I've read a few articles about TFA, and this one gets close to the real issue at hand with TFA, but not quite close enough. What writers don't understand about the students hired by TFA is that they are type A people; that they share a lot more in common with those typically hired at investment banks than those that join the Peace Corps. The same type-A mentality that makes a new investment banker call his/her job 'interesting' and 'rewarding' while working regular 80 hour weeks fuels TFA hires to have low turnover, incredible dedication to their job, and the ability to say they have a lifelong dedication to ending educational inequality when they probably don't. I have seen articles that say TFA is simply a '2 year stopgap' for recent college grads that are still 'finding themselves', making it this generation's Peace Corps. It's not. Those types of people may still apply, but they are soundly rejected, and usually end up in law school or ... Peace Corps. No, TFA recruits hardworking and bright student with the highest GPAs -- and no doubt makes that the focal point of their grant applications. These type-A students hired by TFA and investment banks are valuable as a group to these organizations because of the ease of using peer pressure as a tool to manipulate their work habits. In a room full of competitive people driven to be #1, the company line is gospel, and they will work long hours without complaining or quitting because to do so would be to not be the best. However, being an passionate, excellent teacher and being someone who tirelessly works at teaching are not necessarily the same thing. In fact, they can be quite different. This is where TFA deserves to be criticized -- by favoring 4.0's that will work long hours and be afraid to quit the program early over students that would actually be good at teaching. So TFA does a good job of their stated goal of making TFA a destination job on-par with historically high prestige post-graduation jobs like investment banking. They have the low acceptance rates, high retention rates, and high teacher GPAs to prove it. But are the people TFA hires necessarily good teachers? The data I've seen in articles on that has not been promising. In fact, I would go so far as to say that most TFA hires will not make ending educational inequality a lifelong quest but enjoy the prestige that comes with the job. Meanwhile, I think TFA is turning away canidates who may have less impressive resumes yet may be much more effective teachers. TFA should make their hiring practices more balanced, and try to hire people that would genuinely enjoy teaching. Those people may be harder to come by. (BTW, I have never applied to be in TFA. I am not some bitter reject. This is just what I think after seeing what my college friends have ended up doing.)

Very interesting analysis. At the end of the day, then, what makes a good teacher? How can we recruit more of those people? Is it a teachable skill much as lawyering or doctoring are assumed to be?

We make such assumptions in the training of our high-prestige professional class, which is why competition for medical and law schools is so intense. You offer no evidence in your argument that good teaching cannot be taught and obtained in a smilar way, which begs the question: What are you complaining about?

Teach for America brings type A, highly successful people into the fold (although perhaps only for a limited time period). If anyone is going to "get it" and "make it work" within a limited time period, it is these people.

I am not trying to be snide (with a nod to all evidence to the contrary), but I have a serious interest in education (secondary and university) and I find the question of "what is a good teacher" fundamentally fascinating.

As a teacher, and someone who graduated with an MA in Education, I believe that you can absolutely train people to be successful (if not necessarily inspired) teachers. However, TFA does not put the best practices of the field in place. To be a good teacher, you need a few things. First and foremost, you must be able to like your students and to connect with them- all the GPA points in the world won't help you teach teenagers if they sense that you are insincere and do not like them. This, in my opinion, can't be taught. You either have it, or you don't. Second, you need a solid grounding in educational and pedagogical theory. This allows you to plan lessons and courses that are not simply thrown together based on state standards (which can be helpful tools, but are not that helpful on a day to day basis). In addition, this grounding gives you the tools to be a reflective practitioner of your craft, constantly striving to change what you are doing and hone your practice, based on what you see happening in your classroom. Third, you need a strong mentorship program. The best people to learn teaching from are those who are doing it, and having someone to talk to about the problems that inevitably arise is crucial.

My big problem with TFA is that it assumes at a basic level that any intelligent person can figure out how to be a teacher without professional education and training. I think that much more emphasis should be put on professional (MA) programs, rather than programs like TFA, which essentially, in my view, devalue the profession of teaching by suggesting that "anyone" can jump in and do it well.

insidia:

To be a good teacher, you need a few things. First and foremost, you must be able to like your students and to connect with them- all the GPA points in the world won't help you teach teenagers if they sense that you are insincere and do not like them. This, in my opinion, can't be taught. You either have it, or you don't.

Here, Insidia articulates better than me, and I agree. This is a quality that I think TFA hiring ignores. On the other hand, I am not necessarily sure how this quality can be determined fron an interview. I'd venture to say that sucess in teaching is related to enjoyment of teaching (unlike, for example, accounting) So TFA teachers that dislike their jobs but stay at them for a long time may theoretically be removing open slots from those who might enjoy it.

insidia:

programs like TFA, which essentially, in my view, devalue the profession of teaching by suggesting that "anyone" can jump in and do it well.

This is also a valid criticism of TFA. I have also been reading in other posts that TFA's purpose is to not simply overwhelm schools with TFA teachers, but to enrich the TFA teacher's perspective and instill a lifelong passion for ending educational inequality. I'm not sure how former TFA teachers are supposed to do this in non-education related professions. I don't think being on a school board in whatever suburb they start a family in counts, and I don't think you need to be in TFA to care about educational inequality as a voting issue. I suspect that TFA applicants already do. Certainly something needs to be done about educational inequality, and TFA is one of the few organizations that is actually doing something about it. But, it remains to be seen that they are going about it in the most effective manner.

On a somewhat related topic, I think its a shame that most cities don't have the latitude to extract tax revenue from suburbs. While suburb residents commute to the city daily for jobs, they do not contribute back to that city's services and infrastructure. The only state that I am aware of that can do anything about is Texas, where large cities routinely swallow suburbs with younger charters. While this hasn't done anything to reduce sprawl, it has somewhat reversed the residential desireabilty for middle class families from the suburbs to back within the city limits. (at least in Houston)

djanes1:

This is a quality that I think TFA hiring ignores. On the other hand, I am not necessarily sure how this quality can be determined fron an interview. I'd venture to say that sucess in teaching is related to enjoyment of teaching (unlike, for example, accounting) So TFA teachers that dislike their jobs but stay at them for a long time may theoretically be removing open slots from those who might enjoy it.

djanes,

before I respond, please let me know if you have ever been involved first-hand (volunteer or employed) in the TFA interview or selection process (if you have been, I would love to compare notes; I just don't want to stick my foot in my mouth!)

On the chance that you are speaking out of conjecture and not firsthand experience, I (as both a long-time volunteer recruiter and short-term compensated interviewer for TFA) would like to challenge your assumption. I am aware you may have several friends who have been corps members, however, I am a former corps member who has interacted with hundreds of TFA-ers at corps events, alumni programs, and recruitment activities.

The TFA interview process is more rigorous--and plain long! my interviews took place over four days--than that at several firms, think tanks, and high-ranking government positions for which I have interviewed. Again, this is something that has been improved as years go by, so there is a difference in the type of person admitted in say, 1996, and 2003, and, in turn, 2003 and 2007. Each year, the process is further refined.

[Recent] TFA recruiters are trained to spot "resume-padders" a mile away. If I say so myself, we've been getting better and better at it, too. We have standardized, clear rubrics that emphatically instruct us to turn away/award low points to people without a demonstrated passion for public education and related issues--irrespective of major, GPA, or alma mater. I have personally awarded low interview points to 3.9-ers from Princeton, Yale, and Chicago in favor of B-average applicants with the spark of creativity, engagement, and personal caring and investment TFA requires in its applicants; they are some of the qualities, I daresay, that teachers' colleges and education programs look for in their applicants, as well.

(If you are really interested in TFA's recruitment process, I encourage you to volunteer with a TFA regional office to learn more about it. I do not know their policy on non-corps members being able to interview prospective applicants, but I have come across non-corps members in full-time positions in TFA's management.)

No matter how rigorous the screening, however, some corps members become dejected and disillusioned--especially after the first year (notorious for almost all new teachers, TFA or no). I venture to say it would be unusual for most new teachers to rhapsodize over everything that went right in their first-year classrooms. In TFA's earlier years, people were unprepared to expect this, leading to the well-known drop-out cases (still, they are significantly in the minority of both TFA and first-year teachers in general).

As both the front-end interview process improves, and as TFA increases its support and resources for first-years, and as formerly mistrustful school districts (such as mine) see the energy and enthusiasm TFA corps members bring, the situation has gottern better for everyone involved: for the students first and foremost, and for the school districts and corps members themselves.

I understand the frustration of some long-time teachers who took more traditional routes to the classroom--they (correctly) believe the general public already devalues their profession, and may wonder, "do we need these upstarts coming in here acting like anyone with a B.A. and a good heart can teach?"

However, I would suggest that the more engaged, passionate, and deeply invested people we can draw into and KEEP in the world of public education--a world that is as far from glamorous or high-powered as possible--the better off students and society will be. This is not an issue of a limited demand for a product or service produced by a highly specialized labor force that fears encroachment by outsiders, thus devaluing the product--high fashion design or regional specialities such as Waterford crystal, for example, thrive on exclusivity, and the consumers benefit from the brand-name status.

But public education is different. I do not agree with arguments that would reduce the amount of high-quality learning available to youngsters who have been severely underserved by the current system as it stands. Veteran teachers and corps members--whether they intend to stay only through their second year, or whether they put the Master's in Education common to many TFA'ers to use for the rest of their lives in the classroom--must stand together.

You know, I don't get this top post at all. I don't understand why a two-year commitment, with no desire to go beyond that, is necessarily a terrible thing. Folks have this weird idea about teaching that it requires some kind of "special" effort. There is no doubt that some folks would make lousy teachers, and it takes a lot more than being merely intelligent or well-educated, but there really isn't any mystery to this profession. Most people, with some training and experience, can learn to be good teachers.

I suspect TFA training is so rigorous precisely because their teachers may not go past the 2-year mark (many of my TFA friends have moved on), so they need to be as ready as possible from Day 1. And from what I can gather, most of them are much better on that first day than I was.

I've been teaching for five years. I'm starting to wonder how much longer I'll do it. I'm not sure I can dedicate 20 or 30 years to this profession. I've worked in several different schools, and it seems to me that the older teachers, the ones who have been at it for 20 years or more, tend to be the most close-minded; they tend to be less willing to collaborate with their peers, and many of them are just plain burned out. Of course there are some that are still dedicated and very good at it, but I get the idea that most of us (and our schools, for that matter) might be better off if we looked at teaching as a 5 or 10 year commitment, rather than a lifelong career.

I love what I do, but there are times when I miss working for the private sector (which I did for eight years before teaching). I'm still submitting work for publication, and maybe that will work out; maybe it won't. I just think too many believe teachers should be utterly selfless, when in fact we ought to make personal development in our respective fields a top priority. I know English teachers that haven't read any serious literature for mere pleasure in years. It's a shame.

Anse:

but I get the idea that most of us (and our schools, for that matter) might be better off if we looked at teaching as a 5 or 10 year commitment, rather than a lifelong career.

This is an intriguing idea. I have toyed with an idea--based on observation of the many non-TFA teachers with whom I've worked--that some of the best teachers are ones who have first worked in another sector/capacity and chose to move into teaching after. Interestingly, two of these individuals were only teaching because they were immigrants (a chemical engineer-cum-6th grade science teacher, and a biologist-cum-8th grade science teacher) who could not find work openings in their original fields.

Others were an editor who became a high school social studies teacher, and a social scientist/researcher who taught Spanish.

My observation of these teachers and what I heard from my students confirmed that they were, for the most part very effective, especially after intensive classroom management training (which is usually something that needs to be taught and practiced).

The students benefited immensely from having teachers who had done other things professionally, even when the teacher was teaching something not directly related to her previous field. Their expertise in other fields helped diversify the topics and methods of the standard curriculoum, and proved my belief that topics at the middle school and high school level should be introduced in as inter-disciplinary fashion as possible, for example, a project combining the geometry with the history/cultural context of the Egyptian pyramids, with a novelized piece of literature about the ancient Egyptian dynasties.

This is not to say that I have not observed effective and outstanding teachers who taught from their first day out of teachers' college or bachelor's. I just think the teaching force, like most work forces, will benefit from intellectual and life experience diversity.

sorry for quick-typing typos; wish there was an edit function.

I just think the teaching force, like most work forces, will benefit from intellectual and life experience diversity.

Yeah, I think a lot about how college professors are not really teachers, but researchers/writers/etc. They produce actual work in their chosen field. A lot of professors are terrible teachers, but most of mine were actually quite good and seemed to enjoy spending time with students. I found college to be so intellectually stimulating precisely because I knew my instructors were professionals in the work of their chosen fields; teaching was not the end, but the means to an end. They got as much out of their students as we got out of them, I think.

It's hard to do, because we're so incredibly swamped with work as it is, but I wish we could develop our professional credentials, not just as "educators" but as writers or researchers or real participants in the subjects that we love. I didn't major in English because I dreamed of teaching it one day. I majored in English because I love literature, you know? I think that kind of passion can be infectious for students. Sorry if that's a little corny but that's how I feel about it.

Hey, I'm not Type A and I got into TFA, fulfilled my 2-year teaching obligation, and am still teaching, although in another country.

I was, however, dedicated, passionate, and exuded a natural inclination towards teaching. I agree with the posts above stating that the interview process is rigorous. Everything about TFA is rigorous. That's why I can't imagine a teaching situation that could ever be as hard as those two years. I hear teachers around me now complaining about having to write a lesson plan. Ha, we spent weeks and weeks learning how to long-term plan. Sometimes they complain about being assessed by their superior. My principal came in to watch me once every two weeks. And that was with screaming kids running around. :)

TFA is not perfect, but no one can say they are not making a difference or trying to improve themselves. I'm a bit biased because it was the most intense and fulfilling period of my professional life. To be honest, my teaching experiences since then have been a bit boring in comparison.

That's why the trick is to move out of the county (in Houston's case, Harris) and suburbify old existing hick towns. This way the city, county, AND school board doesn't get your property taxes and there is no danger of annexation (you can't annex an incorporated town). My best example is Sugar Land (home of Tom Delay) which is in Fort Bend County and pays money to Fort Bend Independent School District and the city of Sugar Land.

While everyone I've met in Sugar Land says that the only thing Sugar Land people do for work is "drive to Houston." The sugar mill closed down when I was a kid, or earlier.

This is an interesting plan. But speaking for myself, I'd rather walk ten miles barefoot over broken glass to get to work than live in Sugar Land (I'm a Houstonian). :)

Besides, you still pay taxes...just to a different taxing entity, and for what? To live in the suburbs?

KilgoreTrout:

That's why the trick is to move out of the county (in Houston's case, Harris) and suburbify old existing hick towns. This way the city, county, AND school board doesn't get your property taxes and there is no danger of annexation (you can't annex an incorporated town). My best example is Sugar Land (home of Tom Delay) which is in Fort Bend County and pays money to Fort Bend Independent School District and the city of Sugar Land.

While everyone I've met in Sugar Land says that the only thing Sugar Land people do for work is "drive to Houston." The sugar mill closed down when I was a kid, or earlier.

Excellent post! I agree with you that teaching might be better as a portion of your career rather than as the whole thing. There are a lot of things about teaching that make it clear why people would leave it: low pay, constant need for recertification (and often low/no reimbursement), the near-ubiquitous lack of classroom supplies and resources, and even just the sameness of teaching the same material year after year. The same classroom, the same material, and the utter sameness of everything made me forget my childhood desire to teach. At least college instructors can sometimes switch to a different set of courses, or switch off between fall and spring semesters. I can't imagine spending my whole life as a high school teacher, trying to find new ways to teach the same stuff for 20 years.

Also, teaching lacks a lot of things people need to feel that they are advancing in a career: no promotions, no big raises, no holiday bonuses. Some people are fine with that or find other ways to stay fulfilled, but I can see how an ambitious young person might put in 2 years and head off to a more competitive job. They spend a year getting acclimated and developing a teaching style--how could they do anything else? Then they spend the second year showing their best stuff and send off a class to the next year. Challenge over, game won. I'm not saying that they get everything right or that there are no new challenges, but if you are a "see problem-solve problem-move on to next problem" kind of person, teaching is hard because there is no clear end point, but a series of checkpoints, after which you are constantly refining the work product that got you through the last stage. Teaching is like spending your career in a rough draft; you never get to read the book because you are constantly doing rewrites.

I did end up in education after college (in case you were wondering), but not as a teacher. I'm good at teaching, but teaching isn't good for me. I work in a computer lab with language students at a community college and I teach one class a semester. I need the variety offered by my changing schedule, different students, and even different courses I teach. My colleagues keep asking why I don't apply for an instructor position. The answer is above--the job would drive me nuts! At least my job now uses my strengths. The projects I do have a beginning and an end, and I can feel the sense of accomplishment that goes along with looking at a finished product. If I had been in TFA, which I seriously considered, I would have left after my 2 year commitment ended and felt happy that I had made a difference. It would have been like a study abroad, where you go and learn how to live in another country and then come home and carry on with your life at the end off the semester, leaving behind a finished chapter of your life. You keep the lessons you learn and the friends you make, but you can't stay there forever.

"They spend a year getting acclimated and developing a teaching style--how could they do anything else? Then they spend the second year showing their best stuff and send off a class to the next year. Challenge over, game won. I'm not saying that they get everything right or that there are no new challenges, but if you are a "see problem-solve problem-move on to next problem" kind of person, teaching is hard because there is no clear end point, but a series of checkpoints, after which you are constantly refining the work product that got you through the last stage. Teaching is like spending your career in a rough draft; you never get to read the book because you are constantly doing rewrites."

I just have to laugh at the the idea that you can develop a teaching style in 1 year- I am 5 years in, and still feel like I'm figuring out how to teach. My "best stuff" in my second year is embarrassing to think about now, and this idea that you are teaching "the same stuff" year after year is just silly. Sure, you might be teaching the same subject, but if you are a good teacher, you will constantly be revising what you are doing, trying new methods, and most importantly, responding to your students. What works with one class will bomb with another, and it's your job to constantly adjust your teaching to meet the needs of the students in front of you.

I also think that the idea of teaching as a "2 year career" is not a good one- both for the reasons I mentioned above, and because if teaching is not attractive because of low salaries, the solution is not to attract less qualified people, but to RAISE THE SALARIES. I am very invested in the idea of teaching as a profession, and I find the idea of teaching as some sort of internship to be pretty insulting.

djanes1 is almost on point about TFA. My friends and I applied for them. I was an Americorps alum and my friends have Master's degrees in Mathematics from University of North Carolina. They were engaged and were both 27 years old. One worked on an intership with Mercedes Benz and the other was a language teacher in Germany for Berlitz. All this they bought to the table in their application for TFA. I myself had 5 years substitute teaching experience and international teach abroad experience. We wanted to go to either New Orleans or Hawaii to teach children of diversity like ourselves, so that we could be examples of the enpowerment of getting an education. All of us were turned down sent the email saying don't call us 'cause we aren't calling you. I knew the guythey accepted in my city. He was under 25 years old and went to a tonny educational institution for undergrad.His mother told me, if you're over 25 and you don't look like someone who would be hired for an investment firm or someone who looks or sounds like those young people types on "The West Wing', you aren't going to get hired by them. The last time they showed people from my state (AZ) they came from the richest section off the city. Ms. Koop is just taking people she thinks she can best call in that debt later in the form of money. the guy didn't even last the 2 years.

Basically, they get success stories but you need a silver spoon in your mouth to get in.