Sub Teachers Should Be State Certified?

Question

I am an uncertified sub teacher. I took the LAST exam in 2001 and passed by the skin of my teeth. However, I passed.

The more I think about sub teachers and sub pay, the more I am convinced all subs should be required to pass the LAST and ATS-W before getting hired.

All subs should be able to atleast know the basics.

I never took the ATS-W but plan to do so this fall.

What is your view?

Should sub teachers be required to atleast pass one or two of the state exams given to all regular teachers?

I say YES! What about you?

Answer 1

In most states subs have to be a college graduate or at least have 2 years of college. For regular subs, I think that this is fine. usually a sub is following the plans that the regular teacher has written. They are also using the teacher's manuals. I think that this is adequate for regular subs. Now, for long term subs such as a medical leave, the sub will. at some point, have to do their own plans. For this, I think they need to have some sort of qualifications.

Answer 2

not if they are the kind of sub that goes into a specific class for 1 day....  those people are basiclly baby-sitters.

if you are going to sub for an extended period of time such as to cover vacations, and maternaty leave, and things like that then yes. i do think they should because then they will actually need to be teaching those kids something.

Answer 3

Substitutes in most states are required to have a 4 year degree before they can become subs, which shows that they know the basics of education.

I agree that long-term subs for a class should have a degree in the subject or have passed the state test.  However, short term subs often sub in several classrooms, in different grade levels and for different subjects.  They are usually given work to give the kids which does not require them to have more then very basic knowledge of the subject.

Subs in our state require licensure, but they are not required to be tested on any subject, a simple BA will suffice.

Answer 4

In a perfect world, all subs would know the basics of academic studies and would be able to present a lesson, give a test/quiz, and conduct a class discussion on the topic selected by the regular teacher.  

The fact is, however, subs are hard to find.  Competent subs (people who can do the above things even without a degree or certificate) are even harder to find.  Making it necessary to have only certified subs would make it impossible to find people to fill the day-by-day vacancies every school experiences.  

Of course, we could require the teacher to either find his own sub or "crawl in sick."  If teachers had to do this, it would elminate any cries for "certified subs only."  When you're sick, you'll settle for just about any warm body in your chair!

Besides...just take a look at some of the people in our schools today (not all, not even a majority, but a sizable number nonetheless) who are certified to the hilt but absolutely, undeniably incompetent.  Certification is far overrated.

Answer 5

Ideally, yes. In my state we have a lot of little schools that wouldn't be able to find certified teachers for any or all sub positions. In our district, we can't even get enough certified teachers for all sub positions, many days we run out of subs.

So my answer is that it just isn't practical, but yes! The students deserve the best. Sometimes we can't do any better than we do!

Answer 6

Yes! They need to be, at least, somewhat qualified.

Answer 7

In the program i am in, you are required to do several substiuting hours before you are fully certified, it is part of becoming a certified teacher. However for those who decide to persue just becoming a substitute as a full career, i think they should have to be fully certified.