July 14, 2010--Teach For . . .?
It started with noble intentions--to encourage graduates of elite colleges to think as much about teaching in inner-city schools as securing big jobs on Wall Street.
Twenty years ago Teach for America was the inspiration and devotion of a then recent Princeton graduate, Wendy Kopp. She captured the imagination and idealism of a generation of the best and brightest young Americans who wanted to make a difference. Not just money.
She recruited fellow Ivy grads to get a summer's worth of teacher training and then go to work in some of America's most dysfunctional schools. Her guiding assumption was, and is, that these schools need the skills and devotion of people such as her. Without explicitly criticizing the vast majority of public school teachers who do not come from such privileged backgrounds, the unspoken implication was that a major reason these schools were failing their students was that current teachers were not up to the task of getting the job done. And if Wendy could entice enough of her colleagues to go through just five weeks of teacher training they would, by definition, be more effective than the "typical" teacher who studied education and its methods for years.
Yes, there was a hint of bravado or even arrogance in this, but if she and her recruits were right it would be worth taking the criticism.
And from much evidence Teach for America seems to be working out. Yes, it's teachers represent just 0.2 percent of all of America's teachers, but if they are doing better, much better than their conventionally-prepared peers maybe their success would begin to have a systemic impact. That things would cascadingly improve and improve. Our kids deserve nothing less.
From a dorm-room startup, over these 20 years TFA has become a virtual institution with an annual budget of more than $185 million and a teacher corps of about 10,000. And now, rather than having to run around looking for grads to sign up who are willing to make a commitment to serve for at least two years, TFA is so oversubscribed that, according to the article linked below from the New York Times, it is more difficult to get accepted into Teach for America than Harvard Law School. This year 46,2300 applied to Teach for America for only 4,500 positions. An acceptance rate of less 10 percent.
Some are wondering what's going on. Why are so many graduates of our top college graduates this eager to join TFA? Besides a desire to serve, it is obviously also because of the dampened economy. On many of our "best" colleges campuses, at Yale and Dartmouth and Duke, among many others, Teach "hired" more students than any other employer. More even than Goldman Sachs.
And there is another reason so many are seeking to be accepted by TFA--it has become an increasingly valuable experience to list on a budding resume when leaving teaching (as the vast majority do) and applying to graduate or professional school or returning to the more traditional job market.
Also attractive, while riding out the recession, with TFA helping its participants get teaching jobs in big-city schools, they get full teaching salaries from the districts that employ them. In Dallas, as one example, beginning teachers earn $45,000, the same a recent graduate would make at an entry level public relations job, assuming in this economy one can find one.
But then there is the mixed news about Teach for America's effectiveness. How best to measure that?
If it is a program to get high-achieving college grads to have exposure to teaching at-risk children, it is obviously a major success. If it is to engage as many well-intentioned rich people and foundations as possible in funding education projects, it is obviously a remarkably successful. But if it is to recruit and retain teachers, it is not so successful. Data indicate that of TFA teachers in New York City, fully 85 percent leave by the fourth year. And if TFA success is to be defined by their teachers being measurably more effective with students, studies indicate that TFA teachers do about as well as traditionally-trained and selected faculty members.
So one remains to wonder why there is so much fuss and attention paid to Teach for America. Many much more successful education reform programs exist well out of public site and envy TFA's ability to attract front-page attention and money.
If I were cynical I would say Teach for America is in the long tradition of noblesse obige, where those blessed to be more fortunate reach out a helping hand to those they see to be in need. And then leave while things remain much the same.
Twenty years ago Teach for America was the inspiration and devotion of a then recent Princeton graduate, Wendy Kopp. She captured the imagination and idealism of a generation of the best and brightest young Americans who wanted to make a difference. Not just money.
She recruited fellow Ivy grads to get a summer's worth of teacher training and then go to work in some of America's most dysfunctional schools. Her guiding assumption was, and is, that these schools need the skills and devotion of people such as her. Without explicitly criticizing the vast majority of public school teachers who do not come from such privileged backgrounds, the unspoken implication was that a major reason these schools were failing their students was that current teachers were not up to the task of getting the job done. And if Wendy could entice enough of her colleagues to go through just five weeks of teacher training they would, by definition, be more effective than the "typical" teacher who studied education and its methods for years.
Yes, there was a hint of bravado or even arrogance in this, but if she and her recruits were right it would be worth taking the criticism.
And from much evidence Teach for America seems to be working out. Yes, it's teachers represent just 0.2 percent of all of America's teachers, but if they are doing better, much better than their conventionally-prepared peers maybe their success would begin to have a systemic impact. That things would cascadingly improve and improve. Our kids deserve nothing less.
From a dorm-room startup, over these 20 years TFA has become a virtual institution with an annual budget of more than $185 million and a teacher corps of about 10,000. And now, rather than having to run around looking for grads to sign up who are willing to make a commitment to serve for at least two years, TFA is so oversubscribed that, according to the article linked below from the New York Times, it is more difficult to get accepted into Teach for America than Harvard Law School. This year 46,2300 applied to Teach for America for only 4,500 positions. An acceptance rate of less 10 percent.
Some are wondering what's going on. Why are so many graduates of our top college graduates this eager to join TFA? Besides a desire to serve, it is obviously also because of the dampened economy. On many of our "best" colleges campuses, at Yale and Dartmouth and Duke, among many others, Teach "hired" more students than any other employer. More even than Goldman Sachs.
And there is another reason so many are seeking to be accepted by TFA--it has become an increasingly valuable experience to list on a budding resume when leaving teaching (as the vast majority do) and applying to graduate or professional school or returning to the more traditional job market.
Also attractive, while riding out the recession, with TFA helping its participants get teaching jobs in big-city schools, they get full teaching salaries from the districts that employ them. In Dallas, as one example, beginning teachers earn $45,000, the same a recent graduate would make at an entry level public relations job, assuming in this economy one can find one.
But then there is the mixed news about Teach for America's effectiveness. How best to measure that?
If it is a program to get high-achieving college grads to have exposure to teaching at-risk children, it is obviously a major success. If it is to engage as many well-intentioned rich people and foundations as possible in funding education projects, it is obviously a remarkably successful. But if it is to recruit and retain teachers, it is not so successful. Data indicate that of TFA teachers in New York City, fully 85 percent leave by the fourth year. And if TFA success is to be defined by their teachers being measurably more effective with students, studies indicate that TFA teachers do about as well as traditionally-trained and selected faculty members.
So one remains to wonder why there is so much fuss and attention paid to Teach for America. Many much more successful education reform programs exist well out of public site and envy TFA's ability to attract front-page attention and money.
If I were cynical I would say Teach for America is in the long tradition of noblesse obige, where those blessed to be more fortunate reach out a helping hand to those they see to be in need. And then leave while things remain much the same.
posted by Steven Zwerling at
5:35 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home