I myself am a lawyer, but I come from a family of teachers. I can't stand TFA, and I think it causes more harm than good. Let me tell you why:

1) Practical Issues: If TFA were used purely as a supliment to actual hired teachers I could see some benefit to it as it would decrease class size and allow more veteran teachers to tackle more difficult classes. However TFA is too often used by schools as an "instead of" option not an "in addition to" proposition. Schools will too often opt to not hire new staff knowing that they are getting TFA participants and they can keep their class sizes under State and Federally mandated maximums. These positions would be better filled with actual teachers.

2) Perception Issues: TFA fosters the perception that teaching isn't a profession, but it simply a job. It undermines the great skill and training required to become a successful teacher. Can you imagine a program called "Lawyer for America" where young college grads could practice law at the Public Defenders Office for two years? Or "Doctor for America" where college grads with minimal training could preform surgery in inner city hospitals? These programs seem ridiculous and illustrate how we view lawyers and doctors as more professional than teachers.

3) Academic Issues: TFA undercuts the importance of an eduucation in education. The notion that enrgy + knowledge of a subject = good teaching is absurd. Good teachers are trained is child or adolescent psychollogy. They understand the complex methodology of teaching and have studied divergent views of pedagogy. They have spent 6 months to a year in practicum leaning from a master teacher and learning their craft.

TFA ignores all these issus and place underqualified, undertrained individuals in classrooms that often need the most training and skill.

If these college grads truly wants to make a difference they might want to think about getting an actual teaching credential.

I am a teacher. I am not affiliated with TFA, but I have several colleagues who are. They never cease to amaze me with their skill, their patience, their work ethic, and their overall preparation for every class day. They forced me to reexamine what I do in the classroom.

Maybe my experience isn't common. I'm in my second high school now, and it's been the same here as it was at my old school. The TFA teachers are routinely among the very best on the staff.

As for the turnover problem, I'm on the fence about it. We need to hold on to good teachers, so it's tough to see the good ones go (the two TFA teachers in my department this year are returning to graduate school next fall). On the other hand, while I do value my experience gained by working in the profession for the last five years, I don't know if it's necessarily a terrible thing to have teachers coming and going year in and year out. It's not an easy job. I've pondered various options myself from time to time.

One last thing: the "education in education" argument is bogus. I got certified in college, and my education classes were the biggest waste of time and money I had to endure before finally graduating with an English degree. Everything I learned about teaching I learned on the job, both as a student teacher and a professional.

It's just strange to me that we can have completely different opinions about this organization.

In certain states, like California, an actual teaching credential is required to teach after a certain number of years (3? I think?). I'm sure other states must require this as well. This may be why there is so much turnover after the program - people don't want to go back through those trainings. Although, I think TFA has a credentialing program, and it requires a lot more work than mine did...

I hear what you are saying Anse, and that is great that you have such positive experiences with TFA colleagues. It's also a shame that you felt your education classes such a waste. A good education program can offer valuable insight into how a mind learns, how various cultures approach learning, and how to best differentiate instruction. But I will agree that many education programs accross the country can be a waste of time.

My larger issues with TFA are 1) How schools tend to use it to cut back on staff or hire less staff than they otherwise would and 2) What TFA as a whole says about how we view teachers. I am sure you would agree that my Lawyer for America or Doctor for America ideas are rediculous.

My question is why are your wonderful and smart TFA collegues so eager to go back to grad school. If they are so good at teaching why not stick around for a bit?

1) How schools tend to use it to cut back on staff or hire less staff than they otherwise would and 2) What TFA as a whole says about how we view teachers. I am sure you would agree that my Lawyer for America or Doctor for America ideas are rediculous.

Schools are eager to hire them because they're good. Sometimes you take a gamble with somebody seeking a permanent position. TFA teachers, at least in Houston, are never a gamble.

My question is why are your wonderful and smart TFA collegues so eager to go back to grad school. If they are so good at teaching why not stick around for a bit?

When is being good at something the same as being satisfied with it? The fact that they don't stay in the profession is a bigger indictment against the public school system than it is of TFA.

Anse:

Schools are eager to hire them because they're good. Sometimes you take a gamble with somebody seeking a permanent position. TFA teachers, at least in Houston, are never a gamble.

I think I'm going to have to disagree with you there. TFA might be all fine and well if it were a suppliment. But arguing that TFA participants should be hired above actual trained and credentialed teachers, who have at lease had the experience of student teaching, is absurd.

And as I keep pointing our if your logic is true Anse, why not Lawyer for America? What is the difference? Unless you think it takes more skill and professionalism to be a lawyer? Or perhaps a lawyer is a more important job than teaching?

I would gladly receive treatment from a "Doctor for America" if he were better than his peers who graduated med school. Unfortunately, that is the state of the profession of teaching, at least in the under served schools that TFA sends its people to. Nobody has a gun to principals' heads forcing them to hire TFA instead of "actual" teachers - they are free to choose the candidate they feel is most qualified. The traditional Ed schools could use the competition because for the most part they are sorely lacking. I am curious which schools you have experience with that offer such rich teacher preparation - perhaps I will enroll.

But arguing that TFA participants should be hired above actual trained and credentialed teachers, who have at lease had the experience of student teaching, is absurd.

You have a severely distorted concept of what it means to have teaching credentials. I got certified as an ESL (English as a Second Language) teacher last year after two hours of study and an exam, no experience, no longwinded classes or seminars, no mentorship with an actual, experienced ESL teacher (teaching English is not the same thing). Master's degrees in Education are infamous for being some of the easiest to obtain. I knew a guy who got his while teaching full-time and moonlighting in a rock band at a local bar on weekends.

And like the poster above, I would gladly take a "temp" if I had reason to believe he was good at what he does.

cmulroe:

I would gladly receive treatment from a "Doctor for America" if he were better than his peers who graduated med school. Unfortunately, that is the state of the profession of teaching, at least in the under served schools that TFA sends its people to. Nobody has a gun to principals' heads forcing them to hire TFA instead of "actual" teachers - they are free to choose the candidate they feel is most qualified. The traditional Ed schools could use the competition because for the most part they are sorely lacking. I am curious which schools you have experience with that offer such rich teacher preparation - perhaps I will enroll.

Or could it be because hiring a TFA participant is a lot cheaper for a school district than hiring an actual teacher? I don't think its about qualifications. No schoold district would happily hire an uncredentialed teacher who had never gone through practicum. But they'll do it if they can save a buck and keep class sizes under mandated maximums.

And I highly recommend the Brandeis University Education Program. You should enroll, I'm sure you'll love it.

Anse:

But arguing that TFA participants should be hired above actual trained and credentialed teachers, who have at lease had the experience of student teaching, is absurd.

You have a severely distorted concept of what it means to have teaching credentials. I got certified as an ESL (English as a Second Language) teacher last year after two hours of study and an exam, no experience, no longwinded classes or seminars, no mentorship with an actual, experienced ESL teacher (teaching English is not the same thing). Master's degrees in Education are infamous for being some of the easiest to obtain. I knew a guy who got his while teaching full-time and moonlighting in a rock band at a local bar on weekends.

And like the poster above, I would gladly take a "temp" if I had reason to believe he was good at what he does.

Certified to teach ESL is way different than obtaining a teaching credential. They'll certify anyone to teach ESL. One of the many problems with our "English Learners" education in America.

Certified to teach ESL is way different than obtaining a teaching credential. They'll certify anyone to teach ESL. One of the many problems with our "English Learners" education in America.

It's not that different. The TFA guys get certified while on the job. It's called ACP, the Alternative Certification Program. They get stuck taking useless education classes in the evenings while working full-time in the classroom. I've never heard them say anything good about the classes. They sound about as valuable as the ones I took as an undergraduate.

Anse:

It's not that different. The TFA guys get certified while on the job. It's called ACP, the Alternative Certification Program. They get stuck taking useless education classes in the evenings while working full-time in the classroom. I've never heard them say anything good about the classes. They sound about as valuable as the ones I took as an undergraduate.

But Anse, what you are presenting is such a logical fallacy. You think education classes are bogus. I get that, but that is only one of my many arguments against TFA.

And just because you have this terrible experience with education classes doesn't mean that TFA is the solution. Wouldn't a more logical and efficient solution seem to be.....wait for it.....making the credentialing process more rigorous.

What you advocate is the equivalent of me saying: I think Law School was a waste of time, so anyone should be allowed to practice law. That logic just isn't sound.

How about instead we raise teacher pay, raise the rigor in credentialing programs, and hire more teachers to lower class sizes?

TFA is a crappy band-aid on an amputated limb.

maverjoe:

Or could it be because hiring a TFA participant is a lot cheaper for a school district than hiring an actual teacher? I don't think its about qualifications. No schoold district would happily hire an uncredentialed teacher who had never gone through practicum. But they'll do it if they can save a buck and keep class sizes under mandated maximums.

When principals want to save money they hire someone called a "permanent substitute" who reads a newspaper at his desk for a year while the students fool around in the classroom and learn nothing. TFA and other alternative-certification candidates, on the other hand, earn perhaps $1,000 less than a traditionally certified teacher. Many districts will immediately give these savings back in the form of tuition reimbursement. Additionally, my city's system paid out up to $15,000 per person in signing bonuses this year to first-year teachers, including TFA. So I am wondering where this discount you keep referring to is realized.

Whatever other assumptions you hold, PLEASE let go of the notion that great "actual" teachers are lining up to apply for jobs at our toughest schools, only to be turned away because principals are looking to save a buck. This could not be farther from the truth.

What you advocate is the equivalent of me saying: I think Law School was a waste of time, so anyone should be allowed to practice law. That logic just isn't sound.

Believe me, there is no comparison between law school and the curriculum offered by most education programs in this country. I do think they need to be more rigorous, but I'm not completely sold on the idea that they're essential. You don't need to understand Piaget's theories of cognitive development or Skinner's radical behaviorism to be a teacher. It's great if you are an expert in that sort of thing, but at the end of it all, very little of that stuff applies in a classroom.

The only thing you need to be a teacher is an education in the field you wish to teach and careful instruction in the art of classroom management (classroom management is a subject sorely lacking in college education curriculum, in my experience). With some experience and focus, you will improve with time. It's a job you really have to learn while doing. No amount of instruction in educational theory will be enough to prepare you.

I've got all kinds of ideas about how to improve schools, but the key problem with teachers is simply attracting solid candidates. Good salaries are not the whole problem, either, though it's hard for people to resist the allure of the private sector.

I've never posted before, but reading this article and the subsequent post makes me feel as though I have an obligation to. I finished my TfA commitment in '06.

1. Please understand, in the school that I taught in, there were no other options. No one else interviewed for my position. No one wanted it. No teacher who has spent 4 years preparing to be a teacher wants to teach in a school like that unless it is a last resort.

I'm trying not to bristle at the "actual teacher" jab, because I spent six sleepless weeks in the most rigorous training of my life, then got certified through night classes while teaching. TfA requires this, some people choose to go a step further and do a masters program. Oh, and I was observed once a month and paired with a veteran teacher, as all new teachers are.

2. Lawyers and Doctors have professional degrees. I've never met a practicing lawyer or doctor who came straight out of college. Teachers, on the other hand, enter the classroom right out of college, certainly with less training than a lawyer or doctor.

3. During my two years as a science teacher (that has a BS), I answered an unbelievable number of questions from veteran teachers that equate to basic science knowledge. Understanding of a subject is of paramount importance. And no, knowledge of a subject does not inherently enable one to teach it-- think about how many awful professors you had in college that droned on, oblivious to the sleeping students around them. But! That's why we were trained! I know science like the back of my hand-- all they had to do was teach me how to teach it.

I'm sure none of this will change your perspective, but I don't really care. I would not, however, say that I caused "more harm than good". My students met my 80% mastery goals and (most) passed their state tests. That, to me, sounds pretty good.