By Kristin
Have you seen the education issue of Time magazine? Be ready. In an earnest but hackneyed effort, Time and its reporters Amanda Ripley and John Cloud throw a lot of numbers around ("16:1 Student-to-teacher ratio in 2007, compared with 22:1 in 1970." Really? Where is that 16-student average coming from?), highlight the temporary contributions of the Teach For America corps, and dabble a bit in some of the better-performing charter schools. And of course, they vilify unions and discount the contributions of excellent public school teachers because they are union members.
Let's take moment to follow the scent Cloud and Ripley wave across the trail, and then we'll look at some real solutions to help public schools serve challenged and challenging kids.
Charter schools do not perform better than public schools (look at page 75), but reporter John Cloud's piece highlights Teach For America, charter schools, and The New Teacher Project as the role models for the future. He writes, "we hire lots of our lowest performers to teach, and then we scream when our kids don't excel." He makes the claim a teacher can earn "$150,000 a year or more. And he gets the summer off." This is inflammatory, cliche'd, and misleading. Most teacher candidates who graduate from accredited programs are high performers. I do not know of any classroom teacher who earns even close to $150,000, but every teacher I know works outside of the contract day to grade, plan, and spend time with students.
Amanda Ripley's piece centers on the new movie by Davis Guggenheim, Waiting for "Superman," a documentary following five families as they endure the lottery process of enrolling their children in popular charter schools. Guggenheim's children attend an elite private school in Los Angeles, so while he's chosen to contribute his directorial skills to exposing the problems in public education, he's kept his passion, mentoring potential and money firmly invested in his class. This does not help solve the problems public schools are facing.
What we need, and what this issue of Time does not address even for a moment, is to be shown great public schools and their teachers who are successful with their reluctant learners.
The answer to the problem of low-performing schools, students and teachers is only partly to be found in the examples of charters, TFA and TNTP teachers – and the worth of the examples they set is their energy and idealism. The real solution lies with excellent public school teachers, whose practice we need to emulate and who need to speak up and expect the best from their colleagues.
The real solution also lies with society. We need to financially support the public services challenged public schools provide so that teachers can focus on teaching. We need to financially support the public services that will bring families into the equation, educating parents and breaking the killer cycle of distrust and disrespect for education.
We need to start caring for the children who are at risk of dropping out instead of expecting teachers to save them with no support from the community. We can't continue to ignore the fact some children live crime-riddled lives of violence, and then turn the spotlight on the teacher who can't get those children to master trigonometry. Let's do something about the crime-riddled lives of teenage violence.
The problem in education is not evil unions versus holy charters. The problem is one that can be solved if society is willing to invest in schools and invest in children, and if teachers are willing to take some difficult risks. I think we can do it, and I think we will do it, but not if everyong refuses to acknowledge the outstanding work that is happening in public schools right now.
Btw, Kristin, this kind of “evidence” (http://www.mckinsey.com/clientservice/Social_Sector/our_practices/Education/Knowledge_Highlights/Closing_the_talent_gap.aspx) is similar to that cited by many researchers in claiming that teachers tend to be the lower-performing folks getting college degrees.
There are some more traditional, peer-reviewed sources of this information but as this report was released today (and ended up on my desk), I thought I’d bring your attention to it.
Jason,
I’ve been unable to find any positive research about teacher education programs. I don’t think I’m totally wrong, because based on the teaching candidates I’ve met from accredited programs, bright, successful, intelligent people are entering the profession. But, I can’t prove it. And you’re probably right that many programs aren’t that competitive and are taking less-than-masterful candidates. I always shudder when I see a teacher with a typo in her sign on the news. Ooooh. I’m shuddering now, just thinking about it.
You are absolutely right that it needs to be the teachers who are the face of the response. Next Wednesday I’m being interviewed for a spot put out by Alliance for Education – so I’m hoping that some people with the time and money to do some good PR work for public education are already putting something together.
Hi Kristen,
Thanks for your thorough response. I apologize if at times I mixed your views with some of the wider views on Stories From School– I’m not always attentive to specific authors.
A couple of points–
I have seen quite a bit of research which links things like SAT scores, college GPA, and overall college quality as metrics of “high performers” (not in the classroom, per se). I think that most of the researchers/policy-makers are referring to when talking about “low performers” entering teaching is that a disproportionate number of teachers have lower SAT scores, lower GPAs, and went to less competitive colleges than the population of people who have as many years of schooling as they have. This may not be a “problem”, but there are some questions about whether or not the standards to enter teaching are too low and/or the prestige of teaching is too low in the US to attract the brightest minds in droves. Most teaching preparation programs (including graduate school programs) are not particularly competitive and this may be why there is a difference between your observation and what I’ve read is the general trend.
“At the same time, I’m frustrated that the leaders in the education reform movement constantly use TFA and TNTP teachers as the example while rarely, if ever, looking at your standard public school teacher who is doing great things.”
I would share and expand that frustration a level beyond that– we don’t hear enough about whole schools that are beating the odds that aren’t charters. I’m a fan of the charter concept done well, but more importantly I’m a fan of good schools. It’s funny– charter leaders I’ve met who recently started their schools talk about traditional schools that beat the odds alongside charters and how they looked for elements of practice they observed in all those places to build a great school. Somehow the media, and even the research community, finds it more sexy to talk about the new structure on the block. That being said, I think a lot of research/best-practices literature on teachers, even when produced by CMOs and charter supporters, does mention many TPS teachers (non-TFA/TNTP/in charter). There needs to be less politicking and a better PR machine around those folks. Not to blame the unions, but the AFT and NEA have not been effective at telling the stories of their members and TPSs that are really kicking butt the way the CMOs, TFAs, and TNTPs are able to. The money would probably be better spent there to change perceptions of the teaching profession than a million being dropped to defeat Mayor Fenty in DC.
As for your support for many things unions vehemently oppose– I think that’s awesome and I’m glad you’re willing to be active in your union. Most of your stance there is the kind of common sense that flies in the face of all union’s bread and butter– ensure that all employees are equivalent and protected to the maximum degree. There are some unions and union leaders that are very effective change agents, but this tends to happen at the local chapter level and in specific instances. I think the key for reform is to engage TEACHERS, not unions. Teachers don’t always share the positions of their union, and teachers don’t always share interests with their unions. For example, you have a lot less investment in ensuring that the folks next to you are treated identically to how you’re treated.
Actually, Cloud didn’t claim the 1:16 ratio – it was in a side bar of the article.
As if you all need to read more of me….
So I’m poking around on my lunch break, trying to find some research on TEP students. Still looking for that, but have some emails out.
Then, I poked around on my old posts to see if I really have advocated for change, and found this old post on special education rooms – https://www.storiesfromschool.org/2010/05/the-burden-of-leaving-no-one-behind.html
And here, I think, is where Cloud got his 1:16 ratio. If we have special education classes with 7 students, and I have a tenth grade English class with 34, perhaps they equal out (eventually – other classes entered in the math) to 1:16. Hmmmmmmm. Averages can be so misleading.
Jason, you raise great points. Thank you.
As for teacher candidates, I haven’t seen that research either, but I’m looking for it and will share my findings. I also haven’t seen the research that supports Cloud’s claim that our “lowest performers” enter teaching. My refutation of his claim is based on my work with two accredited teacher education programs in the Seattle area. They are competetive programs, and the teacher candidates I’ve worked with were high performers in their previous education. As well, many of them left successful careers in the business world to enter teaching. But your point is well taken, and I’ll see what I can find.
We should not toss aside the examples set by TFA and TNTP, for a number of reasons. At the same time, I’m frustrated that the leaders in the education reform movement constantly use TFA and TNTP teachers as the example while rarely, if ever, looking at your standard public school teacher who is doing great things. The cover of Time magazine, for example, says “What Makes a School Great.” Well, one thing that makes a school great is its teachers, but nowhere in the issue do they mention a public school teacher who is not TFA or TNTP except for that abusive teacher who told the little girl her future was pre-determined. There’s never been a TFA teacher who said something mean and damaged a student? I find that hard to believe.
As for teachers taking risks – we have to. I am a huge supporter of teacher accountability and I hope my posts on this site support that. I do not think teachers should have tenure based on seniority, and I’m vocal with my union and my colleagues about that issue. I do not mind having my students tested, and I don’t even mind having those results tied to my job security as long as the tests are good tests. I am willing to take risks to reform education, and I’m trying to get other teachers to be willing to take risks too. The media does not recognize that there are union members excited about education reform. We are left out of the conversation.
As for social problems – here’s my stance: teachers can raise test scores, but if we’re going to expect teachers to raise test scores then we need to allow them to focus on academics. Right now, with the student populations who tend to perform poorly on tests, teachers are dealing with a lot of other stuff in the classroom beside academics. While it’s easy to say, “Well, just teach,” that’s not the reality for a teacher faced with truant, high, abused, hungry, or traumatized students, especially if there are 32 of them.
What I am trying to say is there are many parts to the solution of what’s wrong with public education, but again and again we hear that the solutions are charter schools and alternative teacher program. I don’t think those are the only solutions. The answer also lies in our classroom teachers. Public schools and public school teachers are the biggest part of education, why aren’t we utilizing them? Why are we trying to go around them? I don’t buy the answer that “the unions prevent change.” That’s a cop-out.
I really appreciate that you pushed me to think about these things, and I hope I clarified instead of rambled. It is a complicated issue, with no easy solution, but we have to be willing to wrestle with untangling the knot, and not simply toss it and go buy a new rope.
“Most teacher candidates who graduate from accredited programs are high performers.”
I have never seen research which supports that statement. Care to share?
“…TFA and TNTP teachers – and the worth of the examples they set is their energy and idealism. The real solution lies with excellent public school teachers, whose practice we need to emulate and who need to speak up and expect the best from their colleagues.”
Isn’t the goal of TFA and TNTP to create excellent public school teachers? Not that I’m a fan of the 2-years and out strategy, but these things are not mutually exclusive– the energy and idealism of TFA and TNTP as well as the alternative pathway can be one way we get to excellent public school teachers. Research I’ve seen seems to suggest they haven’t gotten it any better (but neither are they worse), but that doesn’t mean we should toss it aside, no?
“… if teachers are willing to take some difficult risks.”
What risks? It seems like you went from saying we need excellent public school teachers to solve the problem one moment, than switched to the old, “Nothing can be fixed until we go and fix all the social problems outside of the school.” Obviously it’s not an either/or proposition, but for all the harsh words for reform attempts that go on in these pages I’ve seen very little effort to articulate what teachers and schools CAN do. There seems to be an implicit acceptance that teachers and schools are already doing everything they can.
Everyone has an opinion but very few have context and experience. I used to watch other parents in the grocery and get mad that they didn’t control their children better. Then my own little angel threw a massive fit in the canned veggie aisle and I understood suddenly that it’s all a little more challenging than I once thought.
The same is true for the haters who sit in the sidelines (or in the ivory towers) and cast judgment without having had experience.
Maybe they should have paid better attention to Atticus.
Charter schools can be good places to learn for the few students who actually get into one. As a sustainable solution to the systemic problems facing public education, though, they are absolutely useless.