COMMISSION DRAFT

JOINT LEGISLATIVE AUDIT

AND REVIEW COMMISSION

Report to the Governor and the General Assembly of Virginia

Commonwealth of Virginia

September 12, 2023

Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

2023

COMMISSION DRAFT

JLARC Report 576

jlarc.virginia.gov

Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission

Senator Janet D. Howell, Chair

Delegate Robert D. Orrock, Sr., Vice Chair

Delegate Terry L. Austin

Delegate Kathy J. Byron

Delegate Betsy B. Carr

Delegate Barry D. Knight

Senator Mamie E. Locke

Senator Jeremy S. McPike

Senator Thomas K. Norment, Jr.

Delegate Kenneth R. Plum

Senator Lionell Spruill, Sr.

Delegate Luke E. Torian

Delegate R. Lee Ware

Delegate Tony O. Wilt

Staci Henshaw, Auditor of Public Accounts

JLARC sta

Hal E. Greer, Director

Justin Brown, Senior Associate Director

Lauren Axselle - Principal Legislative Analyst, Project Leader

Christine Wolfe, Senior Legislative Analyst

Laura White, Associate Legislative Analyst

Information graphics: Nathan Skreslet

Managing editor: Jessica Sabbath

Contents

Summary i

Recommendations and Policy Options vii

Chapters

1. Virginia’s Public K–12 Teacher Pipeline 1

2. Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers 5

3. Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways 11

4. Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process 29

5. Teacher Recruitment and Retention 37

Appendixes

A: Study resolution 43

B: Research activities and methods 44

C: Teacher vacancies by school division 52

D: Agency response

Online Appendixes

E: Inventory of state-supported K–12 teacher pipeline programs and initiatives

F: Traditional teacher preparation programs at public institutions

Commission draft

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

WHAT WE FOUND

Statewide, teacher vacancies and reliance on less than fully licensed

teachers has increased

Having enough, high quality teachers is among the most important factors necessary

for a quality education system. The latest available

data shows continued declines in the number of

teachers in Virginia’s K–12 system and the propor-

tion of them who are fully licensed:

• 4.8 percent of teaching positions were va-

cant at the start of the 2023–24 school year,

up from 3.9 percent in the prior school year

(and less than 1 percent in years prior to the

pandemic); and

• 16 percent of Virginia’s teachers were not

fully licensed or not teaching “in field” in

SY2022–23, up from 14 percent in the prior

school year (and 6 percent a decade ago).

Some divisions are facing substantial

teacher workforce problems, but other divisions are not

The severity of the teacher workforce problems varies widely across the state. Some

divisions have much higher than average teacher vacancy rates, while others have very

few or no vacant teaching positions. Virginia school divisions with large populations

of Black students have especially high teacher vacancy rates.

As with vacancies, school divisions’ reliance on teachers who are not fully licensed

varies widely. For example, two divisions reported that all their teachers were fully li-

censed, while two reported that only about half of their teachers were. Similarly, two

divisions reported that all their teachers were teaching “in field,” while two reported

only about two-thirds of their teachers were.

Direct pathways to licensure tend to better prepare teachers to be

successful in the classroom

In general, teachers who use direct pathways to become a fully licensed teacher are

better prepared for the classroom. The most common direct pathway by far in Virginia

is graduating from a traditional higher education teacher preparation program as a fully

licensed teacher. Traditional higher education-based preparation programs prepare

WHY WE DID THIS STUDY

In 2022,

the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Com-

mission (JLARC) directed staff to review the adequa

of the supply of qualified K

–12 teachers in Virginia.

ABOUT

VIRGINIA’S K-12 TEACHER PIPELINE

Virginia’s “teacher pipeline” consists of the programs

and proce

sses that attract, prepare, licens

e, recruit, and

retain public K

–

12 teachers. While the Commonwealth’s

134

local school divisions individually recruit and retain

teachers, the state plays a role in

the teacher pipeline

through higher education institutions that administer

teacher preparation programs, VDOE’s licensure of

teachers, and funding for initiatives to promote the

teaching profession.

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

about 2,600 teachers annually in Virginia. These programs include important compo-

nents of effective teacher preparation, including pedagogical coursework, student

teaching and mentorship from experienced teachers, and college-level subject area

coursework.

School divisions believe traditional higher education preparation programs better

prepare people to teach than indirect pathways. For example, 46 percent of school

divisions surveyed by JLARC reported that provisionally licensed teachers are very

poorly or poorly prepared to be teachers, while only 3 percent of school divisions re-

ported poor preparation among individuals who attended traditional higher educa-

tion preparation programs.

Teacher residency programs also produce well prepared teachers. Residency pro-

grams involve an extended co-teaching placement while simultaneously completing

coursework. Residency programs have a rigorous design and are low cost to partici-

pants because of the financial assistance provided. Residency programs, though, are

expensive to administer and currently have limited capacity in Virginia. State-sup-

ported residency programs prepared just under 100 individuals for teaching in

SY2022–23.

In January 2023, VDOE initiated a registered teacher apprenticeship program.

VDOE has distributed funds to six partnerships between school divisions and higher

education institutions to implement programs. Apprenticeship programs can pro-

duce teachers that are well prepared, according to experts. They also pay individuals

during their preparation and have the advantage of being able to use federal work-

force funds to cover a portion of program costs. If implemented effectively, Vir-

ginia’s new registered apprenticeships should result in additional well-prepared teach-

ers without the financial barriers associated with traditional preparation.

Indirect pathways give individuals flexibility to obtain credentials

over time and cost less

In recent years, an increasing number of individuals have been entering teaching

through Virginia’s indirect pathways to fill current teacher vacancies. These indirect

pathways include provisional licensure, career switcher programs, and division-led

preparation programs. Individuals using these pathways to become a teacher are typi-

cally less well prepared in the short term, but can move through those pathways at

substantially less cost and benefit from more flexible pacing and delivery format (fig-

ure, next page). For example, most provisionally licensed teachers take required

courses at their convenience, often online, while working as a teacher. Tuition can still

be costly for these courses, but many divisions offer tuition reimbursement for provi-

sionally licensed teachers, and several divisions offer in-house preparation at no cost

to participants.

In Virginia, provisional

teaching

licenses are

non

renewable and valid

for three years.

In 2018,

the General Assembly

passed legislation allow-

ing provisional license

receive up to two,

one

-year extensions if a

teacher has satisfactory

performance evaluations

and receives a recom-

mendation from the divi-

sion superintendent.

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

iii

Teacher pathways have tradeoffs between quality and affordability

Program quality /

Participant preparedness

Participant

affordability

Direct pathways

Traditional teacher preparation programs

●

○

Teacher residency programs

●

Registered apprenticeship programs

Indirect pathways

Provisional license, classes as needed over time

○

◑

Special education provisional license

◑

Career switcher programs

◑

Division-led preparation

Varies

●

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis.

NOTES: Program quality / participant preparedness = High quality mentor provided; student teaching component;

candidate finishes content and pedagogical coursework prior to being teacher of record. Participant affordability =

cost of tuition and fees; ease of holding paid employment.

A new indirect pathway—online courses through a private provider called iTeach—has recently been approved in

Virginia but is not yet operating.

Teacher residency programs are affordable for participants but often costly for the state or sponsoring division.

A new direct pathway—registered apprenticeship programs— is currently being implemented in Virginia. Vir-

ginia’s program is too new to evaluate.

Preparedness measured when provisional licensee becomes teacher of record; preparedness varies and is likely to

increase as classes are completed.

Virginia-specific assessment required for traditional teacher

preparation programs may be an unnecessary barrier

A Virginia-specific test (which is separate from the nationally used and recognized

Praxis subject assessments) is preventing some individuals from enrolling in and com-

pleting traditional higher education teacher preparation programs. The Virginia Com-

munication and Literacy Assessment (VCLA) is a Virginia-specific test with two sub-

tests that measure reading comprehension and written communication skills. While 86

percent of test takers eventually pass the VCLA, an average of about 630 test takers

(14 percent) did not pass it each year over the last six years.

The VCLA may present an unnecessary barrier to admission to or completion of tra-

ditional teacher preparation programs when the state needs more people to enter the

teacher pipeline. According to staff at 11 of the 14 Virginia public teacher preparation

programs, failure to pass required assessments such as the VCLA is a top reason indi-

viduals are unable to enroll in and/or complete preparation programs. The test, which

was developed in 2007 and has not been updated, is outdated and tests prospective

teachers on skills that are not relevant for some types of teachers to be effective.

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

Tuition, assessments, and unpaid student teaching present financial

barrier to some participants in traditional preparation programs

Costs associated with traditional higher education teacher preparation programs are

another barrier to participation in these high quality programs. Seventy-three percent

of new teachers surveyed by JLARC who attended traditional preparation programs

reported at least one cost associated with preparation (tuition and fees, cost of licens-

ing tests, unpaid student teaching) to be a moderate or significant barrier to complet-

ing their preparation program. In addition, staff from 10 of the 14 traditional prepa-

ration programs at Virginia’s public higher education institutions cited financial

concerns as a top reason why teacher candidates did not enter or complete their pro-

gram.

Virginia has a relatively small ongoing program to reduce the cost of tuition for tra-

ditional teacher preparation for some students. The Virginia Teaching Scholarship

Loan Program (VTSLP) awards up to $10,000 for tuition and fees to teacher candi-

dates at public or private institutions pursuing teaching in a critical shortage disci-

pline or who are minority teacher candidates. The program requires recipients to

teach for at least two years in the critical shortage discipline or in a school where

more than half of the students are eligible for free or reduced lunch.

Recently, $708,000 in annual VTSLP funding has facilitated scholarship loans to 75

recipients per year. This represents an estimated 10 percent of all graduates of Vir-

ginia’s traditional teacher preparation programs who have financial need (based on

Pell grant eligibility). Higher education teacher preparation programs report there is

substantially more demand for this program than current funding levels support. For

example, one large public institution reported having at least 50 additional individuals

eligible for scholarship loans every year who were not able to receive them.

Licensure requirements and process can seem complex and be unclear

to some applicants

School division HR staff surveyed by JLARC expressed mixed opinions on how clearly

defined the requirements are to obtain a Virginia teaching license. Thirty-six percent

of division staff “strongly disagreed” or “disagreed” that teacher licensure require-

ments are sufficiently clear. When asked on a JLARC survey, one new teacher said:

“The process to apply for a license is so complicated and draining.”

The lack of clarity about licensure requirements can be especially challenging for

teachers with provisional licenses and fully licensed teachers in other states interested

in teaching in Virginia. VDOE does not publish information specifying which courses

meet licensure requirements. As a result, provisionally licensed teachers may take

courses that do not fulfill Virginia’s licensure requirements, which can be costly and

delay their ability to teach. Similarly, VDOE does not publish information on the spe-

cific license types and endorsement areas that are comparable between Virginia and

other states. As a result, teachers from another state seeking a Virginia license must

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

submit a full application to VDOE to learn whether their license and/or endorsement

area will be accepted.

Factors other than barriers to preparation program participation and

the licensure process are primary reasons for state’s teacher shortage

Though the state can improve the teacher preparation and licensure processes, Vir-

ginia’s teacher shortage will not materially improve until the root causes of the short-

age are addressed. Teachers in Virginia have left the profession primarily either for

personal reasons (e.g., family moving to another location), or because they were un-

happy with the job. Inadequate support for teachers generally, high workload, ineffec-

tive school leadership, and low salary are the top reasons cited for their unhappiness

with being a teacher (figure), according to a JLARC survey.

Reasons licensed teachers left positions in Virginia public schools

SOURCE: JLARC survey of licensed teachers who are not currently teaching in a Virginia public school.

NOTE: Respondents could select more than one response. Some respondents provided other reasons for leaving

their jobs in Virginia public schools, including deciding to pursue another career and deciding they no longer

wanted to work for pay.

Other, recent JLARC reports have recommended ways to address issues related to

teacher support and workload (e.g., more instructional assistants), and salary (e.g.,

changing the SOQ formula inputs to more accurately reflect actual teacher salaries).

Therefore, the potential benefits of the recommendations and policy options in this

report related to the teacher pipeline must be considered in the context of these

broader factors that more heavily influence teacher recruitment and retention.

WHAT WE RECOMMEND

Legislative action

• Authorize a waiver that allows higher education teacher preparation pro-

grams to recommend qualified individuals who have not passed the VCLA

to receive full teacher licensure.

• Increase funding for the Virginia Teaching Scholarship Loan Program.

JLARC surveyed

individuals with Virginia

teaching licenses who

were not working in

Virginia public schools

in July 2023. The survey

was sent to individuals for

whom VDOE had em

ail

addresses. JLARC re-

ceived 1,164 responses

for an overall response

rate of 34 percent.

Summary: Virginia’s K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

Executive action

• Replace the VCLA with a relevant and nationally recognized test, or remove

it as a requirement for full teacher licensure.

• List on the VDOE website the (i) courses that fulfill licensure requirements

in each endorsement area for provisionally licensed teachers pursuing full

licensure and (ii) license types and endorsement areas that qualify for reci-

procity with selected other states.

• Report on the program participation, size, and funding levels of the new

registered teacher apprenticeship program.

The complete list of recommendations is available on page vii.

Commission draft

vii

Recommendations and Policy Options: Virginia’s K-

12 Teacher Pipeline

JLARC staff typically make recommendations to address findings during reviews.

Staff also sometimes propose policy options rather than recommendations. The three

most common reasons staff propose policy options rather than recommendations are:

(1) the action proposed is a policy judgment best made by the General Assembly or

other elected officials, (2) the evidence indicates that addressing a report finding is not

necessarily required, but doing so could be beneficial, or (3) there are multiple ways in

which a report finding could be addressed and there is insufficient evidence of a single

best way to address the finding.

Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION 1

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language in the Appropriation

Act directing the Virginia Department of Education to report (i) which higher educa-

tion institutions and school divisions have been approved to have apprentice pro-

grams, (ii) when they expect to begin preparing prospective teachers, (iii) how many

individuals are expected to be prepared through each program annually, and (iv) how

each program will be funded. The report should be submitted to the Board of Edu-

cation and House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by June

30, 2024. (Chapter 3)

RECOMMENDATION 2

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language in the Appropriation

Act directing the Virginia Board of Education to either (i) replace the Virginia Com-

munications and Literacy Assessment with a nationally recognized teacher licensure

test that is more relevant for assessing prospective teachers or (ii) eliminate the Virginia

Communications and Literacy Assessment as a requirement for a full 10-year renewa-

ble Virginia teaching license. (Chapter 3)

RECOMMENDATION 3

The General Assembly may wish to consider amending the Code of Virginia to create

a waiver through which the Board of Education shall issue a full 10-year renewable

Virginia teaching license to qualified individuals attending approved higher education

teacher preparation programs who have not passed the Virginia Communication and

Literacy Assessment but meet established criteria. (Chapter 3)

Recommendations: Virginia’s K-12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

viii

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Virginia Board of Education should revise section 8-VAC-20-543-50 of the Vir-

ginia Administrative Code to remove the incentive traditional higher education teacher

preparation programs currently have to establish admission policies that unnecessarily

restrict the number of individuals enrolling in such programs. (Chapter 3)

RECOMMENDATION 5

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language and funding in the

Appropriation Act to increase the annual funding for the Virginia Teaching Scholar-

ship Loan Program. (Chapter 3)

RECOMMENDATION 6

The Virginia Department of Education should work with Virginia higher education

institutions that offer teacher preparation courses to develop, publish on its website,

and periodically update a list of specific professional studies and subject-matter courses

that fulfill licensure requirements in each endorsement area for provisionally licensed

teachers pursuing full licensure. (Chapter 4)

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Virginia Department of Education should list and periodically update on its web-

site the specific teacher license types and endorsement areas in other states that qualify

for a Virginia teaching license through reciprocity, prioritizing states from which Vir-

ginia receives the most reciprocity applications. (Chapter 4)

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Virginia Department of Education should report on the status of its teacher li-

censure process, staffing, and information technology improvements to the Board of

Education and House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by

December 15, 2023, and again by June 30, 2024. (Chapter 4)

RECOMMENDATION 9

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language and funding in the

Appropriation Act directing the Virginia Department of Education to (i) hire a con-

tractor to develop a database that can store and maintain teacher information; (ii) reg-

ularly collect information on the teacher preparation pathway, licensure status, place

of employment, indicators of instructional quality, and public K–12 teaching tenure

for each teacher who is prepared in Virginia; and (iii) share such information about

these teachers with the Virginia preparation programs from which they graduated.

(Chapter 5)

Recommendations: Virginia’s K-12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

RECOMMENDATION 10

The General Assembly may wish to consider amending the Code of Virginia to direct

the Virginia Department of Education to biennially report on the preparedness and

tenure of teachers prepared through each of Virginia’s teacher preparation pathways

and programs and recommend improvements to specific preparation pathways and

programs as needed. The report should be submitted to the Board of Education and

House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by November 1 every

other year. (Chapter 5)

Policy Options to Consider

POLICY OPTION 1

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to create a pilot program for provisionally licensed teachers to complete a curriculum

and instruction course or classroom and behavior management course by the end of

their first semester as a teacher of record at no cost. (Chapter 3)

POLICY OPTION 2

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

for the Virginia Department of Education to increase funding for teacher residency

programs to help cover the cost of preparation for additional teacher residents. (Chap-

ter 3)

POLICY OPTION 3

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to provide state general funds for the Competitive Grant for Praxis and Virginia Li-

censure and Certification Assessment program. (Chapter 3)

POLICY OPTION 4

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to provide state general funds for the Paid Internship Scholarship for Aspiring Virginia

Educators program. (Chapter 3)

POLICY OPTION 5

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

directing the Virginia Department of Education to administer a three-year pilot pro-

gram that provides targeted mentorship assistance to divisions with high teacher va-

cancies using mentors trained and coordinated by Virginia higher education institu-

tions. (Chapter 5)

Recommendations: Virginia’s K-12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

Virginia’s Public K

–12 Teacher Pipeline

In 2022, the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) directed staff

to review the adequacy of the supply of qualified K–12 teachers in Virginia. Staff were

directed to identify the number of K–12 teachers needed and available; evaluate fac-

tors contributing to the decline in individuals entering teacher preparation programs;

evaluate the state process for determining the qualifications and credentials teachers

need to be fully licensed; and identify effective or innovative practices used in other

states to maintain or increase the number of individuals entering and graduating from

teacher preparation programs and becoming fully licensed teachers (Appendix A).

To address the study resolution, JLARC analyzed data related to public K–12 teacher

licensure and employment; surveyed new teachers in Virginia, individuals who are li-

censed in Virginia but not currently teaching, and school division human resources

staff; interviewed staff at the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE), staff at

public and private teacher preparation programs, staff at local school divisions, stake-

holder groups and associations, and state and national experts in teacher preparation

and retention; and reviewed effective teacher pipeline practices in existing research

literature and other states. (See Appendix B for a detailed description of research

methods.)

Multiple entities, programs, and processes comprise

Virginia’s K–12 teacher pipeline

Virginia’s “teacher pipeline” consists of multiple programs and processes that help

attract, prepare, license, recruit, and retain public K–12 teachers. While the Common-

wealth’s 134 local school divisions individually recruit and retain teachers, the state

plays a role in the teacher pipeline through higher education institutions that adminis-

ter teacher preparation programs, VDOE’s licensure of teachers, and funding for ini-

tiatives to promote or incentivize the teaching profession.

Virginia offers several options to become a teacher

There are several different pathways individuals can take to progress through Virginia’s

teacher pipeline. Virginia’s direct pathways to licensure include traditional higher edu-

cation programs and teacher residency or apprenticeship programs. The state’s indirect

pathways to licensure include career switcher programs, division-led preparation pro-

grams, special education provisional licensee programs, and individuals who take

courses ad hoc after obtaining a provisional license. New teachers, as well as individuals

licensed in other states who want to teach in Virginia, then submit teacher licensure

applications to VDOE for review and approval. Virginia public school divisions recruit

Though this report spe-

cifically focuses on the

public K

-12 teacher pipe-

line,

JLARC has released

other

reports about K–

education during the

past decade.

These re-

ports address a wide

range of topics, including

(i)

Virginia’s K–12 fund-

ing f

ormula, (ii) the pan-

demic

’s effect on public

–12 education, (iii) the

operations and perfor-

mance of the Virginia

Department of Educa-

tion

, (iv) special educa-

tion services

, and (v) ur-

ban high poverty

schools.

Chapter 1: Virginia’s Public K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

teachers to fill needed positions and provide ongoing support to retain existing teach-

ers.

Various entities are part of Virginia’s teacher pipeline, making it highly decentralized.

VDOE reviews and accredits teacher preparation programs and reviews and approves

teacher licensure applications. Separately, 14 public higher education institutions, 23

private higher education institutions, several community colleges, and at least six local

school divisions train teachers through teacher preparation programs and courses that

are designed and implemented differently. Virginia’s 134 local school divisions recruit

and retain teachers, each using different strategies and incentives. Although some col-

laboration occurs, the entities involved in the pipeline generally operate independently.

Virginia recently created a registered teacher apprentice program. Virginia is one of

several states approved by the U.S. Department of Labor to offer a teacher apprentice

program. The new program will allow Virginia school divisions to hire unlicensed

school employees (e.g., classroom aides, paraprofessionals, substitute teachers) and

support them while they complete the coursework and training needed to become fully

licensed teachers.

VDOE administers Virginia’s teacher licensure process

While likely not a major determining factor affecting people’s interest in becoming a

teacher, the process individuals must navigate to become licensed has historically been

administratively complex and cumbersome. The process to obtain a license previously

required mailing a check and paper application to VDOE. This manual process re-

sulted in delays, longer than expected processing times, and frustration from applicants

who could not easily obtain information about the status of their application.

Efforts over the last few years to re-engineer the licensure process have not fixed key

deficiencies, but VDOE reports being close to having a new system available. In 2019,

the General Assembly appropriated $348,500 for VDOE to automate the license ap-

plication process. However, efforts to automate the process had several limitations

(sidebar). During 2023, VDOE has been making new efforts to automate the process

and make it more efficient. VDOE hired a new IT vendor in February 2023, and a

new automated system is planned for implementation in October 2023.

State provides funding to support teacher preparation, recruitment,

and retention

In FY23, the state provided over $16 million for at least 19 additional initiatives de-

signed to help individuals advance through the teacher pipeline or remain in teaching

positions. Additional state funding also helps support the operations of traditional

teacher preparation programs. (See Appendix E for an inventory of programs and

initiatives that comprise Virginia’s K–12 teacher pipeline.)

VDOE also allocated $5 million of pandemic relief funding to a new registered

teacher apprenticeship program. VDOE awarded over $1 million to six partnerships

DOE began automat-

ing the li

censure system

2019. The new system

enabled

individuals to

submit licensure applica-

tions and pay licensure

fees online.

However, the

new system had several

limitations, including (1)

additional documents

could not be uploaded

after applications were in-

itially submitted

;

(2) appli-

cations for adding en-

dorsements or converting

from provisional to full li-

censure could not be

completed online

; (3) the

system did not indicate

whether applications had

satisfied licensure re-

quirements

; and (4) appli-

cations co

uld not be as-

signed to VDOE staff for

review

through the sys-

tem

Chapter 1: Virginia’s Public K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

between school divisions and higher education institutions in July 2023 to implement

apprenticeship programs. As of early September 2023, at least one partnership en-

rolled an apprentice in fall 2023, and at least three partnerships plan to begin enrolling

apprentices in spring 2024.

Several factors that affect interest in teaching

profession have worsened since pandemic

Research has found that the classroom environment, compensation, and support out-

side of the classroom are among the factors people consider when deciding whether

to be a teacher and in which division to teach. For example, a 2022 Annenberg Institute

study found that in addition to salaries and benefits, teachers also value having access

to key support staff (e.g., counselors) and other expertise (e.g., special education).

The pandemic’s disruptions to K–12 education created several challenges for teachers.

For example, according to a 2022 JLARC survey, teachers cited the following issues as

the most serious problems they faced after the pandemic:

• Classroom environment - a more challenging student population, including

behavior issues (56 percent indicated this was a very serious issue), student

anxiety and mental health (43 percent), and higher workload because of un-

filled vacancies (40 percent).

• Compensation - lower than desired salary given the demands of the profes-

sion (51 percent).

• Outside the classroom - lack of respect from parents and the public (47

percent).

This report is not evaluating these factors because prior JLARC reports have identified

issues related to these factors and made recommendations to address them. For exam-

ple, in 2022 JLARC recommended several ways to better support teachers in the class-

room by addressing challenging student behavior, funding more instructional aides, or

expanding student access to mental health supports. Similarly, in July 2023, JLARC

recommended changing the K–12 funding formula to more accurately reflect actual

teacher compensation in each division, which would increase state funding for teacher

salaries. The recommendations and policy options in this report must be considered

in the context of these broader factors that influence teacher recruitment and reten-

tion.

Reduction in quantity and quality of teachers

complicates quickly improving teacher pipeline

Several key teaching positions have historically been difficult to fill, such as special

education teachers. However, in recent years, divisions had difficulty recruiting and

Chapter 1: Virginia’s Public K–12 Teacher Pipeline

Commission draft

retaining enough teachers generally—as evidenced by the increase in vacant teaching

positions (discussed in Chapter 2).

Divisions are not only having difficulty hiring and retaining enough teachers, but are

also having difficulty finding and keeping enough qualified teachers. Recently, divisions

have relied more on provisionally licensed teachers and teachers working outside their

“endorsed” direct field of expertise or training (sidebars).

The challenges associated with hiring enough teachers to fill vacant positions has ex-

acerbated the challenge of ensuring teacher quality. As divisions have had more diffi-

culty filling vacant positions, their focus has understandably been on finding teachers

for the positions, which has led to a willingness to hire more teachers who are not fully

licensed or not endorsed in the area in which they are hired to teach. One division

human resources director stated: “I’m surprised when we get an application from a

fully qualified teacher.”

Practically, until the supply and demand for teachers stabilizes, school divisions will

need to continue to rely on teachers who are provisionally licensed or teaching outside

their field. Reducing reliance on provisionally licensed teachers and teachers teaching

outside their fields must, therefore, be a longer term goal.

The Virginia Administra-

tive Code defines a provi-

sional license

as a “non-

renewable license valid

for a period not to ex-

ceed three years issued to

an individual who has al-

lowable deficiencies for

full licensure

” (8VAC20-

-50). A provisionally li-

censed teach

er is not re-

quired to have taken any

teacher preparation

courses. A school division

can request a provisional

license for an individual it

hires to fill a teacher va-

cancy.

eachers are “endorsed“

their content area if

they have taken the ap-

propriate courses and/or

passed t

he appropriate li-

censing exam for the en-

dorsed content area.

VDOE must verify and ap-

prove that the require-

ments have been fulfilled

for endorsement.

Commission draft

Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12

Teachers

JLARC’s 2022 review of the pandemic’s impact on K–12 public education found that

Virginia school divisions faced substantial recruiting and retention challenges. These

challenges were also faced by other states. Legislative interest in helping to address

these challenges prompted this JLARC review of the public K–12 teacher pipeline.

Virginia school divisions employed about 87,000 K–12 teachers in SY2022–23 (Figure

2-1). Most of Virginia’s public K–12 teacher workforce is female and white. The me-

dian Virginia public K–12 teacher has 10 years of experience and is 43 years old. About

29 percent of teachers are elementary education teachers. Special education teachers

were the next largest group (13 percent), followed by language arts teachers (7 percent).

FIGURE 2-1

Virginia had about 87,000 public K–12 teachers in SY2022-23

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school year 2022–23.

NOTES: Elementary education includes kindergarten through fifth grade. Pure mathematics is one of the state’s cat-

egories of math teachers and can include subject areas such as algebra.

Teacher vacancies increased statewide, though some

divisions still have no or few teaching vacancies

Teacher vacancies can create a variety of problems for teachers and students. Just one

vacant teaching position can create substantial challenges for schools, requiring either

the use of a long-term substitute or larger class sizes. For example, an elementary

school with 80 third-grade students that planned to have four teachers may be forced

to substantially increase class sizes if it can only hire three teachers. Rather than having

four classes of 20 students, the school may start the year with three classes of either

Virginia’s public K

–12

teacher workforce

has

similar demographic

characteristics compared

to other

states’ teacher

workforces, according to

results of the National

Center

for Education Sta-

tistic’s 2020

–21 National

Teacher and Principal

Survey. Teacher gender,

ethnicity, and median age

in Virginia w

ere

similar to

the national average.

Chapter 2: Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers

Commission draft

26 or 27 students. Larger class sizes typically make it more challenging for teachers and

can reduce the quality of instruction students receive—especially for students needing

individualized or small group assistance. In addition, teacher vacancies can require

schools to reduce the types of courses they offer, such as advanced placement or elec-

tive courses. Finally, teacher vacancies often create a greater workload for remaining

staff, which contributes to lower morale and lower job satisfaction.

Statewide number of vacant teaching positions has substantially

increased

The latest available data shows that 4.8 percent of teaching positions were reported

vacant on the first day of SY2023–24. This represents a 23 percent increase from the

prior year’s vacancy rate of 3.9 percent. These vacancies represented a substantial in-

crease from prior years (Figure 2-2).

FIGURE 2-2

School divisions reported over 4,000 vacant teaching positions at the start of

SY2023–24

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school years 2015–16 to 2023–24.

NOTE: Vacant public K-12 positions are full-time equivalent positions reported by divisions as of October 1, 2022

for SY15–16 through SY22–23. SY23–24 vacancy data reflects actual or assumed to be vacant public K–12 full-time

equivalent positions on the first day of school for 123 divisions.

Statewide, over half (57 percent) of teacher vacancies are in elementary education or

special education positions. Elementary education (defined to include pre-kindergar-

ten through sixth grade) has the most vacancies, representing 30 percent of all teacher

vacancies statewide at the start of SY2023–24. Special education accounted for over

one-fourth (26 percent) of all vacancies at the start of SY2023–24. Special education

and elementary education had such a large number of teacher vacancies in part be-

cause a large portion of the state’s total teaching positions are in these two areas.

Chapter 2: Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers

Commission draft

Some divisions have no vacancies; others have substantial vacancies,

especially those with more Black students

While the statewide average rate for teacher vacancies is 4.8 percent, some divisions

have no vacancies, while others have very high vacancy rates (Table 2-1 and Appendix

C). Ten divisions reported no vacant teaching positions at the start of SY2023–24. In

contrast, 15 divisions reported at least 10 percent of their teaching positions vacant.

TABLE 2-1

Some Virginia school divisions have high vacancy rates while others have no

vacancies

10 divisions with

highest teacher vacancy rates

10 divisions with

lowest teacher vacancy rates

Division

Vacant

Division

Vacant

Danville City

40.4%

Botetourt County

Charles City County

21.5

Carroll County

Suffolk City

17.7

Clarke County

Lancaster County

17.0

Colonial Beach

Norfolk City

16.8

Falls Church City

Essex County

15.1

Fluvanna County

Cumberland County

14.7

Grayson County

Poquoson City

14.3

Lexington City

Caroline County

13.7

Russell County

Pulaski County

13.2

Staunton City

Source: JLARC analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school year 2023–24.

NOTE: Vacancy data includes actual or assumed to be vacant public K–12 full-time equivalent positions on the first

day of school for 123 divisions. See Appendix C for a complete list of teacher vacancies by school division.

As with individual divisions, there is variation in teacher vacancy rates across regions.

The Southside region had the state’s highest rate of vacant teaching positions, 6.8 per-

cent, a decline from the prior year’s vacancy rate of 7.4 percent. The Tidewater and

Eastern Shore region included divisions with, on average, 6.3 percent of their teaching

positions vacant, slightly higher than last year. The Northern Virginia and Middle Pen-

insula region’s teacher vacancy rate of 5.2 percent was above the state average and

substantially increased from the prior year’s vacancy rate of 2.9 percent.

Virginia school divisions with large populations of Black students tend to have higher

teacher vacancy rates. According to a data analysis conducted by JLARC staff (side-

bar), divisions with mostly Black students had teacher vacancy rates in SY2022–23 that

were 6 percentage points higher than divisions with almost no Black students, control-

ling for other differences across divisions.

JLARC staff conducted a

multivariate regression

analysis

to estimate the

factors most strongly re-

lated

to division-level var-

iations

in teacher

vacancy

rates

in SY2022-23. The

dependent var

iable was

the public K

-12 teacher

vacancy rate

, and the in-

dependent variables in-

cluded: (1) %

students by

race and ethnicity

; (2) %

disadvantaged students

;

(3) % disabled students;

(4) composite index; (5)

VDOE region; and (6) de-

gree of in

-person instruc-

on during COVID-19

pandemic. See Appendix

B for more information

on the methodology and

results of this analysis.

Chapter 2: Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers

Commission draft

Deficit of teachers has grown because more teachers

are leaving than entering the profession in Virginia

Increasing vacancies can be partially explained by the widening deficit between teach-

ers leaving the profession and newly licensed teachers (Figure 2-3). The deficit between

newly licensed teachers and those leaving averaged about 1,250 annually in the years

preceding the pandemic. (Individuals licensed to teach for the first time in Virginia are

a key indicator of the total teacher supply, because they account for more than 85

percent of the total number of teachers entering Virginia’s teacher workforce each

year.)

After the pandemic, though, the number of teachers leaving began to far outpace the

number of newly licensed teachers. The deficit between newly licensed teachers and

those leaving the profession was about 3,000 after SY2020–21, and jumped to nearly

5,500 after SY2021–22. In a positive development, the number of newly licensed

teachers stabilized in SY2022–2023. Data about teachers who have left the profession

after SY2022–23 will not be available until early 2024.

FIGURE 2-3

More teachers have been leaving than are newly licensed, creating a deficit

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school years 2015–16 to 2022–23.

NOTES: *2023 data on teachers leaving not available until early 2024. Counts of newly licensed teachers entering

the workforce each school year reflect VDOE’s licensure data as of June 2023 and differ from data cited in JLARC’s

2022 review of Pandemic Impact on Public K–12 Education because of data updates.

Fewer teaching positions are occupied by teachers

who are fully licensed and teaching “in field”

As more teachers leave Virginia’s teacher workforce, divisions are increasingly relying

on teachers who are not yet fully licensed or teaching out of their endorsed field. For

example, the combined proportion of Virginia’s public K–12 teacher workforce that

Chapter 2: Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers

Commission draft

was not fully licensed or teaching out of field was 6 percent in SY2012–13 but in-

creased to 14 percent by SY2021–22 and 16 percent by SY2022–23 (Figure 2-4).

Teachers who lack full licensure may not have completed the coursework on methods

of teaching (pedagogy) that Virginia requires for full licensure, which contributes to

teacher effectiveness. Teachers who are teaching out of field have not demonstrated a

minimum level of competency in the content area they are teaching and may be less

effective.

There is wide variation across divisions in the proportion of teachers who are not yet

fully licensed or teaching out of field. In SY2022–23, two divisions reported having all

their teachers fully licensed, while two others each had only about half of their teachers

fully licensed. Similarly, two divisions reported all their teachers were teaching in their

field, while two others had only about two-thirds of their teachers teaching in their

field of expertise.

FIGURE 2-4

Smaller proportion of teachers are fully licensed than a decade ago

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school years 2012–13 and 2022–23.

NOTE: “Other” includes individuals such as long-term substitutes.

Chapter 2: Trends in Virginia’s Supply of K–12 Teachers

Commission draft

Virginia’s Teacher

Preparation Pathways

An effective K–12 system needs fully prepared teachers. Teachers who are less than

fully prepared typically do not provide the same quality of educational experience for

students, according to research literature.

Virginia has multiple pathways individuals can follow to complete the preparation

courses and training needed to become public K–12 teachers. Some pathways, such

as traditional higher education-based programs and teacher residency programs, pro-

vide a direct route to full licensure and qualify individuals for a 10-year renewable

teaching license upon completion (Figure 3-1). Other pathways, such as career

switcher programs, division-led programs, and taking courses ad hoc are indirect, al-

lowing individuals to teach under a temporary provisional license (sidebar) while they

complete the preparation courses required for full licensure.

FIGURE 3-1

Direct and indirect pathways offer different routes to teacher licensure

NOTE: Career switcher programs have a different indirect pathway, where students receive the majority of their in-

struction prior to being issued a provisional license.

In Virginia

, provisional

teaching

licenses are

non

renewable and valid

for three years

. In 2018,

the General Assembly

passed legislation allow-

ing provisional license

receive up to two,

one

-year extensions if a

teacher

has satisfactory

performance evaluations

and receives a recom-

mendation from the divi-

sion superintendent.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

TABLE 3-1

Indirect pathways for K-12 teaching in Virginia

Indirect pathway

Description

Provisional license, classes

as needed over time

Individual works as teacher of record while completing require-

ments for full licensure (e.g., professional studies courses, assess-

ments).

Special education

provisional license

After completing prerequisite course, individual works as teacher

of record while completing remaining requirements for full licen-

sure. Some candidates complete an approved program at a higher

education institution, while others complete courses at their own

pace.

Career switcher

programs

Individuals complete accelerated coursework and brief field experi-

ence before becoming teacher of record on a career switcher pro-

visional license. Career switchers can be granted full licensure after

at least one year of teaching and 20 hours of additional seminars.

Division-led

preparation

Individuals work as teacher of record while completing profes-

sional studies coursework for full licensure provided by division

staff or in partnership with external providers (e.g., iTeach).

SOURCE: Virginia Administrative Code and interviews with VDOE staff.

NOTE: Teacher of record is the teacher who is responsible for the delivery of instruction. The teacher of record

must hold a license issued by the Virginia Board of Education.

Limited data is available on the proportion of individuals who pursue teaching

through Virginia’s various direct and indirect preparation pathways. Data that is

available indicates just less than half of all newly licensed teachers are provisionally

licensed, while the remainder are prepared through a direct pathway or licensed

through reciprocity with another state. The percentage of newly licensed teachers in

Virginia using indirect pathways has grown as school divisions are increasingly hiring

provisionally licensed teachers to fill teacher vacancies. Half of Virginia’s newly li-

censed teachers each year are prepared in Virginia, and half are prepared in other

states (sidebar). (See Chapter 2 for more information on trends in Virginia’s teacher

supply.)

Direct pathways prepare teachers better but require

more time and cost more than indirect pathways

Ideally, Virginia school divisions would be able to fill all teaching positions with well-

prepared teachers. However, there are not enough teachers completing direct, higher

education preparation programs to fill vacancies with fully licensed teachers. Many

divisions are increasingly relying on provisionally licensed teachers who have not

completed their preparation.

An individual’s path to become a teacher is not always determinative of their effec-

tiveness in the classroom. School division staff and experts frequently cite examples

of teachers from varied backgrounds and training who are extremely effective teach-

ers. No reliable or comprehensive data exists, however, about the effectiveness of

About

half of newly li-

censed teachers were

prepared outside of Vir-

ginia

in SY2021–22.

These individuals include

new graduates from

preparation programs in

other states who pursue

initial licensure in Vir-

ginia and experienced

teachers licensed by reci-

procity.

Some licensed

teachers from out of

state who do not qualify

for reciprocity initially

teach in Virginia with a

provisional license.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

each teacher in Virginia. In the absence of this information, staff developed a meth-

odology to help understand the relative differences among pathways to become a

teacher.

In general, teachers who use direct pathways to become a fully licensed teacher are

better prepared for the classroom (Table 3-2). These programs, though, typically cost

more for the participant or provider because they take longer and are more compre-

hensive. Teacher residency programs, which involve an extended co-teaching place-

ment while simultaneously completing coursework, have the most rigorous design and

are low cost to participants because of the financial assistance provided. Residency

programs, though, are expensive to administer and currently have limited capacity in

Virginia. The state is beginning to build teacher apprenticeship programs, which can

also effectively foster preparation through required coursework and in-classroom ex-

perience.

Individuals using indirect pathways are typically less well prepared in the short term,

but can move through those pathways at substantially less cost and benefit from more

flexible pacing and delivery format. Individuals using indirect pathways are also typi-

cally able to maintain paid employment while they are taking the required coursework

or assessments.

TABLE 3-2

Teacher pathways have tradeoffs between quality and affordability

Program quality /

Participant preparedness

Participant

affordability

Direct pathways

Traditional teacher preparation programs

●

○

Teacher residency programs

●

Registered apprenticeship programs

Indirect pathways

Provisional license, classes as needed over time

○

◑

Special education provisional license

◑

Career switcher programs

◑

Division-led preparation

Varies

●

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis.

NOTES: Program quality / participant preparedness = High quality mentor provided; student teaching component;

candidate finishes content and pedagogical coursework prior to being teacher of record. Participant affordability =

cost of tuition and fees; ease of holding paid employment.

A new indirect pathway—online courses through a private provider called iTeach—has recently been approved in

Virginia but is not yet operating.

Teacher residency programs are affordable for participants but often costly for the state or sponsoring division.

A new direct pathway—registered apprenticeship programs— is currently being implemented in Virginia. Vir-

ginia’s program is too new to evaluate.

Preparedness measured when provisional licensee becomes teacher of record; preparedness varies and is likely to

increase as classes are completed.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

The differences in the quality and nature of preparation between direct and indirect

pathways likely matter less as a teacher gains experience in the classroom. Research

shows that teacher experience is positively associated with student achievement

throughout their career. As teachers gain experience and learn on the job, differences

in initial preparation may have less of an impact over time.

Direct pathways through traditional higher education programs

typically produce teachers who are better prepared for the classroom

Direct pathways through traditional higher education preparation programs generally

produce higher quality new teachers than indirect pathways. Traditional higher edu-

cation-based programs include important components of effective teacher prepara-

tion, including pedagogical coursework, student teaching and mentorship from expe-

rienced teachers, and college-level subject area coursework. (See Appendix F for

more information on Virginia’s traditional teacher preparation programs at public in-

stitutions.) In contrast, individuals using indirect pathways can become responsible

for a classroom (called the “teacher of record”) without completing any pedagogical

preparation or obtaining classroom experience through student teaching.

School divisions and new Virginia teachers believe traditional higher education prep-

aration programs (direct pathway to full licensure) better prepare people to teach

than indirect pathways. For example, 46 percent of school divisions surveyed by

JLARC (sidebar) reported that provisionally licensed teachers are very poorly or poorly

prepared to be teachers, while only 3 percent of school divisions reported poor prep-

aration among individuals who attended traditional higher education preparation

programs (Figure 3-2). Similarly, 44 percent of new teachers who responded to a

JLARC survey (sidebar) and attended a traditional higher education preparation pro-

gram reported feeling prepared in their first year of teaching, compared with 30 per-

cent of new teachers who took an indirect pathway for preparation (e.g., career

switcher, provisional licensee) (Figure 3-3).

Research literature indicates that provisionally licensed teachers have shorter tenures

than fully licensed teachers; yet Virginia’s experience has shown only a small differ-

ence. Subject matter experts emphasize that preparation plays a role in teacher reten-

tion and effectiveness (sidebar). According to Virginia data over the last decade,

teachers with provisional licenses typically have a slightly shorter tenure than fully li-

censed teachers. Comparing the bottom quartile by tenure of fully licensed and

provisionally licensed teachers, the bottom quartile of fully licensed teachers leave

within four years or less; the bottom quartile of provisionally licensed teachers leave

within three years or less. In addition, in Virginia, 27 percent of provisionally licensed

teachers over the past 20 years did not go on to obtain full licensure after three years.

However, it is too soon to assess how these trends may have changed during the

pandemic (provisional licenses issued after 2019 are still valid).

LARC staff surveyed

new K

–12 public school

teachers in Virginia

about their teacher prep-

aration, experiences with

the state licensure pro-

cess, and first year of

teaching. New teachers

were defined to include

individuals who began

teaching in a Virginia

public school after J

anu-

ary 1, 2022

. JLARC re-

ceived responses from

917 teachers (25 percent

response rate). See Ap-

pendix B for more infor-

mation.

JLARC surveyed human

resources staff from

Virginia school divisions

in July 2023 to ask about

the state’s teacher licen-

sure process, new teacher

support programs, and

divisions’ supply of public

–12 teachers. JLARC re-

ceived responses

from 75

divisions for an overall re-

sponse rate of 5

percent.

Subject matter experts

like the National Council

on Teacher Quality say

that

high quality prepa-

ration is important

for

teacher retention

, par-

ticularly in the early years

of a new teacher’s career.

Student teaching is a

critical co

mponent of

preparation, and candi-

dates who are trained

under a quality mentor

have been shown to be

more effective

instruc-

tionally

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

FIGURE 3-2

Divisions reported teachers from traditional higher education preparation

programs were the most prepared to be a teacher

SOURCE: JLARC survey of Virginia school divisions, summer 2023.

NOTE: Because there are only a small number of residency programs in the state, most divisions do not have new

teachers who graduated from residency programs.

FIGURE 3-3

New teachers from Virginia’s traditional preparation programs reported feeling

more prepared than teachers using indirect pathways

SOURCE: JLARC survey of new Virginia teachers, summer 2023.

NOTE: Results for residencies not reported because of small number of respondents.

To better prepare new provisionally licensed teachers for success in the classroom

from the outset, the state could consider piloting a program that would eventually

require all provisionally licensed teachers to complete a curriculum and instruction

course or a classroom and behavior management course by the end of their first se-

mester of employment as a teacher of record (sidebar). Both of these courses are

already required for full licensure. A curriculum and instruction course covers compe-

tencies that include the principles of learning, methods of communication with stu-

dents, and the selection and use of materials, curricula, and methodologies to support

student learning. A classroom and behavior management course covers research-based

Provisionally licensed

teachers are required to

complete six profes-

sional studies courses

for most endorsement

areas:

curriculum and in-

struction, classroom and

behavior management,

assessment of and for

learning, human devel-

opment and learning,

foundation

of education

and the teaching profes-

sion,

and language and

literacy.

Provisionally li-

censed teachers cur-

rently must

complete

these

courses prior to

the expiration of their li-

cense.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

classroom and behavior management techniques, classroom community building, pos-

itive behavior supports, and individual interventions.

The state could initially award grants to several higher education institutions to provide

the course to all new provisionally licensed teachers in a subset of divisions. The pro-

gram could be evaluated based on the feedback of participating provisionally licensed

teachers and school administrators. The course would be most effective if it is offered

online at times compatible with the teacher workday, taught live by a qualified instruc-

tor who is available to help students outside of class time, and is free of charge to

participants. The program could be applied to new teachers once it becomes available,

not retroactively.

POLICY OPTION 1

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to create a pilot program for provisionally licensed teachers to complete a curriculum

and instruction course or classroom and behavior management course by the end of

their first semester as a teacher of record at no cost.

Indirect pathways give individuals flexibility to obtain credentials

over time and cost less

More individuals have been entering teaching through Virginia’s indirect pathways to fill

current teacher vacancies. To help their provisionally licensed teachers achieve full li-

censure, more divisions have shown interest in offering in-house preparation or part-

nering with external entities to offer required professional studies coursework. In 2019,

the General Assembly allowed divisions to petition the Board of Education to approve

alternative coursework and assessments to meet requirements for licensure. Under this

regulation, iTeach, the online private provider, has recently been approved to offer

preparation to provisionally licensed teachers in multiple divisions.

Though generally lower quality than direct pathways, indirect pathways to becoming a

teacher typically allow more flexibility and are lower cost. For example, most provi-

sionally licensed teachers take required courses at their convenience, often online,

while working as a teacher. Tuition can still be costly for these courses, but many divi-

sions offer tuition reimbursement for provisionally licensed teachers, and several divi-

sions offer in-house preparation at no cost to participants. In contrast, teacher candi-

dates at traditional preparation programs often pay tens of thousands of dollars in

tuition and fees (Table 3-3). Possibly as a result of being lower cost and more flexible,

indirect pathways have attracted more Black teachers than direct pathways, which can

be beneficial for student learning outcomes (sidebar).

Researchers have found

that

diverse teacher

workforces that mirror

their student population

are important for stu-

dent outcomes

Students

with at least one teacher

with the same racial or

ethnic background tend

to have higher test

scores, lower rates of

chronic absenteeism,

fewer susp

ensions, and

higher rates of high

school graduation and

college enrollment.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

TABLE 3-3

Indirect pathways are more affordable than traditional teacher preparation

Traditional

program

Career switcher

program

Division prepa-

ration program

Provisional

license, taking

classes as needed

Cost to

participant

$15K-$96K $2K-$6K $0 $0K-$12K

SOURCE: JLARC data collection from public higher education institutions, interviews with division staff, and analysis

of publicly available tuition data

Provisionally licensed teachers can take classes online or in-person at higher education institutions, community

colleges, or with approved providers. Many divisions offer tuition reimbursements for courses taken by provisional

licensees pursuing full licensure. Reimbursement amounts vary, but some divisions cover the full cost of courses. In

addition, some higher education institutions offer discounted tuition to provisionally licensed teachers.

Teacher residency programs produce well-prepared teachers and

prepare them to work in hard-to-staff schools

Residency programs are Virginia’s most rigorous teacher preparation pathway (side-

bar), but they have limited capacity and therefore prepare a small number of teachers.

Virginia currently has three state-supported teacher residency programs that prepare

individuals for teaching through a co-teaching placement of at least a year while par-

ticipants simultaneously complete coursework. State-supported residency programs

prepared just under 100 individuals for teaching in SY2022–23 (traditional higher ed-

ucation-based preparation programs prepared approximately 2,600 teachers in the

most recent year for which data is available). Residency programs are costly to admin-

ister because they typically cover the cost of preparation and provide a stipend to

participants, limiting the number of resident positions available. Several divisions also

have partnerships with traditional higher education teacher preparation programs to

offer residency placements for selected teacher candidates (sidebar).

In addition to providing high quality teacher preparation, teacher residencies also help

improve teacher recruitment in divisions with high teacher vacancies. (JLARC recom-

mended expanding teacher residency programs in its 2014 Low Performing Schools in Ur-

ban High Poverty Communities.) Virginia residency program participants are placed in

hard-to-staff schools, and they are required to teach in those schools for several years

after completing residency programs. These requirements help divisions experiencing

significant teacher vacancies recruit new teachers. Many Virginia school divisions with

large populations of Black students and limited resources have especially high teacher

vacancy rates, according to a JLARC staff analysis, making teacher residency programs

an especially useful recruiting tool in these schools. (See Chapter 2 and Appendix C

for more information about divisions’ teacher vacancies.)

Additional state funding for teacher residency programs in Virginia could increase the

number of students able to receive high quality preparation each year and direct more

well-prepared teachers to divisions with the most teacher vacancies. State funding

Division

funded teacher

residency partnerships

offer financial support

and an extended field

placement to students in

traditional teacher prep-

aration programs. Part-

nerships vary in design,

but

residents may fill va-

cant support positions

like long

-term substi-

tutes or instructional

aides. Partnerships may

also include a service ob-

ligation.

Subject matter experts

consider teacher resi-

dencies

the most effec-

tive method for

training

teachers

because re-

search shows residency

participants

have higher

teacher retention and

eel better prepared to

teach. Residencies also

attract diverse candi-

dates

and fill critical va-

cancies.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

could either be used to develop new or expand existing higher education-based teacher

residency programs or division teacher residency partnerships, as both models are de-

signed to provide high quality preparation to prospective teachers.

POLICY OPTION 2

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

for the Virginia Department of Education to increase funding for teacher residency

programs to help cover the cost of preparation for additional teacher residents.

New registered teacher apprenticeship program should provide

rigorous preparation and be cost-effective due to federal funding

Registered teacher apprenticeship programs are another pathway that can provide

high-quality teacher preparation, while addressing the financial barriers that can pre-

vent individuals from pursing teaching. Apprenticeship programs can produce teach-

ers that remain in teaching positions longer and feel better prepared to teach than

individuals who use less rigorous pathways, according to experts. Apprenticeship pro-

grams also pay individuals during their preparation, which research shows facilitates a

more diverse teacher workforce.

Registered teacher apprenticeship programs use a preparation model that is similar to

teacher residency programs, but their funding sources can differ, and apprenticeship

programs must meet certain federal requirements. Similar to residencies, registered ap-

prenticeship programs require individuals to complete extensive on-the-job training

while simultaneously completing courses required for teacher licensure. In addition,

individuals are paid during the program, and they work with experienced teachers ra-

ther than immediately becoming the “teacher of record.” Unlike residencies, however,

registered apprenticeship programs can receive federal workforce funds to cover a

portion of program costs. Registered apprenticeship programs must also meet certain

federal requirements, including providing 2,000 on-the-job training hours per year, 144

hours of related technical instruction hours per year (e.g., degree and statutory require-

ments), and progressive wage increases as apprentices gain skills.

If implemented effectively, Virginia’s new registered apprenticeships should result in

additional well-prepared teachers and remove the financial barriers associated with tra-

ditional preparation. VDOE distributed funding to six partnerships between school

divisions and higher education institutions in July 2023 for registered apprenticeship

programs. As of early September 2023, at least one partnership enrolled an apprentice

in fall 2023, and at least three partnerships plan to begin enrolling apprentices in spring

2024.

As this new program is implemented, VDOE should report on program participation,

size, and funding. Eventually, the role that apprenticeship programs play in Virginia’s

pipeline should be reported and assessed in the context of other pathways (recom-

mendations 9 and 10). If registered apprenticeships begin to prepare a large number

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

of prospective teachers soon, there may be less need for the state to invest additional

funding in teacher residencies (Policy Option 2).

RECOMMENDATION 1

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language in the Appropriation

Act directing the Virginia Department of Education to report (i) which higher educa-

tion institutions and school divisions have been approved to have apprentice pro-

grams, (ii) when they expect to begin preparing prospective teachers, (iii) how many

individuals are expected to be prepared through each program annually, and (iv) how

each program will be funded. The report should be submitted to the Board of Edu-

cation and House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by June

30, 2024.

State can reduce barriers to participation in higher

education teacher preparation programs

The state could address barriers that prevent individuals from participating in the

largest direct pathway—traditional higher education teacher preparation programs.

Doing so will not immediately result in a substantial increase in graduates from these

programs. Over time, though, reducing or eliminating some of these barriers may re-

sult in more people training to be a teacher through traditional higher education pro-

grams and allow the state to eventually return to having a higher percentage of its

teacher workforce fully licensed.

Virginia-specific assessment required for traditional teacher

preparation programs is outdated and may be an unnecessary barrier

Teaching assessments are used to help ensure teachers have a minimum level of com-

petency, however there is an ongoing debate among practitioners and subject matter

experts about whether assessments present unnecessary barriers to the teaching pro-

fession or disadvantage certain types of individuals. In recent years, several states, in-

cluding Colorado, Iowa, Maine, Montana, New Mexico, and Wisconsin, have stopped

requiring teaching assessments for all candidates, instead allowing submission of other

evidence of proficiency (e.g., a certain GPA threshold, a portfolio demonstrating con-

tent knowledge and/or instructional quality).

Virginia currently requires individuals to pass two types of assessments to qualify for

full teacher licensure. The Virginia Communication and Literacy Assessment (VCLA)

is a Virginia-specific test with two subtests that measure reading comprehension and

written communication skills (sidebar). Praxis subject assessments are used nationally

and measure specific content knowledge. Individuals in some endorsement areas (e.g.,

elementary education, special education) are also required to take a Praxis teaching

reading assessment that measures knowledge of reading instruction.

ll individuals pursuing

teaching

in Virginia

must take the VCLA

un-

less they are out of state

teachers licensed by reci-

procity. Some test takers

apply to traditional prep-

aration programs at

higher education institu-

tions, while others

use

different pathways such

as career switcher pro-

grams, teacher residency

programs, or are working

towards full licensure un-

der a provisional license.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

Virginia’s higher education institutions require teacher licensure assessments at differ-

ent points in the process. Ten public institutions require individuals to pass the VCLA

before being admitted into their teacher preparation program and pass the Praxis subject

assessments before being approved for student teaching. Four do not require passage

of VCLA for admission and instead require passage of both VCLA and Praxis subject

assessments before student teaching. Regardless of when the assessments are required,

all individuals attending higher education preparation programs must pass both assess-

ments to complete their program and qualify for full licensure.

VCLA is outdated and includes some irrelevant content for certain endorsement

areas

The content of the VCLA is outdated, according to teacher preparation program staff.

Virginia developed the VCLA in 2007, and it has not been changed since it was devel-

oped (even though the vendor has offered to update it at no cost to the state). Virginia’s

teacher workforce has changed significantly since 2007. Moreover, the VCLA was de-

veloped when there was more interest in the teaching profession and the state was not

experiencing a major teacher shortage (0.54 percent of positions were vacant). The

concept of a test to “weed out” weaker applicants to teacher preparation programs

prior to admission may have been reasonable in that environment, but it is less reason-

able during a teacher shortage.

In addition, the VCLA currently tests individuals on skills like advanced copy editing

that are not necessary for at least some types of teachers to be successful in the class-

room. Preparation program staff pointed out that the ability to copy edit seemed ir-

relevant for endorsement areas in which editing is not essential (e.g., math, music,

physical education). Some preparation staff also shared that the VCLA may disad-

vantage individuals with certain disabilities (e.g., deaf students, students with ADHD)

because of its format.

VCLA may be an unnecessary barrier given numerous other requirements to

become a fully licensed teacher in Virginia

The VCLA may present an unnecessary barrier to traditional teacher preparation pro-

grams when the state needs more people to enter the teacher pipeline. In addition to

the VCLA, individuals must meet numerous requirements to complete a traditional

teacher preparation program and obtain full licensure. These include preparation pro-

gram coursework, student teaching, and Praxis subject assessments (Figure 3-4). While

86 percent of test takers eventually pass the VCLA, an average of about 630 test takers

(14 percent) did not pass it each year over the last six years. According to staff at 11

of the 14 Virginia public teacher preparation programs, failure to pass required assess-

ments such as the VCLA is a top reason individuals are unable to enroll in and/or

complete preparation programs. One staff member noted: “I have a list of about 30

kids that can’t pass the VCLA. If they can’t pass, they are delayed a semester or have

to drop out [of the education major]. They want to be teachers.”

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

FIGURE 3-4

Teacher preparation program participants must fulfill numerous requirements

to obtain full licensure

NOTES: Teacher preparation programs are required by accreditation standards to have requirements that ensure

teacher candidates gain sufficient competencies as they progress through the program. This figure represents typical

requirements in Virginia for an undergraduate teacher preparation program; however, the exact requirements to

progress vary by institution.

Given the VCLA’s content deficiencies, and the fact that it is reducing the number of

individuals able to enroll in teacher preparation programs, Virginia should replace the

VCLA with a more relevant test, or eliminate it entirely. If the VCLA is replaced, Vir-

ginia should consider using a nationally recognized test (sidebar) to ensure that it pro-

vides a meaningful assessment and is better aligned with other states. Nationally rec-

ognized tests, though, may include additional subject areas beyond reading

comprehension and written communication (e.g., math) that are not essential for many

teachers; therefore, the state should avoid adopting a test with unnecessary content.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language in the Appropriation

Act directing the Virginia Board of Education to either (i) replace the Virginia Com-

munications and Literacy Assessment with a nationally recognized teacher licensure

test that is more relevant for assessing prospective teachers or (ii) eliminate the Virginia

Communications and Literacy Assessment as a requirement for a full 10-year renewa-

ble Virginia teaching license.

Until the VCLA is replaced or eliminated, a waiver should be created that would allow

Virginia higher education preparation programs to rely on other requirements and not

Virginia previously

required prospective

teachers to pass the

Praxis Core assessment

to be admitted into

teacher preparation pro-

grams. This assessment

is nationally recognized

and has subtests on

reading, writing, and

mathematics. Virginia

ow requires individuals

to pass the VCLA instead.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

require certain individuals to pass the VCLA for admission to or completion of a pro-

gram. The waiver could be similar to the one that has been available to school divisions

for several years (sidebar). According to preparation program staff at higher education

institutions, because this waiver is available for divisions but not traditional higher ed-

ucation preparation programs, some individuals who cannot pass the VCLA have

dropped out of their higher education preparation programs to teach in divisions un-

der a provisional license where the assessment requirements can be waived. This means

they do not participate in student teaching, a key part of preparation for the teacher

profession. Flexibilities granted for teacher licensure assessments should ideally be

consistent across higher education preparation programs and local school divisions to

ensure a consistent level of quality among new teachers and avoid creating a disincen-

tive for individuals to pursue more rigorous pathways. Once Virginia is no longer ex-

periencing critical teacher shortages, the state may want to assess whether flexibilities

granted to divisions and potentially to higher education institutions for teacher licen-

sure assessments are still warranted.

RECOMMENDATION 3

The General Assembly may wish to consider amending the Code of Virginia to create

a waiver through which the Board of Education shall issue a full 10-year renewable

Virginia teaching license to qualified individuals attending approved higher education

teacher preparation programs who have not passed the Virginia Communication and

Literacy Assessment but meet established criteria.

The Virginia Board of Education should revise the current regulatory requirement

that many institutions said is the reason they require the VCLA as an admissions test.

Many institutions currently use the VCLA as an admission requirement because the

state requires each Virginia teacher preparation program to achieve a minimum assess-

ment pass rate of 80 percent for all required teacher licensure tests, including the

VCLA (8-VAC-20-543-50). Institutions that do not meet the 80 percent pass rate may

have their preparation program approval revoked; therefore, many teacher preparation

programs require passing the VCLA before admission so individuals who cannot pass

the VCLA are not enrolled in their programs, thereby jeopardizing their ability to meet

the minimum pass rate and receive program approval.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Virginia Board of Education should revise section 8-VAC -20-543-50 of the Vir-

ginia Administrative Code to remove the incentive traditional higher education teacher

preparation programs currently have to establish admission policies that unnecessarily

restrict the number of individuals enrolling in such programs.

The 2019 General A

sembly passed HB 2037,

which g

ave school divi-

sion superintendents

the ability to recom-

mend a provisionally li-

censed teacher for full

licensure without pass-

ing required assess-

ments

. To be eligible, the

individual

must hold a

provisional lice

nse that

will expire within three

months,

employed by

a school

division, have

unsuccessfully attempted

to pass the required as-

sessments, ha

ve rec

eived

an evaluation rating of

proficient or above each

year of the provisional li-

cense, and meet all other

requirements for licen-

sure.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

Tuition, assessments costs, and unpaid student teaching present a

financial barrier to some participants in teacher preparation programs

Several costs are cited by new teachers and teacher preparation program staff as a

barrier to attending traditional teacher preparation programs. Seventy-three percent

of new teachers surveyed by JLARC who attended traditional preparation programs

reported at least one cost associated with preparation (tuition and fees, cost of li-

censing tests, unpaid student teaching) to be a moderate or significant barrier to

completing their preparation program. In addition, staff from 10 of the 14 tradi-

tional preparation programs at Virginia’s public higher education institutions cited fi-

nancial concerns as a top reason why teacher candidates did not enter or complete

their program (sidebar).

Tuition and fees could be offset by expanding existing program to reduce the

cost of attending a traditional teacher preparation program

Tuition and fees are by far the largest cost associated with traditional higher education

teacher preparation and require a substantial investment, especially when considering

a teacher’s expected future earnings relative to other professions. The average cost of

tuition and fees for in-state students to complete a traditional teacher preparation pro-

gram at a Virginia public higher education institution (excluding financial aid) is

$57,388 for undergraduate programs and $23,776 for graduate programs (SY2022–

23). Some higher education students can expect high earnings over their lifetime to

justify these costs. However, teachers have lower lifetime earnings than many other

professionals with similar levels of education and can expect to make less on average

annually over the duration of a typical career (Figure 3-5). These lower lifetime earn-

ings make it difficult for some students to justify incurring the costs of a traditional

teacher preparation program.

Virginia has a relatively small ongoing program to reduce the cost of tuition for tradi-

tional teacher preparation for some students. The Virginia Teaching Scholarship Loan

Program (VTSLP) awards up to $10,000 for tuition and fees to teacher candidates at

public or private institutions pursuing teaching in a critical shortage discipline (e.g.,

special education) or who are minority teacher candidates. The program requires re-

cipients to teach for at least two years in the critical shortage discipline or in a school

with more than half of the students eligible for free or reduced lunch. According to

VDOE staff, the vast majority of recipients successfully complete their teaching obli-

gation, and recipients who do not complete their program and required teaching ser-

vice must reimburse the state. VTSLP’s requirement for award recipients to work in a

certain area of need also targets program funding to divisions with teacher shortages.

“

In order to make an

impact on the critical

teacher shortage, there

must be a significant

financial investment in

teacher education, as

cost continues to be a

major barrier for

students. Today’s

students work multiple

jobs to pay tuition and

fees as well as costs

associated with their

daily living expenses.

”

–

Teacher preparation

program administrator

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

FIGURE 3-5

Individuals with education degrees tend to earn less over their career than

professionals with similar levels of education in other fields

SOURCE: JLARC analysis of data from Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce

NOTES: Analysis of data on the national median earnings for individuals whose highest degree is a bachelor’s degree.

Differences shown are in earnings from ages 25 to 59.

To reduce financial barriers to traditional teacher preparation programs while attract-

ing more minority teacher candidates and candidates willing to teach in critical short-

age areas, the General Assembly should appropriate more funding to the Virginia

Teaching Scholarship Loan Program. Recently, $708,000 in annual program funding

has facilitated scholarship loans to around 75 recipients per year, which is less fund-

ing than appropriated in neighboring states (sidebar). Virginia’s current scholarship

loan recipients represent an estimated 10 percent of all those who complete Virginia

traditional teacher preparation programs who have financial need (based on Pell

grant eligibility). Preparation programs typically can nominate three students a year

to be considered by a panel for the award, but several institutions report they have

substantially more eligible students than they can nominate. For example, one large

public institution reported being unable to nominate at least 50 eligible students for

scholarship loans every year. Another large institution estimated that as many as 100

additional students in their program would qualify each year.

The state has options to expand this program to meet unmet demand. The maxi-

mum award amount of $10,000 could be maintained and provided to more recipi-

ents. Alternatively, the award amount could be increased and provided to the same

number of recipients, or both the award amount and number of recipients could be

increased (Table 3-4). Teacher preparation program staff indicated that increasing

North Carolina

and

Maryland have compa-

rable

teacher service

scholarship

programs.

North Carolina

appropri-

ated

$6 million in FY23

and has proposed ap-

propriating $11 million

FY24

in state funding for

teacher

scholarship

loans.

Maryland appro-

priated

$8 million in

FY23

and $12 million in

FY24 for teacher scholar-

ship loans.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

the number of recipients would help more individuals pursue teaching. Considera-

tion could be given to using the state’s recently increased higher education financial

aid grant funding (sidebar) to cover any increases in VTSLP funding, which would

represent a small proportion of state financial aid grant funding.

TABLE 3-4

Potential new funding and award levels for the Virginia Teaching Scholarship

Loan Program

Current

Potential new

Program funding

$708,000

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

Max award

$10,000

$15,000

Recipients (avg. / est.)

100

200

133

SOURCE: JLARC analysis of Appropriation Act and VDOE data.

NOTES: Figures under “new” column illustrate different potential approaches to increasing program funding. Two

state funding amounts ($1M and $2M) show how recipients change as state funding increases. Two max award

amounts ($10K and $15K) show how recipients change if awards increase and state funding is $2M. State funding

and award amounts are hypothetical and could be higher or lower.

$10K max award is less than one year of tuition and mandatory fees for an education degree in an initial licensure

program at most Virginia public institutions.

RECOMMENDATION 5

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language and funding in the

Appropriation Act to increase the annual funding for the Virginia Teaching Scholar-

ship Loan Program.

Barriers related to testing fees and unpaid student teaching could be better

addressed by extending two ARPA-funded programs that will expire

Before graduating and becoming a teacher, individuals also incur additional costs and

forgo potential wages. Individuals interested in becoming a teacher typically must pay

to take multiple licensure tests prior to completing their teacher preparation. Tradi-

tional teacher preparation programs also have mandatory student teaching, a key ele-

ment of high quality preparation that is usually unpaid.

Individuals typically pay $250 to $542 to take required licensure assessments (assuming

they pass them on the first attempt). While the cost of assessments is relatively small

in the context of the total cost to become a teacher, teacher preparation staff and new

teachers report the cost can still be a barrier. (Financial aid typically cannot be used to

pay for these assessments.)

As noted earlier in this chapter, teacher residency programs and the anticipated ap-

prenticeship programs compensate individuals while they are in the program. How-

ever, individuals attending traditional teacher preparation programs also have to

complete between 10 and 16 weeks of full-time student teaching for which they are

typically not paid but are still paying tuition and unable to work other jobs during the

day. Many individuals rely on loans to cover their expenses during student teaching

(sidebar). For example, a Virginia teacher responding to a JLARC survey reported

A Bank Street College

survey of

12 institutions

in seven states, including

Virginia, found that

be-

tween 30 and 40 per-

cent of teacher candi-

dates’

total student loan

amounts

were taken out

during the student

teaching

ortion of their

preparation program

Virginia increased state

funding for need

-based

financial aid grants

from

219M in FY2

3 to $306M

in FY24. This additional

state funding may help

support individuals purs-

ing teaching through

public higher education

based programs, but

public institutions deter-

mine which individuals

receive state grant

awards, and state grants

are awarded to

individu-

als pursuing degrees

other than teaching.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

they quit their job and borrowed $7,000 to cover housing and food expenses during

student teaching.

The state has two small, temporary programs that use federal pandemic funding to

cover costs for individuals to take required assessments or to help pay for living ex-

penses during student teaching. Both programs have recently been funded through

the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). The temporary ARPA funding has already

been used for one program and is scheduled to be used for another in 2024. VDOE

does not have data on the outcomes of these programs because they are new, but

preparation program administrators reported that awards from these programs were

beneficial to recipients.

The Competitive Grant for Praxis and Virginia Licensure and Certification Assess-

ment (Competitive Grant) was awarded to teacher preparation programs and school

divisions. Recipients were selected by a VDOE-led committee based on factors such

as their planned use of the funds and geographic area. The program or division

could use the funds to offset or completely cover the cost of required assessments

and provide test preparation. For example, an $8,400 award covered the cost of the

VCLA for 44 students ($5,720) and VCLA and Praxis tutoring for 91 students

($2,607). The Competitive Grant was appropriated $80,000 in 2021 for a single

round of grants and has not received any funding since.

The Paid Internship Scholarship for Aspiring Virginia Educators (Paid Internship)

awards stipends of up to $15,000 during a student’s final semester in which they stu-

dent teach. Candidates for the grant are nominated by their preparation program,

and VDOE partners with representatives from three universities (GMU, ODU, and

VCU) to evaluate applicants based on financial need, as well as whether the candi-

date is preparing to teach in a critical shortage area, is performing well academically,

and is from an underrepresented group. Since fall 2021, 158 student teachers re-

ceived stipends of, on average, about $7,150 each. The paid internship was appropri-

ated $2 million, and its funding will expire after fall 2024.

The General Assembly could appropriate more funding to the Competitive Grant

Program and the Paid Internship Program to reduce the financial barriers of assess-

ment costs and unpaid student teaching. Staff at VDOE report that demand for

these programs continues to exceed the funds that were initially allocated. Additional

appropriated funds could replace the programs’ expiring ARPA funds and possibly

provide additional funds to expand assistance (Table 3-5). Several others states fund

similar programs (sidebar).

At least six other states

have programs that pay

stipends to student

teachers

. For example,

Maryland

will pay stu-

dent teachers up to

$20,000

as part of a new

Teacher Development

and Retention Program

pilot.

Several states have pro-

grams to help individu-

als

afford required

teacher assessments

North Carolina, Colo-

rado, Connecticut, and

Indiana ha

ve programs

to subsidize assessment

fees, pay for retests, or

pay for tutoring or other

assessment preparation

materials.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

TABLE 3-5

Potential funding levels for the Competitive Grant program and the Paid

Internship program

Competitive Grant for Praxis and Virginia Licensure and Certification Assessment

Program funding

$80,000

$100,000

$150,000

Recipients (avg)

320

400

600

Paid Internship Scholarship for Aspiring Virginia Educators

Program funding

$650,000

$1,000,000

$2,000,000

Recipients (avg)

140

280

SOURCE: JLARC analysis of Appropriation Act and VDOE data.

NOTES Competitive Grant assumes average test cost of $250 for VCLA and Praxis, although the grant may also be

used for tutoring. Paid Internship program assumes average award of $7,154.

POLICY OPTION 3

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to provide state general funds for the Competitive Grant for Praxis and Virginia Li-

censure and Certification Assessment program.

POLICY OPTION 4

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

to provide state general funds for the Paid Internship Scholarship for Aspiring Virginia

Educators program.

Chapter 3: Virginia’s Teacher Preparation Pathways

Commission draft

Virginia

teachers must

be licensed to serve as

the teacher of record

which is the teacher re-

sponsible for the delivery

of instruction

. “No

teacher shall be regularly

employed by a school

board or paid from public

funds unless such teacher

holds a license or provi-

sional license issued by

the Board

” (§ 22.1-299).

Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Public K–12 teachers are required to complete the state’s licensure process and obtain

a full or provisional license before they can be responsible for a classroom full time

(sidebar). The licensing approval process should be expedient so that applicants who

are granted a license can apply for open teaching positions. Applicants should be able

to understand the process and requirements to obtain a license, whether they are in

Virginia or seeking to transfer from another state.

To complete Virginia’s teacher licensure process, teachers first submit their licensure

applications to the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE). VDOE processes

several types of teacher licensure applications, including those for first-time licensees,

teachers from other states applying for a Virginia license through reciprocity, renewal

applications, and applications for adding endorsement areas (Figure 4-1). Licensure

applications can be submitted online or by mail and may be submitted by the applicant

or by a school division on the applicant’s behalf. VDOE licensure specialists review

applications and verify requirements have been met before approving individuals’

teacher licensure. Individuals who do not meet requirements receive a letter from

VDOE describing the additional items needed to receive a teaching license.

FIGURE 4-1

VDOE reviews and approves several types of public K–12 teacher licenses

SOURCE: JLARC interviews with Virginia Department of Education staff.

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

Several licensure requirements are not sufficiently

clear

Virginia’s teacher licensure requirements are complex, so they must be conveyed to

prospective teachers clearly and transparently. Virginia currently has 10 different types

of teacher licenses and over 40 different endorsement areas (sidebar). Each license

type and endorsement area has different requirements that individuals must meet. For

example:

• An individual applying for a full 10-year license with a biology endorse-

ment must have a bachelor’s degree in biology or have completed 32 se-

mester hours in eight subject areas specified by VDOE (e.g., genetics,

botany, and ecology). The applicant must also have taken the required

professional studies courses (e.g., curriculum & instruction and classroom

& behavior management).

• An individual applying for a three-year provisional license with a biology

endorsement must have a bachelor’s degree in biology or a bachelor’s de-

gree in another subject area and a passing score on the biology PRAXIS

exam.

Some school divisions and teachers believe licensure requirements are

not sufficiently clear

School division HR staff surveyed by JLARC (sidebar) expressed mixed opinions on

how clearly defined the requirements are to obtain a teaching license. Thirty-six per-

cent of division staff “strongly disagreed” or “disagreed” that teacher licensure re-

quirements are sufficiently clear. Of division staff who indicated the requirements

could be clearer, the most frequently cited items needing clarification were which

courses fulfill the requirements, reciprocity between Virginia and other states, and the

information and documentation that should be submitted when applying (Figure 4-2).

Teachers also had mixed views on the clarity of the licensure process and requirements.

Most new teachers who recently completed the licensure process did not express con-

cerns about the clarity of the process, but some indicated it could be more clearly

defined. One teacher said: “The process to apply for a license is so complicated and

draining.” Another said: “The complexity of applying for a teaching licensure is stag-

gering. It needs to be simplified drastically.”

JLARC surveyed human

resources staff from

Virginia school divisions

in July 2023 to ask about

the state’s teacher licen-

sure process, new teacher

support programs, and

divisions’ supply of public

–12 teachers. JLARC re-

ceived responses

from 75

divisions for an overall re-

sponse rate of

56 percent.

An “endorsement” is a

content area in which a

teacher specializes.

All li-

censed teachers mus

have at least one en-

dorsement.

Examples in-

clude

elementary educa-

tion, special education,

and secondary math.

In-

dividuals

receive an en-

dorsement if they have

taken the appropriate

courses and/or passed

the appropriate licensing

test

for the endorsed

content area.

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

FIGURE 4-2

Divisions identified several aspects of licensure process that could be clarified

Source: JLARC survey of school division HR staff, summer 2023.

No information is publically available for provisionally licensed

teachers about specific courses that fulfill licensure requirements

It can be unclear to provisionally licensed teachers whether the courses they have taken

(or plan to take) meet requirements for full licensure. All provisionally licensed teach-

ers must complete professional studies courses and subject-matter courses to qualify

for full licensure. Subject-matter courses must be completed in the subject area in

which teachers are pursuing endorsement (e.g., biology). Because many provisionally

licensed teachers are not participating in a teacher preparation program with estab-

lished coursework, they must navigate Virginia’s teacher licensure requirements on

their own, which can be difficult. For example, Virginia licensure regulations require

individuals applying for an endorsement in biology to have at least one course in ecol-

ogy. Many higher education institutions offer multiple ecology courses, but VDOE

does not publish information specifying which of these ecology courses meet licensure

requirements. As a result, provisionally licensed teachers may take courses that do not

fulfill Virginia’s licensure requirement, which can be costly for them and delay their

ability to teach. One new teacher said: “I thought I’d fulfilled all requirements, only to

discover that there was more that the state required. Make requirements more clear,

especially when it comes to …what courses will count [and] which will not.”

VDOE should work with Virginia higher education institutions that have teacher prep-

aration programs, as well as frequently used online teacher preparation providers, to

identify courses that fulfill VDOE’s requirements for provisionally licensed teachers

pursuing full licensure. VDOE should publish on its website and update, as needed, a

list of the specific courses that fulfill the professional studies requirements and subject-

matter requirements for each endorsement area. Higher education institutions’ ability

to help VDOE develop this list may vary, so a course list that includes all institutions

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

may not be immediately feasible to develop. VDOE could focus its near-term atten-

tion on the most needed or popular courses at the largest institutions. VDOE should

publish course information for each institution as it becomes available. This resource

would allow provisionally licensed teachers to understand which courses VDOE will

accept for full licensure. Developing a course list may also reduce VDOE licensure

staff ’s workload, because it could reduce the amount of research that licensure staff

conduct to determine whether specific courses meet licensure requirements.

RECOMMENDATION 6

The Virginia Department of Education should work with Virginia higher education

institutions that offer teacher preparation courses to develop, publish on its website,

and periodically update a list of specific professional studies and subject-matter courses

that fulfill licensure requirements in each endorsement area for provisionally licensed

teachers pursuing full licensure.

No information is publically available for teachers licensed in other

states about whether their license will transfer to Virginia

Teachers who have a license in another state are a key part of Virginia’s public K–12

teacher pipeline. Hiring licensed teachers from other states increases the pool of po-

tential teacher applicants available to fill vacancies and enables Virginia to hire individ-

uals with more teaching experience than first-time teachers.

Licensed teachers from other states can receive a Virginia teaching license through

reciprocity if VDOE determines their license is “comparable” to a full license in Vir-

ginia, and they meet other basic eligibility requirements (sidebar). Some out-of-state

licenses are not considered “comparable” and are therefore not accepted in Virginia.

For example, Virginia physical education teachers must have an endorsement in both

physical education and health. Licenses in states where physical education teachers are

endorsed only in physical education (but not health) are not considered comparable

and would not be accepted. Similarly, licenses from states with endorsement areas that

Virginia does not have, such as psychology, have no comparable Virginia license and

would not be accepted. Virginia also does not accept licenses from other states that

are not full licenses, such as emergency licenses and provisional licenses, because they

are not considered comparable to Virginia’s full license.

VDOE does not publish information on the specific license types and endorsement

areas that are comparable between Virginia and other states. Therefore, out-of-state

teachers interested in coming to Virginia must go through the full application process

to learn whether their license and/or endorsement is accepted. This includes waiting

between eight and 20 weeks for VDOE to process the license applications during

SY2022–23. (Case processing time had improved to three weeks on average as of Au-

gust 2023, according to VDOE.) If an out-of-state teacher’s license is not accepted,

VDOE may grant a provisional license and require the teacher to complete additional

coursework to be eligible for full licensure.

Virginia teaching licenses

can be awarded through

reciprocity

to licensed

teachers

from any state

with

“comparable en-

dorsement areas if the in-

dividual

… holds a valid

out

-of-state teaching li-

cense (full credential

without deficiencies)…”

(8VAC20

-23-100.A).

Teachers must

also meet

Virginia

’s statutory train-

ing

requirements (e.g.,

complete required CPR,

dyslexia awareness, and

child abuse and neglect

courses).

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

This opaque reciprocity process may hinder Virginia’s ability to attract licensed teach-

ers from other states. Teachers in other states who are interested in teaching in Virginia

may be discouraged from applying if they are unsure if their endorsement is compa-

rable. Virginia may also lose the ability to attract some out-of-state teachers because

of the burden and long waiting period associated with completing a licensure applica-

tion in Virginia. Finally, out-of-state teachers who are granted a provisional license and

are required to complete additional coursework may be discouraged from teaching in

Virginia because they may not have the time or resources to complete it.

To make it easier for licensed teachers from other states to determine whether their

license is accepted in Virginia, VDOE should develop a list of the specific license

types and endorsement areas that are accepted from other states and post the infor-

mation on its website. VDOE licensure specialists already know some of the license

types and endorsements that are and are not accepted in Virginia, but a comprehensive

list may be time consuming to develop. Therefore, VDOE could focus on states from

which Virginia receives the most reciprocity applications, and/or endorsement areas

in which Virginia is experiencing critical shortages (e.g., elementary education and spe-

cial education). VDOE staff should review and update the list every two years to en-

sure it reflects changes to licensure types and endorsements in other states.

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Virginia Department of Education should list and periodically update on its web-

site the specific teacher license types and endorsement areas in other states that qualify

for a Virginia teaching license through reciprocity, prioritizing states from which Vir-

ginia receives the most reciprocity applications.

Virginia has recently made it easier for out-of-state teachers to obtain their Virginia

license, and could consider further refinements to the process. For example, in 2018,

Virginia implemented a fairly major change that eliminated the requirement that li-

censed teachers in other states have three years of experience before receiving a Vir-

ginia license. Other process changes may also be possible to facilitate reciprocity, in-

cluding relatively minor changes. For example, Virginia currently requires reciprocity

applicants to submit the same application and amount of information—including

sealed college transcripts from the colleges they attended—as first-time license appli-

cants. For individuals who have been licensed and teaching for years, this requirement

may be unnecessarily burdensome. Any changes to requirements, however, would

need to ensure that adequate standards of quality are maintained for out-of-state teach-

ers being licensed in Virginia.

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

Licensure process can be lengthy and frustrating for

applicants

As found in prior JLARC reports, the teacher licensure process has historically been

paper-based, inefficient, and confusing. VDOE has attempted to streamline the pro-

cess and has recently been working with a private IT vendor to develop and implement

a new licensure system. Problems developing a new system and staffing challenges

have hindered some of VDOE’s recent improvement efforts. For example:

• An IT solution developed and launched over the last 18 months had ma-

jor limitations, and a new IT vendor was selected in early 2023.

• Within the last year, there has been substantial turnover and vacancies in

leadership positions overseeing the licensure office.

Amid these IT and staffing problems, licensure processing was delayed during the 2023

school year, according to school divisions. The information VDOE maintains about

its licensure process was too unreliable for JLARC to quantify recent licensure delays,

but VDOE staff, licensure applicants, and division HR staff all agree the process has

been taking longer than it should.

Despite these issues, most new teachers surveyed by JLARC (sidebar) reported delays

in processing their application did not affect their ability to obtain a teaching job. Only

about 15 percent of JLARC survey respondents who were new teachers and indicated

the licensure process took too long said that delays did affect their ability to get a

teaching job and begin teaching (e.g., losing out on a teaching job or having to start

their job later and forgo pay).

Division HR staff, who deal with the licensure process much more frequently, did cite

some negative impacts from licensure processing delays. About two-thirds of division

HR staff surveyed by JLARC estimated that either all or most of the licensure appli-

cations from staff in their division had taken more than three months for VDOE to

process during the last year. Staff cited several problems that these long processing

timeframes have caused for their division (Figure 4-3), though some division HR staff

reported it did not ultimately hinder their ability to hire teachers.

VDOE’s superintendent has made addressing these delays a top priority. The current

superintendent has taken steps to reduce recent delays, such as hiring and dedicating

support staff to answer licensure questions and handle administrative tasks so licensure

specialists can prioritize processing applications. The superintendent has also acceler-

ated the timeframe for implementing the new IT system by several months. In addi-

tion, despite licensure delays, the VDOE staff who process licensure applications were

largely viewed by division HR staff as helpful, knowledgeable, and friendly.

JLARC staff surveyed

new K

-12 public school

teachers in Virginia

about their teacher prep-

aration, experiences with

the state licensure pro-

cess, and fir

st year of

teaching. New teachers

were defined to include

individuals who began

teaching in a Virginia

public school after Janu-

ary 1, 2022

. JLARC re-

ceived responses from

917 teachers (25 percent

response rate

). See Ap-

pendix B for more infor-

mation.

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

FIGURE 4-3

Some divisions cited negative impacts from lengthy teacher licensure

processing

Source: JLARC survey of school division HR staff, summer 2023.

NOTE: Respondents were asked to consider applications in their division during the prior 12 months.

Even after VDOE’s new IT system is fully operational, there will still be opportunities

to make the licensure process more efficient, especially from the applicant’s perspec-

tive. The new system and process could address several issues, including:

• Lack of prioritization of applications for teachers in specific shortage ar-

eas (such as special education). The one exception is military spouse licen-

sure applications, which are prioritized and must be processed within 15

days, according state law.

• Inefficient and unfair process for addressing applications for which addi-

tional information is requested. When additional information is required,

the application is closed and typically goes to the end of the queue, which

can substantially increase the processing time for that applicant.

• Lack of flexibility in assigning VDOE licensure specialists to divisions

based on workload to minimize overall application processing times. Spe-

cialists are assigned certain divisions without adjustment based on work-

load, which results in uneven workloads and less efficiency.

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Virginia Department of Education should report on the status of its teacher li-

censure process, staffing, and information technology improvements to the Board of

Education and House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by

December 15, 2023, and again by June 30, 2024.

Chapter 4: Virginia’s Teacher Licensing Process

Commission draft

Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Teacher recruitment and retention are the final stages of Virginia’s teacher pipeline,

but they have a substantial impact on the state’s supply of well-prepared public K–12

teachers. Recruiting new teachers in Virginia helps school divisions fill teacher vacan-

cies and can prevent Virginia from losing teachers prepared to educate in Virginia to

other states. Retaining new teachers enables the state to develop an experienced teacher

workforce, which helps improve student outcomes and is needed to mentor additional

new teachers. Retention also reduces the pressure to overly rely on recruitment to en-

sure an adequate supply of teachers (sidebar).

Recruitment and retention challenges are highly localized. Some areas are able to re-

cruit and retain teachers without difficulty, while others operate with a substantial num-

ber of vacant teaching positions. Teacher staffing levels vary by region and by the

school divisions within each region. Virginia school divisions with large populations

of Black students and limited resources have an especially difficult time maintaining

an adequate supply of well-prepared teachers. (See Chapter 2 and Appendix C for

more information on teacher vacancies.)

Higher pay and better classroom support systems

could encourage more people to teach

Licensed teachers who have left the profession cite personal reasons and unhappiness

with being a teacher as the primary reasons they left. Nearly half of people responding

to a May 2023 JLARC survey (sidebar) reported leaving the profession because their

family moved, or to care for another member of their family, usually a child. The re-

mainder either retired or left because they were unhappy being a teacher. Those who

reported leaving because they were unhappy cited inadequate support (in the class-

room but also from the broader community in which they taught), high workload,

ineffective school leadership, and inadequate salary (Figure 5-1).

“

We are not going to

recruit our way out of

this problem. There is

not enough capacity or

interest [in teaching].

”

–

Teacher preparation

subject matter expert

JLARC surveyed

individuals with Virginia

teaching licenses who

were not working in

Virginia public schools

in Ju

ly 2023. The survey

asked

why they were not

teaching and what, if any-

thing, would make them

consider working in a Vir-

ginia public school in the

future. The survey was

sent

to individuals for

whom VDOE had

addresses

. (More individ-

uals likely

have valid

teaching licenses, but

VDOE does not have

electronic contact infor-

mation for them.)

JLARC

received 1,

164 responses

for an overall response

rate of

34 percent.

Chapter 5: Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Commission draft

FIGURE 5-1

Teachers left the profession for personal reasons or because they were

unhappy being a teacher

SOURCE: JLARC survey of licensed teachers who are not currently teaching in a Virginia public school.

NOTE: Respondents could select more than one response. Some respondents provided other reasons for leaving

their jobs in Virginia public schools, including deciding to pursue another career and deciding they no longer wanted

to work for pay.

Most Virginia licensees who are not currently Virginia public school teachers indicated

they might consider teaching in the future if changes were made. This includes indi-

viduals who are working in non-teaching careers and individuals who are not currently

working for pay. Specifically

• 43 percent said better pay might encourage them to teach in a Virginia pub-

lic school;

• 32 percent said better systems for managing student behavior; and

• 30 percent said better support for teachers (in school and in the commu-

nity) could encourage them to teach in a Virginia public school.

Only 14 percent of individuals with Virginia teaching licenses indicated they would not

be interested in teaching in a Virginia public school at some point.

JLARC reports released in November 2022 and July 2023 made numerous recommen-

dations that could help address these issues, particularly compensation and challenging

classroom environments.

• Compensation – JLARC has recommended recruiting and retention bonuses

targeted to school divisions facing particularly high vacancy rates and chang-

ing the SOQ formula so that state funding for salaries is more reflective of

actual practice and regional labor costs.

• Classroom environment – JLARC has recommended the state fund more in-

structional assistants to help manage the classroom and expand an existing

state program to help school staff better manage student behavior issues.

Chapter 5: Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Commission draft

Effective mentorship can help retain new teachers,

but divisions struggle to find enough mentors

The majority (57 percent) of Virginia school divisions that responded to a JLARC

survey in July 2023 (sidebar) reported struggling to retain their new teachers. Divisions

reported that new, fully licensed teachers with between one and three years of experi-

ence are the most difficult to retain. The exit rate for first-year teachers has been in-

creasing. Between SY2012–13 and SY2019–20, about 17 percent of first year teachers

left. Since SY2021–22, nearly one-quarter of first year teachers have left.

Although research on the effectiveness of new teacher mentorship programs is some-

what mixed, well-designed mentorship programs can be an effective way to help retain

new teachers, according to recent research. Mentorship programs use experienced

teachers to regularly support new teachers and help them refine various teaching skills

(e.g., lesson planning, classroom management). Mentorship programs have been

shown to help retain new teachers if the mentor (1) is assigned early in a teacher’s first

year, (2) teaches the same subject, (3) provides frequent support with curriculum, class-

room discipline, and technology, and (4) supports improved classroom management

and quality instruction.

Virginia already requires divisions to have mentor programs for new teachers that

many teachers and divisions say can be effective, but divisions are having trouble find-

ing mentors because of staffing problems. Most new teachers (75 percent) surveyed

by JLARC (sidebar) rated their mentor as excellent or good at helping them adjust to

their job. Similarly, most school divisions (79 percent) surveyed by JLARC reported

their current mentorship programs can help retain new teachers. However, many divi-

sions that responded to JLARC’s survey said their current teachers do not have the

time, willingness, or experience to mentor new teachers.

Research indicates that intensive mentoring from university-trained mentors can im-

prove the effectiveness of mentoring and improve new teacher retention. Some states

partner with higher education institutions to provide new teacher mentoring in public

K–12 schools. For example:

• North Carolina has a New Teacher Support Program that is administered

through the state’s public universities and provides instructional coaches to

mentor new teachers in low-performing schools.

• Alaska has a statewide mentor project run by the University of Alaska Fair-

banks School of Education that provides new teachers in all school districts

with highly trained mentors, most of whom are retired teachers.

To address the challenges some school divisions are facing finding enough mentors

for new teachers, VDOE could work with Virginia higher education institutions to

develop and pilot a new state or regional teacher mentor program. The program could

be staffed by university-trained mentors and provide mentorship assistance to divi-

sions with the most teacher vacancies. Institutions that wish to participate in the pilot

JLARC surveye

d human

resources staff from

Virginia school divisions

in July 2023 to ask about

the state’s teacher licen-

sure process, new teacher

support programs, and

divisions’ supply of public

–12 teachers. JLARC re-

ceived responses

from 75

divisions for an overall

re-

sponse rate of

56 percent.

LARC staff surveyed

new K

–12 public school

teachers in Virginia

about their teacher prep-

aration, experiences with

the state

licensure pro-

cess, and first year of

teaching. New teachers

were defined to include

individuals who began

teaching in a Virginia

public school after Janu-

ary 1, 2022

. JLARC re-

ceived responses from

917 teachers (25 percent

response rate

). See Ap-

pendix B for

more infor-

mation.

Chapter 5: Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Commission draft

could be awarded state funding to hire and train mentors. Retired (or experienced

teachers who recently left) Virginia public K–12 teachers could be considered for these

new mentor positions, given their experience with Virginia public schools. VDOE

could collect data from participating institutions and divisions each year and report on

the program’s effect on new teacher retention.

POLICY OPTION 5

The General Assembly could include language and funding in the Appropriation Act

directing the Virginia Department of Education to administer a three-year pilot pro-

gram that provides targeted mentorship assistance to divisions with high teacher va-

cancies using mentors trained and coordinated by Virginia higher education institu-

tions.

State does not collect or analyze data on teacher

preparation programs’ outcomes

Virginia does not consistently track or analyze data on the outcomes of the various

teacher preparation pathways, which makes it difficult to identify which pathways are

most effective at producing well-prepared teachers who stay in their jobs. VDOE re-

quires Virginia higher education institutions with teacher preparation programs and

school divisions to regularly report on various types of teacher-related data, such as

the number of teachers who complete teacher preparation programs and the schools

where teachers are working. However, data on whether individuals prepared in Virginia

ultimately receive a Virginia teaching license, provide quality instruction, and remain

teaching is not currently shared with entities in Virginia’s teacher pipeline.

Virginia needs better teacher outcomes data to assess how well the pipeline is working

and to identify possible improvements, according to researchers and Virginia practi-

tioners. In a 2015 review of state teacher preparation program accountability, the Na-

tional Council on Teacher Quality recommended that Virginia collect more infor-

mation on teacher preparation outcomes (e.g., teacher evaluation results and five-year

retention) and publish program report cards for all preparation programs. Virginia’s

higher education institutions also expressed the need for better teacher outcomes data.

One institution told JLARC: “It would be beneficial if [we] received data from the

VDOE that shows fully licensed educators in Virginia and the institutions where the

teacher preparation was completed [so] each institution would have data relating to

retention in P-12 education after graduation…”

Several other states regularly publish teacher outcomes data, which helps state officials

and accreditors assess the effectiveness of teacher preparation programs. For example,

Tennessee posts an educator preparation report card online each year that includes

metrics for each of its preparation programs, such as teacher employment in Tennes-

see public schools, teacher effectiveness in the classroom, and self-reported teacher

“

The mentor programs

are becoming difficult to

maintain because there

are more new teachers

than seasoned teachers

to mentor them.

I would love for DOE to

hire successful, retired

school teachers to be 1-

on-1 mentors to

ANYONE who is

provisionally licensed for

their first few weeks of

employment. Just

assigning a mentor isn't

enough.

”

–

HR staff,

Virginia school division

Chapter 5: Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Commission draft

preparedness. Delaware, Florida, and Colorado also regularly publish teacher prepara-

tion program reports with various teacher outcome metrics.

VDOE should begin to collect and periodically share with preparation programs in-

formation to help determine whether and how to improve individual programs and

the teacher pipeline collectively. Information about teachers prepared in Virginia

should be the primary focus and should include individuals who were prepared

through direct and indirect pathways. For each teacher, the information collected

should include their (1) preparation pathway, including the program(s) they completed;

(2) licensure status; (3) place of employment; (4) indicators of instructional quality in

their classroom (e.g., student achievement, classroom observation results, self-reported

teacher preparedness); and (5) tenure as a public K–12 teacher. This information

should be compiled by program. Each preparation program should receive this infor-

mation about graduates of their program to help them assess the effectiveness of their

programs. Information on individual teachers should not be published or used to eval-

uate teachers (collectively or individually). VDOE should hire a third party to assist

with establishing a database capable of storing and maintaining this information be-

cause of its complexity and likely IT support needed.

RECOMMENDATION 9

The General Assembly may wish to consider including language and funding in the

Appropriation Act directing the Virginia Department of Education to (i) hire a con-

tractor to develop a database that can store and maintain teacher information; (ii) reg-

ularly collect information on the teacher preparation pathway, licensure status, place

of employment, indicators of instructional quality, and public K–12 teaching tenure

for each teacher who is prepared in Virginia; and (iii) share such information about

these teachers with the Virginia preparation programs from which they graduated.

After this information is initially collected, VDOE should regularly analyze and pub-

licly report on the effectiveness of the state’s teacher pipeline, including the different

pathways individuals take to pursue teaching. There are several metrics VDOE could

use to assess effectiveness of Virginia’s teacher preparation pathways. At a minimum,

VDOE should report biennially on the perceptions of preparedness and tenure of

teachers who come through each of Virginia’s preparation pathways and develop rec-

ommendations to improve specific pathways, as needed, based on the results of its

analysis. This information should be reported and published in aggregate for each

preparation pathway and program. State policymakers could use VDOE’s report to

identify which teacher preparation pathways and programs are most effective and war-

rant continued or enhanced state support, and those that are less effective and need

changes, improvements, or should be discontinued.

Chapter 5: Teacher Recruitment and Retention

Commission draft

RECOMMENDATION 10

The General Assembly may wish to consider amending the Code of Virginia to direct

the Virginia Department of Education to biennially report on the preparedness and

tenure of teachers prepared through each of Virginia’s teacher preparation pathways

and programs and recommend improvements to specific preparation pathways and

programs as needed. The report should be submitted to the Board of Education and

House Education and Senate Education and Health committees by November 1 every

other year.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Appendix A: Study resolution

Adequacy of the supply of qualified individuals to fill needed K-12 teaching positions

Authorized by the Commission on November 7, 2023

WHEREAS, an adequate supply of qualified teachers to educate Virginia’s 1.2 million public K-12

students is essential for an effective public education system; and

WHEREAS, school divisions report difficulties in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, and the

number of vacant teacher positions is increasing; and

WHEREAS, more teachers are leaving the profession or retiring while fewer individuals are (a) en-

tering teacher preparation programs and (b) being licensed as first year teachers; and

WHEREAS, teachers cite frustration with licensing requirement complexity and recently the propor-

tion of teachers who are provisionally licensed rather than fully licensed has increased; and

WHEREAS, teachers cite concern about their ability to manage their classrooms due to student be-

havior issues, mental health concerns, and increasingly complex student needs, now therefore be it

RESOLVED by the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission that staff be directed to review

the adequacy of the supply of qualified individuals to fill needed K-12 teaching positions. In conduct-

ing its study staff shall (i) identify historical and current numbers of K-12 teachers needed and avail-

able and project the adequacy of the future supply of available teachers to accommodate future need,

(ii) evaluate factors contributing to the decline in the number of individuals entering teacher prepara-

tion programs, (iii) evaluate the state process to determine qualifications and credentials needed to be

a fully licensed teacher, and (iv) identify effective or innovative practices used in other states to main-

tain or increase the number of individuals entering and graduating from teacher preparation programs

and becoming fully licensed teachers.

JLARC shall make recommendations as necessary and review other issues as warranted.

All agencies of the Commonwealth, including the Board of Education, Virginia Department of Ed-

ucation, public institutions of higher education, State Council of Higher Education for Virginia, and

local school divisions shall provide assistance, information, and data to JLARC for this study, upon

request. JLARC staff shall have access to all information in the possession of agencies pursuant to §

30-59 and § 30-69 of the Code of Virginia. No provision of the Code of Virginia shall be interpreted

as limiting or restricting the access of JLARC staff to information pursuant to its statutory authority.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Appendix B: Research activities and methods

Key research activities performed by JLARC staff for this study included:

• interviews with VDOE staff, staff from higher education institutions’ teacher preparation

programs and SCHEV, school division staff, subject-matter experts, and other states;

• surveys of new teachers, licensed teachers who are not currently teaching in a Virginia

public school, and school division human resources staff;

• administration of a data collection instrument to teacher preparation programs;

• analysis of VDOE staffing and licensure data, and data on teacher preparation programs;

• a case file review of a sample of teacher licensure applications; and

• a review of relevant documents and research literature.

Structured interviews

Structured interviews were a key research method for this report. JLARC staff conducted over 45

interviews with individuals from a variety of agencies and organizations. Key interviewees included:

• VDOE staff;

• teacher preparation program staff;

• school division staff;

• subject-matter experts and Virginia stakeholders; and

• staff from other states.

VDOE staff

JLARC staff conducted several interviews with staff from VDOE’s Department of Teacher Education

& Licensure office and VDOE’s Educator Engagement Specialist. Staff conducted multiple interviews

with staff from the Department of Teacher Education & Licensure to understand the department’s

programs and processes, including the teacher licensure process and the approval process for the

state’s teacher preparation programs. Interviews also covered recent and planned improvements to

the department’s operations. The Educator Engagement Specialist was interviewed to learn about

VDOE’s marketing strategy for teachers and VDOE-administered support programs for prospective

teachers.

Teacher preparation program staff

JLARC staff conducted interviews with teacher preparation program staff at the following Virginia

public and private higher education institutions:

• George Mason University

• James Madison University

• Liberty University

• Longwood University

• Old Dominion University

Appendixes

Commission draft

• Shenandoah University

• The University of Virginia’s College at Wise

• Virginia Commonwealth University

• Virginia Tech

These interviews were conducted to learn about the institutions’ traditional teacher preparation pro-

grams and any other preparation programs they operate (e.g., teacher residency or career switcher

programs), coordination with school divisions, barriers to the state’s teacher pipeline, and potential

ways to improve the pipeline.

JLARC staff also held two group interviews with private institutions that have traditional teacher

preparation programs to learn about key barriers to the state’s teacher pipeline, and potential ways the

state could improve the pipeline. Representatives from seven private institutions participated.

JLARC staff also interviewed staff at SCHEV and EducateVA, which is the organization that admin-

isters the Career Switcher program at Virginia’s community colleges.

Virginia school divisions

JLARC staff interviewed staff at six Virginia public school divisions: Danville City Public Schools,

Fauquier County Public Schools, Goochland County Public Schools, Hanover County Public Schools,

Henrico County Public Schools, and Newport News Public Schools. The focus of interviews at two

divisions—Danville and Fauquier—was the state’s teachers licensure process. Staff discussed division

concerns about the licensure process (e.g., timeliness, transparency) and the impact of licensure issues

on their ability to hire new teachers. The purpose of interviews at four divisions—Goochland, Han-

over, Henrico, and Newport News—was to learn about these divisions’ teacher preparation initiatives.

Interview topics included the administration of the initiatives (including costs), VDOE’s approval

process (if applicable), challenges experienced with the initiatives, and impacts on teachers.

Subject-matter experts and Virginia stakeholders

JLARC staff conducted interviews with subject-matter experts from 10 educational organizations,

including individuals from the American Association for Colleges of Teacher Education, Association

of Teacher Educators, Bank Street College, Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation,

Education Commission of the States, Learning Policy Institute, National Conference of State Legis-

latures, National Center for Teacher Quality, and National Center for Teacher Residencies. These in-

terviews covered various aspects of the teacher pipeline based on the expertise of the organization,

but most interviews addressed teacher preparation programs and alternative paths to becoming a

teacher, the teacher licensure process and barriers to obtaining a license, effective practices for im-

proving the teacher supply, and recruiting and retaining teachers.

JLARC staff also interviewed staff from the Virginia Education Association and the Virginia Associ-

ation of School Superintendents to better understand the key barriers to becoming a teacher in Vir-

ginia and potential changes that could improve the state’s supply of teachers.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Other states

JLARC staff conducted interviews with staff from three states (New Mexico, North Carolina, and

Tennessee) to discuss practices for increasing the teacher supply, innovative teacher preparation pro-

grams in other states (e.g., residencies and apprenticeships), and statewide teacher marketing efforts.

Staff also interviewed licensure staff from the state of Mississippi to discuss their licensure process

for teachers who are applying through reciprocity from other states.

Surveys and data collection instrument

Three surveys were conducted for this study: (1) a survey of new teachers, (2) a survey of licensed

teachers who are not currently teaching in a Virginia public school, and (3) a survey of school division

human resources staff.

JLARC staff also developed and administered a data collection instrument to Virginia’s 14 public

higher education institutions with teacher preparation programs.

Survey of new teachers

JLARC administered an electronic survey to a sample of new teachers at public K–12 schools in

Virginia. New teachers were defined as individuals who began teaching in a Virginia public school

after January 1, 2022.

The survey covered the following topics:

• new teachers’ experiences in their teacher preparation program and challenges they faced

during preparation;

• the extent to which their teacher preparation program was effective at preparing them to

teach;

• their experience applying for and obtaining a teacher’s license in Virginia, including the

timeliness of the process; and

• their experiences during their first year of teaching, including their experience with their

division’s mentorship program, if applicable.

The survey was distributed electronically to approximately 3,943 teachers. JLARC received 917 re-

sponses, for an overall response rate of 25 percent. The response rate was estimated following the

American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) response rate (RR4) calculation. RR4

estimates a response rate that adjusts for the unknown survey eligibility of non-respondents, and it

includes both complete and usable partial responses in the numerator of the calculation.

Survey of licensed teachers who are not currently teaching in a Virginia public school

JLARC staff administered an electronic survey to all licensed teachers who are not currently teaching

in a Virginia public school. Survey topics included: current employment situation (i.e., either teaching

somewhere else or not working as a teacher), reasons they are not working in a Virginia public school,

and potential factors that would encourage them to teach in a Virginia public school in the future.

The survey was distributed electronically to approximately 4,300 licensed teachers who are not cur-

rently working in a Virginia public school, according to VDOE’s data. (VDOE provided JLARC staff

Appendixes

Commission draft

with a list of currently licensed teachers who are not assigned to a public school, and a survey was

sent to all individuals for whom VDOE had an email address.) JLARC received 1,164 responses, for

an overall response rate of 34 percent. The response rate was estimated following the American As-

sociation for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) response rate (RR4) calculation.

Survey of school division human resources directors

An electronic survey was administered to the human resources directors in all of Virginia’s public

school divisions. Survey topics included: divisions’ experience with, and opinions of, VDOE’s licen-

sure process, including the impact of the process on their ability to hire teachers; perspectives on their

ability to hire an adequate number of qualified teachers; perspectives on the preparation levels of new

teachers from various preparation paths; mentor programs for new teachers; and potential strategies

the state could implement to increase the number of teachers in the future. Seventy-five divisions

responded to the survey, for a response rate of 56 percent.

Teacher preparation program data collection instruments

JLARC staff developed three data collection instruments to collect preparation program data from

traditional teacher preparation programs, teacher residency programs, and career switcher programs

at public higher education institutions. The data collection instruments requested data from the 2022–

23 academic year on: (1) program design and cost, (2) program capacity and enrollment, (3) student

characteristics and outcomes, (4) state funding, and (5) suggestions for state policy changes.

Fourteen traditional teacher preparation programs, four teacher residency programs, and three career

switcher programs received the data collection instrument, and all programs submitted responses for

a response rate of 100 percent.

Data collection and analysis

JLARC staff collected and analyzed several types of data from VDOE for this study. JLARC received

teacher- and division-level data on teacher vacancies, licensure, and employment tenure. JLARC staff

also received data on assessment pass rates, and accessed and analyzed publicly available federal Title

II data from the U.S. Department of Education on teacher preparation programs.

Teacher vacancies (Chapter 2)

Vacancy data for SY2021–22, SY2022–23, and SY2023–24 were obtained from VDOE’s Positions

and Exits Collection, and vacancy data for earlier years came from VDOE teacher supply and demand

reports. Data was available by school division and subject area.

JLARC staff conducted a multivariate regression analysis using division-level data to estimate the fac-

tors most strongly related to the variation in teacher vacancy rates at the division level for SY2022-

2023. The dependent variable was the teacher vacancy rate, defined as the percentage of teaching

positions in each division that were reported as unfilled as of October 2022. The independent varia-

bles were:

• the percentage of students in a division who are Black,

• the percentage of students in a division who are Hispanic;

Appendixes

Commission draft

• the percentage of students in a division who are not white, Black, or Hispanic;

• a measure of the degree to which a division maintained in-person instruction during the pan-

demic (1 = most remote, 5= most in-person);

• the local composite index, which measures a school division’s ability to provide school fund-

ing;

• the percentage of students in a division that are economically disadvantaged;

• the percentage of students in a division that are disabled; and

• indicator variables for each VDOE region.

The estimated effects for two variables above were statistically significant and meaningful in size.

• First, divisions with the highest proportion of Black students had estimated teacher va-

cancy rates of 8.4 percent in SY2022–23, compared with vacancy rates of 2.2 percent for

divisions with the lowest proportion of Black students, a difference of about 6 percentage

points, holding constant the other factors above.

• Divisions that had the most remote instruction during the pandemic had estimated teacher

vacancy rates in SY2022–23 of 6.2 percent, compared with vacancy rates of 1.2 percent

for divisions that had the most in-person instruction, a difference of 5 percentage points.

Number of newly licensed teachers (Chapter 2)

JLARC staff analyzed data provided by VDOE on the number of newly licensed teachers statewide

by license type for SY2014–15 through SY2022–23 to determine the how the number of new teachers

has changed over time.

Proportion of teachers who are not fully licensed (Chapter 2)

The percentage of teachers who were fully licensed, provisionally licensed, unlicensed, teaching out

of field, or long-term substitutes was calculated using two data sources: VDOE Master Schedule Col-

lection data for SY2012–13, SY2021–22, and SY2022–23; and a teacher-level extract from VDOE’s

licensure data system.

Because teachers could be in more than one of these statuses in a given year, a hierarchy was used to

determine the status for each teacher. Teachers with an active full license were counted as fully licensed

(84 percent of all teachers in the VDOE Master Schedule Collection for SY2022–23), even if they

also had a provisional license in the same school year. Teachers who had an active provisional license

but not a full license were counted as provisionally licensed (8.5 percent of teachers). However, if a

teacher was teaching out of field, they were counted as such (5.8 percent), even if they had an active

full or provisional license. Teachers with no active license were counted as unlicensed (1.7 percent). A

small proportion of these teachers had a pending license, but most were not yet in the licensure sys-

tem. Finally, if a teacher was a long-term substitute (0.2 percent) but had an active license (full or

provisional), they were counted as licensed and not as a long-term substitute.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Proportion of provisionally licensed teachers who become fully licensed, and tenure for provi-

sionally licensed teachers (Chapter 3)

Data from VDOE’s licensure system was used to calculate the proportion of provisionally licensed

teachers who became fully licensed within three years of receiving their provisional license. Provisional

licenses in Virginia are valid for three years, with two possible one-year extensions.

Teacher tenure was estimated using teacher-level licensure history combined with teacher-level turno-

ver data for SY2011–12 through SY2022–23. The combined file includes all teachers who initially

received a provisional or full license in SY2011–12 or more recent years and who worked in a Virginia

public school since SY2011–12, about 119,000 teachers. Teachers who were teaching in SY2011–12,

the first year of turnover data, were dropped from the tenure analysis, because they include both

teachers who began teaching in SY2011–12 and teachers who began earlier and were still teaching in

SY2011–12.

Survival analysis—a statistical method to analyze the time until an event occurs—was also used to

measure teacher tenure, including median tenure. The key outcome was the number of school years

taught from a teacher’s first year (SY2012–13 or later) to SY2022–23, the most recent year observable.

For teachers who were still teaching in SY2022–23, the most recent year of data, their total years

teaching is unknown because the year they will stop teaching is unobservable. Survival analysis ac-

counts for this, treating those individuals as censored, meaning they have not exited by the last year

of observation. Ignoring this fact would result in underestimating teacher tenure.

The analysis found the median number of years of teaching for Virginia public school teachers is

nine years for individuals who began teaching in SY2012–13 or later. Twenty-five percent of individ-

uals taught for about three years or less. There is some evidence of a decline in teacher tenure over

time, but the observation period (maximum of 11 years) is not long enough to show trends over

many years. Teachers whose initial license is provisional have slightly shorter tenure than teachers

whose initial license is a full license. One-fourth of provisional licensees teach for three or fewer

years, compared with four years for full licensees. Similarly, median teacher tenure is eight years for

provisional licensees and nine years for full licensees.

Federal Title II data analysis (Chapter 3)

JLARC staff analyzed federal data from the Higher Education Act Title II State Reports (U.S. Depart-

ment of Education) to analyze trends in enrollments and completions in teacher preparation programs

in Virginia. Staff reviewed Virginia State Reports for academic years SY2011–12 through SY2020–21,

the most recent year available, comparing the number of students who enrolled in and completed

traditional and alternative preparation programs in Virginia during this time period.

Licensure assessment data (Chapter 3)

JLARC staff reviewed summary-level data on assessment pass rates for the Virginia Communication

and Literacy Assessment (VCLA), provided by the assessment contractor (Pearson). Staff reviewed

data on statewide first attempt and best attempt pass rates, as well as pass rates by demographic groups,

for SY2017–18 through SY2022–23 to date as of July 2023.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Exit rate for first-year teachers (Chapter 5)

Teacher-level turnover data for SY2011–12 through SY2022–23 from VDOE was used to measure

the percentage of first-year teachers who left teaching after their first year, and to measure exit rates

in subsequent years. Cohorts of first-year teachers were identified for each year of data and followed

to determine whether they stopped teaching at any Virginia public school after the first year, second

year, etc. A first-year exit rate could not be calculated for individuals who began teaching in SY2022–

23, because data was not yet available to determine which teachers returned for their second year in

SY2023–24.

Case file reviews

JLARC staff reviewed 36 teacher licensure applications that were currently under review by VDOE

to determine:

• the types of applicants going through the process (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, school division

employer (if applicable), endorsement areas), and

• the time between the application submission, assignment to a VDOE licensure specialist, ap-

plication being “closed” for missing information (if applicable), and the current date.

VDOE selected the files based on criteria provided by JLARC staff, including applications that (1)

represent a mixture of divisions and preparation pathways (e.g., traditional EPPs and alternative

routes) and (2) a mixture of applications VDOE has recently received for processing and applications

that have been waiting in the queue for a longer amount of time.

Document reviews

JLARC staff reviewed a variety of documents to inform its research, including:

• VDOE statutes and regulations;

• documents related to grants and programs that VDOE oversees or administers, including

o Guidelines for Mentor Teacher Programs for Beginning and Experienced Teach-

ers

o Mentor Teacher Program Evaluation & Program Reports

o Report on Teacher Residency Partnership Grants (SY2021–22)

o Biennial Report: Approved Teacher Education Programs Compliance (2019–

2021)

• contract documents related to VDOE’s new licensure IT system, including the Statement

of Work;

• annual professional education program profiles data;

• previous reviews of VDOE and the teacher pipeline, including a 2020 JLARC review of

VDOE; Report of the Virginia Department of Education on Virginia Teacher Licensure

Policy: Biases and Barriers to Diversifying the Workforce (2022); and Report from the

Task Force on Diversifying Virginia’s Educator Pipeline, August 2017.

Appendixes

Commission draft

JLARC staff also conducted reviews of relevant research literature on causes of teacher shortages;

design elements needed for effective teacher preparation programs, teacher licensure processes, and

new teacher mentoring programs; alternative preparation pathways, and the effectiveness of new

teacher mentoring programs.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Appendix C: Teacher vacancies by school division

This appendix includes public K-12 teacher vacancy data, by school division, collected by the Virginia

Department of Education for the past two school years (SY2022-23 and SY2023-24).

Data show that teacher vacancies vary widely by division in both years, with some divisions experi-

encing zero vacancies, while others experience high vacancies. Several of the divisions with the most

and least teacher vacancies changed between SY2022-23 and SY2023-24.

TABLE C-1

Public K-12 teacher vacancies, SY2022-23 and SY2023-24

SY2022-23

SY2023-24

School division

Total FTE

teacher

positions

Total unfilled

FTE teacher

positions

Vacancy

rate (%)

School division

Total FTE

teacher

positions

Total unfilled

FTE teacher

positions

Vacancy

rate (%)

Southampton

County

194 40 20.8

Danville City

433

175

40.4

Charles City

County

65 11 16.9

Charles City

County

21.5

Portsmouth City

959

158

16.5

Suffolk City

1,002

177

17.7

Norfolk City

2,102

319

15.2

Lancaster County

17.0

Nottoway County

155

14.1

Norfolk City

2,102

353

16.8

Franklin City

13.0

Essex County

15.1

Bland County

57 6 10.6

Cumberland

County

102

14.7

Lynchburg City

609

10.5

Poquoson City

154

14.3

Prince Edward

County

143 15 10.5

Caroline County

278

13.7

King and Queen

County

67 7 10.4

Pulaski County

311

13.2

Newport News

City

1,736 162 9.3

Surry County

11.9

King George

County

307 28 9.1

Nottoway County

155

11.6

Martinsville City

144 13 9.0

Northampton

County

113

11.5

Westmoreland

County

123 11 9.0

Hampton City

1,473

155

10.5

Suffolk City

1,002

8.7

Lunenburg County

117

10.3

Sussex County

85 7 8.3

Buckingham

County

111

9.9

Alleghany High-

lands

229 19 8.1

Prince Edward

County

143

9.1

Fredericksburg

City

252 20 8.0

Bland County

8.8

Spotsylvania

County

1,592 121 7.6

Manassas Park

City

231

8.2

Manassas Park

City

231 17 7.4

Richmond City

1,932

152

7.9

Appendixes

Commission draft

Brunswick

County

100 7 6.9

Highland County

7.9

Petersburg City

320 22 6.9

Newport News

City

1,736

135

7.8

Danville City

433 29 6.7

Prince George

County

440

7.7

Northampton

County

113 8 6.7

Charlottesville City

389

7.7

Prince William

County

5,967 389 6.5

Martinsville City

144

7.6

Madison County

125 8 6.4

King William

County

147

6.8

Lunenburg

County

117 7 6.0

Alexandria City

1,162

6.6

Poquoson City

154

5.9

Petersburg City

320

6.6

Manassas City

432 25 5.8

Appomattox

County

170

6.5

Caroline County

278

5.8

Buena Vista City

6.4

Hampton City

1,473 84 5.7

Chesterfield

County

4,519

286

6.3

Cumberland

County

102 6 5.7

Mathews County

6.3

Culpeper County

561 31 5.5

King George

County

307

6.2

Lancaster County

5.2

Page County

255

5.9

Prince George

County

440 22 5.0

Halifax County

380

5.8

Orange County

334 16 4.9

Spotsylvania

County

1,591

5.8

Chesterfield

County

4,519 220 4.9

Southampton

County

194

5.7

Henrico County

3,450

165

4.8

Madison County

125

5.6

Surry County

4.8

Hopewell City

310

5.5

Winchester City

359 17 4.7

Prince William

County

5,967

322

5.4

Shenandoah

County

443 21 4.6

Accomack County

379

5.3

Bath County

55 3 4.6

Northumberland

County

114

5.3

Buckingham

County

111 5 4.5

Colonial Heights

City

231

5.2

Craig County

4.4

Giles County

193

5.2

Mecklenburg

County

243 11 4.3

Henrico County

3,450

176

5.1

Colonial Beach

4.2

Fairfax County

12,681

605

4.8

Richmond City

1,914

4.2

Lynchburg City

609

4.4

Lee County

241

3.7

Richmond County

4.3

Dickenson

County

173 6 3.6

Arlington County

2,383

101

4.2

Northumberland

County

114 4 3.5

Tazewell County

392

4.1

Halifax County

380 13 3.4

Westmoreland

County

123

4.1

Appendixes

Commission draft

Warren County

382 13 3.4

Shenandoah

County

443

4.1

Tazewell County

392 13 3.3

Fredericksburg

City

252

4.0

Fairfax County

12,681

419

3.3

Middlesex County

102

3.9

Hopewell City

310

3.2

Stafford County

2,338

3.7

Richmond

County

93 3 3.2

Manassas City

432

3.7

Roanoke City

1,066

3.2

Albemarle County

1,083

3.7

Accomack

County

379 12 3.1

Smyth County

353

3.7

Rappahannock

County

68 2 2.9

Loudoun County

6,511

239

3.7

Giles County

193 6 2.9

Pittsylvania

County

635

3.3

Alexandria City

1,162

2.8

Frederick County

1,001

3.3

Chesapeake City

2,945

2.8

Franklin County

524

3.1

Stafford County

2,338

2.8

Fauquier County

832

3.0

King William

County

147 4 2.7

Orange County

333

3.0

Frederick County

1,001

2.6

York County

935

3.0

Gloucester

County

369 9 2.3

Gloucester County

369

2.7

Virginia Beach

City

4,661 106 2.3

Harrisonburg City

524

2.7

York County

935 20 2.1

Isle of Wight

County

393

2.5

Waynesboro City

238

2.1

Lee County

241

2.5

Charlottesville

City

389 8 2.1

Greensville County

168

2.4

Harrisonburg City

524

2.0

Warren County

382

2.4

Franklin County

524

2.0

Dickenson County

173

2.3

Pittsylvania

County

635 13 2.0

Augusta County

713

2.2

Middlesex

County

102 2 2.0

Craig County

2.2

Dinwiddie

County

331 6 1.8

Greene County

227

2.2

Rockbridge

County

224 4 1.8

Culpeper County

561

2.1

Amelia County

112

1.8

Waynesboro City

238

2.1

Isle of Wight

County

393 7 1.8

Buchanan County

198

2.0

Greene County

227

1.8

Chesapeake City

2,945

2.0

Fauquier County

832

1.7

Winchester City

359

1.9

Colonial Heights

City

231 4 1.7

Montgomery

County

762

1.8

Grayson County

148

1.7

Amherst County

327

1.8

Smyth County

353

1.6

Amelia County

112

1.8

Nelson County

126

1.6

Radford City

118

1.7

Page County

255

1.6

Wythe County

311

1.6

Staunton City

195 3 1.5

Rockingham

County

818

1.6

Appendixes

Commission draft

Buchanan County

198

1.5

West Point

1.5

Albemarle

County

1,083 16 1.5

Norton City

1.5

Arlington County

2,383 33 1.4

King and Queen

County

1.5

Henry County

520 7 1.3

Rappahannock

County

1.5

Powhatan County

308 4 1.3

Washington

County

577

1.4

Pulaski County

311

1.3

Virginia Beach City

4,661

1.4

Mathews County

80 1 1.3

Williamsburg-

James City County

828

1.3

Wise County

478

1.3

Bedford County

678

1.3

Amherst County

327

1.2

Dinwiddie County

331

1.2

Campbell County

592

1.2

Sussex County

1.2

Bedford County

678

1.2

Roanoke City

1,066

1.1

Appomattox

County

170 2 1.2

Galax City

1.0

Galax City

1.2

Hanover County

1,265

1.0

Williamsburg-

James City

County

828 10 1.1

Henry County

520

1.0

Loudoun County

6,511 75 1.1

Rockbridge

County

224

0.9

Carroll County

279

1.1

Campbell County

592

0.8

Washington

County

577 6 1.0

Nelson County

126

0.8

Rockingham

County

818 8 1.0

Floyd County

135

0.7

Essex County

1.0

Charlotte County

136

0.7

Augusta County

713

0.8

Salem City

286

0.7

New Kent County

238

0.8

Patrick County

178

0.6

Fluvanna County

249

0.8

Goochland County

199

0.5

Clarke County

134

0.7

Bristol City

207

0.5

Floyd County

135

0.7

Scott County

309

0.3

Wythe County

311

0.7

Louisa County

442

0.2

Hanover County

1,265

0.6

Wise County

478

0.2

Greensville

County

168 1 0.6

Roanoke County

999

0.2

Patrick County

179

0.6

Botetourt County

340

0.0

Bristol City

207

0.5

Carroll County

279

0.0

Russell County

288

0.3

Clarke County

133

0.0

Botetourt County

340

0.3

Colonial Beach

0.0

Montgomery

County

762 2 0.3

Falls Church City

207

0.0

Louisa County

442

0.2

Fluvanna County

249

0.0

Roanoke County

999

0.1

Grayson County

148

0.0

Buena Vista City

Lexington City

0.0

Charlotte County

136

Russell County

288

0.0

Falls Church City

207

Staunton City

195

0.0

Goochland

County

199 - -

Highland County

Appendixes

Commission draft

Lexington City

Norton City

Radford City

118

Salem City

286

Scott County

309

West Point

Total

92,579

3,573

Total

90,381

4,304

SOURCE: JLARC staff analysis of Virginia Department of Education data, school years 2022-23 and 2023–24.

NOTE: SY2022-23 data represents vacant public K-12 full-time equivalent positions reported by divisions as of October 1, 2022.

SY2023-24 vacancy data reflects actual or assumed to be vacant public K-12 full-time equivalent positions on the first day of school for

123 divisions.

Appendixes

Commission draft

Appendix D: Agency Response

As part of an extensive validation process, the state agencies and other entities that are subject to a

JLARC assessment are given the opportunity to comment on an exposure draft of the report. JLARC

staff sent an exposure draft of the full report to the Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) and

the Secretary of Education.

Appropriate corrections resulting from technical and substantive comments are incorporated in this

version of the report. This appendix includes a response letter from the secretary of education and

VDOE.

JLARC.VIRGINIA.GOV

919 East Main Street Suite 2101 Richmond, VA 23219