Join the conversation

The problem is not TFA. And the problem is not TFAers who happen to believe that they are "the answer to all that ails us." The problem is TFAers who also want to drive "reform" and do so by perpetuating those simplistic beliefs in the media. But you are right about the reasons why so many teachers are so overly critical of so many TFAers, as opposed to the few who inappropriately seek political leverage.

Teach for America reminds us that in the United States teaching children is not considered to be a job worth keeping. Need we say more about why our educational system is less than stellar?

John--There are definitely prominent TFA-ers I disagree with, but I've met a lot of former TFA-ers I agree with on many issues. From my experience, it's a pretty diverse group of people ideologically. And I think there's real credence to the TFA argument that it helps bring more people into education--whether into the classroom or the policy shop. One of my colleagues is a TFA grad, and I'm lucky to work with her. Though some have considered Linda Darling-Hammond an opponent of TFA, she has argued that we have to learn from the best of what they do, "apply lessons from both traditional and alternative programs in new syntheses." That strikes me as a reasonable goal for a lot of reforms out there: How do we take the best of those reforms and spread their wealth far and wide?

Linda--I agree with you that's the way TFA has been portrayed may actually diminish, rather than raise, the profession. That, I feel, fans resentments of TFA that neither TFA, and certainly not most of its teachers, really deserves.

Thanks for the hat tip!

I'm with you, Claus. There are lots of serious issues embedded in the very public TFA debate--teacher recruitment and retention, instructional collaboration, education leadership. We don't move forward with reforming any of these when the conversation centers around whether or not TFA teachers are (as the Detroit News recently claimed) "the Marine Corps of teaching, getting results three times better than existing teachers."

Teach for America is now a well-funded publicity machine, securing its own public advocates and research--and occasionally that research doesn't yield the results TFA is looking for. Join the club.

I have found the TFA teachers I worked with bright and committed--and willing to honestly analyze their experiences in the classroom. The TFA teachers in my doctoral cohort seemed to believe that the dysfunction they encountered in their two-year experience was far more widespread. There was the temptation to compare their own K-12 education and their brief teaching career and decide: the way things were done in the schools where I grew up are the way things should be done.

And in that, TFA teachers are not very different from most teachers, who consciously or unconsciously imitate the teaching they got as children.

Claus,

I think we're saying the same thing. I've never met a TFA teacher who was offensive, so unless I get evidence otherwise, I'm assuming that the ideologically driven ones are a minority.

Last night on NPR, Wendy Kopp illustrated both dynamics. I was completely on board with her diagnosis of how difficult the problem of scale is. I admired her energy in addressing the scale issue, and recognizing that their 14,000 are only a drop in the bucket. For all I know, her criticism of Human Relations departments was fair.

I got suspicious when she said that HR people "don't care," and just wanted to fill positions. But here's my big complaint. She implied that if HR departments cared enough, then the shortage of qualified teachers would be solved.

When TFA and others are making their contributes, I have nothing but praise, whether I agree with them or not. When they imply that its educators not caring enough that prevents solutions, at that point its crossing over into being a jerk.

But its not up to me to judge people. I just wish that SOME of them were less judgmental.

Humility and a Generosity of Spirit are TFA core values. Perhaps some members of our organization would be better served by remembering that more often.

Nancy--Pleased to give you the hat tip! The quotation from the Detroit News, my hometown paper when I was growing up, was shocking. Where on earth did they get that? That's the kind of thing that distorts the debate. People think it's just that easy.

John, we probably do agree. It would be nice if people wouldn't assume the worst motives among people who are struggling to make things work. We have to create the conditions to help them work better. That said, HR practices in districts could be better. We dealt with that issue--among others--some time ago in a report addressing staffing in struggling schools: http://www.publicschoolinsights.org/tools#staff.

Mr. Brown--You're right. These days, we could all use some humility and generosity of spirit.

I agree with what's been said- the emphasis on TFA as a miracle cure isn't really constructive. I think at the core, it's due to your first assertion, Mr. von Zastrow, that people see teaching as a calling rather than a profession. Teachers see teaching as a calling- especially the young ones. I think we teachers are playing a large part in building that myth. Perhaps by learning from TFA's example of teacher evaluation we can de-mystify teaching.

I think the problem is in the framing of the issue. TFA is a solution to the problem of teacher shortages so deep that long-term substitutes are a common stop-gap measure; it's not a solution to teacher certification issues. It frames the problem with traditional certification problems as "taking too long" and thereby discouraging people from going into teaaching. And hey, I'd like to be a doctor too, if only I didn't have to waste all those years in medical school. I think I could really give back if I spent a summer learning anatomy and then went straight into the operating room.

TFA could have just as easily conceived of itself as addressing the problems of schooling by seeing them as residing in the dismal physical condition of many school buildings, and recruited Ivy League students to spend two years doing carpentry, masonry, plumbing, and electrical work (a la Habitat for Humanity). However, would we be so quick to believe that an Ivy League education well prepares one to do construction? TFA'ers think that they can be good at teaching because they were good at school. (The fact that very few of them came from the types of schools they're sent into is a definitional problem of a serious order of magnitude.)

While they may achieve some good effects, it's arguable that they're trying to solve a problem using the solution to a different problem; perhaps redefining the problem would allow greater impact with the same amount of effort.

The only common denominator among TFA teachers is that they are intelligent- if not, there is no way they would be accepted into the program. Beyond that, they vary as much as any other group of people.

What the TFA program has that is unique is the fundamental belief teacher actions affect student success. That doesn't mean other factors aren't equally or more powerful, but that doesn't change the fact. This needs to be the ultimate message of every teacher training program and every school system.

Nick, I do agree with you that we need to redefine the problem to get at the big solutions. In TFA's defense, though, they do seem to be working hard at understanding what makes their teachers effective and ineffective--and to support their teachers in the classroom. While one might disagree with their definitions of effectiveness it does seem like they offer some models to emulate.

Angela, I'm not sure the belief that teacher actions affect student success is unique to TFA, though TFA clearly is passionate about the impact of teachers. All people involved in preparing teachers believe that teachers' actions affect student success--why else would they be in the business of teacher preparation. The question is how they define student success and then act on their convictions.

Where is the NEA?

Claus, I read that Atlantic article as well, and it makes me wonder why are teachers thirsting for that kind of support when they have one of the most powerful associations in any industry? Whether you believe its reputation earned or wrongly stated, the NEA is seen by so many as a protectionist union supporting its members over the interests of children. Is all of their focus on local contract negotiations and policy really the best use of member dues? And does the publicity of those efforts attract negative attention to the profession?

I know the NEA does good work in support of teachers, but they can do more, and do more to reach out with what they are currently doing. I don't know enough to suggest that the TFA model could be instructive to the NEA in their support of teachers, but to use the old SAT analogy style, TFA:TFAers :: NEA:Teachers, seems it's a possibility at least.

TFA is more than an augmentation to closing the non-existent achievement gap (in reality it is a socio-economic gap, and widening all the time). It is a process designed to show that there is no need for the professional educator. TFA supports the effort of privatization of education, something arguably unconstitutional if it replaces public education, like Arne Duncan would have throughout America. Privatization, or education for profit, uses the corporate quick and dirty approach that TFA lends itself to so very well. TFA has something to prove. It wants to prove that it has the solution to education through a model of taking recent youthful graduates and placing them into a classroom, yet unprepared for the rigors of the urban classroom, and "expend" their time, energy, and probable will to teach in exchange for the post-two-year greener pasture. In that sense, TFA is truly dangerous. Not only to the young volunteers who flock in times of economic depression to immediate post-graduate opportunity, but to the foundations of the education system of America, that evolved over a couple of hundred years to be influenced by progressives like Dewey and others. For if the TFA model unifies and solidifies with the Arne Duncan model, the role of professional educator is as much a part of American history as the U.S. Constitution before the Patriot Act. Americans should really take a closer look at how Washington endorses educating our children.

The problem with TFA is that it is a propaganda mill par excellent. When there are negative comments they are smothered byt he positive propaganda. The program is poorly administered. Staffers often are not placed until they arrive at the area where they are to teach Idealistic young people are often placed in dangerous classroom situations that they are not prepared to handle. Idealistic graduates spend their summer training and have to use thier own resources unitl they they are placed. Moving expenses are paid with a loan and grant that has to be repaid if the staffer leaves early. I wonder where all the money in their budget goes?