Most states have a teacher testing program in place, and they use the test data to decide whether individual candidates should receive initial certification to teach. The purpose of assessment for teacher certification is to provide information with which to make these decisions well. Many states also use teacher assessment data in their review of institutional programs. The teacher testing movement began more than a century ago and was substantially revitalized in the late 1970s. The current assessment movement gained strength in the early 1980s (Haney, Madaus, & Kreitzer, 1987). Catchphrases like "Help! Teacher can't teach!" (Time, 1980) and "A Nation at Risk" (National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983) helped define a minimum-competency approach to this wave of teacher testing. Legal challenges followed, especially around the issue of equity and disproportionate minority failure rates. In addition, the call to professionalize teaching emphasized the fact that teachers need decision-making skills and the ability to apply specialized knowledge in different situations and contexts. What was wrong with the first generation of teacher tests? Will changes in teacher testing and legislation remedy the situation?
In this article, we describe two different perspectives on assessment for teacher certification: we label one the competency orientation and the other the professional orientation. Of course, the purpose of assessment for teacher certification is to assure both: professional competence in the plain sense of both words. Thus our labels are not entirely satisfactory, but we chose them because they reflect the way the terms are currently used in both the professional and popular press. The labels describe two approaches to teacher assessment that emphasize different models or aspects of teaching. We first define these perspectives, then use them to discuss three current problems in teacher assessment, which we see basically as validity issues.
Validity refers to the truth claims we make for our assessment information. For An earlier version of this article was presented at the 1991 Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.