In my forty years or so of studying the history of American education, I have learned about fads that came and went, disappeared and returned, over the course of the past century, each time treated as an innovation. It demonstrates to me the value of studying the history of education, so as to be aware of why ideas and methods work or don’t work, and to protect children against the latest passing enthusiasm. It strikes me that people who are teaching must find it very distracting to see the mandates come rolling out of the state department of education, or now the federal government, to do what they know is wrong or what is distracting, or to do something that violates their sense of professionalism. Yes, change is important, and yes, change can mean progress. But not always. The wise educator can tell the difference.

A reader answers an earlier post:

In my 16 years of experience, I have seen ideas come and go only to return again when some higher-up at the state DOE thinks that he or she has some kind of innovative approach despite the fact that we’ve tried that method before. Teachers with experience under their belts have an understanding of what works and what doesn’t work in their classrooms. I highly doubt that TFA has some miracle approach on how to teach that will revolutionize the profession.

“Value-added” is another one of those “buzzwords” that reformers like to infuse into the teaching environment. The mere fact that you used the term shows that there is an obvious “superman” mentality in the TFA concept (not just to quote that propaganda of a movie) wherein success is quantifiable in the same way that businesses measure success by profits. Students are not “products”–they’re people as are those who teach them. You cannot put a number on the complexity of teachers’ contributions to the students of our country.