There was an error in this gadget

Friday, May 15, 2009


Everyone knows that procert is redundant with National boards. Why do both? Just do boards. You get $5,000 each year after that. Procert you get nothing. But I completely agree that a masters degree should be sufficient to show the quality of teaching instead of the procert.

1 comment:

  1. I completely agree. I entered teaching 3 years ago with a Master's degree from the University of Washington. My program was wonderful, and I received so much from it. I definitely felt well prepared when I entered my own classroom.

    Now, I must either do National Boards or procert. Obviously, I'll be doing National Boards, but I'm a bit ticked off about having to do it so early in my career, when I am still facing a RIF notice.

    I think that teachers SHOULD be required to do ongoing professional development for the duration of their time in the classroom, but the whole procert process assumes that we come into the profession untrained, and have to "catch up" in our first five years. It's time to get rid of this requirement.

    -Emily L.
    Issaquah Education Association