>> i have very strong confidence that david will be in the right place where the conservative party would like to be on these issues. but obviously we'll wait to hear >> are you happy the way the campaign was conducted? >> the campaign, i think, it's

obvious for all of the parties was affected by the leadership debates. it was something all had to respond to. i think we responded very effectively particularly in the last week, 10 days of the campaign. i think we managed to get the message across quite clearly to the electorate. >> was it a mistake to agree with the debates? >> i think we've been pushing for these debates for many, many years. i think it would have been very hard at the point the prime minister was prepared to do it. we changed our minds. also think it's actually a positive thing. one of the striking things certainly in my count last night was the increase of turnout up to 62 to over 68%. significantly more interest in the political process. that is a good thing. >> okay. thank you all very much. thank you, david. >> it's been reported by one of our political correspondents that david cameron isn't expecting to meet with nick

clegg but more interestingly the tory sources aren't ruling out election reform but he will form a stable government for britain. well, we'll wait to see. let's have a look. we have how many seats to come, 29 to come. >> i want to go back to the phrase and look at the electoral arithmetic. the ones that we're going to talk about are the ones that really bring the mass into play here. for example, this area. let's go inside and have a look of them. westmoreland, it's a very close contest here. just look at the swing that the tories would need to take this. so less than 1% swing here. if i take us on to cheltenham, a pretty similar situation. it's neck and neck. it would take very little to bring the tories here, peter.

>> with both of these seats, we look at what has been happening in these liberal democrats last night and some of them went conservative and some of them went to bigger liberal democrat majorities. so who knows. and, of course, the outcome -- if the tories wins both it affects the parliamentary arithmetic one way. >> we haven't had these results and in one more which is very interesting at least it was a big head result last time around for george galloway, this time ali is the labour candidate. hopes to be the first female muslim labour m.p. and let's just say it doesn't really help to look at the swing, i suppose. she could unseat the respect candidate. there is a respect candidate but it's not george galloway. >> it wasn't george galloway. and indeed george galloway has done worse where he has fought. he'll be the fourth labour gain of the selection. and a train spotter, especially

for train spotters people have been saying the swing to the conservatives in this election is greater than margaret thatcher achieved in 1979. at the moment, it isn't. i say at the moment because margaret thatcher achieved a 5.3% swing. at the moment with a few seats left it's a 5.2% swing. in 1979, what happened is the conservatives went up 8 points and labour went down a little. this time the tory has gone up 4 points and labour has gone down a lot. it's not strictly true to say this is a bigger swing than margaret thatcher swing. >> you see the math has arranged itself in every little vertebra in each constituency. >> on the mechanics of this, are you cool about the way it's being conducted or do you think it's going to become hysterical? >> no i think we should be a bit

more relaxed to us but this happens in every european election. you have to have a negotiation about who forms negotiation and maybe we've become a bit more european. maybe we'll have this in the future as well. where you'll have parties having to trade off between each other. >> but there is quite a fetish with keeping party unity in this country. if you have a proportion representation system, you have more parties and it's easier to move around and break away and form different shapes. i mean, quite clearly from what we've been hearing from the tories, for instance, the idea that the tories might concede some type of representation it's very obnoxious. >> i had to talk to someone who had to negotiate the party. the green party couldn't agree with its party. the leadership may want to concede something but they may not be able to sell their members and that may be the problem. >> greg saying they are not up to clegg to decide these things.

up to us to the party. >> many things about the tories about the proportional representation and that may be what the rub comes. >> let's go to buckingham, the seat -- the disillusion, the speaker of the house of commons, nigel, for you taking him on david shookman is there. david, good afternoon, if it is good afternoon. it is 5 minutes past 12:00. tell us what's going on. >> well, the counting here behind me has been underway for about 2 1/2 hours now. the very latest we're getting the team of john -- they are confident, they are using quietly optimistic. they feel they have done all right so far and really what you're left with is a battle for second place by convention the major westminster party do not put up candi

he has at the point independents against the leader. nigel was hoping to be here today but instead is nursing his wounds in hospital up the road in oxford. some details what went wrong with his stunt trying to tow a banner to try to impress the voters of buckingham. it turned out that what he was trying to do with a pilot was make a multiple series of attempts to collect this banner from the airfield involving the light aircraft flying low over the runway apparently made now, we're hearing believe account from his campaign manager. apparently during this multiple series of attempts, he felt very nervous. the fifth attempt went wrong. the banner somehow got caught up in the tail plane. the plane crashed and as we

know, both injured. what is emerging during the course of the morning is more detail about exactly what happened. he felt like he'd been hit in the chest by a train at the employment of the crash. and then lying in the wreckage he felt the aircraft fuel dripping onto him and told his campaign manager yesterday evening i really thought my time was up. well, he's now in good spirits. he spent the night in the hospital. he's not going to make to the count here today. he will be watching on television. and to say the latest work from the bercow team. they are sounding battle. there's a battle for second place here. between nigal farage. we'll get more information, about half past 1:00. >> thank you very much, david.

and now we're in cheltenham. this is one of the top targets of the conservatives to take from the liberal democrats. what's the story as far as you can gather it today? >> well, i've just spoken to both sides and the early occasions that they might hold this seat. that would be a victory for martin. he was a spokesman on the environment. i must say if you just look behind me they have just finished the investigation process here they haven't even started the official count. we're expecting counts at 1:00. it's a tight seat. the majority -- the national majority would be 316. it would be only needing a .3% from the tories. they do have one of their top a-list candidates here, an openly gay candidate. they've had a lot of ashcroft money according to his opponents. but it looking as if he might not have been able to win the feet for the conservative party.

t and they explained what would happen with the conservative party. he says if he wins the seat he will be at a meeting tomorrow in london he hopes and the decision will be made on policy, he believes. he off the record obviously can't talk about anything in your but it seems fair enough to assume that if there is no deal on p.r., they could support the tories in some way, in a limited way. >> geeta, thank you very much. joe is in norrage north and it was a seat that was taken in a bielection. again, very interesting indications from cheltenham there. what's your feeling there? >> well, certainly a few hours ago it was too close to call. but we're expecting the declaration within the hour and the conservatives and the

candidate chloe smith looking confident. it would be a swing if they were to take the seat. chloe smith won that in the bi-election. david cameron came down to celebrate that win. they were pinning their hopes in this seat. the tories have performed very strongly across the eastern region really labour only holding those two seats. charles clark in norwich south losing by just a few hundred votes. all the focus is here in norwich south and as far as the conservatives are concerned they may reduce the majority that they have, that 7,000 majority but ironically, of course, this is still a national labour majority. if the boundaries changes -- despite that, the labour candidate isn't looking that confident. of course, there is still about

45 minutes to go if the returning officer is correct and we'll, of course, bring you that declaration and then we'll have the result on broad land. it is likely to go tory but it will probably stay with the tories a majority of around 5,000. that certainly is the prediction. one caveat bi-election victories are a strange beast. if you remember it was ian gibson the sitting m.p. since 1997, he resigned suddenly because labour said he wouldn't be able to stand for them again in the election over the expenses. right at the height of the expenses scandal that triggered that bi-election and chloe smith won that. >> and while we're talking about it. it was a majority according to the national result in 2005 this constituency would have had a majority of 6,700. is that dispute by tory and

labour or is that generally accepted that's the accurate position? >> no, i think it is except it's the accurate position. i think the problem here for labour is the fact that the swing back to them even though they have that national -- as you say this very strange turn this national majority would be really huge. and looking at the way it's gone here across this region, across the eastern region, the tories have performed extremely strongly. it would be a very major upset if labour did actually hold the seat as it would be. but at the moment it looks as if it's going to be a conservative game. >> okay. well, we'll look forward to getting that one. john, if john bercow goes back to the house of commons, there's discussion about the incoming conservative government -- the incoming membership, the house would try and change it. do you think they will or is that a trivial matter compared to all the other problems they've got? >> i always thought that the possibility of that was slim.

would a new tory government that's tried to govern in the interests of the nation as its first act in parliament think right? we're going to get -- we're going to get bercow because we don't like him. he's not loved by the conservative party but it would be an extraordinary first act of a conservative government or a minority government to think, right, we've got to get the speaker. i just don't see it happening. it almost seems like student politics rather than serious politics. >> it hasn't written since 1865. charles suffered a defeat of >> douglas comes well who was the m.p. who played a key role in bringing down the former speaker he's come out on his website and said something the tories should embrace electoral reform. >> okay. we're joined by ian watson who has information from the labour camp. and good afternoon.

what's the story that you have? >> yes. well, the senior sources inside labour headquarters come out and spoke to us a few minutes ago and they're staying that they're still very confident that potentially some kind of deal could be done with the federal democrats. they're saying if they're interpreting what nick clegg he was very clear to leaving the door open and wanted to point out his continued emphasis on political reform. what they're suggesting he said during the course of the election campaign, obviously the party that gets the most votes and the most seats, which is the first chance of forming a government you have to have a consistent message during the campaign. but take a look what he said. they're suggesting an electoral reform and that is what they are willing to offer. now, also very senior downing street sources are saying there's a basis for a deal with the liberal democrats which would be based on electoral reform and also tried to get some kind of shared platform to get through the recession and into economic recovery.

so from their point of view they haven't ruled out any kind of deal with the fact that nick clegg he said it's up to david cameron to see if he can govern in the national interest. means that in effect he's expected what to do to talk to both parties. they are expected to talk to nick clegg. they are not going to do so until all the results are in and the reason for that is quite simple. they want to be sure that together labour and the liberal democrats could outvote the conservatives because clearly one thing it would not have in their view legitimacy if they end up being a minority government, a minority kohl's. -- coalition. >> that doesn't seem to be too difficult. the prediction is that they will have between them liberal democrats and labour 315. and the conservatives will have 307. so that's the kind of phony hurdle they're setting up, isn't it?

>> as i said, one of the reasons that they're very keen until every single result is in and not go in the predictions because it goes to the position of why together any kind of coalition deal would be viable in any case. now, they're not saying they need 336 seats. they're simply saying together they need more than the conservatives would have. obviously, there are going to be some minor parties as well and labour could rely, of course, on the support of the sdlpmp's from northern ireland. they would expect support from the northern, you know,ists. and that's why at the moment they don't want to go any further than what they said earlier. they believe nick clegg is keeping the door open. they believe they are deal of election reform being for the liberal democrats but what they're emphasizing at this time they will not have the formal discussions until after the final results are in. now obviously the fight that nick clegg that david cameron and not gordon brown gets first

choice as a potential sitter hasn't disturbed them too much if nick clegg believes political reform is the key to this. >> okay. and thank you very much. you'll keep us informed if there are any developments. there are bound of developments after david cameron speaks at 2:30 which we're waiting for. i assume the queen will not be coming back to london this afternoon. she was holding an investitures being held this morning. the national anthem being played after it. she was expected at 1:00 today. and it's three-quarters before that. unless gordon brown wishes to resign there's no particular purpose in her coming back. so the queen there. you wanted to make a point about something or other. i can't remember what it was? >> i think i've exhausted all my

points. >> really. >> i'll make fresh points if you want. i can always -- >> fresh but nonexhausted. >> i wanted to ask jonathan powell actually when you were talking about what happened in 1970 when the liberal democrats led a merry dance and there was no agreement on proportion representation. what was gordon brown's attitude at that time? >> i can't actually recollect the negotiations at the time. these negotiations were held tight indeed -- >> because john prescott made absolutely clear that he was opposed to any kind of deal. i wonder mr. gordon brown at that stage because he has been a late convert -- >> i think the problem was selling representation to the labour party. the interesting thing now it's is the labour party offering proportionate representation and the conservatives who are being cherry about it. >> in wonder gordon brown was a primary tribal politician. i wonder what his -- >> the experience of tony blair,

you got the roy jenkins on. but by the time that had happened the steam had gone out of it and i don't know what roy felt about it. i suspect he didn't find it at all agreeable to find his favorite word. he put a lot of effort. it's a wonderfully eloquent report. if cameron offered a speakers conference or inquiry to the liberal democrats they might think very and justifiably that we went that way before with tony blair and it takes forever and produces zippo. >> yeah. and the times change in the process. so you're absolutely right. when we started down the process, the idea was to get to a.v. plus and to bring liberals into the government in cabinet positions. but by the time we got there, it was too late and it was clear that wasn't going to be -- >> and they're not devils but i mean, politicians -- if they're wise eat with a long spoon, don't they. you can't be too careful. jeremy? >> david, thanks very much

indeed. we're joined now by alex salmon of the snp. you're not -- >> good afternoon. >> gach. -- good afternoon. you're not talking to anyone, are you, about possible arrangements it keep either cameron or brown in government? >> well, you know, if i were generally it would be unwise to discuss it in too much detail with you. on television. otherwise, they wouldn't talk to me again. >> i note that's not really an answer, is it? >> well, of course, it's not an answer because that would be the point of having the discussions. people can't have private -- i mean, jeremy, we've been through this situation for years ago in scotland. we're well used to colleagues have been used to the national assembly. i have to say to you making declarations of revelations of our television is not conducive to discussion.

>> there's no possibility of you doing a deal with the conservatives given they have such minimal support there, is there? >> if you want a straight answer to the question i think you're absolutely right. >> okay. and as regards to the labour party, what would be the price there? >> well, as you probably noticed we don't have the final results yet, jeremy. but as you probably noticed the fate seeming to have dealt us of a mighty hand between ourselves and companies. as i understand it, on the projections we have at the present moment sadly there would have to be some involvement of the s & p. if you were to get and construct a government scenario. for that reason, jeremy, i'm accepting the offer of the prime minister on behalf of the s & p company are accepting to have this civil service backup to have discussions to see what the possibilities are in terms of defending the interests of scotland, wales in this parliamentary situation.

>> and what are you looking for? >> you know, that's why we have the -- accept the offer and have the discussions. again, i've been through this process in 2007 with civil service backup to discuss from a different vantage point. that was the foremedication that ended up in an snp minority government in scotland. and i know exactly how you should go about this and it doesn't involve in showing too much of your hand before you have the discussions. >> thank you. that's very illuminating. we're joined now by two people who know a lot about coalitions. whose pocket are you in? >> cheeky. let's be serious. >> well, let's be serious. yes, go on. >> there's something not quite right there. i don't see either david cameron or gordon brown agreeing to any kind of arrangement which involves give us some more money which is really been the sum cry throughout the election. >> give us some insights, david,

as to how this sort of relationship works when you're trying to forge a common purpose and support each other? >> offquite know what you're offer. you want serious discussion about a country that is facing a very, very great fiscal crisis, which none of the political parties -- i'm not a member of any of them -- have faced up to. and are you messing around with discussions with salmond and the snp. >> somehow -- >> there's a strong, stable government. it is open to david cameron to talk to nick clegg. and if he does, they've got the numbers to have a government that can take us through this economic crisis, which is certainly going to last for two years and probably three. >> which do you think is preferable? a deal between brown and clegg or a deal between cameron and clegg? >> well, you must think i'm an idiot to ask me that question. i mean, the basic facts are that the electorate have given a

strong mandate but not an outright victory to david cameron. so he has obviously the first port of call. he is holding the position of having the largest number of mp's and the largest number of votes. that is by any standards a starting point. the question is, can we widen that government out to involve others? only he can decide that. but nick clegg has made it clear he will talk to him because he has got the strongest mandate which nick clegg defined as having the largest number of mp's and the largest number of votes. so i don't know why the bbc is spending its whole time about the labour party and the labour government. the issue is who is the electorate supporting? >> in the case of the occupancy of number one procession is nine/tenth of the law? >> no, it's not the complete travesty the constitution. at the moment gordon brown is a caretaker.

i'm sure he will act honorably and he's waiting for a situation to arise where he could resign confident that there was a majority government capable of being formed. the issue is they've all said they want stable and strong government. stable and strong government does not come on a minority government. [talking simultaneously] >> the said election is as follows. the liberal democrat 8,977. independent, 197. davidson, ian, green party, 693. christopher, u.k. independence party, 926. james andrew, the labour party candidate, 17,363. white, chris, the conservative

party candidate, 20,876. [applause] >> conservatives gained warrick and leamigton. 84% turnout and a swing from labour to conservatives of 8.8%. nearly 9%. so chris white the seat in 2005. took it from james plaskitt and there's the swing. there's a conservative gain in warwick and leamington. 84.5%. i'm interested what's going to happen in the wait of the chaos that there has been in so many of these counts. that the kind of -- all this has been looked at. we were talking about the jep

kins review how you kick something in the long grass. we talked about whether there should be polling stations in supermarkets and whether people should be able to vote on saturdays when it's much more conducive to people having the time to go and vote. in wonder if some of these things -- it's all lovely going in there with the plywood partitions and the stubby pencil but i wonder if there isn't a better way of doing things. the good people of warwick and leamington have gone out in force and done their democratic duty without too much trouble. >> let's have look at warwick and leamington. >> this is a seat labour clung on to with 266 votes. since then there have been boundary changes and so you can see if we go into that what the tories have taken us around. peter, i'm wondering how much the boundary changes have favored any party. i mean, clearly it was designed to be particularly fair but are we guessing any sense what that has done? >> the boundary changes should have helped labour. it made it slightly different. they failed to do so because of the size of the swing.

across britain, yeah, you see an 8.8% swing. had labour kept the swing down to 3 or 4% which they have in many oth have ginals th held onto it because of the boundary changes but they didn't. in other parts of england, the boundary changes have generally helped the conservatives. it hasn't undone all the bias in britain's political geography but it has undone some of that bias. >> john was mentioning this extraordinary rise in turnout. i mean, a sense that people know when they're in a marginal. are they all turning out? >> they tend to at the end. when pollsters ask when they have week or two weeks ago he ask do have a marginal and safe seat they say no. as the parties pile in with the phone calls and the leaflets by the end people do. clearly they did in warwick and leamington. >> next time we'll show you a very odd electoral anomaly between two seats, same share of the seat. david? >> i look forward to that.

in the meantime, jeremy vine on labour's share performance of the vote. historically, from number 10. >> yes, from our own interior of the stairwell at number at the point. let me make my way up the stairs. they had the portraits against the staircase. we're going to look up and see in context grown's performance in terms of share of the vote compared to other labour leaders. so, for example, we have atley 1945. 47.7% of the vote. 146 seat majority. the majority is written underneath the pictures. nearly 50% of the vote. that's because the liberals were not really at the races at this stage in british politics. then 1964. hal wilson, 44%. a much smaller majority here. big percentages slips below 40 in february, '74. harold wilson as you can see 37.2.

and harold wilson below 40%. 39.3. and he gets a very, very slender 3-seat majority. and it looking as if labour's vote share is drifting away. you have jim callahan, 1979. 36.9% of the vote. and them you get in 1997, this extraordinary recovery with new labour and tony player and 43.2%. and a 177 seat landslide majority. and labour very much back in the game and gradually the vote share drops 2001, 40%. 165-seat majority. you can see and then it comes down even further in 2005 with mr. blair winning with only just over 35% of the vote. 64-seat majority for him. down the staircase the various performances of labour leaders and if mr. brown look away how has he done?

well, the answer today in the general election 29%. so that's below all the other leaders we just mentioned. in all the other elections we just mentioned. where do we go to a labour leader that performed that badly we could go to 1992. never became prime minister. neil lost that election 35.2% of the vote. still above what gordon brown got. the obvious comparison, i think, probably actually is this one, a very painful one for mr. brown. michael foote, 1983, 28.3% of the vote. and it's something that, of course, hasn't been discussed too much yet because we've been busy with so many other things. but gordon brown's performance in terms of percentage share of the vote is very low in this election. and it's one of the reasons the argument is made that he cannot stay at number 10. david? >> jeremy, thanks very much indeed.

now, let's go back down to college green and join under neil. >> thanks, david. we're always happy to obottom line. we'll talk about the conservatives. i've got the political editor to keep us right here. good to see you. i'm joined by ed who wants me to tell you he won his seat of 52% of the vote so he doesn't need electoral reform. tim montgomery and friday forehead. tell me the mood of the conservatives as they come out of this campaign and head towards mr. cameron's statements at 2:30? >> there is not very much happiness among the conservatives ranks. david cameron has got the greatest swing since 1931 but he failed to get a majority against prime minister as unpopular gordon brown is and record as dismal as labour has. we should have done better and got the majority. the campaign seems to have reduced tory support rather than increased it. and that the party is looking very weak now because if there

is a second election and again, most of the speakers i speak to said there probably would be then david cameron will have to do them and now. -- then and now. it will make it difficult to get a majority around. >> so any kind of deal with the lib dems? >> no. there's great sensitivity that some parts of the tory party may want a p.r. deal which would create believe sort of centralizing consensus and the parliamentary party doesn't want anything to do with the lib dems if they had a voice right now and they don't because there is no chairman of the backbench mp's group. they would be saying under no circumstances would we do a deal with lib dems. heading toward the election. >> as you said with conservative home you have unparalleled lines to the tory grassroots. is it your sense of the party would rather see a minority cameron government than any kind of deal with mr. clegg

>> we started a poll of grassroots numbers this morning. and we had about 1500 replies to do that survey so far. we asked him coalition or minority government and it's 92% in favor of going alone and not joining the liberal democrats. >> so 8%, isn't it? >> it's 8%. [laughter] >> you also told me during the campaign that you would tell me the truth about the tory campaign once the election was over. describe it to me in two words. >> i can't do it in two words. the issue i think is that the grassroots wanted a very difficult campaign from the tory leadership. and the tory leadership told you get all they knew what they were doing. and we have perhaps the best opportunity in a generation to win an election. and we haven't won that lick. -- election. and what we need from the cameron leadership is a much more open kind of leadership. a leadership that listens to the views of the broad cross-section

of the party because the party feels frustrated that the kind of campaign that they would have liked to have seen wasn't offered and actually it's been not a campaign that succeeded. >> and because he didn't win the campaign he has to listen now? when you win you can do what you want. when you don't win you got to listen? >> well, i think david cameron has won. he's taken us within spitting distance of a majority win. >> should he do a deal with the liberal democrats? >> well, my view is that a deal is not on the cards either from nick clegg or from david cameron. i think they will have a liberal -- >> my sense here there's a lot of conservatives here illustrating the problem and illustrating the phrase that was used in expenses. they don't get it. there isn't a conservative minority government currently on offer. they don't have the rights to do that. >> let me just interrupt you. let's go straight to the results.

>> for each candidate at the said election is as follows. >> this is the seat which george galloway. 27,800 -- [applause] >> there's a new respect candidate in place of george galloway. >> 21,784. the green party, 856. patrick brooks, independent, 277. independent, 100. united voice, 209. the conservative party candidate, 7,071. [applause]

>> independent, 71. [laughter] >> the british national party, 1,405. [booing] >> liberal democrat, 10,210. [applause] >> respect, 8,532. [applause] >> pirate party of the united kingdom, 213. the number of ballot papers rejected, 662. ballot papers include -- >> so this is a labour gain. the third labour gain of this election.

and respect no longer has the seat in the house of commons. so labour take that seat back. and especially the figures. the majority of 11,500. a hefty majority. not a big turnout. 10 points up last time it was around. the majority of 11,574. and the change here -- and this human nature fall in -- huge fall was 10% job when he stood her in the last general election, he said he wouldn't stand twice in this space. and the swing of 14.1% from respect to labour. the conservatives have held on to walden since we're short of results, let's just see that. we've got 25 to go.

haselhurst stands with the budget is taken. majority 15,000. and up 5 percentage points. labour down 5 percentage points. so there we are. we might just have a look at one or two faces that will come in with the conservatives. this is not a new face but zach goldsmith is in richmond park. the novelist louise in corby of a steel town. and jacob reese whose sister failed to take the neighboring seat took northwest somerset, son of the former editor of the "times."

patel in wit whitton and then surrey. is sounds a very large place to be a seat. surrey east, is it? which surrey was that, i wonder. oh, well? i'm not sure. surrey east i think it was. yes. well, now i've opinion joined here by one of the most distinguished figures of british political coverage, of election coverage who has covered every election since 1950 who invented the whole concept of swing which is known as butler swing. who's written studies of almost every election, who i worked with in the first election i presented way back in 1979. and so he really is the guru of gurus of elections. david, in want to ask you what you make of this election? >> well, it's fascinating for a nerd like me and you who like

elections. it is a very -- it's been a various on-story the election as a whole. the result produces very difficult problems for all the parties. and one finds very difficult to see how they can be solved with a lasting -- in a lasting way and i'm afraid i have -- i have to say that we shall see another election before very long because i don't see the compromises that are necessary for an understanding let alone a coalition being made by the parties, the rank-and-file, it is leaders. >> is this for the eagerness to cap one that's uncertain? i mean, like harold wilson in '74. >> in 1974 analogy is very strong one. and i think on the whole if cameron does form the next government, a minority government, he's got a very good chance in the past times you had

a very good chance of winning a clear majority. give them a fair go. unfortunately at the moment the economic situation is so dire that any new government getting in may very soon get itself deeply unpopular. >> is your view then one of pessimism about the british election? after all everyone knows the problems we're in. people differ about the cause of it. that all three parties say there have got to be radical cuts in taxation. you're saying the person who has to do that will become unpopular as though we were all children and can't accept what it is what's got to be done? >> it's the view mervin king holds and maybe a long view. i don't like it. i'm naturally an optimist and i think on the whole my fellow countrymen have a lot of good sense and they ought to be able to sort it all out. i can't say i've been encouraged in that idea really by all the things i've heard in the last 24 hours. >> it's quite interesting.

there's some twittering and tweeting about the liberals and a lot of complaints, yes, about the possibility the liberals getting in bed with the tories? >> what i got is a quick look at the blogs. we've seen -- we've heard a lot about twitter. there are political blogs out there that are important. conservative home we saw its editor. it's got a discussion already out there about p.r. and whether there should be some concession immediately christian support cameron say we need a government alone. p.r. should not be pursued under any circumstances. but by contrast, one perhaps lone voice here douglas caswell kind of a right wing conservative is actually calling for -- for the party to consider electoral reform on his blog so one voice there amongst the conservatives. yes, the liberal democrat voice are talking about this issue. but they're already unhappy, a few people, that nick clegg

seems to be coming down on the conservatives. big mistake says one of them. other people coming back and saying, this is very poor. we shouldn't be doing this. i have a couple of tweets. i thought you were different, nick clegg. i thought you had fairness at heart. but somebody else -- i would have preferred a union. i think clegg has done the right thing. love it or hate it, cons do have more votes. and just on one other tweet here, quite interesting, sally has been one of the biggest twitters. >> the speaker's wife. >> a very vigorous labour supporter. she's turned up at her us. 's count at buckingham and she's gone quiet. no tweets from me. listen to the size of relief. got to do the 1950 political house wifey stuff. there's sally bercow.

>> the principle of argument of some different voting system. are you sympathetic to it intellectually. do you think it's the right way for this country to go? >> i'm sorry. i'm terribly ambivalent about this. i think that the electoral system can't be justified if it doesn't work. i've never thought we'd get p.r. until we had at least two successful elections not producing clear majority which is the justification for the unfairness. but it is system. it's unfair to the conservatives. they need about 7% more than labour did in order to get a clear majority. it's unfair to the liberals. they were very close to labour. they were bound to get fewer seats. but the trouble is if you are pro-p.r. it means that you have to accept we shall have minority governments with b & p and

representation and other awkward minorities with the work of parliament. >> what's your view? >> i've always been told rather in the way that david is because when you look at it, did it in the most detached way possible. our voting arrangements are a rigged market in a era of deregulation. there's also a historical argument saying clear decisive majorities quite often at times of crisis refuse a desirable thing. and the problem we're facing today elections normally are a combination of catharsis and refreshment in the house of commons. we're getting a refreshment of the house of commons. it's far from cathartic. it's a scratchy result which is making it scratchy for ourselves. if we had a minority system each time we would to have institutionalize it. we wouldn't have a bit of paper that i've been quoting endlessly from the cabinet office of the palace of the justice select committee. we'd have to have what scotland had in the de-evolution system for how we handle certain

results like this. >> didn't france try it out and then abandon it? could you try it out and it didn't work, i mean, we're a pragmatic company supposedly and if it didn't work, go back? >> i'm sure that would be a political issue of dispute. all electoral systems have their flaws. and different runs are suitable for different companies and different times. at the moment i'm afraid it is very difficult to come down firmly on one side or the other. they all have snags. >> in his lecture when he was made professor of poetry. his preferred method, with that there could be no argument. that works. let's join jeremy. >> we're joined by jack who has just been elected in birmingham. and joins his wife in the house of commons. his wife being harriet harman. what do you think of this idea of some sort of accommodation between your party and the

liberal democrats? >> well, the electorate have spoken. what they want is stable government. what they do not want is a conservative government. what's extraordinary about the results last night is that the big loser is the conservative party. we have been in power for 13 years. we've had the worst global economic crisis for 100 years. we've had the tories pouring ashcroft money into the marginals to try and buy seats. they were the conservative party 24% ahead in the polls. yet they have failed to gain a majority in the house of commons. >> they got 2 million votes more than you did. >> 2 million more people wanted a labour government apparently. >> yes. but they -- the country wants stable government, progressive government, fair government. it does not want a conservative government. >> well, then why did more people vote for it? >> the verdict of the country is clear.

if this was a conservative country, and it is not a conservative country, the conservatives would have won a majority. the big losers are the conservative party. >> the conservatives got more votes than tony blair got in one of his elections. >> the conservatives have not succeeded in winning a majority in parliament. >> well, thank you -- >> the electorate does not want a conservative government. the last thing at a time like this that the country needs is a conservative government, not least because with their plans, jeremy, for an emergency in 60 days they would make -- >> just to be clear about this. what they really said is they want a minority government led by an unpopular prime minister who has failed to win an election propped up by a party in third place. that's what the people of britain really want, is it? >> discussions will now need to take place as to how we can deliver stable government in difficult times for the people of britain.

the outcome must not be, however, a conservative government. and the liberals are going to have to reflect upon this. do they really want to get into bed with david cameron? because you've only got to come here to birmingham to see what's happened as a consequence of a conservative lib dem alliance in the council cutting 2,000 jobs, services to the community as a consequence in birmingham, the conservatives did not make gains. >> i think we've understood you. thank you very much, jack. thanks. >> thank you. >> so let's rejoin jeremy vine. jeremy, if you're equipped and ready to go? are you in downing street or where are you now? >> we're do you think street. do you remember the start of believe chaff long time ago, 12, 14 hours ago. we were looking at the conservatives paving stones these seats they need, the 116 seats for david cameron to get all the way down to downing street to number 10.

each paving stone has a name of the seat on them. we've put them down on the streets. dover is there and gradually they moved on a little bit further. stockton south means they no longer have only one seat in the northeast of england. you can see the names on the paving stones. chatham, down the street they came winning these seats. we laid them out first in orto difficult and we laid them in the order they won them in and the last one you just heard warrick coming in. and it leaves david cameron short, doesn't he? he hasn't quite paved the whole way to the door of number at the point. there's a bit of space between the paving stones and the doorstep. our projections give him more seats so he'll close believe space down even further. it's tantalizing for david cameron. look how closest. but he's not quite there. he can't go up the steps and go up to the top yet.

and he can't really go through the open door 'cause gordon brown is still in there. david? >> we had one call, not a particularly impressive one for brown to go. >> jane kennedy former m.p. from liverpool. she said gordon brown should step down as he has not been able -- seem to be able to communicate the mental. we needed somebody who could communicate the labour party's vision and policy. and she says that he needs to stand down. let me just add that jane kennedy was not a known liver of gordon brown and has expressed those sort of before about his leadership and seeing she is down as an m.p. not in the front lines saying he's got to go. not in the vanguard it's fair to say. >> nick clegg has left where he made hits statement about conservative party has most votes in the seats. it's up to them to show they can move in the national interest.

and whether he's on his way to meetings or discussions, who knows. maybe he's just going home to have a good night sleep or a good day's sleep. anyway, a man at the center of attention nick clegg as a result of this election which was a disappointment to him as he confessed liberal number of seats fell by 5 or they'd fallen by 5 so far. and the vote -- then it went up a tiny bit. it's an extraordinary story because everywhere you went during that campaign people were saying the liberal votes is going to go up. the liral vo will ar away. everybody was talking how everybody else was going to vote liberal and they didn't or liberal democrats. >> their percentage share of votes is up 1% compared where we were and where we thought we were going to be is not it. >> emily? >> jeremy, we're showing you a second ago his paving stones why the conservatives haven't made it.

this is an extraordinary electoral analogy. i'm going to take to you two seats. the first was the very first declaration of the night. bridget philipson winning. let me take you to another one where the result was exactly the same for the tories, nigel evans winning with 50.3% share of the vote. but the difference this man needed 26,000 votes to the labour candidate's 19,000. why, peter? >> there's two reasons, emily. the first is the electorate is quite larger than the south. 78,000 in the valley. they were operating on 2001 census data. so the -- they're behind the curve. >> can the conservatives complain this is an unfair system where they are winning seats?

>> slightly unfair in the sense of the boundary commission is always operating on the old data and not on the best estimates. the most important reason is the turnout was higher in ribble valley. it was 67% than 57 in houghton. so the combination of higher turnout and the bigger electorate -- the conservatives need typically some thousands more votes on average in their seats. the labour needs in its seat. 5 years ago labour got 36% of the vote and the a clear 63-seat majority. last night or yesterday the conservatives got 37% of the votes, an 8-point lead in labour. it's better in the popular vote in labour. and that's the reason why because britain's political geography is still stacked against the tories. one personal point. it's wonderful to see david butler here, 44 years ago he was -- his lectures inspired me

to go into political number crumbling. -- crunching. it was to give david at the knighthood which is long overdue. >> and certainly if dr. butler is right in his prognosis we won't be dismantling this set anytime soon. >> i don't know whether you heard that? >> yes, embarrassing. >> very embarrassing. [laughter] >> but nonetheless the true. let's go on because we've got a few moments before we go. roger morgan first minister of wales. thank you for coming to talk to us. what do you think about -- what do you think about the state of play here in london at westminster? what advice would you give people how to handle it? >> well, you have to take advice. when we were faced with a similar situation in 2007 i got on the telephone to helen clark and she said her health minister who happened to be in london

attack to the labor executive about how to form a minority government with a coalition because she told me over the phone we just ripped up the westminster rule book in trying to form a coalition. now, obviously david cameron is in the poll position but unless he can do some sort of deal with the liberal democrats or others to get a queen speech through, then i don't think he can form a sustainable government which is obviously desperately needed in the view of financial firestorm going on out there in the financial markets. >> but roger, what do you mean when you said you tore up the westminster rule book. were you prepared to make a whole raft of changes that had never occurred to you when you were fighting the election? >> well, you know, what you have to do -- you have to allow civil servants to be guiding parties like the liberal democrats who are conducting simultaneous negotiations with us, labour.

and with the conservatives to form an antilabour coalition. and in different parts of the welsh assembly government headquarters building there were teams of civil servants bringing together special advisors and not the leaders but the sort of very close to the leaders senior politicians. and special advisors to see if the antilabour coalition could be formed. and the labour lib dem coalition could be formed. >> was it a painful process as a politician? did you have to eat humble pie? >> well, it took us two months and i finished up having half. apart from that it was very stressful clearly but we got there in the end. we have time to be patient because we did not have financial responsibilities nor was there a raging financial firestorm out in the international financial markets but nick clegg is the critical person here and vince cable may be because if david cameron cannot form a sustainable government -- there's no use having say i can form a minority government.

i will dare the other parties to vote down the queen's speech. ...

>> the midterm elections are just a six month away and could change the balance of power in washington. watch the debates that have already taken place in key house and governor races across the country online at the new c-span video library. search it, watch it, clip and share it, all free. it's cable's latest gift to america. >> on tuesday national teachers day the house education committee held at his hearing about supporting teachers. it's part of a series of hearings on the no child left behind act.

this is 90 minutes. >> a quorum being present, the committee on education and labour will come to order. today is national teachers day, and this is a day in the week in which we honor a amazing teachers, all teachers in this country, and all those who hopefully aspire to be teachers. at today's hearing we will explore the urgent issue of how we can best support teachers and leaders in schools, and by doing so support students and our economic recovery. of all other factors involving giving children a good education none is more important than the teacher, school leaders are close second. despite his unique role of helping shape our future generations we still don't treat teachers as professionals. we all know the stories of and rebel teachers who are having success in closing the achievement gap keeping kids in schools and helping students

themselves. 14% of the teachers stopped teaching after their first year. more than a third leave after three years and almost 50% leave within five years. it is clear we have to do a much better job of recruiting, retaining, rewarding and supporting excellent teachers and leaders. we have to do it a much better job of making the classroom reflect a modern workplace and we have to do a much better job in ensuring that teacher talent is distributed equally in a district so that students need the best teachers have access to them. in almost every school district across the country, schools of students most in need of funding often get the fewest resources. children in highest poverty, high minority schools are assigned to teachers without strong backgrounds in a subject matter twice the rate. this leaves us with an embarrassing and persistent achievement gap in this country. and poses a real threat to economic recovery and to our global competitiveness. too often in this country for minority students on on a trajectory towards failure without access to great schools

or great teachers. on average african-american and hispanic students reach fourth grade three years behind their white peers. only slightly more than half of the hispanic and african-american students graduate high school on time compared to over three quarters of the white students. high school dropouts can have any knows economic impact on our local communities and on our nation as a whole. one high school dropout will cost the nation more than a quarter of a dollars in lost wages, taxes and productivity over the course of his or her lifetime. altogether dropouts in classes in a class of 2008 will cost this country nearly $319 billion in wages over the lifetime. but research shows that given the right resources we can change the fortune for many of these students. in los angeles, for example, a study shows as if the district were to replace the least effective teachers with the most effective teachers for four years, it would completely close the achievement gap. that's stunning and will examine whether not it is true.

[laughter] >> these studies, you've got to love them. excellent teachers are the key to success in our schools. but we will be able to resolve the many challenges facing our schools unless we change the way we teach an entry teachers. to help attract and retain bright teaching talent will need to make it what other workers expect, to be treated like professionals with respect, recognition, resources to do their job and be able to collaborate with their peers. in other countries have recognized this. finland as we heard recently in this city, teachers are recruited from the top 10% of the graduating class. teaching is the most sought out profession, more so than law and medicine. but now this happens on its own. it has to be part of a comprehensive and seismic shift in our discussions about the future of our education system in this country and we need our teachers to help us shape the discussion. we already make great progress in some of these forms in the

race in the race to the top and district are now being challenged to make progress and train about the lowest performing schools implementing data systems linked to better assessments and fairly and equally to shipping teacher talent that these reforms will be successful if they're done with teachers, not done to teachers. at every step of the way teachers must have a seat at the table. we need to reward teachers whose students are making significant bank gains in the classroom. we need to provide them with the means and time to help share their skills with less experienced teachers and we need to encourage team effort in the schools. we need to be smarter about where principles are placed in the district. research shows leaders still, that elitist skilled should be set to match the needs of the school, especially as it relates to turning around schools. if we're serious about closing the achievement gap and ending the high school dropout crisis about regaining our current global competitiveness in the world will have to take a streets looked at supporting teachers. i look forward to hang from our witnesses today about what we

can do to create modern teaching were places that will help every teacher, every teacher in every student succeed. and i think all them for being here today but i just want to add a note. that if you review the testimony in the beginning of almost every set of testimony today, you of all told us that the teachers the most important person in the scheme of education that we have in this country. those very same people now are looking at a series of layoffs due to a financial situation and economic condition that was not of their making to the financial scandals of wall street strip local communities of the tax revenues that they historically rely on to finance schools, local tax, property tax, sales taxes and through the state. but because of the downturn in the economy, sales taxes are down, properties are being reassessed, revenues are being lost. at the state level, local school district and school district level. i think we have to because there's an of that. i have introduced legislation, senator harkin has introduced legislation to try to stem the

extent that we can those layoffs. somewhere between 250 to 300,000 teachers, really school personnel, but others who are making so important to the support in the running of local schools of facing layoffs at the beginning of the budget year this june. so i just think that should be a backdrop because our response and our support for teachers isn't just about being in a classroom. it's about also the environment which they're called upon to work and the situations that they are cast into, not only for themselves but for their students and families are suffering the same kind of upsets, because the economic downturn. so i think it's important that i would hope that congress would respond by providing assistance to district to forestall these layoffs this year. and i would also hope for next year, but we shall see. without i would like to

recognize congressman castle, the senior republican and today's hearing. and subcommittee chair. ranking member of that year. >> thank you. whatever. [laughter] >> i was shocked to hear a couple of, you know, comments that you had concerning the studies that we get up here. i always thought they were perfect and we're supposed to assume that. i think you're probably right, they're not. i would also like to welcome the witnesses in both panels here today and offer my thanks for your participation in this hearing today. we are here today as chairman set forth to look at the importance of quality teachers and explore ways to support the best educators for our kids. no one denies the success of our education system depends largely upon the quality of classroom instruction. students deserve the most effective teachers because their future achievement may well depend upon the caliber of the men or women standing before

them in the classroom. academic research confirm that stupid excellent teachers excel while those assigned to teachers who are less affected sadly lacking i. as federal policymakers, we have responsibility to help ensure teachers are equipped and trained to perform well in the classroom. this is a responsibility we share with state and local leaders. who stand at the forefront of education policy. i look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how we can support the efforts already underway that work and reform those that do not. for years, republicans in congress have championed programs such as the teacher incentive fund to improve teacher effectiveness in the classroom, and reward effective teachers. republicans also believe in letting teachers teach, which means trusting the education on the frontlines and not the wisdom of the bureaucrats in washington. administration has included a number of proposals and their blueprint for we authorizing the elementary and secondary education act that touch upon

teacher performance. i am sure those proposals will be a part of our discussion today as well. we need to look into these issues more closely so we can move forward with reauthorization in a way that is responsible and serves the best interest of students. in closing, let me say there is no one size fits all federal solution to ensuring effective teachers in every classroom. but there are ways that congress can learn from our partners at the state and local level, encourage innovation around the country and remove harmful barriers at the federal level that stand in the way of students achievements. we must ensure our efforts in washington, d.c., do not undermine the ability for teachers and principals to make decisions that best suit their students unique needs. mr. chairman, thank you again for holding this hearing. thank you to the witnesses for being with us this afternoon. >> thank you. i'd like now to introduce our witnesses. excuse me,. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i really thank you for calling this hearing today.

today's hearing comes at a critical time in our work of we authorizing the elementary and secondary education that i still hold hope we can finish as this year. i know there's much work to done and those are testifying today will play a very major role. we really need to talk to our teachers. i do that regularly. those individuals that work on the frontlines of our education system and care about the success of the students, i am pleased to see a number of those professionals here today participating in the hearing. i have met with college teachers, as i was teaching myself 45 years ago. got my masters degree at university of michigan, and i appreciate all the work that's done at the university of michigan. some of these teachers are frustrated by the conflict

between mounting federal requirements and shrinking budgets. we certainly are saying that it. we see programs being level funded. even though more students are participating, which means less per student. you can't really justify level funding when there's an increase, even in the customers who come in. we have to give our teachers the tools, we have to give them the education. we have people like yourself on this panel who are involved in the education of teachers. there's two things you have to look at in educating a teacher. first of all, that you know the various methods of communicating to those students. and also, that they know well subject matter. i know when i got my masters degree at the university of michigan, i was teaching latin. so i learned some things about

teaching, great things about teaching, but i also come under doctor suite two is the chairman of the classical music department, he dug deeper into latin. so i would know my subject matter. i think those two things, i think, doctor ball, you have something to say about that. so i appreciate. >> thank you very much, mr. kildee. i would now like to introduce our witnesses and thank you and welcome to your expertise that our first witness will be randi weingarten who is the president of the 1.4 million member american federation of teachers, a longtime voice for america's teachers can also serve as a ft's vice president, was foreclosures the president of the united federation of teachers. she will talk to us about how to support teachers, professional learning of violence, working conditions. and our next witness will be doctor deborah ball who i believe mr. kildee is going to introduce. >> thank you.

deborah ball of the william h. paying collegiate profession of michigan were president obama was just saturday, and as another president had been idly 50 years before. she has received national attention for helping overhaul the universities teaching education program. the new initiative aims to improve teacher effectiveness by giving teacher candidates more training in the field. dr. paul is also the founder of the u. of m. mathematics teaching and learning to teach project which focuses on mathematics instruction, interventions designed to improve its quality and

effectiveness. dr. ball has authored or co-authored over 150 publications and has lectured in mid-numerous major presentations around the world. research has been recognized and several awards and honors and she has served on several national and international commissions and panels focused on policy initiatives, the improvement of education during the national mathematics advisory panel. i welcome heard today. welcome. >> our next witness will be doctor salazar was an associate professor in education leadership department at the university of nevada las vegas. she specializes in research on ship and construction leadership, professional development and school improvement. she also is authored a book for high impact schools which has been adopted by many school districts throughout the country for principle leadership training programs. today shall doctors about her research including which we must work well in was closed and leadership teams. mr. marcus with a senior fellow

at the manhattan institute and conducts research and write extensive the on education policy including topics such as school choice, high school graduation rates, accountability, special education that he is performed studies on high-stakes testing, performance for teachers and doctors on a public school system and his research has been published in many educational journals. welcome to all of you. those of you have been here before know that when you begin your testimony a green light will go on about foreigners into a testimony, and orange light will go on, in five minutes a red light will go on and we suggest you wrap up your testimony. we have two panels today. i'm going to try to get to both panels inside of three hours. i don't how many members will be coming and going. we have some other briefings later this afternoon that i'm worried about on the oil spill and some other activities taking on. what i will do, will go for a period of time and as others come, we will go to the first panel can have a but have a question. but if we don't, are able to do

that they will pick up the question with the people who haven't had a question with a second bill. i think you will see that this focus of these two panels on teaching is really about how we support teachers in the broadest sense but coming from a number of different angles, and so obviously we will make available the witnesses available written questions are followed if members want to do but i just want to make sure that we can get both panels in prior to other in russia that we have made a this afternoon. without, welcome, thank you for your time and we look for to your test with. >> thank you, chairman miller, thank you other committee members for the invitation to testify on the reauthorization, particularly as relates to teachers. i know that chairman miller has already said this, but i need to commend him, and the house for the leadership and commitment

for passing the local jobs for main street act, does the bill will counter the staggering cuts we are sitting to education budgets across the nation. we can't move forward with reform when we are in this kind of a dire economic downturn affecting schools and teachers and kids. and what we're seeing is as many as 300,000 educators nationwide will probably be laid off because of this economic downturn. so it towards this end, in teacher appreciation week, today teacher appreciation day, we have launched a campaign of pink heart, not pink slips to draw attention to these layoffs and the devastating impact they will have on our students and schools come and with many, many buttons for anyone in this room including members of congress who may want to wear them. so look, let me get back to the matter at hand.

every child should have access to a great public education, but students will not do well in school if they are not taught by well-prepared and engaged teachers big at the same time, these are students who cannot succeed unless one, teachers are supported by competent administrators who understand not simply the value that the necessity of collaboration. two, the environment in which they are asked to learn and teach safe, appropriate we sat, and well-equipped. and three, there is a shared responsibility, not simply top down accountability. it is often said that great teachers are not born, they are made. however, our nation approach to teacher quality suggests that we actually believe the converse is true, that great teachers are fully born, ready, willing and able and prepared for that role. the truth of the matter is that good teaching is an art build upon a firm foundation.

we have to begin, and i know that there's some others on the spam who will talk to this issue, but we have to begin by making sure that teachers get good preparation and the schools they attend. high quality induction programs for new teachers should be required for all districts, and should be developed collaboratively by teachers and administrators. once teachers are in the classroom, they should receive ongoing embedded, relevant professional developer and that is part and parcel of both valid evaluation system. as you see, the afp has now been trying to merge both development and a violation together and continues to evolve it and evaluate and system. so we don't so they provide snapshots, but that system can be used to inform teaching and learning. ultimately, these factors, meaning ensuring that we support the teaching, is obviously not divorced from what students need to succeed. but i would also press up on

looking at the out of school factor because we know that they are relevant as well in terms of how a child performs. now, you know we have focused on the way to improve teacher develop and evaluation programs, we know we have to focus on out of school environment issues. we know that there are ways to help ensure that teachers come to hard to staff schools. we know how to do this. so let me, before i -- my time is up, let me just focus on two little things. two things that we have just done. take the contract and if i tuition system that the teachers and school system just bargained in new haven, what it demonstrates through collaboration and collective bargaining that you can use those and to secure tools to create systemic and transformative change, and we have asked for the editorial

about new haven contract that you showed up in yesterday's "new york times" to be part of the record. in terms of professional development, we think that if we have grant programs for teachers centers that provide comprehensive professional development, information on research and curriculum, assistance for new and veteran teachers, and an opportunity for teachers to direct their own professional growth, that will help you julie. lastly, i want to focus on evaluation system. the reauthorization should establish a pilot program for eliades that allow for the collaborative development and implementation of transparent and fair teacher development and if i do wish and system. the goal of such a pilot is develop more dynamic evaluation systems and learn from them. instead of relying on an inadequate measures like a student desk corkum we have to take the time to develop these systems and ultimately, again, i go back to what we just did in

new haven, this is the best model that i have seen. reviews collective bargaining in a way to transform an entire district through the transformation of the development and evaluation system. and i know, if you create the opportunity for us to create those pilots to do that, we will transform teaching and learning in this nation. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, chairman miller, congressman castle, committee members, thank you very much for inviting me to testify today. michael this afternoon is to explain to you what it would take to get effective teaching at scale and all other nations classroom. although my argument applies to the teaching portion in general are going to focus my remarks this afternoon on beginning teachers. i hope you remember just two things to my testimony. first, we let people into classrooms in this country without knowing that they can

perform. and the students who most need good teaching are the least likely to get those teachers. this is unethical. second, we actually do know how to change this so i'm going to concentrate on explaining to you what the elements are of what it would take to change this. let me make the proper as click you as possible. we want to improve the learning of u.s. students but we don't have a system to supply still teachers to every classroom. right now teachers are considered qualified simply by purchasing an approved program or completing an academic major. this means they qualify does not depend on demonstrating that you can teach. imagine if we allow pilots to learn are in licenses are granted medical licenses to people who merely excelled in biology. what we currently do is to supply teachers to classrooms is dangerous for our nation's students. it's not an overstatement to tell you that this is a problem of crisis proportions. we must stop wasting energy

debating whether teachers recruited one way or another are more effective. my argument is not an argument for or against either so-called traditional or alternative pathways into teaching. what matters most is graduates of any pathway be capable of effective practice. many people have ideas about how to improve teaching. some think we should make it easy for people to enter the classroom. some propose we fire bad teachers, pay good was more or create incidents to recruit better teachers. and although all these may sound sensible to you, none of them is sufficient to solve the core problem that is assuring every teacher in every classroom can do the work we're asking of him or her. there are two reasons why training, training, is crucial. one has to do with the nature of the work of teaching itself, and the other has to do with what i'm going to call the scale problem. first, despite our common sense, commonplace, teaching is far from simple were. i did it myself for over 17 years and so i speak from experience as well as from the

research i have done. doing it well requires as congressman kilby said, detailed knowledge of the domain for which you are responsible to teach the student and a lot of skill and making it learnable. in my written testimony i provide you with a simple example of a math problem to give you some extent of the difference between a math problem and knowing it well enough so that you can teach fourth grade. teaching also requires good judgment and a tremendous capacity to relate to a wide range of young people. it involves a few other really important things such as the ability to manage a classroom, and turbo data on student performance, use appropriate instructional task to conduct a discussion with a group of 30, sometimes unwilling young people, and to communicate with their parents. by the way, it may be important for you to realize raising standards for k-12 education which many states are doing will make teaching still more demanding. teaching complex academic skills and knowledge, not to mention the very students who are working collaboratively in an increasingly networked world is more difficult than teaching

basic skills. my first point is teaching his complex work and requires more than being smart and caring about kids. here's my second point. building teaching quality is a problem of massive scale. the teaching force numbers over 3.6 million, no other occupation in the states even comes close to that size. this means that we have to help large numbers of regular americans develop to teach effectively. even if super smart and highly educated people could teach effectively without training, and if you do but most don't, there are simply not enough people to fill all the classes in this country. in the next five years we'll need many, many new teachers due to a massive wave of retirement. some estimates go as high as 1.7 million new teachers in the next seven years. if there is no. we do know what to do to fix this. we must establish specific standards for teaching practice and build a professional ballad licenses and to assess which

would focus on teachers confident knowledge, their actual skills with working with the instructional practices most important for students learning, and their persistence in working to make sure everyone of their students large. these assessments would be substantially different from the ones we currently have in this country which do not for the most part focus on the ability to teach. to prepare teachers for the standards we would need to design a system of high quality, rigorous training that is centered on practice. this system would have three key components. a curriculum focused on the highest leverage instructional practices, and the specialized knowledge of the academic domain that teachers are responsible to teach. second, close practice and feedback in clinical settings so that teachers can be deliberately taught and explicitly coached with the skills to reach a wide range of learners. and third, highly credible and predicted professional assessment of knowledge and skill so that no one enters a

classroom without demonstrated capacity for effective performance of a beginning teacher. in conclusion, students must have teachers who are prepared to help them learn, not beginners who are struggling with their responsibilities. allowing teachers to learn on our young people is unethical. teaching is intricate work that can be learned with appropriate training. we have not done that yet in this country through any approach that it is time to mobilize the expertise, knowledge and will to build a system that can supply still teachers to our nation's classrooms. thank you. . .

research documents what educators inherently know. a strong principle is second only to highly effective teachers in producing student learning and achievement. the renewed emphasis on school level outcomes and student achievement places the school leader at the center of all school reform efforts. today's principals and assistant principals are supposed to be visionary leaders, building managers, assessment specialists, disciplinarians, community builders and more. they are also the ones ultimately held responsible for student achievement.

therefore, it is imperative that we do a better job of preparing principals and other school leaders as well as supporting them to be able to meet the needs of teachers and students. to create a consistently reliable process, to develop, recognize and maintain principals, the national board of professional teaching standards has launched the development of a voluntary national certification for successful, experienced principals, assistant principals and teacher leaders known as national board certification for educational leaders. assisting in this effort are the national association of elementary school principals, national association of secondary school principals, the national middle school association, the american association of school administrators and representatives from higher education, district and state administration and professional associations. i had the honor of serving as the cochair of the committee that developed the national board of standards for accomplished principals. these standards represent a professional consensus on the

very unique practices that distinguish accomplished principals. they are cast in terms of the collaborative actions that accomplished principals take to advance learning to the very highest level for each and every child. these principals recruit, promote, and retain accomplished teachers. they improve the school culture and performance. they advocate for the profession and the needs of their school and they purposefully engage families in the broader community and the school's vision and mission. i am now working on the development of the assessment that will form the foundation. and the rich amalgam of knowledge, skills and dispositions that will characterize national board-certified principals. having a set of standards that define best practices allows the development of professional education that is targeted for the continuum of practice. as school leaders engage and reflect on their level of practice and for those who hold the responsibility of preparing leaders, the standards continuum

offers the profession a much clearer view of the requirements of successful practice and leadership. as school districts seek to select and develop principals, assistant principals and teacher leaders, that can lead the much-needed transformation of our schools, the existence of a continuum of standards to identify accomplished practice is hugely beneficial. national board certification for principals will define and validate. the requirements that identify and accomplish effective and results-oriented principal. as in medicine, law and other fields it will support excellent motivation and prestige within the profession. indeed, principals that meet these standards will have made a commitment to excellence in their schools and throughout their school districts. however, if principals and assistant principals are to meet the growing, ever-changing expectations of this very demanding position, they require continued professional development. personalized to meet their

individual needs. this is true for all school leaders regardless of their initial preparation or their length of service. the educational challenge of the 21st century is to achieve high levels of learning for each and every student. as increased accountability becomes the norm, leadership becomes more challenging and demanding. in today's complex world, in schools be set with new kinds of issues and problems, the ability of the principal to improve the effectiveness of the school is the critical element in determining the kind of impact that the school will have on its students. there are no short cuts to school success. but a serious examination of the leadership practices that can drive the quality and effectiveness of our schools is the most significant way that we can offer our media students that you referred to. these students deserve the better support to help them reach the high standards of excellence.

effective educational success depends on quality school leadership. this means that it is imperative that we attract, develop, and retain the very best and brightest educational leaders to the profession to prepare students for the expectation of an ever changing diverse population and global economy. thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. >> dr. wirntsz? -- winters? >> chairman miller, congressman castle. the findings of modern research strongly confirm what parents, teachers and school administrators have always known. the quality of a child's teacher is the most important factor within a school's control that determines a student's learning in a given year. the best estimates indicate that the difference for a student being taught by a good or a bad teacher amounts to about an grade level's worth of learning at the end of the school year.

unfortunately, the current system fails to distinguish between our best and worst teachers. nearly all teachers are rated satisfactory or higher according to their official valuations. when the current system does distinguish between teachers it's according to two attributes that research consistently finds has little or no relationship to the performance in the classroom. attainment of advanced degrees and years of experience. research is consistently finding no discernible relationship between whether or not a teacher has a master's degree and learning students acquire in a given year. the benefits from classroom experience seem to plateau after about the third to fifth year. some students get better over time but some teachers don't improve while others burn out and get worse over time. whether an individual teacher is better today than yesterday it's determinative if she's more effective down the hall. studies consistently find that experience and other easily observed characteristics explain very little the difference in teacher effectiveness.

credentials and experience tell us little about effectiveness is disappointing because school districts decide those alone on a salary. teachers respond to their incentive of their pay scale by pursuing unproductive degrees. the personally of school teachers with a master degrees or higher has increased from about 24% in 1961 to about 52% today. it's common for school systems to determine layoffs based entirely on seniority within the system. those first, last off lay off rules are coming into play as states across the country are finding it necessary to reduce their teacher staff during this time of fiscal strife. on factors unrelated to classroom effectiveness will be the many young wonderful teachers will be let go and poorly performing but more experienced teachers will remain in the classroom. further, in most school systems upwards of 95% of more teachers who remain in the classroom the three years or so required to become eligible for the job protections of tenure. it requires a teacher cannot be

fired without a due process proceeding. however, in practice a that due process is so burdensome that most administrators don't bother with it. 10 of new york city's 55 teachers were fired for any reason in 2007. even if we were to believe that schools were capable of identifying and removing all of their ineffective teachers so early in their careers, the practice of tenure still essentially assumes that anyone not shown to be incompetent in their third year will be effective in the classroom in their 30th. given the complexity of a teacher's job it's not surprising that the basic attributes like experience and credentials explains so little of their advancement. and complex information clearly explain most of our influence on students learning. those attributes not lend themselves to simple salary schedules and layoff policies. if we take the lessons of modern research seriously we have to conclude that today's system has its priorities backwards. a better system would measure an actual performance in a

classroom and reward the most effective effective ones accordingly. the first effort towards creating a better system is to improve teacher evaluations. school districts replace the current evaluation system with one based on part in the measurable influence on students standardized scores. data analysis is far from perfect and it should not be used in isolation to make employment decisions. modern techniques can raise red flags and that's how the administrators distinguish between students who excel and students whose language fail. once a school system has identified the best and worst teachers it should act upon that information. states and districts should continue to experiment with different ways to tie some portion of a teacher's performance of performance in a classroom. states should streamline the process for administrators to remove ineffective teachers once they've been identified. unfortunately, local union affiliates continue to fight hard against some of this meaningful change. considering new york's recent experience. when it appears the new york city mayor bloomberg was using

test scores for ten you're. and the union made it legal to do so. further it was an estimated 15,000 teacher layoffs on the horizon in new york, it's the state and teacher union stood strongest against proposed union discretion would remain up to the principals. it would be productive to focus efforts on reducing class sizes for teachers. the argument for reducing class sizes is a study from 79 public schools in tennessee during the 1980s. it was a very good study. the study finds high quality random design and found some evidence student learning was greater in smaller class sizes environment. when taken to scale the result of class size reduction programs have been disappointing. a study found california's class size reduction program has no influence on effective si. for efficiency. the current system is incapable of achieving that goal. it's time for school systems to

rethink the way that they evaluate, compensate and hold accountable public school systems. i look forward to your questions. >> thank you all for your testimony. let me see. how to proceed here. [laughter] >> i think this panel's testimony is compelling to the idea that we should give serious consideration after my 36 years on this committee of maybe breaking with the past and starting to think that -- how people arrive at the decision to become a teacher and then how -- whether or not that individual enters the field and what happens to them then. and whether we're going to, after all the rhetoric, we're, in fact, going to decide there's something to this, that this is a profession.

and if you look across-the-board at other professions, it seems that the training never really stops. i'm a lawyer. you have the continuing education of the bar. i don't know if it's any good. i'm inactive but i don't know. but it seems that everybody throws up something in terms of training. if you're a firefighter, the training never stops. if you're a police officer, the training never stops. if you're a doctor, boom. but it also seems a lot of people enter the being trained when they enter the field and in teaching a lot of people can still walk in the side door given the circumstance of the district where they happen to be who knows whom and all of a sudden there you are and you have the credential. and in some cases, that's enough. but we've sort of enabled this to go on and on and on. you know, to what extent the federal government can change that is what this zaiabout.

-- what this idea is all about. you talk about the redesign of teacher training, the three steps you lay out don't look a lot like what most teachers -- what i think most teachers have been led to believe most teacher programs look like. they come later. you get your credential. you've gotten your major degree and you get a credential and then people start talking about training you. when i look at the three things you outlined, it would seem to me that some of that has to occur beforehand. i mean, i don't know what schools of education do. i don't see any evidence that they do much. but i need to know how -- how do we back this up so that people come with a greater skill sets. we try to develop this skill sets. this is a very complex job.

i think the point of your testimony. if you would like to respond. >> thank you for the opportunity to take that up. indeed, my argument was that it's crucial to ensure that we established standards for the entry of the profession. and i was quite clear in saying that i think that can be provided potentially through a multitude of pathways. that schools of education should and can provide that sort of training but so could that be done through other pathways. what's crucial is to establish the bar that someone needs to meet in order to be large practice. we do that with many professions and, in fact, many trades in this country don't allow people to perform what we consider to be, you know, skilled trades without actually have a license. you don't have someone to put in disposal that don't know how to put in drains. we have a key set of things people who has a teacher who can't do this and it would

require a -- that some would learn as becoming a expert. my colleague refers to the fact that teachers don't improve with experience. i think it's quite easy to point to the fact much of the training provided to teachers as they advance through the professionzin enable increasing skill. in those, if that were inherently true that nobody improved after three years of teaching and you would see that around the world and you don't see that around the world. in the countries where the professional education system is much more substantial and helps people to become more and more accomplished professional teachers, you don't see that leveling off at the third or fourth year. it's entirely due to the fact that in this country the kind of professional training that's available to teachers is often weak. and i think the drive to pursue these so-called useless masters degrees is a quest by teachers to seek additional professional training. the masters degree on its own isn't valuable or not. it has to do what's inside that degree or any other form of professional training. sort of in sum, i think that we need both to ensure that beginning teachers know their content well enough to be responsible to teach it to young

people. but we need also to articulate a set of basic skills of teaching including managing the classroom. conducting a discussion, assessing student learning, using data, communicating with the home and we should not allow people to be practicing -- >> but you're still describing currently it and i'm not asking it to defend the system. you're still describing the system that's currently hit or miss? >> oh, right now people become licensed without having to demonstrate they can do any of those things. people become licensed currently by completely an approved program. neither of those is what i'm describing. i'm describing an assessment system where we would hold any program accountable for demonstrating it's candidates who was recommending for licensure could actually do those things before they enter. do that with students. conduct a discussion. call up a parent. diagnosis a common error a student makes in learning. we allow people begin teaching who have not demonstrated that they can do those things. and the system that was changed

would require any program to prepare people to pass that set of assessments. that's not the system we currently have. >> thank you. mr. castle? >> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. winters, in your testimony, you indicated that research shows that certain factors such as smaller class size and i think you mentioned tenure in there is a feature has little impact on student achievement. can you tell us what skills are necessary in order to produce good teachers? >> the short answer is no. i mean, the problem is -- i mean, right. reducing class size has been found to have a positive effects. as far as what are the overall attributes for good teaching. i'm not sure we know that as a professional. maybe some of my colleagues would agree about that. my research is that we know that there is enormous variation in the quality of teachers.

but very little of what we -- what we try to explain that variation even studies that use things like the courses students have taken in college, s.a.t. scores seem to correlate with this some but not as much as we would hope. a lot of those attributes don't explain very much of that variation. so i actually think that a lot of teaching is innate and not something that we're seeing -- that we're producing. which leads me to believe a better system would allow people to become teachers. identify who's good at it and do the best we can. no matter why they're good at it, what they're doing to be good at it. and do the best we can to keep those people in the classroom. >> leading into this question which is, do you have anticipate thoughts about the difference between alternative certification programs and traditional roots of certification in terms of either quality of teachers or

methodologies which are used? >> i think the research on those things are still pretty young. but so far the experience with alternative certification programs have been generally positive. now, you do see wide variation among teachers who come through alternative routes as well. but again we see enormous variation in the quality of teachers who come through the more traditional routes. which again i think goes to the point where the -- some people are just wonderful at teaching. and what we should be doing is trying to get smart people in the classroom and provide them with the training. i don't think it's fair that teachers need no training. i don't want to say that. but i do think what we should be trying to do is through alternative certification routes and others put smart people in the classroom and evaluate them afterwards and try to get them out before -- get the bad ones out and get the bad ones in. >> thank you. >> dr. salazar, all i know comes from teacher ranks.

that's generally true throughout the country. is there any experimentation or has anyone looked into alternative methodologies of bringing people in to principals ranks that don't come through the teacher ranks and is there any judgment it's successful or not in any way? >> i have to tell you that in terms of research around that topic, i'm not aware of any. and i'm sure someone has done research taking a look at alternative routes to the principals and there's different certifications across the state as who can be a principal and who can't. that's not the case in nevada. everyone does come from the ranks of the teacher. and so i could get information back to you on that but i really don't have any information on that. >> okay. thank you. ms. weingarten, you said in some places and it was disconnected from what you said in my mind. and i agree with you completely on this. we need to look at out of school factors.

and that's true obviously in terms of how we're educating kids. but i'm not sure exactly what -- how you intended that when you said it looking at out of school factors. in terms of judging teachers or in terms of, you know, what we as a society should be doing with respect to educating kids? >> sorry. what we need to do is, i think, three things. one -- and today we're focused on the past to great teaching and great teachers. and the second thing is -- and none of us actually focused on it as much as we should today. there's a need to have a broad engaged curriculum. chairman miller and this committee has been talking about that in the context of common standards and assessments that are aligned with common standards. but an engaged curriculum, rigorous curriculum that includes art, music and physical

education but is deep in terms of social studies and science is very important as a lock-in with great teachers and great teaching.!w and the third point was that poverty can't be an excuse for students to not have the engine of opportunity. but what we have seen is that if you do -- if you find ways to compete with poverty, schools alone and teachers alone will never be able to do this. and i d9y: with my friend marcus on the other side of the table because you can't -- teachers alone can't do this. maybe in isolated circumstances, yes. but so what we've seen is that in schools and districts that have wrap-around services, community schools where the schools itself are the hub for those outside services, like health care, after-school care, some social services, you see a way of being able to level the playing field for poor kids and narrowing the achievement gap. so what i'm saying is we need to deal with all three.

not use out of school factors as an excuse. but help kids by deal with all three. and so in what we have actually proposed for an overhaul of teacher development and evaluation is by focusing on shared responsibility as opposed to just top-down accountability. when teachers, for example, will say i need to lower class size so i can differentiate an instruction among and between children. that's the import of class size. or i can identify that this child needs some other additional supports, i can do what i can do instructionally but you have to help me get those other supports for this child. that's what we're talking about when we talk about a holistic development and evaluation plan that includes access to wrap-around services. and that, congressman, is exactly what new haven has just done which is why i am so fixated on new haven. >> thank you. thank you all very much.

>> thank you, mr. chairman. dr. ball, i really appreciate your recommendations to reform the way we prepare our teachers in this country. if we were to move forward with these recommendations, what is the federal role? and can we learn from other professions. a century ago in ireland or france or germany, very often in a small village, the most educated and the person turned to the most in that village would be the priest, the lawyer, the physician and the teacher. these were the professions that really with the most knowledge. can we learn something from other professions as we prepare teachers for their responsibilities? >> thank you, representative kildee.

i think that on the second question first, from other professions, in fact, other clinical professions and in particular ones which work with young people so i gave the example of flying a plane. but it may be more appropriate to think of professions where people work with people where there's uncertainty with how you work with a young person and how you work with a client. if you're a psychologist. a colleague at stanford university pam grossman and her colleagues have conducted a study in preparation of other professions to learn more about the clinical preparation in other fields. and, in fact, they do much better at teaching the clinical skills, at breaking them down, at naming them and rehearsing them and coaching them and assessing people on them. so i disagree with my colleague that teaching can't be taught. i would argue it's highly dangerous to take a policy strategy that permits people to be tried out in classrooms and fire those later who don't produce results. there are real children in those classrooms who are suffering under the teaching of people who later find out they can't do it. let me give you simple example. when a child makes an error in

elementary mathematics as the kind that i produced in my written testimony for you, you don't want somebody in that classroom who's mystified by that error. you want somebody to rapidly size up what the difficulty is that the student is having and who has three or four key leverage things to do next to help the student learn. it's deeply dangerous to put people into classrooms who can't quickly recognize the errors that kids make and could diagnose them and move on. that is precisely what other diagnostic human professions have done is put people lots of knowledge and identifying when patients or clients have those difficulties and having the strategies to deal with them. i can't understand a strategy in which we think it's permissible to put people into classrooms who are smart and hope that after two or three years they've done well. and if they haven't, we fire them. those are real children in those classrooms and it's unconscionable. and using more integration in common content in this country.

it's very difficult to prepare teachers for their work when they teach entirely different content in different parts of the country. and i know that's a very deeply problematic issue. but it's actually quite important to teaching. i do want to close by saying one other thing the research of alternate routes versus other teacher education programs show they actually are very little different. one study shows a slight advantage to the other. the overall message i want you to understand that no pathway or program that we are preparing professionals adequately at the scale that we need in this country and no pathway, whatsoever. >> okay. thank you, mr. chairman. >> i was mystified but i think it's because i was reading it after a long -- that math problem after a long jet trip. [laughter] >> that and cold fusion while i was waiting for my bags. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> i can't go back to the classroom?

>> you always could. you might be mystified. i'm a little confused. chairman miller used the analogy of lawyers and he's a lawyer. i'm a lawyer. and my first job out of law school was clerks. -- clerking for a job in the u.s. court of appeals. i got a broad education on every issue that came up and i was hired by a law firm which i didn't do and decided to practice on my own. and here having been doing the socratic method and suddenly back to, you know, how do i write a real estate contract? how do i do probate and things? no clue and nobody to help me because i was on my own. what do you do, you go to the continuing education and, you know, go into the classes and talk to people there and get the ideas.