{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018421052631578946, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0061403508771929825, 'mean_word_length': 5.557471264367816, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Does Alternative Route Preparation Meet the Requirements of IDEA Assurance 14? A Policy Analysis

Persistent teacher shortages have led states to promulgate policies to support alternative pathways into teaching and hence supplement supply. Such alternatives may differ from traditional preparation in many ways, but each tends to tap non-traditional participants. Currently, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) requires that special education teachers (SET) be fully certified and, if not, that they be enrolled in high-quality alternative preparation. The purpose of this study was to identify state policies supporting alternative route programs and to organize them into mutually exclusive conceptual models. We also determined whether and under what circumstances these models satisfy IDEA Part B assurances concerning SETs who are not fully certified. We identified 174 policies across 48 states and grouped them into eight models, two of which offer good potential for addressing the IDEA assurances. We discuss the implications of these findings for states and, with regard to design, alternative route providers.