Principals vs. Pundits on Teacher Prep

Yesterday the Center for the Future of Teaching and Learning released its 2007 report on the Status of the Teaching Profession in California, again lamenting that the state does not have “a coherent teacher development system that builds knowledge and skill” needed to close the achievement gap. While over the last five years the state has made progress in reducing the numbers of underprepared teachers by more than 25,000, poor children and those of color are still far less likely to be taught by “prepared and well-supported” teachers. This “prepared and well-supported” definition is more robust than the federal "highly qualified" teacher standard because of its inclusion of teachers who have yet to meet minimal certification standards. But some pundits say that current certification standards do not matter for teacher quality. Well, I would be the first to agree that in many cases current standards leave much to be desired and that they do not always set the bar at the right height for determining whether or not a prospective teacher is ready to teach, particularly in a high needs school.  But…

…check out Fact Sheet 1 in the once-again hard hitting CFTL report where principals are surveyed as to what they consider “most important” in hiring California’s teachers. The highest rated criterion is certification status – while the two lowest are academic standing of prospective teachers as well as their non-teaching job experience  — the two criteria the pundits often report as being the most important teacher qualification specifications.  Hmmm, something is not computing. So certification while is not sufficient and needs to be transformed (about which I have written extensively), it does matter to those in charge of leading California’s schools.

Today I am speaking at the Commonwealth Club of California on the “future of teaching.” I will report from this experience later this week.

Comments

[Amber]

This does not make sense to me. Why would principals want to make certification status the top criteria for hiring a teacher when the report on the Status of the Teaching Profession in California says that the state of California does not have a "coherent teacher development system that builds knoweldge and skill." I have certification as a highly qualified special education teacher in the state of Ohio. I will say that I was not highly qualified when I entered my first year of teaching special education. I had a lot of things that I had to learn. I attended a nationally accredited school that is known for preparing effective teachers. I was well prepared to teach in the general education classroom but not in the special education classroom. The classes that were required for special education were to broad. Our certification covers from age 3 to 21. This shows that teachers are being set up to fail in the aspect of closing the acheivement gap in education. How are teaches gaining certification to teach if the programs are not up to par. In turn, how are the principals justifying hiring a teacher based on a certifcation when there may be someone else that is a more effective and a higher quality teacher?

[Amber]

This does not make sense to me. Why would principals want to make certification status the top criteria for hiring a teacher when the report on the Status of the Teaching Profession in California says that the state of California does not have a "coherent teacher development system that builds knoweldge and skill." My certification is a highly qualified special education teacher in the state of Ohio. I will say that I was not highly qualified when I entered my first year of teaching special education. I had a lot of things that I had to learn. I attended a nationally accredited school that is known for preparing effective teachers. I was prepared to teach in the general education classroom but not in the special education classroom. The classes that were required for special education were to broad. Our certification covers from age 3 to 21. This shows that teachers are being set up to fail in the aspect of closing the acheivement gap in education. How are teaches gaining certification to teach if the programs are not up to par. In turn, how are the principals justifying hiring a teacher based on a certifcation when there may be someone else that is a more effective and a higher quality teacher?