Another reason why teaching may not be considered a Real Profession by its critics is due to the fact that the profession lacks rigorous standards that prevent entry or that weed-out those who should not be teachers. There are no multi-day board or bar examinations (as in medicine and law), no tooth-drilling practicum (as in dentistry), and no inquisition by a denomination (as with clergy).
To be honest, this critique may be a legitimate criticism. In order for me to become a public school teacher I had to:
- complete a portfolio for my master's program, which took some significant time for reflection and writing. However, could I have put less time and energy into the portfolio and still gotten my license? I'll never know, but I don't think anyone in my program failed to get the stamp of approval from the graduate school or the state because their portfolio was substandard.
- student-teach for several weeks. This was probably the most important part of my training, but it only lasted about 10 weeks.
- take a two-part, four-hour exam called the Praxis. I didn't have to study at all for this exam. I think that some high school students whom I currently teach could have passed it. Let's just say, it wasn't exactly rigorous.
I'm not saying that the sum of these things was trivial, but I don't think that it is a process that really selects those who will make capable teachers from those who won't.
The funny thing is that the public is constantly clamouring for higher standards for teachers. "We need to make sure these teachers are qualified," they say in the public sphere. Here's the problem: you can't raise the bar for teachers without also increasing the incentives. Durham Public Schools, for example, still needed to fill dozens of teaching positions several of weeks after the start of school. This shortage is not due to the fact that the standards are too high; on the contrary, there just aren't enough teachers who want to teach in Durham. We must give people greater incentives to join the ranks of teachers or we must content ourselves with what we currently have.Its fine with me if the hoop-jumping that disguises itself as "high standards for teachers" becomes instead legitimate and rigorous standards for teachers. Raise the standards for teachers; make rigorous teaching examinations; require year-long teaching apprenticeships, create genuine and helpful systems for teacher accountability. However, with increased standards there must be a commensurate increase in incentives. Otherwise, we should just get used to the phrase "lack of qualified teachers."
2 comments:
Incenting teachers is a tricky business, right? They're unusual in that the monies that go to them are neither directly nor indirectly gathered as a result of their performance, like many jobs in the private sector. First, as a secondary school teacher, my wife goes to work 2/3's as many days as I do. Second, it seems as though district-level administrators make the lion's share of the money in the school system - generally for doing jobs that would garner a lot less money and require a lot more time (and competence) in the private sector. If school systems can leverage these two facts - I believe there is almost enough money in the system to incent more potentially qualified individuals to study to be teachers (assuming that higher pay engenders both competiton and increasingly "qualified" applicants). Then someone could teach me how to write that sentence so it doesn't run-on so much. Oh well. I guess too many engineering classes took their toll.
I think you are right--this is a complicated issue. It seems to me that two things must occur simultaneously: 1) an increase in the financial incentives for highly qualified people to go into teaching and 2) the establishment of genuine accountability for teachers' performance. I think these two things will encourage qualified people to go into teaching and reward capable teachers for staying in teaching. I also agree with you about the money paid to administrators. In my school system, for example, assistant principals usually make more money than teachers for doing what I would consider to be secretarial work--calling substitutes, checking off which buses have arrived, keeping track of textbooks, organizing graduation, etc. Add to this the fact that they have little or no accountability for their job performance (unlike many teachers). Thanks for commenting.
Post a Comment