Opening Classroom Doors for Teachers Who Can Teach

Nicholas Kristof often gets it right. But in his April 30, 2006, New York Times op-ed, Opening Classrooms Doors, he really missed the point. In addressing the endemic problems in both teacher supply and quality, Mr. Kristof claims there is at least one “easy” solution: Let all comers who have “graduated from a recognized college, have passed a competency test in their field and have passed a rigorous background check teach.”

Don’t get me wrong. There is no question that the wisdom and experience of Colin Powell, the spirit and expertise of a Meryl Streep, or the idealism and energy of bright young college graduates who promise two years of Peace Corps, volunteer-like service, can offer much needed boosts in many of our nation’s schools. But, the facts are clear: While current teacher education and licensing standards leave a lot to be desired (and need a good overhaul), teachers with preparation and those who successfully complete an internship before they begin teaching are more effective and more likely to stay in teaching.

I am bit wearisome of policy wonks, journalists, and school reform pundits who insist on casting the teacher quality and supply problem as nothing more than a battle between the education schools and alternative certification groups like Teach for America and Troops to Teachers. The issue is not teacher education schools that offer nothing but “secret snake-charming skills” to prospective teachers and prevent brilliant professionals or political and cultural icons from becoming teachers.

To be sure, a number of wonks and pundits, with inflammatory rhetoric and carefully spun research results, seek to undermine pedagogical preparation. However, we desperately do need alternatives to current teacher education that does not adapt its programs to mid-career switchers and licensing demands that ignore experiences and accomplishments of non-traditional teacher candidates.

Interestingly enough, Mr. Kristof mentioned IBM’s Transition to Teaching program as antidote to the inept teacher education curriculum that prospective teachers must endure. What Mr. Kristof probably did not realize is that the IBM program, which I am helping the corporation design and implement, actually requires both education courses and an internship of its employees who they hope will become teachers. IBM officials, a number of whom have extensive experience in education, realize that “smarts” and content knowledgeable are insufficient if one is going to succeed in teaching. The program, in its pilot stage, will help determine the essentials of teacher education for an academically-able and accomplished professional, who at 45 years of age, wants to get serious about helping young people learn. IBM is actually paying its eligible employees to get at least some of the preparation they need to ensure  that know how to teach a child who is a struggling reader, has a learning disability, or does not speak English as a first language.

Granted, we need to find ways to get the Mr. Powells and Ms. Streeps of the world into our schools (if they truly want to teach) and “we need to expand the pool of those eligible to teach." But also, we should expect our federal and state governments to offer scholarships for well-prepared teachers to enter teaching and require our novice pedagogues to be taught and mentored by our nation’s best teachers in what would be education’s equivalent of a teaching hospital. Mr. Kristof’s apparent disdain for teacher preparation does little to serve students who surely could benefit from both dazzling icons and expert teachers.

Comments

[EG]

Do we even know if Meryl Streep or Colin Powell would not fall apart in a classroom full of real live kids?

Maybe if Streep and Powell passed the American Board exams they would be fine.

By the way, Kristof clearly hasn't carefully read the Mathematica study on TFA that he cited, I mean, failed to cite.