Why, I have been asked, have you, a former vice-president ...



WHY ABCTE, TFA AND TAP?

Joan Baratz Snowden

Education Study Center

Why, I have been asked, have you, a former vice-president for assessment at the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and a former director of Educational Issues at the AFT, joined the board of the American Board for Certification of Teacher Excellence (ABCTE), and why are you hanging around with those folks from Teach for America (TFA) and the Teacher Advancement Program (TAP). I thought you were for high standards and the professionalization of teaching?

My answer. I , believe that these organizations, despite their different origins—ABCTE as the product of a right-wing political ideology, TFA from a naïve, smart, earnest folk can-do-good belief, and TAP with a just apply business techniques and get the job done attitude—all have come to a similar conclusion as they have tried to reform education. That conclusion—there is more to teaching than knowing subject matter, really caring, or offering pay incentives. As they have evolved, these three organizations have been open to change in the face of what they have learned. They are acknowledging that teaching is a complex, profession, with knowledge and skills that are essential to success.

Let me explain what I mean. Take ABCTE. This organization started out by declaring that all that was necessary to enterteaching was to know ones subject matter. They quickly learned that no one was buying that canard and in addition to developing subject matter tests for entry into the profession, they created a test of pedagogy. But even that was not sufficient to convince state policymakers so ABCTE has begun to develop curricula for the assessments and support systems for new teachers who enter the classroom via an ABCTE credential. They are evolving from a national teacher testing organization into a credible alternative route program for entering the classroom.

And TFA, what have they learned from their experiences in the field? They too have moved away from a simplistic view that youth, a good education, and a desire to make a difference, can alone ensure that someone will be successful in teaching and remain, at least for two years, in the classroom. Over the years, TFA has become quite sophisticated in their efforts to prepare their candidates for the classroom. In addition to a summer “pre-service teaching experience,” TFA recruits have access to an excellent curriculum that deals with classroom management, parent-teacher relationships, teaching reading and other critical elements of effective instruction. These excellent materials contain information that all beginning teachers should have access to, but which according to a recent review of teacher education offerings, is not consistently available to aspiring teachers in many of our teacher training institutions. TFA also has developed a beginning teacher-support system for their teachers that helps them to confront the myriad challenges that any beginning teacher is likely to encounter, particularly when placed in high need settings.

TAP is an interesting case in point. I’ve followed the progress of TAP over the years, and the program has made great strides. I wasn’t always delighted with it. Originally, TAP was billed as an incentive plan that through a pay for performance scheme would get the good teachers to “produce” (as if teachers were “holding back” their services and will only increase their teaching when paid more), get rid of the bad teacher (presumably by starving them), and finally, attract a new breed of teachers into the system with the promise of more money (but hardly enough to compete with salaries in other fields requiring comparable training and education).

This TAP miracle was going to be done largely by redistributing the existing money. Well, TAP tried this and it didn’t fly. Instead of blaming the system and moving on, TAP learned from its earlier efforts. Like excellent teachers, they reflected on their practice, and they made the necessary changes. They realized that teachers weren’t succeeding because the system was failing them. They didn’t have the knowledge and supports necessary to succeed.

As it has matured, TAP has become a program that addresses the needs of teaching as a profession. It has moved from an economist’s model to an educational one that recognizes the teaching professional, and it embeds pay for performance within a larger framework of education reform. So what does TAP do? Along with involving teachers and their unions in the process of designing the compensation system, the TAP model recognizes the need for a competitive base pay, creates multiple paths to additional compensation, has clear standards for teaching performance, and has an evaluation system that involves teachers and requires trained evaluators, and finally links its evaluations system not only to financial rewards but also to professional development opportunities so that all teachers can improve.

As a nation, we are on the cusp of sweeping changes in our economy, in our society, and in our schools. The world has changed, but our schools and the preparation of our teachers have not kept up. ABCTE, TFA and TAP are trying to address these new realities. In their efforts to reform the system, each organization has learned about the need for a professional teaching force. What can we learn from them regarding needed changes in teacher preparation, recruitment and retention?

The answer:

• we must be more selective in deciding who goes into teaching;

• we must create a rigorous teacher preparation curriculum;

• we must make entry level standards and licensure tests more rigorous;

• we must give beginning teachers support from outstanding, experienced teachers;

• we must create evaluation systems that not only identify excellence but also help teachers improve their practice;

• we must alter the current compensation system to make it more responsive to market needs; and

• we must reward excellence.

While many of my friends in the unions and in teacher education and the broader policy community may worry that I have let my guard down and have begun to fraternize with “the enemy,” I believe the time has come to set ideology aside and move beyond the polarizing regulate/deregulate debate that has shed more heat than light, and instead look for the best solutions from both camps and establish new common ground on behalf of teachers, students, and the future of public education.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download