| This study focuses on six alternative certification program sites in two states with differing policy contexts, Massachusetts and Louisiana. The study describes how program administrators and faculty responded to the need to provide incentives that would attract candidates, while simultaneously ensuring that they were well-prepared.;The research documents how the program providers used the program components to promote quality in their graduates, including: recruitment and selection, coursework, clinical experience, and follow-up support. While the components were similar in name, they were quite different in design and implementation across program sites. The study also examines participants' experiences of these program components and the ways in which participants reported the components were more or less useful before and after they began teaching.;The findings indicate that the programs in this study were attractive to candidates because they could be completed quickly; they were inexpensive in comparison to traditional programs and offered fewer opportunity costs when compared to a university-based program; and they were more convenient for many prospective teachers, particularly when they were located close to their homes. However, the incentives also introduced limits on program capacity and placed pressure on content of the training they could reasonably provide. Programs in this sample did the best they could to balance this tension between providing attractive incentives and ensuring participants' quality. In so doing, they took two different approaches: all-purpose and locally-grounded.;The all-purpose programs in this study were initiated to recruit and select candidates broadly and prepare them for jobs throughout a state. In contrast, the locally-grounded programs were designed to target candidates who wanted to work in a local district and to prepare them to fill specific shortages. The design of the programs---all-purpose or locally-grounded---influenced the structure and content of the components of the program and what program administrators could do in terms of providing attractive incentives and training that promised candidates would be prepared. Thus, there were trade-offs inherent in both designs, and participants' experiences of the program components varied. |
