.

Hedges, L.V., Laine, R.D., and Greenwald, R. (1994). Does Money Matter? A Meta-Analysis of Studies of the Effects of Differential School Inputs on Student Outcomes. Educational Researcher, 23(2): 5–14.

Ingersoll, R. (1996). Out-of-Field Teaching and Educational Equality (NCES 96–040). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Ingersoll, R. (1999). The Problem of Underqualified Teachers in American Secondary Schools. Educational Researcher, 28(2): 26–37.

Ingersoll, R. (2000). Rejoinder: Misunderstanding the Problem of Out-of-Field Teaching. Educational Researcher, 30(1): 21–22.

Levine, R., McLaughlin, D., and Sietsema, J. (1996). Trends in School District Demographics: 1986–87 to 1990–91 (NCES 96–399). U.S. Department of Education.Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Lewis, L., Parsad, B., Carey, N., Bartfai, N., Farris, E., Smerdon, B., and Greene, B. (1999). Teacher Quality: A Report on the Preparation and Qualifications of Public School Teachers (NCES 1999–080). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Mayer, D.P., Mullens, J.E., and Moore, M.T. (2000). Monitoring School Quality: An Indicators Report (NCES 2001–030). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Monk, D.H. (1994). Subject Area Preparation of Secondary Mathematics and Science Teachers and Student Achievement. Economics of Education Review, 13(2): 125–145.

National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. (1996). What Matters Most: Teaching for America's Future. Report of the National Commission on Teaching & America's Future. Summary Report. New York: Author.

Neuschatz, M., and McFarling, M. (1999). Maintaining Momentum: High School Physics for a New Millennium. College Park, MD: American Institute of Physics. Available: www.aip.org/statistics

Ravitch, D. (1998, August 10). Lesson Plan for Teachers. The Washington Post, p. A17.

Robinson, V. (1985). Making Do in the Classroom: A Report on the Misassignment of Teachers. Washington, DC: The Council for Basic Education.

U.S. Department of Education. (2002). Meeting the "Highly Qualified Teachers" Challenge: The Secretary's Annual Report on Teacher Quality. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.