Evidently the Relay Graduate School of Education is not the only “graduate school of education” in which charter school leaders award masters’ degrees to charter school teachers.
There is also a “graduate school of education” in Boston organized by charter schools to train charter teachers to get “jaw-dropping” test scores. Not surprisingly, this one acknowledges its ties to Relay and TFA. It seems we are developing a parallel system of “graduate” schools, one for charters, another for public schools.
As I scan the “faculty” of this “graduate school of education,” I could not find anyone with a doctorate in any field.
As I scanned the “course catalogue,” I saw courses in methods, classroom management, community relations, and data analysis, but no research, no sociology of education, no cognitive psychology, no history of education, no economics of education, nothing about adolescent psychology, nothing about psychometrics, nothing about contemporary issues in urban education, nothing about the arts in education, nothing about the politics of curriculum and testing and textbooks, no analysis of the pros and cons of anything.
Maybe I am old-fashioned, but I think that a real graduate school of anything has some faculty who have made a career as scholars of their disciplines and that a real graduate school of anything has a curriculum that examines the field from many angles. Sure, it’s good to have practitioners on the faculty, but to have a faculty with no scholars at all seems odd. And to have a curriculum that omits every recognized field of study seems passing strange.
This graduate school, like Relay, seems to be devoted to one thing only: How to raise test scores. How did so many bright young men and women, graduates of our finest liberal arts colleges and universities, get the idea that education consists of nothing more than the ability to pick the right answer on a bubble test? That was not the way they were educated.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
I am an elementary school principal. Reading this latest article makes me wonder — are the charter schools using Pearson workbooks and the Core Curriculum ??? Inquiring minds want to know, because we feel , that the Pearson materials are designed to purposefully widen the achievement gap in an effort to further open the path for the creation of Charter schools.
Marge
Yes
Sorry, yes to the latter part of your question. They are trying to male all public schools fail.
That’s horrendous! Thanks for highlighting these glaring omissions. On the other hand, I think we should take this opportunity to mention that graduate schools in general do not include any courses on classroom management, which is a HUGE part of teaching. It always seemed strange to me that here we are talking about instruction, child psychology and development, etc, but what about how to effectively manage a classroom? What about creating classroom culture. While I was in graduate school these important factors were conspicuously absent.
Classroom management is part of the physical/emotional component of teaching and gets short shrift, unfortunately. I had a strong philosophical background in ed when I graduated, but learned the fullness of the art as I taught.
What disturbs me the most is that teaches are signing up to get these “degrees”. They are being further indoctrinated into a way of thinking that is harmful to our students and our profession. Where are their critical thinking skills?
Diane,
I am so glad that you brought up this “emergency teacher prep” program. I recently applied there (to the “Match Teacher Corps”, a one-year teaching prep program) and was pretty appalled.
I just graduated from a very prestigious school and in my senior year began applying to different teaching programs. Since my school focused on liberal arts and less on practical applications, I was unable to take any education coursework or even minor in education. However, I knew all along that I wanted to go into teaching. My career center kept recommending to me MATCH-like programs — TFA was recommended to me many times, as well as MATCH, and the Academy for Urban School Leadership in Chicago (responsible for many of those lovely turnarounds!). Many of my peers were attracted to these options.
You asked in a previous post, how are our nation’s brightest and best being attracted to these ridiculous programs? Well, I am one of that population, and I will explain: academia buys into the idealism of these programs, and the notion that they can prepare teachers “faster” than regular programs. Many of my peers are on the fast-track to a career, especially when bogged down with student loans, and to many of us who have no background in education, it seems much more logical to become certified in three months rather than three years. If we get our salary faster, we can get on our feet faster, and start leading a stable life. Not to mention that TFA looks great on a resume, and who would want to teach in public schools, anyways?
Well, apart from all this, I applied to MTC (Match Teacher Corps) and got asked for a phone interview. They provided me with the first chapter of one of their curricular texts. The chapter starts out with a quote from Gary Rubinstein (ironic, right?): “Too many teachers struggle through their first year, expending vast quantities of energy trying to maintain classroom discipline–at the expense of teaching.”
This text is extremely unprofessional and belittles the notion of teaching as a profession. Examples:
In this book, we describe the beliefs, presence, and moves you’ll need. At the end of the book, we’ll outline how we’re going to help you buy into the beliefs, develop your presence, and master the moves.
The 6 Beliefs are:
1. Belief 1: I am the ultimate authority in my classroom.
2. Belief 2: My goal in classroom management must be 100%.
3. Belief 3: My Patrolling Effort and Behavior Oblongata (PEBO)
needs to be strengthened to the point of automaticity.
4. Belief 4: Even though my classroom management abilities are not
perfect, I still have the right and the responsibility to correct wrong
behavior.
5. Belief 5: I have to hit the ground running on the first day in
September.
6. Belief 6: Even “bad” kids want to be good and do well.
The 3 Rules of Authoritative Presence govern:
1. Your body language: Straight, squared up, still, relaxed, and with
eye contact.
2. How your voice sounds: Loud, decisive, confident, and urgent.
3. The words you choose: Formal and concise.
The 7 Proactive Moves are:
1. Greet students at the door.
2. Circulate.
3. Use Proximity.
4. Scan.
5. Deliver clear directions & expectations.
6. Narrate compliance.
7. Planned reminders of expectations.
The 9 Reactive Moves are:
1. Stop and stare.
2. Sit up signal.
3. Hands down signal.
4. John I need.
5. I need 2.
6. Demerits.
7. Dismissal from class.
8. Do it again.
9. Group reset.
–It then goes on to say–
Belief 1: I am the ultimate authority in the classroom.
In other words, your mindset is, “I am a total bad@$$.”
Belief 2: My goal in classroom management must be 100%.
Getting 90% of kids to do things will feel good. But the thing
about 90% is, it just ain’t 100%. And the other thing about 90% is, soon it becomes 80%…and then it’s 70%… and on down the road, you don’t got any percent.
Belief 3: My Patrolling Effort and Behavior Oblongata needs to be
strengthened to the point of automaticity.
As in, “I will pounce like a cat on anything less than 100%!”
–Etc., etc. It then goes on to have a picture of Chuck Norris, with the caption “Is this Chuck Norris? Or a mirror?” And a picture of a shaky house with the caption “This house used to be on 100% solid ground. Then it was 90% solid ground. Then 80%. Then…not.”
I could go on, but I won’t. There is enough to analyze here, alone. How damaging could it be to adopt and truly believe Belief 6? And what is it with this emphasis on 100%–how quickly a teacher will burn out if they truly believe they are obligated to reach every student! Do students here sound like they are respected as individuals, or are they treated as cogs in the machine of education? It seems to me that the teachers themselves are treated like cogs, and if the students do not succeed it is the fault of the teacher.
What kind of profession does this text reflect? A respectful career choice, or a stint as a bartender? This reads more like an instruction manual giving tips on how to catch a girl. I was offended in reading it and was glad that another job opportunity opened up before I had to make a decision about MATCH.
I’ve always believed higher degrees should push students to become thinkers and contributors in their chosen field. Luckily I found a graduate certification program (in 1 very busy year) after my receiving my B.A. that helped me develop as a thoughtful educator. I’m sorry that you didn’t have that same experience Michael.
I know absolutely nothing about these programs, but I can identify a number of things the teachers are being taught which ARE important. Most students make their decision about a teacher within the first 10 minutes of the first day of class (whether or not the teacher is good, whether or not they will comply in class or “how they feel about class”). Again, I am a college teacher – so I know K-12 is very different. But emphasizing good body language and presenting a demeanor that the job is learning and what roles are in the classroom? YES – very important. I don’t think people should make fun of this because many times when I see a teacher who has big problems in the classroom, they are either not aware of, or do not think these are important to success.
Sounds dangerous. I can just see a teacher who has been through this program being assigned to a class of autistic or severely mentally retarded students. A little boy smiles, takes her hand and says, “mama”, one of his three words, and leads her to the mat table, gets on it, turns her around climbs on her back, and says “go”. All her proactives and reactives melt away. She will walk out or give that baby his piggyback ride!
Won’t work for disadvantaged kids either. They need positive, nurturing interaction with caring adults. This program seems to promote being the exact opposite. It reminds me of some of Harry Wong’s stuff.
Thing is, special ed. is often where the not-teachers are assigned. They should never be, but that is where the shortages are.
Chuck Norris, huh! I seem to recall his being a conservative and NRA member. Not the best example for a teacher! I have seen teachers like this one and classrooms run by them. The teacher wears suits that are dry clean only, hose, and heels. The children are not allowed to cling to her and soil her even if they are very young or disabled. The rooms are immaculate. The decorations are up to date and orderly. So are the childrens’ desks. There is great discipline in the classes and NO LEARNING. And once she leaves school and goes to Happy Hour the children no longer exist to her!
The question, in my mind, concerning such dubious and absurd institutions is the same as that concerning various “Leadership Academies” and ( my favorite) “Superintendent Academies”: how in the world are such flimflam places accredited ? In NYC where I work you can not legally be alone in a classroom for one minute unless you are a certified and licensed teacher. This is for the protection of the children. Who is protecting them from these frauds and how is this acceptable ? What is the basis ?
Diane,
I am so glad that you brought up this \”emergency teacher prep\” program. I recently applied there (to the \”Match Teacher Corps\”, a one-year teaching prep program) and was pretty appalled.
I just graduated from a very prestigious school and in my senior year began applying to different teaching programs. Since my school focused on liberal arts and less on practical applications, I was unable to take any education coursework or even minor in education. However, I knew all along that I wanted to go into teaching. My career center kept recommending to me MATCH-like programs — TFA was recommended to me many times, as well as MATCH, and the Academy for Urban School Leadership in Chicago (responsible for many of those lovely turnarounds!). Many of my peers were attracted to these options.
You asked in a previous post, how are our nation\’s brightest and best being attracted to these ridiculous programs? Well, I am one of that population, and I will explain: academia buys into the idealism of these programs, and the notion that they can prepare teachers \”faster\” than regular programs. Many of my peers are on the fast-track to a career, especially when bogged down with student loans, and to many of us who have no background in education, it seems much more logical to become certified in three months rather than three years. If we get our salary faster, we can get on our feet faster, and start leading a stable life. Not to mention that TFA looks great on a resume, and who would want to teach in public schools, anyways?
Well, apart from all this, I applied to MTC (Match Teacher Corps) and got asked for a phone interview. They provided me with the first chapter of one of their curricular texts. The chapter starts out with a quote from Gary Rubinstein (ironic, right?): \”Too many teachers struggle through their first year, expending vast quantities of energy trying to maintain classroom discipline–at the expense of teaching.\”
This text is extremely unprofessional and belittles the notion of teaching as a profession. Examples:
In this book, we describe the beliefs, presence, and moves you\’ll need. At the end of the book, we\’ll outline how we\’re going to help you buy into the beliefs, develop your presence, and master the moves.
The 6 Beliefs are:
1. Belief 1: I am the ultimate authority in my classroom.
2. Belief 2: My goal in classroom management must be 100%.
3. Belief 3: My Patrolling Effort and Behavior Oblongata (PEBO)
needs to be strengthened to the point of automaticity.
4. Belief 4: Even though my classroom management abilities are not
perfect, I still have the right and the responsibility to correct wrong
behavior.
5. Belief 5: I have to hit the ground running on the first day in
September.
6. Belief 6: Even \”bad\” kids want to be good and do well.
The 3 Rules of Authoritative Presence govern:
1. Your body language: Straight, squared up, still, relaxed, and with
eye contact.
2. How your voice sounds: Loud, decisive, confident, and urgent.
3. The words you choose: Formal and concise.
The 7 Proactive Moves are:
1. Greet students at the door.
2. Circulate.
3. Use Proximity.
4. Scan.
5. Deliver clear directions & expectations.
6. Narrate compliance.
7. Planned reminders of expectations.
The 9 Reactive Moves are:
1. Stop and stare.
2. Sit up signal.
3. Hands down signal.
4. John I need.
5. I need 2.
6. Demerits.
7. Dismissal from class.
8. Do it again.
9. Group reset.
–It then goes on to say–
Belief 1: I am the ultimate authority in the classroom.
In other words, your mindset is, \”I am a total bad@$$.\”
Belief 2: My goal in classroom management must be 100%.
Getting 90% of kids to do things will feel good. But the thing
about 90% is, it just ain\’t 100%. And the other thing about 90% is, soon it becomes 80%…and then it\’s 70%… and on down the road, you don\’t got any percent.
Belief 3: My Patrolling Effort and Behavior Oblongata needs to be
strengthened to the point of automaticity.
As in, \”I will pounce like a cat on anything less than 100%!\”
–Etc., etc. It then goes on to have a picture of Chuck Norris, with the caption \”Is this Chuck Norris? Or a mirror?\” And a picture of a shaky house with the caption \”This house used to be on 100% solid ground. Then it was 90% solid ground. Then 80%. Then…not.\”
I could go on, but I won\’t. There is enough to analyze here, alone. How damaging could it be to adopt and truly believe Belief 6? And what is it with this emphasis on 100%–how quickly a teacher will burn out if they truly believe they are obligated to reach every student! Do students here sound like they are respected as individuals, or are they treated as cogs in the machine of education? It seems to me that the teachers themselves are treated like cogs, and if the students do not succeed it is the fault of the teacher.
What kind of profession does this text reflect? A respectful career choice, or a stint as a bartender? This reads more like an instruction manual giving tips on how to catch a girl. I was offended in reading it and was glad that another job opportunity opened up before I had to make a decision about MATCH.
Michael,
Who would be attracted to a program like that? Drill Sargents?
Do they have any great demo videos like Relay? Those would be interesting to watch.
I have been a classroom teacher (English, ELA, literacy or whatever they’re calling it these days) for over 25 years. I’m sorry, but I do not see anything wrong with the MTC classroom management lists Michael posted above.
That being said, subject knowledge and deep, deep preparation have to come FIRST. This is where I see many teachers lacking. They do not have the knowledge and are not willing to do the preparation (or just don’t know where to start?) This past semester an American history teacher (with many years experience, and older than I) told my students something completely erroneous about constitutional amendment processes.
Also, Michael, have you tried being a 5 foot 100-lb female and teaching high school classes by NOT doing most of the things on those lists? My guess is not… Please do correct me if I’m wrong!
I would like to see a copy of this chapter you got.
you will, but not now. First I finish the book.
We have lost our way. More and more teachers and administrators are being pushed into making poor decisions. When did education stop being about the individual student. More often I am hearing about test scores and school grades and the child becomes the afterthought. We have to get back to the why we are there…to serve the students…to make learning engaging…not to score on bubble making ability.
I was at a meeting the other day where Pedro Noguera of NYU said exactly what you wrote: “Is it our goal to get higher scores or to make learning exciting?” Our goal defines our actions.
I am so happy Mr. Noguera finally saw the light. i really respect him as a professional. I wish he would be as vocal as you. We need all the support we can get.
Diane, I know you have helped so many teachers. I do not think either of these goals is the ideal. Learning should BE exciting, but the goal should be to engage students in learning, and to do everything possible to support and encourage their learning. Actually, when learning is real, it is exciting. It is exciting for students to be able to do things they did not think they could do – or didn’t know were good things to do, or learning about things they had never thought of or imagined before.
They creating technicians, not professionals. That’s how many want it to be.
Diane —
You ended with this statement:
“This graduate school, like Relay, seems to be devoted to one thing only: How to raise test scores. How did so many bright young men and women, graduates of our finest liberal arts colleges and universities, get the idea that education consists of nothing more than the ability to pick the right answer on a bubble test? That was not the way they were educated.”
While I am strongly opposed to this focus on test scores, I have worked with a number of TFA teachers and I would argue that they accept this idea (that education is nothing more than the ability to pick the right answer on a bubble test) BECAUSE that is the way they were educated. They always did well in school and they always knew the one right answer on the multiple choice test and they never got it wrong. They are also probably very good test takers and can’t understand why so many students struggle with testing or learning in a classroom where only one instructional method is implemented. They got into our finest colleges and universities because they did well on tests and always knew the one right answer to every question which resulted in their high GPAs and probably very high SAT/ACT scores.
I agree with you on the concern over this so-called graduate school and I agree with you on so many other issues. But I do think part of the problem is that the people involved with this continued focus on test scores simply don’t know any better because that same system did work so well for them.
What kind of colleges did they attend? Is thinking no longer required in college?
Have you seen the ‘new’ Doctorate of ed leadership at Harvard? I have mixed feelings about this approach since it will provide access to the HGSE, Harvard Law and Kennedy school of business along with a list of partnerships that seem week on traditional educational opportunities.(http://www.gse.harvard.edu/academics/doctorate/edld/index.html ).
Sounds like a good deal? Well, perhaps, but having school law and school finance courses is nothing new, education administrators have always had to have those classes—-how much more law and business do educators need? Why not a partnership with the sociology or psychology depts?
Harvard recently accepted a former NYC school teacher into this program who never achieved tenure–not once, but twice!! However, he was part of a group called Educators4Excellence and believed teachers should be judged by solely on test scores. (It didn’t work for him.)
The Harvard program is not really attracting good educators IMO. They are attracting those who drink the reform Kool Aid. The idea that a “teacher” who taught a short amount of time and hates collective bargaining and due process could one day be setting policy for others is frightening.
“nothing about psychometrics” That’s about the only positive thing I can see that they don’t do. Psychometrics a true pseudo-science, the basis of standardized testing.
In my experience, the most well-informed critics of standardized testing and its misuses are psychometricians. I recommend to you Daniel Koretz and Laurie Shephard. There are many more. Back when I was at the Thomas B. Fordham Foundation (now Institute), we published an essay about “Why Testing Experts Hate Testing.” Don’t discount those who know the limitations of testing.
Sounds like a new degree needs to be offered in the catalogs: Test Taking Skills. That would be really sad.
Does anyone know if these graduate schools have regional accreditation (RA) or if they’re pursuing it?
RA typically expects faculty with doctorates, especially for those teaching grad courses, and I don’t see how they would approve a slim curriculum that promotes dogma.
One of the methods that Milken used to obtain RA was to merge with existing schools that were already regionally accredited, and then separate from them down the road –but that didn’t always go his way. Any idea if these schools are doing that?
Another approach is obtaining national accreditation from DETC for online schools. Still, unless the billionaires plan to buy regional accrediting bodies and/or legislation which typically requires that degrees be from RA schools for employment eligibility, I don’t understand what would be the value of their degrees, except to spread their doctrine and teach at more charters.
As a person with a PhD, it bothers me not at all that this place does not have anyone with a doctorate. I’m much more interested in whether participants are learning from people who have made a real, positive difference with students. I’d judge that not just on test scores but also on attendance, things like the Hope Survey which measures whether students are learning to set goals and work toward them, graduation rates, attrition rates, student and family surveys of schools, etc.
Some years ago we surveyed Minnesota’s last 20 Teachers of the Year. (These were all district public school teachers, incidentally). We hired some to do workshops and without exception they were terrific teachers of other teachers.
Virtually none had ever been asked to speak at, much less teach a class at a Minnesota College of Education.
Outstanding teachers DO have a lot to share. I’d like to see them more deeply involved in the preparation of the next generation of teachers. Do we really care if they have doctorates?
Hi Diane,
I’m a Teach For America corps member in the Bay Area. I just finished my first year teaching at a charter school. Because of my affiliation both with TFA and with my charter school, I was forced to enroll in a teacher credentialing program that sounds similar to what you describe. What’s worse is that this “Institute” is not even an accredited university! I am not someone who will just be doing my 2 year committment in TFA and then leaving teaching afterwards – and as such, I have been completely disappointed and insulted by this program! Fortunately, I have recently been able to transfer programs, though I am concerned in general with the credentialing and graduate programs that TFA partners with. They all seem to be quick and incomplete routes to credentials and Master’s degrees, without providing the depth and history of education that you point out as missing. If TFA wants to create a pool of qualified teachers who remain in the classroom for longer than 2 years, there must be better options for us.