...That is the question that needs to be answered. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan is making this a big push on his swing out to California, rolling out fresh mandates from DC that will eventually trickle down.... From this morning's L.A. Times story:
"U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan on Tuesday announced new guidelines to improve the preparation of the nation's teaching ranks that will require states to rate the performance of training programs and shift federal funding to those that receive high marks.
The proposed regulations would allow states broad flexibility to develop measures of performance but demands that emphasis be placed on teacher outcomes, such as employment, retention and success in the classroom. That could include evaluating training programs based on the test scores of K-12 students taught by their graduates, a model that provokes heated contention in the education community."
I've heard this sentiment locally and at national conferences-it is a story about how teachers are coming out of education school unprepared for the realities in the American K-12 classroom of 2014.
But is an intensive focus on these schools of education really the solution? Or, is it the convenient solution, absolving local districts, parents, students, current teachers, current administrators, unions and everyone else practically of any responsibility for the current state of American public education?
Joel Klein agrees with this sentiment, that teachers need better preparation. He stated it at a recent conference I attended. In NYC, with its Union dominated schools--there are many applicants for every opening. The pay and benefits are really good, people compete for jobs there to get into that system--so that district can be selective. I get that.
Similarly, in other countries like Finland, there are 9 applicants for every open teaching slot according to a fascinating presentation I recently watched from Andreas Schleicher. Teachers there ( and in many other high performing systems worldwide) are valued by their society, they enjoy great salaries and esteem--so they can be selective, too. (Schleicher gave an amazing presentation comparing different educational systems worldwide. Unfortunately, this video is not published online anywhere. I found a similar presentation he gave from Missouri in 2012, which is linked here )
So what is going on here in America? We don't pay teachers enough, apparently. We don't provide them with enough professional development, apparently. Last but not least, we don't prepare them well enough in education colleges in the U.S. Yes, that is the new clarion call to fix the issue. Start punishing the Education Colleges. Could a changing society be a bigger factor in why teachers are leaving the profession and their replacements are not coming forward in sufficient numbers? Could the real problem be much more simple, yet infinitely more controversial? I think so. Nevertheless- the convenient, PC fix du jour is, let's demonize colleges!
....But wait. Fewer students than ever are going into education.
I'm all for holding the bar high, but won't this exacerbate shortages if we start shuttering education schools? How will those shortages be fixed? We already cannot recruit enough candidates locally to fill our classrooms. Minority hiring? we're lucky to get a handful each summer to take contracts--and we're trying really hard! I mean, even though nobody can give me a cogent rationale for why having a teacher force that mirrors the population they serve, is ABSOLUTEY ESSENTIAL!! I'm told by everyone, and everything I read, says that's the problem. But I don't buy it. Until someone can logically answer the question "Why does it matter if Asians teach whites, Blacks teach Whites, or Whites teach Blacks--what difference does it make if all teachers are qualified and effective?" I will not buy that politically expedient, liberal talking point that I feel is a disingenuous, fallacious lie. Rubbish. Regardless, even though we
