Randi Weingarten proposed a national bar exam for future teachers, and it stirred quite a reaction. Most worrisome is that the idea appeals to certain figures in the public eye who are known for making negative comments about teachers.
Some on this blog complained that Randi was echoing the corporate reformers’ complaint that teachers are the problem and must be blamed for the achievement gap, low scores, and every other issue.
But I’m inclined to agree with Randi that the profession needs higher entry standards or it will never get the respect it deserves.
One of the admirable aspects of Finnish education is that there are high standards for entry into teaching. Only 1 in 10 applicants is accepted into teacher education programs. Teachers have high prestige, as high as other professions. There is no Teach for Finland.
By contrast, many US states have low standards for entry into teaching and welcome teschers with little or no professional preparation. Growing numbers of teachers acquire their masters degree through dubious online “universities.”
I don’t think that a bar exam, by itself, will make much difference, although in the long run it may raise the prestige of the profession.
The question that must be faced is that any such exam is likely to have a disparate impact on minorities. The courts might even strike down an exam that excluded disproportionate numbers of black, Hispanic and Asian applicants. And there are unintended consequences; I am thinking of a story I read a year or two ago about a great music teacher, beloved by his students, who had to leave teaching because he could not pass the math section of the state test.
It’s always wise to look before you leap.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
We need to be really careful here. There’s nothing about being “smart”, per se, that makes one a better teacher. Especially being “smart” in a way that makes one more likely to pass an entry test. Some of the best teachers are themselves some of the worse test-takers. They teach well because they know what it’s like to struggle with material and what it’s like to be afraid of not doing well on tests. An awful lot of things that could be done to make teaching “more prestigious” and to attract a “higher caliber” of teacher will weed out a lot of people who are most suited to be teachers. I think this is especially true at the elementary level where subject knowledge isn’t as important. But even at secondary levels subject knowledge takes a back seat to being able to establish the kind of relationships and environment in which learning can take place.
LikeLike
I agree with your caution, Dienne.
Excellent teachers are creative problem solvers, possess incredible patience and perseverance, and are adept at people and time management skills, just to name a few essential characteristics.
Will a teacher “Bar Exam” accurately assess these qualitative attributes?
LikeLike
No, but there are other qualities it would ensure which I would think come first–having something to teach (or content knowledge).
LikeLike
With regards to subject matter not as important on the elementary level, I beg to differ. We teach kids how to read in elementary school. Without this skill, the rest is mute with the exception of mathematics. Our subject knowledge is crucial.
LikeLike
I think you mean “the rest is moot . . .”
Sorry. Pet peeve.
LikeLike
Pet peeve? I think that could have been a wrong answer on a test…probably cost the person a few percentage points off her bar-exam certification. 😛
LikeLike
The mentality behind this garbage is that morons become teachers while the “smart” people become lawyers, executives, doctors, and politicians. Of course it isn’t true at all. It’s because the teaching profession is female-dominated, “reformers” think women will just sit back and take it.
LikeLike
BTW, let’s stop with the Finland comparisons. The entire population of Finland is equal to only ten percent of the AMERICAN public school enrollment and it is not diverse.
LikeLike
As a teacher I’ll gladly contribute my “thinking ability” to go against any lawyer, doctor, (who cares about the politicians-ha ha or the business executive-ha ha, other than they have a tendency to have the “bully” pulpit).
LikeLike
But there is probably also nothing about being “smart” that makes you a better CPA, MD, nurse or lawyer either, yet those professions don’t shrink away from bar exams and are usually highly regarded.
Also, I wonder if it wouldn’t be possible to design a teaching bar exam in two stages, like Professional Engineer exams. When I graduated, I took the Engineer-in-Training exam that tested basic “book-smarts” for engineering. I never followed up on this, but after some years of experience, engineers then can demonstrate engineering “street-smarts” if you will to receive a PE license.
I was once told that very few college grads could pass a PE exam because it relied so heavily on rules of thumb and practical knowledge gained in the field. In my mind, that sort of bar exam would be ideal for teaching–high standards for entry, but a test of truly useful knowledge for full licensure.
LikeLike
David, we already have required exams. Also, I was on an “apprentice teacher” license before obtaining a “professional teaching” license. I can remember a time when people seemed to have similar regard for nurses and teachers; once nurses started making more money, they seem to have passed us up in prestige.
LikeLike
David,
I invite you to read why all standardized tests are invalid due to the myriad errors involved in the whole process as shown by Noel Wilson in: “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at:
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700
“A Little Less than Valid: An Essay Review” found at:
http://www.edrev.info/essays/v10n5index.html
Click to access v10n5.pdf
You have stated before that you have developed test questions that supposedly measure a student’s higher order thinking. I asked you to provide examples and you didn’t. So I assume that you can’t do that.
Duane
LikeLike
As usual, Dienne, excellent post!
LikeLike
Duane, I tried to read the article you linked to on why standardized tests are invalid (?) but can’t understand the abstract. Can you put it in clearer (simpler) terms for us? What exactly is the author claiming?
LikeLike
Basically, it’s impossible to “quantify” a “quality”. Any attempt to do so results in error. And there are so many errors involved in the process (Wilson identifies 13), any one of which makes the exercise invalid.
Take your time and read the study and I think it will become quite clear what the problems of standards and standardized testing are.
LikeLike
And speaking of overly relying on test scores:
Let’s examine some key points in this new set of findings from STANFORD:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2013/january/test-scores-ranking-011513.html
1. When differences in countries’ social class compositions are adequately taken into account, the performance of U.S. students in relation to students in other countries improves markedly.
2. The report also details how errors in selecting sample populations of test-takers and arbitrary choices regarding test content contribute to results that appear to show U.S. students lagging. Based on their analysis, the co-authors found that average U.S. scores in reading and math on the PISA are low partly because a disproportionately greater share of U.S. students comes from disadvantaged social class groups, whose performance is relatively low in every country.
3. As part of the study, Carnoy and Rothstein calculated how international rankings on the most recent PISA might change if the United States had a social class composition similar to that of top-ranking nations: U.S. rankings would rise to fourth from 14th in reading and to 10th from 25th in math.
4.There is an achievement gap between more and less disadvantaged students in every country; surprisingly, that gap is smaller in the United States than in similar post-industrial countries, and not much larger than in the very highest scoring countries.
5.U.S. PISA scores are depressed partly because of a sampling flaw resulting in a disproportionate number of students from high-poverty schools among the test-takers. About 40 percent of the PISA sample in the United States was drawn from schools where half or more of the students are eligible for the free lunch program, though only 23 percent of students nationwide attend such schools.
6. But the highest social class students in United States do worse than their peers in other nations, and this gap widened from 2000 to 2009 on the PISA.
7. The researchers show that score trends on these different tests can be very inconsistent, suggesting need for greater caution in interpreting any single test.
8. Carnoy and Rothstein say that the differences in average scores on these tests reflect arbitrary decisions about content by the designers of the tests. For example, although it has been widely reported that U.S. 15-year-olds perform worse on average than students in Finland in mathematics, U.S. students perform better than students in Finland in algebra but worse in number properties (e.g., fractions). If algebra had greater weight in tests, and numbers less weight, test scores could show that U.S. overall performance was superior to that of Finland.
So, Perhaps we should be far more careful about relying so much on the draconian test culture we have created.
LikeLike
The fear we have as a nation about making it harder to become a teacher is that we know, on some level, that teachers are not treated very well. We already have a hard time filling many teaching positions; making it more difficult to become a teacher means you might have to make the job a little more palatable.
This is the opposite of the corporate education model (ie the Walmartification of education), which makes it very easy to become a teacher via TFA and similar programs and counts on young teachers burning out and moving on to other things before they become vested in any retirement plans.
LikeLike
In order for this to work in Mississippi, we would need to increase teachers’ salary. Do you know how Finnish teachers’ salary compare to other professions there?
LikeLike
Correcting my post – Mississippi would need to increase teachers’ pay in order for this to work. Do you know how Finnish teachers’ salaries compare to other professions there?
LikeLike
I’m confused. Didn’t I already complete and pass tests in order to become a certified (and re-certified, and certified in another subject-area, and certified in ESOL, etc.) teacher?
LikeLike
Don’t we already have things like this? In CT, there is the Praxis test for basic skills and Praxis II for specific subject areas. I imagine other states have similar tests for certification.
I’d hate for Ed programs to become test prep though…
LikeLike
That’s what I thought… Guess you hit reply while I was writing mine…
LikeLike
Any standardized test, by definition is invalid, see Noel Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error” found at:
http://epaa.asu.edu/ojs/article/view/577/700 or
“A Little Less than Valid: An Essay Review” found at:
Click to access v10n5.pdf
LikeLike
Diane, I wish there was a way to not have my comments “being moderated”, although I understand why that is the case. But I post these all the time and they are more than valid.
Please look into this.
Thanks,
Duane
LikeLike
Sometimes your posts are moderated, other times not. I don’t know why
LikeLike
Diane,
Thanks for the response. I think it may have something to do with the number of external links that I post. That is why in my post from 8:08 I limited it to two external links, but that didn’t work either. I thoroughly appreciate what you do. I don’t know if there is a way to not require moderation when there are too many external links.
Duane
LikeLike
Diane and Duane:
By default, WordPress lets posts with just one link go, but posts with two or more links are held for moderation and that can be adjusted: In the left panel, under Settings -> Discussion -> Comment Moderation –bottom of the page. (At least that’s where it is in the free version.)
For those of us who are teachers and accustomed to providing further info and supporting documentation, being limited to just one link before being red flagged can be very frustrating!
LikeLike
CT,
Thanks for the info!!
Duane
LikeLike
Caution is always wise, but I have thought (and do again in this case) that Randi tries hard to get ahead of events, to take pre-emptive action.
This strategy would (again) put the lie to the myth of “teacher intransegience” and might at least cause the rephorm privateers to take their eye off the ball momentarily. Plus, if there’s a chance such an exam might happen anyway, at least the good guys would begin the narrative.
LikeLike
“. . . Randi tries hard to get ahead of events, to take pre-emptive action”. Must be she’s channeling her best “11 dimension (or is that dementia) chess” skills a la Obomber.
LikeLike
Donvila,
If you been by getting ahead of events, she sides with reformers, than that statement is true. And yet, her actions have always hurt instead of helped.
LikeLike
I was under the impression that the state required Praxis tests were a sort of “bar exam” already. For my initial certification, I had to have the required coursework/degree and pass the required Praxis Tests. At that time, I remember people weren’t allowed to teach if they couldn’t pass the Praxis.
Interestingly, I cannot even sit for the bar exam today without going to an accredited law school (in all states but CA), and there don’t seem to be any “online” law degrees (at least not credible ones). There certainly isn’t a Litigate for America organization that will allow me to bypass law school and the bar exam, although anyone can represent him or herself pro se.
If I move to another state, I have to do whatever that state requires for licensure to teach. Although some states may have reciprocity, I’ve met many teachers who had to complete additional coursework or required tests in the process of transferring. We also have National Board Certification available as well. I don’t disagree with Randi’s sentiments, but let’s look at the requirements we already have, improve the rigor, and make everybody (i.e. TFA) abide by them. No exceptions… No excuses…
LikeLike
I almost forgot this! THEN after NCLB passed, and despite having a masters, the state required me to take even more Praxis tests to become “highly qualified.”
LikeLike
When the NCLB Highly Qualified thing came around I was suddenly not qualified to teach Classical Mythology. I have an advanced degree in Classics, but Classical Mythology was offered through the English department. I was not qualified to teach it because I don’t have an English degree.
LikeLike
“Reciprocity” doesn’t truly exist except for those with National Board Certification, which is a ripoff and a joke. Great teachers don’t pass the “rigorous” process but are ripped off of thousands of dollars of their own money, while mediocrities get the “coveted” certification. It is easily gamed.
Randi Weingarten needs to be run out of AFT and Karen Lewis should take the job instead.
LikeLike
Diane, I get your point, but how many test do I have to take to prove that I am competent to teach? In Florida, I took a general knowledge exam, a professional practices exam, a subject area exam, and that was for ESE. Later, during the Bush era, I was told that I was not highly qualified, so I took the Elementary exam and I have a reading endorsement. I have a Master’s Degree as well from a state university. I have been teaching 20 years.
LikeLike
Maybe we need a “national bar exam” for union leaders! I’m not sure Randi is highly qualified if she’s going to make such uninformed proposals.
LikeLike
But, but, but Randi’s playing the “eleven dementia chess” end game.
LikeLike
Randi is a lawyer who has negotiated some of the worst contracts in the history of teaching. Nuff said!!
LikeLike
Randi Weingarten is a tool of the reformers. I don’t trust her with anything, and she is NOT a teacher to boot but an attorney. I am deeply insulted with her nonsense of a “bar exam” when in fact teachers are already tested TO DEATH to become licensed.
Repeat, the problem in education isn’t with “lousy teachers.” The problem is with administrators who are NOT held accountable for their actions.
BTW, teaching doesn’t get respect and it NEVER will because it is female-dominated.
LikeLike
Randi Weingarten hasn’t done one hundredth the amount that Ms. Ravitch has done. I’m old enough to remember who it was that laid the groundwork and created the conditions for ed deform. It was NOT Weingarten.
LikeLike
Susan,
Well said, thank you!
Duane
LikeLike
Susan, you make a good point! Seems the ADMINISTRATORS should have to take bar exams! As it is, in Illinois, one can get into an administrative program after teaching for just 2 or 3 years, finish in a year, take the test (which IS a test, but definitely no bar exam),
apply for a job, and become a principal or director (e.g., special ed.)
Voila! Fairly instant administrator! OR–one could simply attend Broad Academy (do their “grads” take any qualifying tests?)
Additionally, the question I have about these “bar exams” for teachers is–who designs and markets these tests?
Oh, right, they’ll come from Pearson.
LikeLike
How about bar exams for all the corporate CEO’s and politicians making decisions now for education?
LikeLike
“But I’m inclined to agree with Randi that the profession needs higher entry standards or it will never get the respect it deserves.”
Diane: So is this just window dressing to confer a veneer of professionalism? Or is it actually necessary because there are too many unqualified teachers? Previously I understood you to be taking the second position, but now it sounds more like the first.
My own view is that a “bar exam” of this type would throw up another barrier to entry in a profession that we should be encouraging people to enter. And speaking from my experience as an attorney, bar exams don’t do much more than weed out people who don’t pay for test prep courses. It would be a boon to the companies that sell those courses, though.
LikeLike
flerper,
Thanks for that explication!
Duane
LikeLike
I don’t think that we need new tests, although better ones wouldn’t hurt. We do need to raise the bar on the tests that we already have. There are states where a pulse would qualify you as having passed the praxis (or their version of it).
The opinion here seems to be that there are very few teachers who are struggling because of their aptitude. I beg to differ. I cant count how many times I went to PD in Chicago and listened to teachers talking about how hard the algebra text was and how they didn’t get certain problems. Now, if you can’t do algebra, you most definitely shouldn’t be teaching it.
One time Johnetta James, the area CIO, called my principal and I in front of a tribunal because I had refused (and got the principal to back me) to switch to a semi-scripted curriculum backed by Gates money. It was a completely lame program, and I had already built out a program that was showing results.
First, Ms. James couldn’t wrap her head around that our freshmen and sophomores performance wasn’t evaluated by how well the last class of Juniors did on the ACT. We had started the curriculum with freshmen and moved up a year at a time. The juniors that flailed on the test had never seen my curriculum. We went around this for awhile, but she wanted to insist that kids older and from a different program had test scores that would predict my students scores.
Next, when pressed to say why their curriculum was lame, I pointed out that anyone worthy of being a teacher should be good enough that they don’t need or want a scripted program to make it through the day. I pointed out that I wasn’t a trained monkey, but a professional with proven results.
The panel said that while it may be ok for me, an experienced and intelligent math teacher, to build a curriculum, that we had many teachers in CPS high schools who struggled with the math that they were teaching and the script would be a great help to them.
I explained to these highly paid managers that what they described wasn’t a curriculum problem, but a human resources problem. I suggested that they stop hiring people who don’t know algebra to teach high school math. Ms James was visibly upset that we wouldn’t budge.
There are definitely people teaching who should be screened by testing their basic knowledge. In my experience there are more in urban districts, especially at chronically underperforming schools. Does this mean that all teachers in urban schools are like this? Not by a long shot. But when we don’t even admit what is this obvious, we have a credibility problem.
LikeLike
“although better ones wouldn’t hurt.”
Horse manure. There are no “better ones”. Please read the Wilson studies I have referenced.
LikeLike
I have seen this too, George A., especially with Math, but also in
Language Arts classes, both in middle school. I was an L.D. Resource Teacher in a Math class in which the sub. (a retired Science Teacher) gave several students an incorrect formula (shouldn’t a middle school Science Teacher have to know Math?).
Since one of the students was on my caseload and struggling, I explained the correct way to solve the problem, but did it in a very quiet and non-obtrusive way. The teacher glared at me, and later
gave me a rather large amount of trouble. In an L.A. class, the rather lingustically talented teacher (fluent in several languages–however, English was not one of them) continually misspelled words on the white board, which she would have children copy
five times each. I winced when one of the students corrected her:
for her trouble, the student received a severe tongue-lashing in front of the entire class (middle school).
However, this lies within the realm of an administrative problem: why do administrators hire teachers who really cannot teach a certain area? I know from experience that numerous administrators do not look at state certification test area scores. Additionally, teaching is the ONLY profession whereby square pegs are forced into round holes–a law firm would not tell one of its lawyers–whose
specialty is real estate–to now act as a criminal defense lawyer.
A medical practice or hospital would not hire a physician whose specialty was pediatrics to switch to geriatrics. Why, then, is it acceptable to move teachers around into areas in which they did not major? (An Early Childhood Special Ed.Teacher, for example, is transferred to Middle School Special Ed.) The teacher(s) are told,
“But you’re such a WONDERFUL teacher–you could teach ANY
grade!”
Only in education.
LikeLike
Gearge A and retiredbutmissthekids comments illustrate two important points. First it is teachers who know about poor teaching in the classroom, so it should be that teachers are responsible for evaluating each other. When teachers start thinking that policing the profession is part of their job it will go a long way to improving the public perception of professionalism.
Second, the problem of teachers with a lack of content knowledge is concentrated in some of the subjects taught in schools. The talented music student is happy to have a career teaching music because it may well be the best paying job that will allow her to use her musical knowledge and skills on a daily basis. The talented mathamatics student knows that there are many different careers that will allow her to use her mathamatics skills on a daily basis, and she knows that teaching is amoung the lowest paid of her possible careers.
LikeLike
That’s exactly what PAR does. It puts teachers front and center to make decisions that effect their school and it works!! We don’t need a bar exam when other exams are in place.
In NYS, you have to be certified in the area you teach. But under Bloomberg who refuses to hire ATRs, many classes that still do not have a full-time teacher are being covered by ATRs who are NOT licensed to teach that area. This is a man who claims to put students first. And this happens in our poorest districts. When it was happening at a middle class high school in Queens, the parents had a fit and that situation was quickly rectified.
LikeLike
I have posted any number of times advocating for PAR, but many who post here take the opposite position. See my interchange with LG below, Please contribute to that discussion if you would like.
LikeLike
I strongly support peer assistance and review. Professionals will either evaluate their own or be evaluated by sham measures concocted by politicians.
LikeLike
susannunes
thank you for mentioning NBPTS which is now owned by Pearson.
I mistakenly signed to this certificate and figure I should at least complete it but I have already told just about everyone I know that it is a scam. There is absolutely no reason it has be that complicated and convoluted and I am always suspicious when I am asked to sign all kinds of papers that say I must never reveal any information about NBPTS.
I suspect the NBPTS is what Randi probably is thinking about since it would be a major boon for Pearson, yet again.
LikeLike
Just to clarify susannunes and Anne, I’m not advocating National Board Certification; I’m just saying it’s already there. It never ceases to amaze me how somebody (Randi or anybody else) will come up with an idea such as a “bar exam” for teachers as if we don’t already have something like that to begin with. Praxis, NBPTS, etc… it’s as if people disregard what we already have and then propose a similar idea…
BTW, I agree with you both on your views of NBPTS, especially if Pearson “owns” it.
LikeLike
I agree, Joe. Our “leadership” has lost touch with its members if it it doesn’t even know what hoops we need to jump through just to become teachers. Due to changes in Connecticut’s teacher evaluation and accreditation laws, I will need to take the Praxis after 28 years of teaching. I took a Praxis 1-type exam when I graduated. Praxis 2 was not out at that time. As reforms came and went, I was
grandfathered, so I never had to take Praxis 2. Now I do in order to teach k-3 reading. And if I don’t pass, I will no longer be allowed to teach primary grades, despite having taught primary grades the bulk of my career and having been very successful in teaching young children to read.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Students Are Enough and commented:
If the premise for the creation of a bar exam is based solely on bringing prestige to the teaching profession then that would be great because sadly this country equates effectiveness to passing of exams that don’t test skill yet memory. Not only does a achievement gap exist, but there is also a minority teacher gap. These are reasons to exam the entire realm of education. Lack of proficiency on standardized test does not mean lack of success in the future, often times our students have knowledge but they do not possess the skill to take standardized test. These test are not higher order thinking, and don’t fully determine whether someone is a great student or will be a success in the future. In the grand scheme of things we are not scratching the surface if we based student readiness upon a teachers passing of a test.
Rachel Elle
LikeLike
“f the premise for the creation of a bar exam is based solely on bringing prestige to the teaching profession then that would be great”
Horse manure, if you are that insecure as a teacher then get out of the profession, we need those that understand we don’t need “outside opinions” to determine who is a good teacher or not. See the above referenced Wilson studies to understand why, And if you aren’t willing to do so then you deserve all the crap that is being thrown your way by the edudeformers. And the “you” here is not personally directed at you but all of the teachers who allow this bullshit to infect their minds.
LikeLike
I think you missed my point; I agree with what you are saying. My point was this a bar exam will only provide solace to those who need major tests to make them “feel” as though they are getting the best. As current teachers we are aware that when we chose our career, we were accepting the roses and the thorns. Being aware of the criticisms of our profession, is what makes us effective; for we choose daily, to give it all our and place our students ahead of the politics because they are more than enough.
LikeLike
I think you misunderstood my entire commentary. The creation of a bar exam to give prestige to the field of teaching isn’t a comfort for educators, but for those who view education in shambles. As a teacher, with years of experience in a variety of education facets, I understand the pendulum will swing back in forth in who is to blame for the lack in this country. I don’t believe there are many teachers who allow this to “infect” their minds; however as a current professional the school of public and political opinion does have weight on how we approach the artistry. However, I continue to teach because the students are enough reason for me to stay endless hours after work and come early prior; yet, sadly they don’t have a voice in this.
LikeLike
Cash strapped states will NEVER pay teachers what we are worth–never. Education is the biggest line item on the states balance sheets, and teachers salaries make up most of it. If we were paid a good salary, property taxes would soar. The bar idea is a waste of time and resources. The unions should be helping to hold the line on what we are in the process of losing– tenure, collective bargaining…
LikeLike
I agree that entry standards should be increased. This, along with faculty governance and peer evaluation will go a long way to profesionalizing K-12 teaching.
LikeLike
TE,
Bullshit, sorry but I’m in that state of mind tonight. Teachers already have to go through a bunch of “hoops”, oh, sorry, standards, to teach as it is.
LikeLike
I think the standards are different for different fields. You have already verified that the college courses required to become a mathematics teacher would be completely inadequate to teach a foreign language. You might want to look at George A’s post above.
LikeLike
To echo Duane, there are plenty of professional hurdles through which teachers go. What is the evidence supporting your statement that K-12 teaching is not professional?
LikeLike
Actually a large part of my concern stems from a discussion with you about a teachers responsibility when confronted with colleagues that do not maintain minimal standards. I argued that a teacher who found the students of a specific junior high school science teacher did not know anything of the theory of evolution should have notified the supervisors in the district. You said that it was unethical for one teacher to report another teacher for poor teaching practice (you did make an exception for immediate physical danger to the student).
When it becomes unethical to not report bad teaching to those in charge of mentoring and hiring teachers, teachers will put the interests of the students first and be true professionals.
LikeLike
TE,
Do economists report “bad” economic thinking of other economists to the authorities? If not are they then unethical?
Duane
LikeLike
Many hammer all over the wall and believe that with each blow they hit the nail on the head.–J.v. Goethe
First off, there are bad apples in EVERY profession. Does that make the good apples less professional?
It is up to the administrator in every profession to take action against misconduct. The biggest problem with those who are lumped into the pile of (what many outside of the field call) “bad teachers” stems from administrators who are not doing their jobs to remove them from the classrooms. The second biggest problem with the whole “bad teacher” commentary is that opinions are like —holes. Everybody has one.
“Actually a large part of my concern stems from a discussion with you about a teachers responsibility when confronted with colleagues that do not maintain minimal standards.”
By whose judgement are these peers NOT maintaining minimal standards? Are these peers trained administrators? If so, why would we need administrators in the first place?
Teaching styles are so varied that giving peer teachers carte blanche to “report” anything they feel is “wrong” would result in a principal’s office filled with tattle-tales. Often times, content/grade level teams or even co-teaching teams have disagreements. It is protocol to attempt to work them out between peers as a first step. If this does not solve the issue, the next step is peer mediation on behalf of the association. If this does not work, the final step is to bring the matter to the attention of the immediate supervising administrator WITH association representation in tow. Most disagreements do not involve administrators at all, but when they do, association representatives are present to make sure that the complaint is the only part of the discussion and there are no contract violations added on for good measure because of personality conflicts. The association is there to maintain the facts. Administrators are also welcome to bring their own representation–the more the merrier.
This is how professionals resolve conflicts. Tattle-tales are the utmost in unprofessional–kind of ironic that you would be touting what appears to be tattling as if the act itself was the mark of a professional.
Now in the case of the one example you gave of someone who is teaching in clear opposition to the curriculum, I can assure you that a strong administrator would be in-the-know. How could something so inappropriate go unnoticed by anyone outside of a fellow teacher? Was it a sneaky, “don’t tell your mother” kind of deal? And further if it was such a secret, how could a fellow teacher who has his or her own teaching assignment be privy to such a clandestine offense when he or she is not in the same room?
Perhaps these curriculum offenses that are not on the radar of the average person outside of the classroom could only be detected by the super-hero senses of the fictional savior-teacher in your scenario–the TRUE professional that you claim does not exist. If it was a co-teacher, see the protocols listed above.
I do remember the example you gave–the problem was systemic within that district spreading to a level of incompetence among the higher-ups. That one instance should not color an entire profession, but you choose to continually play the game of “nit-picking one example as representative of all.” It gets tiresome.
Now then, how is a stringent “bar-like” exam going to prevent disagreements, “curriculum violations” and other ills that are representative in EVERY profession including law thus making said professions more “professional?” Every instance of unethical behavior in the law profession negates your argument, I mean…since we’re nitpicking here.
LikeLike
“Do economists report “bad” economic thinking of other economists to the authorities?”
In my experience they report it to anyone who will listen.
LikeLike
Yes, I have.
In higher education, decisions on hiring, firing, promotion, salary increases, and tenure are all primarily made by the faculty, not administrators. It is not viewed as being a tattle tale, but as part of the profesional responsabiliies of being a professor.
You might be interested in this article dicussing the ethical duties to report misconduct from the American Bar Association entitled SELF REGULATION AND THE DUTY TO REPORT MISCONDUCT MYTH OR MAINSTAY?.
It can be found here: http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/cpr/pubs/plattsmier2.authcheckdam.pdf
LikeLike
Let me quote from a very relevant section of the paper:
For perhaps more selfish reasons, as a group, lawyers should demand greater compliance with Rule 8.3(a). The lawyer-thief who converts client funds harms the client of course, but often triggers recompense from a Lawyers’ Fund for Client Protection, common to most jurisdictions (and that is funded by lawyers typically). The incompetent, neglectful lawyer may well have rendered ineffective assistance in a criminal matter requiring a retrial; thus, further clogging an already overburdened justice system. For a whole host of reasons, lawyers have a huge interest in weeding out bad actors from the legal profession. A really sobering one is the threat of regulation by those outside the profession.
I think the parallels with teaching are clear.
LikeLike
TE, if I may, is it that you are suggesting that law is a professional line of work but teaching isn’t because of the parallels? Sounds like they SHARE the qualities of professionalism because of the parallels.
Teachers want quality peers, but one must also maintain integrity when incomes to commentary that affects job retention of a peer.
The rules in higher academic institutions are not always foolproof, either. When my brother was presenting his doctoral dissertation to committee, he nearly dropped out of the program. The committee members were making “recommendations” for his research that were purely academic as if reading from a manual rather than engaging him in a discussion of the practical implications of his research. It became evident that they were going through the motions since none were scholars on the topic, and none treated him as more expert for having done the exhaustive research. This was from a highly respected institution, no less. So much for valid peer-review. Thankfully, he was not professor at this institution himself. Long story short, my brother played the game, got the piece of paper and suddenly was deemed “good enough” to be a full professor despite having proved himself time and again in his job. The doctorate was a final step in making my brother’s status official at his university position.
Just as there are many fine examples of good practices in post-secondary education, it is also filled with examples of questionable practices that are protected by a system. One can find many instances to support any argument on the issue of professionalism. This is not to devalue the time, effort, and experiences of those who strive toward accomplishments in higher education–this is just an illustration of how your argument boasting that post-secondary education is a superior entity in professionalism can be refuted by an anecdote just as you attempted to prove that teaching is not professional enough by citing an example of a creationism-teaching science teacher. The point is, you can argue professionalism in any level of education. There are good and bad examples everywhere, but would it be prudent to keep coloring one profession one way knowing that variances exist?
I have never been a proponent of peer evaluation. How do you determine which peer educators should have the job of evaluating other educators? When and how do you train them? How do you compensate them? When in the school day will they be evaluating instead of teaching and how do you determine the impact of reassigning them for that time period on their students’ learning? Who evaluates them–the teachers they evaluate? How do you prevent them from being influenced by personality judgements? What sort of legal protections would you offer them in case a peer feels their evaluation was unfair? How do you reconcile their own influence on the education of the students in the charge of the teachers of whom they evaluate?
It takes an entire school to educate a child, and no child learns in a closed environment. Every teacher in the building has a collective influence on the child’s education whether directly or indirectly. I see peer evaluation for job retention as problematic. I’m not sold on it, and I have yet to hear a compelling argument for it that negates the problems. I am all for peers offering help, suggestions or advice since teaching is a collaborative process, but I am not for placing peers in administrative positions while still acting as peers. Further, peer teachers are teachers themselves. They have job responsibilities to the students.
LikeLike
TE,
Thanks for that info on attorney misconduct. I can’t agree, though, that a law practice is the same as, or even similar, or even “parallel” to teaching. And what you are referring to appears to be gross misconduct and not just differences in “lawyering” styles. I believe that any teacher who found out about an instance of “gross misconduct” would probably report it.
The fact is is that it is the administrator’s responsibility to monitor their workforce, i.e., the teachers. If they do their job then the “bad” teachers do get weeded out. I’ve seen it done, but at the same time I’ve seen more examples of teachers being railroaded out of a school by an administrator with a certain type agenda, i.e., “my way or the highway”. And good to great teachers are forced out. The principal at my prior high school ran off three teachers of the year in her first couple of years because they would not comply with her idiotic demands. She ran me out, and she managed to become the Super of one of the largest districts in the state. She knew what she wanted and it had nothing to do with the teaching and learning process.
LikeLike
Duane,
The parallels I saw where concerns about clogging up the system by having to retry a case. If a students has poor instruction in third year Spanish, how much effort must you spend in the fourth year class doing remedial work? Also the last sentence warning about regulation by those outside the profession. Isn’t that what most of the folks here object to about current changes in teaching?
LikeLike
LG,
I am not arguing that peer evaluation is perfect, just that it is better than any alternative I can think of.
LikeLike
“I am not arguing that peer evaluation is perfect, just that it is better than any alternative I can think of.”
Fair enough. However the imperfections seem to far outweigh the benefits, at least when you consider all of the possibilities for misconduct or lack of fairness for both the teacher being evaluated and the evaluating teacher alike.
Call me a traditionalist, but I can see keeping admins as evaluators as well as collaborators who offer support to their staff members and keeping peers as collaborators who offer support and advice. Putting a peer in charge of whether or not another peer keeps his or her job is too great a legal responsibility. What’s next, students deciding which of their peers graduates?
LikeLike
Education schools should pay more attention to subject matter: they should require teachers to major in the subject they are going to teach (or a related subject) and show not only subject-matter knowledge, but an ability to prepare and deliver lessons.
Teachers should enter their first teaching position with a collection of lessons that they have already prepared–if possible, lessons that roughly correspond with the school’s curriculum. Of course they will need to make adjustments once they’re actually teaching–but they shouldn’t have to do everything from scratch, on the fly.
Schools should do their part, too: they should have an actual curriculum, and they should hire teachers for the subjects in which they are prepared. They should allow teachers to teach the same subject and grade level year after year (up to a point), instead of shuffling things around for the sake of “change.” Yes, it’s good for teachers to stretch beyond their familiar zone, but this shouldn’t be pushed recklessly. Even within a familiar area, one can learn indefinitely.
Teachers should have numerous opportunities to take courses and pursue independent research after they have begun teaching. Professional development should not be limited to pedagogical training; teachers should be able to take courses in history, literature, languages, and more–and should be able to offer seminars for their colleagues at their schools. They should also have access to scholarly communities.
Should there be a bar exam? Yes-but it should reflect what the teachers have studied and what they will teach. It should evaluate, among other things, prospective teachers’ ability to take a topic within their subject, interpret it, and put together a lesson or series of lessons on it.
Why such emphasis on subject matter? So many fads push it into second place; so many people of different ideological persuasions argue that teachers don’t really need it. But then how do they propose teachers deal with the lack of knowledge (or lack of time for preparation in the subject)? They push some pedagogical model where the teacher isn’t teaching much–be it a model with constant group work, or a virtual classroom, or a scripted curriculum. This turns away teachers who do want to teach their subjects–and then a vicious cycle starts. But put subject matter at the center–and you not only attract teachers who want to teach it, but you also make the school environment more interesting and the priorities saner.
LikeLike
This all seems correct to me, but there is a long distance between where we are and where we want to be.
LikeLike
By the way I didn’t read any responses before posting this. I’ll go back now and see what others have said.
LikeLike
Dammit that was supposed to posted after my original response.
LikeLike
Hell no!! OH, let’s make the teaching profession like the law profession, who can screw the most out of everybody while making it all legal.
Screw that thought!
LikeLike
So we argue against high stakes tests for our students and what it does to their education, and then we turn around and argue for another high stakes test for teaching?
LikeLike
Thank you 2o2t. You’re being way too logical!!
LikeLike
There is no research that says bar exams are valid, Heck how many poor lawyers are there out there?
Schools of education need to have higher standards for admittance and graduation. The courses that they offered must be improved and include more observation time.
Real mentoring programs ( not what many call mentoring now) should be developed and used.
More experience should be required before you get certified as an administrator. In NYS it’s a mere 3 years!
Bottom line, a test doesn’t guarantee a thing. many states already have tests has a requirement .
LikeLike
And would this standard apply to special TFA temps or do they get a free pass since they are the future reformy “leaders”?
LikeLike
We mustn’t overburden them. After all, they already need to take bar exams in preparation for their “real” careers once their stint of edu- tourism slumming has ended.
LikeLike
The proposed exam, as I understand it, would apply only to new teachers. It would probably exclude most or all TFA because of their inadequate training.
LikeLike
But then does that mean that the TFAers would still be allowed in the classroom?
I’d almost agree with this “bar exam” proposal if it would keep the TFAers and other non professionally trained (degreed in education) out of the classroom. NAH, no, nope can’t even accept it for that reason.
LikeLike
I think we all know it wouldn’t apply to us. But the bottom line Diane is that this is a bad idea. And I think you really have to consider why this is upsetting us. I know you know that Randi and her Unity party makes people sign oaths of loyalty, so that in itself makes it impossible for teachers to have any dissenting opinions. If you back this insane plan, what does it say about our knowledge and opinions of what needs to be done.
Teachers need to be certified in their fields, and this is already done in many states. Teachers need to go through a probation period.
One can argue that Randi passed a bar exam, yet Klein was able to find many loopholes in her contracts with NYC–unless that was deliberately done.
Why isn’t Randi advocating for more teacher collaboration time instead of mandated meetings?? Teachers need time to revisit lessons and adapt them to their students’ needs. Linda-Darling Hammond worked in many schools where extended day was used just for this, and it resulted in increased student achievement. It wasn’t top down agendas. Teachers identified problems and fixed it. This was also the time students were given elective courses like PE and the Arts otherwise they wouldn’t be part of the curriculum.
PAR is working and it didn’t require any bar-like exam. It’s a sham and I am surprised you don’t see it. It will do nothing to stop the push to privatize. It will do nothing to raise the salaries of teachers in Hawaii. It will do nothing.
LikeLike
Forget the term “bar exam.” Think instead of a qualifying exam for new teachers that tests literacy and general knowledge of child development and pedagogy, perhaps with a demonstration of classroom skills. My hunch is that it would weed out the illiterate and the itinerant.
LikeLike
“Teachers need time to revisit lessons and adapt them to their students’ needs. Linda-Darling Hammond worked in many schools where extended day was used just for this, and it resulted in increased student achievement. It wasn’t top down agendas. Teachers identified problems and fixed it. This was also the time students were given elective courses like PE and the Arts otherwise they wouldn’t be part of the curriculum.”
Forgive me if I might be a little offended by that last statement. From your posts, I do not believe you meant any disrespect, but it is important to remember that teachers are teachers no matter what subject they teach.
As a music teacher, I feel that the students’ time with me is more than just a prep time for other teachers to collaborate. My job is teaching students, not merely teaching a subject. As well my subject area supports all other areas. I feel that all teachers need time to collaborate and reflect on their teaching.
In the last three days of school, we had early closings for parent conference meetings. Despite only teaching for a fraction of the time, I felt that any extra time I had when no parents were scheduled to see me was a godsend for tweaking my lessons, meeting with my peer music teachers from other buildings, and keeping up with the details of my notes for individual classes and students.
Every teacher could benefit from more professional planning time…yes, even the PE and Arts teachers. As well, the level of exhaustion from teaching so many hours prevents many teachers from having the energy and focus level to thoughtfully reflect on their lessons regularly. A little less direct teaching/supervision time and a little more planning time for teachers would provide an environment of less stress and in turn, better teaching. I do believe that teachers in Finland are afforded far more prep time than their American counterparts. Changing this would be an immense expense, but perhaps resources can be appropriated to provide this time for those who have direct regular meetings with students and cut back on the top-heavy administration expenses necessary to facilitate so many of the useless reforms in which our schools are currently immersed.
The second benefit of parent conferences for me was the insight fom the parents who came to visit me. The discussions we had were also collaborative and did inform me of another perspective of the children I teach–all very valuable time spent.
LikeLike
“Forget the term “bar exam.” Think instead of a qualifying exam for new teachers that tests literacy and general knowledge of child development and pedagogy, perhaps with a demonstration of classroom skills. My hunch is that it would weed out the illiterate and the itinerant.”
Diane, many states already have these tests in place. I could not be certified in PA without the core battery: general knowledge, communication skills, professional knowledge. My degree required coursework on child psychology and development. PA requires a masters degree for certification permanency. As well PA and NJ required two different content-level tests in my area for certification. I was tested out the wazoo, yet somehow that wasn’t enough?
Where are the illiterate teachers of whom you speak? I didn’t think colleges and universities would pass out degrees of any kind (let alone accept them as students in the first place) to folks who do not have literacy skills. An additional qualifying test would not be necessary if every state followed these same credentialing protocols.
In regard to the itinerant, yes…many states do not accept the same certification credentials and instead require teachers to follow their own requirements as in my having to take a nearly identical content area exam when seeking certification in NJ despite having taken one in PA. If you are asking for equity between all states, you are asking for the US DOE to mandate it, if it already hasn’t been.
LikeLike
To LG:
I am sorry if you misconstrued my comment. Before that program was put in place, these schools had cut The Arts and other so-called “electives”. Please understand I don’t see these subjects as “electives”. They should be in place in every school along with a library program. But those have been cut too, some for budgeting reasons and others because of blocking literacy and math periods. It seemed like the best idea to get these subjects back into the program while providing a longer school day, If I am not mistaken, Chicago teachers just contracted a similar clause to get The Arts back into schools.
This is not to say that these teachers were not given planning time.
They just had it before extended day. These were not staff meeting, but grade or department meetings where teachers chose the topics. Again, I am sorry if I wasn’t clear.
Diane,
Believe it or not, many of these exams that are now in place that do just that. Classroom skills, knowledge of your subject and preparing and giving lessons are judged throughout the college couses and through student teaching. That is why it’s better to have a year of student teaching and at different types of schools. But no exam can test for common sense–and that to be is the best indicator of a good teacher. The certification tests also measure these factors.
No test can really measure how well a teacher will do in the classroom. Student teaching is the best indicator because your professor, cooperating teacher and the principal of the school can see you in action. It was a great learning experience for me because I saw things the cooperating teacher did that I would never emulate.
Then there was my first year of teaching. Having experienced teachers give me advice really helped with real-ife lesson planning. And, the probation period is an excellent time to judge for the things you are looking for and provide the needed mentoring. I bet there are teachers who didn’t score high on these tests but turned out to be excellent teachers, while teachers that did, no so much. The only way to really judge the value of a prospective teacher is on the job. That’s why extending student teaching is a better idea rather than give some testing company a new profit margin by making all new teachers take a bar exam. Will that make teachers from Columbia U. better candidates than teachers from Queens College? Will we also be competing for schools that can offer us a higher starting salary??
I just don’t understand why you are still trying to defend a very bad idea?? But most of all, I can’t help but wonder if this post and the posts by Goodman (and I was right about being suspicious of him unless you like being compared to the Tea Party even though your name wasn’t mentioned) are favors to Randi and the Unity party. You do know there is a very important NYC election coming up. And you do know that MORE is starting to gain momentum. Maybe what I would like to see is equal time. And perhaps you could invite Julie to post on your blog??)
And maybe this wasn’t the best post to put up before going on a vacation!!!! Look at how many comments it’s generating and yet you still find time to answer. Before you go on your next vaca, post something light and funny and then go enjoy your time away from all this.
LikeLike
Honestly, what educated young person would want to be a teacher now? Let’s get real. I tell every student teacher I meet to go abroad: Japan, Europe, Canada, anywhere.. Why would they want to teach in this climate of teacher bashing. If I had know (15 years ago) that it was coming to this, I would have dropped the idealistic crap and stayed in business. Teaching today is terrible, even in the top districts. They want to run schools like corporations now with data and scantron tests, hire and fire, climate of fear and loathing. It’s sickening. I left corporate America to get out of that soul-destroying environment, and now look what we have. I would never let my children become teachers or professors in America. I will tell them to teach English in Europe or in Japan. They should go somewhere where teachers are respected. This movement has been going on for awhile. Who would want to go through a bar exam, etc. to make half what they would in business, with no respect, and no tenure? Wow, where can I sign up for that? As a bonus, you are demonized and blamed for all the ills of society. Let’s blame policemen for the level of crime in their district. Let’s blame dentists for their patients’ cavities and doctors for fatalities. You got to love this personal responsibility. And anyone doubts for a minute that America isn’t in civilizational decline??? This is a completely mute argument. Any thinking young person would be a moron to be a teacher today. It is better to drive a cab or work in a restaurant where you can meet girls. Forget it! Life is too short and it’s not worth it anymore. It was probably better being a teacher in the U.S.S.R. than here in this sick country…
LikeLike
Jack, many days I could echo your feelings, most days, in fact. I’m not sure that I could put myself through it anymore even if someone offered this old lady a job. I miss that magical bubble of my own classroom. I miss my students even on their worst days. After almost two years, I am still in withdrawal. I do not, however, miss the “management” or should I say micromanagement of an administration breathing down our backs. I do not miss hours of data driven busy work that did little to inform my instruction. I do not miss writing district decreed lesson plans complete with “essential questions” that changed almost daily with the needs of my special ed students. I do not miss the hypocrisy of higher ups who spout all the current eduspeak with “rigor” and “fidelity” and have no idea what they are talking about. As you say, Jack, what young person in their right mind would want to teach in this climate?
LikeLike
Jack,
“And anyone doubts for a minute that America isn’t in civilizational decline???
NO, don’t doubt it. When a society decides that it can kill at will anywhere in the world at anytime, that society will collapse, it’s just a matter of time. Now, to me the question is: “Will we go silently into the night a la England, or will we collapse a la Rome or the Soviet Union?”
LikeLike
Yes more mentoring; how effective that would be!
Also choices in ongoing continuing ed. No money left for that.
Now we only have long meetings required after school. Haven’t had a continuing ed course that was relevant to education in 2 years. Each meeting is Common Core!, ( or as my young child calls it, Common Stinkin Core) , APPR!, Local Testing Measurements! State tests! Analyze the Test Data, SHOW ME YOUR SLO’S!!!, (should be SOL’s) How to Progress Monitor!
BLECHH!!!!
LikeLike
I usually do a lot of doodling during those sorts of meetings, and then go back to my classes and quietly do whatever I see fit.
LikeLike
We can call it CC doodling…common bore, common corpse, common crap. With every workshop, PD day, training, etc…they contradict what the last presenter told us.
They keep making changes to the changes before we implement the first change and there is rarely anyone at the top, district or state-wide, who has stayed long enough to keep track of each new edict.
They love to come up with new terms and acronyms for practices we have had for years. However, they are sure their idea is the new and revolutionary one!
LikeLike
What about turning the paltry semester of student teaching into some sort of residency, like in a teaching hospital? It seems like that would serve the profession better than even more standardized testing folderol.
LikeLike
They’re already doing that in TN. Now teachers have to complete a year of so-called “residency.” I realize physicians spend much more than a year in residency, but I’m skeptical as to whether or not increased quantity will improve quality.
LikeLike
A good place to look would be at the history of the NYC Board of Education’s Board of examiners that died because of exactly that reason in the early 1990s. However a newer version may indeed accomplish the goal it sets out to achieve without racial bias.
LikeLike
This is still a bad idea, Diane. Teachers need autonomy in the classroom, better wages, fewer students, and…well, pretty much everything we rail against the decimation and privatization of in public education. Don’t fall for the latest privatization and standardization smokescreen.
LikeLike
Really. You never met an bad lawyer??? Look at what teachers have to deal with just to get certified. And how many A+ students make ineffective teachers?? And just how much will this bar exam costs and who will run it–Pearson??? This is nonsense!!!
Funny, this is the 2nd post you put up about Randi in “glowing” terms. Yet the comments are not so glowing. This is a horrible idea!! Perhaps make student teaching one year instead of one semester. And have these teachers go to different schools–good and bad so they can determine if this career is really for them.
Funny Randi is selling this garbage, but won’t back a plan like PAR.
LikeLike
“Funny Randi is selling this garbage, but won’t back a plan like PAR.”
Remember Randi is playing “eleven dementia chess” here. You can’t expect those lowly and lowlife teachers to be able understand what she is selling, oops I mean proposing.
LikeLike
Randi Weingarten needs to GO!!! When is the next election and who is running against her? Can we nominate Karen Lewis?
LikeLike
Sorry, this is a bit off track, but–speaking of Broad Academy–Mr. J.-C. Brizard (you remember him? Short-term CPS CEO?) now has a position “as a senior adviser for the College Board in Washington, D.C. Brizard will help the company, which oversees the administration of national SAT testing, ‘develop the College Board’s initiatives to strengthen and expand career education in the nation’s middle schools, high schools and community colleges’…He starts Feb.1.–Michael Sneed, Chicago Sun Times
Those Broad grads always land on their feet, don’t they? I wonder if, since Mr. Brizard has a new job (with full benefits, I’d imagine), will give back the remainder of his $250K payout, since he’d left so as “not to be a distraction” to the very important task of educating Chicago’s children. (While he was CEO, he participated in a radio interview, in which he was asked if he would sacrifice the same percentage of his salary that had been forced on the teachers. He said no, because he had a family to support.)
You know, perhaps this “bar exam” will come from the College Board!
LikeLike
Why did teachers ever elect an attorney to be their leader? Of course, she would favor a bar exam. Randi has done so much to harm teachers lately that she really should be ousted. Watching The Inconvenient Truth Behind Waiting for Superman again recently, the NYC union is conspicuously absent from that film. For a union perspective GEM went to Chicago to film Karen Lewis. She takes an annual salary of $560,549. She should do more to earn it.
LikeLike
“But I’m inclined to agree with Randi that the profession needs higher entry standards or it will never get the respect it deserves.”
As you hint at, it ‘never gets the respect it deserves’ because ederformers continue to peddle the idea that teaching is lacking in respect. It doesn’t actually mean that it’s lacking in any respect.
Isn’t it then better to challenge the teachers-lack-respect myth? Calling for a new teaching exam feels like pandering to the myth and will only work to reinforce it.
LikeLike
That’s a fair point. I think teaching continues to poll near the top of the most respected professions.
LikeLike
I’d like to add to the concern about doing a bar exam: first it’s another test, and second when we raise the standards and respect of the profession then we’ll need the funds to pay them accordingly. And we know how that conversation goes…
LikeLike
Good point. Where are the funds to pay teachers? Respect in this country follows the reported salaries of professionals. There is more respect for professional athletes than for professional teachers. This is because students look at the teacher’s salaries and say who would work for that little compensation? How can they live in the current economy? Its good to know that they are thinking about something but really…salary should follow the demand for higher credentials.
LikeLike
Just a note that the NEA Comission on Effective Teachers and Teaching released a report over a year ago that called for increased entry standards. However, a national bar is not the appropriate path. As has already been demonstrated is that the current teaching tests (Praxis) eliminate certain populations from the teaching profession. Further, if you want excellent teachers, then you need to find a way to test empathy, creativity, patience, and flexibility.
LikeLike
Excellent food-for-thought.
LikeLike
LikeLike
It’s also worth noting, in case readers here aren’t aware, that there is no national bar exam for attorneys. So what Weingarten, Ravitch and others are proposing would go beyond what exists in the field of law.
LikeLike
The Bar Exam is a two day exam. One day is known as “the multi-state.” This portion is in fact what you call “national.” The second day is devoted to state law for the state in which the attorney plans to practice. Each state controls this second half of the exam.
LikeLike
To LG:
There seems to be a point of contention about using peer review. Yet it is working in places like Montgomery County. As for how teachers are selected, I would hope that would be through an election process and teachers will select those they feel are fair. Without PAR the only alternative is having the principal and VAM be the only deciding factors–neither who I trust. Teachers on the PAR committee want to see teachers succeed and therefore usually recommend mentoring instead of firing. However, teachers know who the bad apples are. The ones that don’t care. The ones that don’t prepare and are there to collect a pay check. Under PAR I bet those teachers will soon change their tune. Keep in mind that PAR still gives teachers all their due process rights. Teachers can fight if they believe the eval was unfair–and that’s something that is not in the NYS eval system (unless you believe allowing only 13% of those fired having that right–and who decides which 13%)???
Here is how I first learned about PAR and have been following other article on this. I have also read feedback from teachers who like it. Like anything else, it took a few years to develop, but at least once you get the kinks out, it works. And having a model already in place helps.
LikeLike
This is very interesting.
LikeLike
I have a different experience in that my principal and assistant superintendent are very supportive of the staff. They are both highly trained and experienced educators who create an environment of respect and empowerment. They strive to give staff members the space they need to be creative and the help they need to navigate through the changes in curriculum and building initiatives. I realize that not everyone is as fortunate as my colleagues and I, but it gives me pause to think that administrators are all completely untrustworthy everywhere.
As a society of educators, we should be pushing for the training and retention of quality administrators who are experts in teaching within our systems.
Granted, Montgomery County had to work out kinks, but I am suspect of the sustaining of a system that expects people to evaluate peers no matter how much “trust” is in place at present.
Administrators are paid for their training. Are the teacher-evaluators trained evaluators? If not, they should be. If they are trained, are they compensated commensurate with their training, expertise and responsibilities as evaluators? If not, they should be. If they are, they should be making a lot more than peers of their experience and credential level. Now if they are making more than teacher peers, how does one get such a great-paying job? If they are elected, how do those who elect them learn of their credentials as teacher-evaluators? Do they campaign? Do they win these positions by majority vote? Are they elected by administrators? Are they elected by the same people who will be evaluated by them? Is there any danger of a campaign becoming a popularity contest? Or is there danger of teacher-evaluators being elected by the majority of teachers who share their philosophies, teaching styles, subject area knowledge, penchants for certain methods, etc. at the exclusion of all others? Do they share students? Do they share expertise in subject area? In special areas where there is limited staff, such as with the arts, are their enough expert teachers on the evaluating committee to represent these areas?
Advocating for people to evaluate peers and therefore having a say in the firing of them is a sticky wicket. Better use of experienced staff opinion is for support, advice, and collaborative counsel. When one puts a person in charge of his or her peer’s livelihood, there are many legal grey areas that need to be accounted for, such as who decides who gets what power and why.
In regard to trust, I find it difficult to trust a superintendent who calls Arne Duncan a friend:
“Dr. Weast, who calls the United States secretary of education, Arne Duncan, ‘a good friend,’ said, ‘He’s told me, ‘Jerry, you’re going where the country needs to go.’ ‘ “
LikeLike
[Ugh, sorry for the typo..it should read “are THERE enough expert” not “are their enough expert.” I hate auto-correct.]
LikeLike
Many of the posters have expressed disdain for administrators, pointing out the minimal amount of training required among other problems. Perhaps one of them could speak about their experiences.
LikeLike
Yes, I was one of them. I’ve had my share of questionable ones an my share of great ones. However, not all admins are terrible or untrustworthy. I have been very critical of the limited teaching experience requirements of some admin certification programs which is why I suggested that we as a community of educators should advocate for the recruitment and retention of highly trained experienced educators as school administrators.
LikeLike
First I do not think who the superintendent is friendly with should count against his brave decision to not accept RTTT funding. btw, if you did further research you will find the new superintendent also decided to stay with PAR. Joshua Starr is also not a believer in using VAM to judge teachers. And if not PAR, that will be the only alternative under the present system.
As for principals. Many of them are coming out of the Broad Academy–nuff said!!
It seems your mind is made up on this issue which is sad. Winerip was one of the only education reporters to actually be on the side of teachers. I trust his articles, but I also trust comments I get on my FB page from teachers who work under this system and like it. If I recall, you said you were music teacher. I do not know of any high-stakes test in music that can make or break a career (yet), but I understand these tests are coming for both music and art.
NYC used to have teachers be on the hiring committee until Klein got Weingarten to take it out of the contract. He only wanted principals to have that power. Then he started the Leadership Academy (now Broad) that trained people–some with little classroom experience–how to break the union. Randi sits on the Bd of Directors of this academy. (Conflict of interest anyone???)
As long as I and other teachers are judged by VAM, we will never get a fair evaluation. And to rely on a “fair” principal is fine, But what about those who don’t have a fair principal?? I think you should Google Joshua Starr and PAR to see how well this system is working before you rush to judgment. I am sure the teachers on the committee are not making any of this personal. We all can identify teachers in need–many of whom are giving a pass by principals for whatever reason. And this process gives a struggling teacher a year to improve.
The best way to improve a school is allow teachers to have ownership–to be part of the collaboration and decision-making process. If this process wasn’t working, I would be against it. But it is working and with union protections. Given NYS now has into law that any teacher who falls short on VAM 2 years in a row (which is worth 40% of the eval) will be fired. And only 13% of them are allowed to fight it. So 40% really equals 100%. Under VAM 200 teachers lost their job in DC. I don’t know how much you know about VAM (or if you are or will soon be judged by it) but any teacher who teaches an advanced class will not show any improvement using this flawed statistical model. Politicians don’t want to change it because they want to either break the unions or turn as many schools into charters as they can–and that includes my Democratic governor.
LikeLike
schoolgal, thank you for your response.
I mean no personal disrespect to Dr. Weast, but the mentioning of his friendship with Duncan in the article certainly has a political bent to it. I don’t usually consort with people with the political power to damage my livelihood even indirectly, but keeping Duncan as a friend could serve to influence him toward the policy changes that take the test score evaluation out of the federal equation. It may be difficult to know peoples’ motivations, but I often have a very difficult time trusting a person who openly sleeps with the enemy, after a fashion.
Many of the Broad principals of whom you refer are in school districts in states that have been overrun by reformers, but not all are in this situation. Believe it or not, there are many administrators who are trained educators at-large with no affiliation to Broad or any other reformer laboratory. For those districts that have the unfortunate position of having a Broadie in charge, the first order of business is to give the district back to the people. I don’t have a lot of faith in the idea that a Broad-run school or district will adopt PAR while there is corruption at the helm. Broad is a disease of the district’s brain and bringing in PAR is like operating on the heart of a brain-dead patient with the hope it will live. Get the district back into the hands of the people first by giving them voice via their local school boards and then by educating them about the credentials of their administrators.
My mind is not made up on whether or not to accept the concept of PAR, although I am suspect of PAR as a system that is tied to the firing or increment-awarding aspects of teacher evaluation. I fully support peer observation and counsel. In fact, I believe that having a peer counseling team in every school should be a mandate. I am not an advocate of giving firing power to peers, no matter how honest and sincere they seem now. Over years, there will be people taking advantage of that system like they always do. It is in human nature for someone to always be trying to gain advantage. Right now, it seems like a big ol’ love fest, but in reality, these kinds of systems have far too many problems with hierarchy issues.
Regardless of whether or not music and art are included in high-stakes testing is irrelevant. Kindergarten, first and second grade teachers as well do not give an assessment that could be tied into to evaluations. To satisfy the state legislation tying test scores to a percentage of evaluation, all teachers in my district are mandated to support writing and math in their courses and all teachers will share in the test-score component of the evaluation. We are going to be evaluated as a school, not as individuals, for the assessment portion of each evaluation. None of this makes sense for the same reasons you pointed out: These types of evaluative instruments do not take into account a host of variables that make them unfair, so you better believe I care about the quality of the work done by my teaching peers. I just do not feel that I nor they should be making the decisions of whether or not our peers keep their jobs.
Having teachers on a hiring committee is interesting but could be problematic. We used to do that in my district, but it fell by the wayside for reasons I was not privy to being a new teacher in the district at the time. I feel that there is some danger of nepotism in a situation like that.
“As long as I and other teachers are judged by VAM, we will never get a fair evaluation. And to rely on a ‘fair’ principal is fine, But what about those who don’t have a fair principal?? I think you should Google Joshua Starr and PAR to see how well this system is working before you rush to judgment.”
I am not putting PAR down–I am not ready to “pick it up” until the many questions I have posed are answered.
“I am sure the teachers on the committee are not making any of this personal.”
I’m sure they are not either. Sounds like everyone is on the up-and-up. In time, however, systems of trust break down. This is why we have laws, contracts, and (sorry for those who got screwed by by the AFT/UFT in NY) unions.
It’s unfortunate that there are cynics out there, but without us, the Kum-ba-ya moments in our lives won’t turn around to bite us in the behind…that is, bite us too much. I want to believe that PAR is a great thing. Conceptually having teachers help struggling peers is absolutely the right course of action. My concern as I’ve tirelessly stated over and over here is with putting teachers in charge of their peers’ firing. It’s not a position in which a peer should be put. I would very much love to see the “union protections” of which you speak. I could not dream up enough protection for the evaluator-teacher in this scenario, but you claim it exists. So lay it out for me, and I will give it a chance.
The article you posted gave some insight into the process, but I am still having issues with the “power” conditions. Because of that component, I am not convinced it is the smartest idea. Again, please do not construe that I am against teacher-driven support systems. Those should be in every district, and there should be time in the schedule for these. We absolutely need teachers to collaborate on good teaching practices. We also need teachers to be more involved in their own personal evaluation process. We do not need to be putting responsibilities of hiring and firing people onto their peers. That is my biggest, and right now only, concern.
LikeLike
Once again you fail to understand that this is a “union-sponsored program” which means due process rights are secured. However, like you said, what if the program was co-opted. Is the current system using VAM any better? Principals can easily stack a class against you. Their percentage is still not entirely based on objectivity. Look at how many principals are misusing Danielson. I would rather be in a PAR system if I worked for a Broad principal because it would diminish his/her authority and save good teachers that are outspoken. And that’s why Bloomberg would never go for it.
Again, The new superintendent is not tied to Duncan. The point of Winerip’s story was someone with ties to Duncan stood up to him and stood up against VAM because their process was indeed working. Under VAM good teachers can easily lose their jobs and bad teachers can easily teach to the test or cheat. Your responses leave out VAM. And that’s what we are all stuck with if your district wants RTTT funding which btw no student ever sees. It all goes to consultants and testing companies.
Of course a reform state and Obama/Duncan will never accept PAR because it doesn’t line the pockets of Pearson. This was never about the students. It was never about empowering teachers. It was always about privatization. Montgomery isn’t the only district using PAR. And as I suggested, you can Google it to learn more.
But you failed to answer my question:
Do you teach a subject that is tied to VAM??
LikeLike
“Once again you fail to understand that this is a ‘union-sponsored program’ which means due process rights are secured.”
With all due respect, perhaps you failed to read what I wrote. My concern is not just for the teachers being evaluated by their peers–it is also for the teacher-evaluators. I am most interested in knowing how they are protected. I have seen unions agree to policies that appear to be benign before–I’m still reeling over how the use of the ATR system ever got the blessing of the union in NYC–so using the argument that PAR is a “union-sponsored program” as proof that it is a good idea does not negate my skepticism.
“However, like you said, what if the program was co-opted. Is the current system using VAM any better? Principals can easily stack a class against you. Their percentage is still not entirely based on objectivity. Look at how many principals are misusing Danielson. I would rather be in a PAR system if I worked for a Broad principal because it would diminish his/her authority and save good teachers that are outspoken. And that’s why Bloomberg would never go for it.”
Obviously VAM is worse than anything. However, the system that employs trained and experienced educators who are actual administrators evaluating their staff members is better than giving teachers the power to fire their peers–it is an absolutely excellent idea to ask peers to counsel each other, yes, but not to recommend termination. As you keep insinuating, yes, admins can be corrupt, but so can fellow teachers. I think it’s a mistake to put the responsibility of recommending whether their peers keep a job or not on teachers. Firing and making contract renewal recommendations is the job of an administrator, not a peer.
I am most interested in learning more about the misuses of the Danielson model as my district has just begun training us on Danielson. We had an introductory workshop on it two weeks ago. Next week, we go into further detail. So far, my principal’s initial interpretation of the model most aligns with what we have done in the past–his approach is to connect the two models by examining their commonalities first before exploring their differences.
“Again, The new superintendent is not tied to Duncan. The point of Winerip’s story was someone with ties to Duncan stood up to him and stood up against VAM because their process was indeed working. Under VAM good teachers can easily lose their jobs and bad teachers can easily teach to the test or cheat. Your responses leave out VAM. And that’s what we are all stuck with if your district wants RTTT funding which btw no student ever sees. It all goes to consultants and testing companies.”
I understand full well the travesty of VAM. Let me make this perfectly clear, I am not arguing FOR VAM, although I am perplexed as to why you keep bringing it up as an off-shoot of my concerns. It seems that you speak of PAR in terms of little else but VAM, yet a discussion of the differing evaluation systems is irrelevant to the most basic red-flag with PAR: putting the responsibility of recommending a person be fired on that of his peers.
I am going to simplify my concern in a question: Do you honestly think that putting teachers in charge of firing their peers is a good thing, and if so, how do you reconcile all the possible issues that surround this positioning of teacher-evaluators as administrators? “Administrators” are essentially what they ultimately become when you put them in charge of people’s livelihoods.
“But you failed to answer my question:
Do you teach a subject that is tied to VAM??”
Not sure what my opinion on the mis-use of teachers as administrators has to do with my personal experiences with VAM. I advocate for individuals having more of a say in their own evaluations, but I fail to see how any experience with VAM cancels out my concern for the power distribution and protections of all parties involved in PAR. According to my principal, the Danielson model is designed to allow teachers more input in their own evaluation process, but not necessarily to evaluate each other to determine who should keep a job and who should not.
And I did answer your question…the evaluation of every teacher in my district will include student test results starting next year as per new state legislation (surprise, surprise), so indirectly…YES, we all teach a subject that is tied to VAM–at least that will be next year unless something drastic changes in the law. I have already had a conversation with our new supervisor during a team meeting about the unfairness of the policy. She agreed but could not answer me when I asked what we, teachers and administrators alike, are doing about it. Perhaps she was blind-sided by my question, but even our admins do not know how this will play out. I have a meeting with her this week where I am going to broach the topic again. As for my principal, he knows how I feel about it. He’s feeling the crunch himself this year. It is my hope that admins like my principal will continue to influence his supervisors to affect changes in the policy since it is a misuse of standardized tests, not to mention, wholly unfair.
LikeLike
As a NYC teacher, I know just how badly my union can screw things up. I and others posted all over every NYC blog including Edwize against voting for the ’05 contract. I therefore have no pity for any ATR that voted the money over their rights. However, besides being here, I am an advocate for bringing back excessing rights and an end to the ATR provision. I am also fighting hard to get Julie elected as our next UFT president. But many schools seem not to be interested in union politics and that is a big problem. I also agree I would not be happy with any negotiation done by the UFT without our input and vote. I think its criminal NYC teachers can’t vote on any eval deal Mugrew puts through–and I don’t trust him. It’s for that reason I liked the PAR deal because unlike the NYS deal, due process rights are included.
NYC teachers were also on the hiring committee until Randi and Klein took that away. That’s something I would like to see returned. But what I truly like about PAR–unlike the VAM system–is that staff development is included. And as a teacher I feel most teachers who I hope are “voted” on the committee (God forbid if it’s principal selection–but I would never agree to that in any agreement including PAR) would opt for the staff development. I have taught with some really horrible teachers. If principals did their job correctly, we wouldn’t be having this conversation, debate, or whatever this is. I just suggested you did more investigation as to why teachers under this plan like it before you continue with why is “might” not work.
LikeLike
Thanks for the dialogue, schoolgal. Your passion is encouraging me to find out more about PAR and hopefully get some answers as to how the committees are chosen and their positions compensated and protected. A fellow colleague of mine who is also our union executive board member has talked about a similar system, as well, although he and I never seem to have the time to get our debate off the ground.
My heart ached for the NYC teachers the very second I learned of VAM through one of the many articles in the NYTimes that my then GSE professor at Rutgers had sent to us for discussion. I was so horrified by the equation used to evaluate teachers that was posted in the article that I asked the prof how in the world this mathematical construct could be justified knowing what we all as graduate students/educators knew about teaching. His response was for me to write the equation on the chalkboard behind him while the class engaged in the discussion. This took me several minutes which further solidified the ridiculousness of the VAM model for all of us.
Needless to say, I was and remain horrified by the goings-on in NYC. I can only hope that a new mayor can usher in an ideology of change for the better. The coming campaigns of candidates to replace Bloomberg will be of utmost importance. And yes, I have also found schools in my district with members who refuse to get involved in the politics of education–an act of folly since politics have been forced upon us. Your best bet is to organize your colleagues and support those who can crack the current destructive political agenda. I am my district Legislative Action Team Chairperson, and my job is to inform the membership of the goings-on in the state legislature. Whenever I think about even the most minute piece of legislation and how insignificant it may seem, I think about the plight of ATRs and how I could never live my life with so much instability in my career. I send everything along to our members no matter how trivial it may seem. As well, we are watching our neighbors to the NE very closely in an effort to learn from what is happening there.
You have our support, my sister. Here’s hoping this whole reform agenda takes a turn for the better and soon.
LikeLike
Thank you. But living under Christie can’t be easy either. I think the article you are referring to is “Evaluating NYTeachers, Perhaps the Numbers Do Lie” about a new teacher who was denied tenure due to VAM even though the staff and her principal thought she deserved it. That was also written by Winerip. btw, I also tried to fight the Newark deal along with people like Jersey Jazzman and others. But this is another example of teachers wanting money by giving up rights. And under the new rubric, I doubt many teachers will see those bonuses–unless of course they teach to the test.
LikeLike
“…I have also found schools in my district with members who refuse to get involved in the politics of education–an act of folly since politics have been forced upon us.”
I used to say that I wasn’t a political animal, that I just wanted to teach. I can’t believe how incredibly naive I was! You cannot afford not to be political. When push comes to shove, no one else but you can watch your back. If you are blissfully unaware, it is only dumb luck that you haven’t suffered the effects of your ignorance. Take it from someone who still hasn’t totally given up on the innate goodness of people. I still just want to teach, but they took that away from me.
LikeLike
From where I stand, Newark is hot mess. The current contract was a mistake that will echo all over this state. You can be certain we are keeping a close eye on its impact.
LikeLike
Are you aware of the TPA (Teaching Performance Assessment)? It is currently being used in several states during student teaching. Info can be found at edtpa.aacte.org/. In Ohio, it is currently in the pilot stage. It is basically a mini National Boards. Possibly as soon as next year, student teachers will not get a teaching license unless they pass the TPA. Once they do, they will get a 4 year license, and then have to retake the TPA in their third year of teaching to prove they are worthy of a 5 year license. This is extremely problematic, as we are asking pre-service teachers to do what many didn’t do until they taught 10-20 years(National Boards). MAYBE this is a good idea. I could go for using this in place of using student test scores to ‘grade’ teachers, as long as educators are scoring them. Any thoughts?
LikeLike
I believe the TPA is the Pearson assessment over which the UMass teacher instructor, Barbara Madeloni, lost her position.
LikeLike
If that’s the Pearson assessment, it was approved in NYS–with the approval of the UFT president who btw took over when Randi left. It’s only getting worse under “Unity” folks!!!
LikeLike
Yes. It is Pearson. What current assessment isn’t?
LikeLike
The newest “someEEcard” out is:
“If ed reformers ran art museums, artists would be forced to paint by numbers.”
LikeLike
Interesting choice of analogy. Exactly how a mathematician’s lament begins.
LikeLike
I would totally be okay with a bar exam. Something more unified than all these different state tests. I think its the right idea, if we want the best teachers then we need to make those entry levels hard!! And I say this as a college student!
LikeLike
So, do you all realize that the bar exam officially proposed last month by Randi is practically a done deal? AFT Report Recommends Teacher Bar Exam, NBPTS to Assist: http://www.nbpts.org/about_us/news_media1/web_feature_releases?ID=803
What are the chances that states will substitute all their other teacher certification exams with just this one –or will they require the Bar on top of all of those tests?
To those who support it, do you expect Bar certified teachers to then be paid as high as lawyers, when so many “reformers” (like Rhee) argue that education and experience don’t matter to teacher quality?
LikeLike
To tell you the truth I was suspicious about the timing of this post since Diane didn’t seem for or against it when it was first proposed. I just hope Diane is not in any way doing Randi any favors. Diane doesn’t need Randi. Randi needs Diane. I wonder how many good people who really want to become teachers will now look for another path? Randi has not made one proposal that will stop high-stakes testing or stop privatization. In fact, she is now trying to open new sources of dues by unionizing charter teachers, but not with as strong a contract. Her last deal was with Newark public school teachers was horrible. This exam is just theatrics on her part. It will do nothing to increase the respect for teachers or our pay scale. As more states vote in merit pay and take away collective bargaining and seniority rights, where is Randi??? Look how she gave control of the NYC schools to Bloomberg and took away excessing rights. Look at how she got duped into an agreement with Rhee that led to 200 teachers getting fired. And the same will happen in NYS within the next few years under that agreement where VAM trumps the 60% principal evaluation after the 2nd year. Everything she proposes and gets turns to %%%%!!!
LikeLike
When Randi came up with the Bar idea and discussed it on Twitter last year, most teachers opposed it. As with other issues teachers have disagreed with, she just dug in her heels, I think Randi has repeatedly demonstrated that she discounts teacher concerns.
I agree that a Bar exam is going to dissuade many potential teachers from pursuing a career in education and I fear it will serve as a gatekeeper that prevents more people of color from entering the profession.
I have never seen “reformers” make exceptions about the quality of National Board Certified Teachers, so what’s the likelihood they will suddenly respect teachers (and increase their pay) if they have passed a Bar exam? The very “reformers” Randi seems to have sold out to believe that a high ACT/SAT score, BA and just 5 weeks of teacher training are needed to become an “Irreplaceable.” I’ve seen Randi defend TFAers because, she said, they also belong to the union –but she failed to mention that most joined because it was a requirement where they work, i.e., not in the “Right to Work” states.
I think this is another example of the double standard: increasing regulations and qualifications for regular public schools and teachers, while decreasing standards for charter schools and charter teachers.
As the charter empire expands and the number of low needs students attending neighborhood public schools, as well as teachers needed to serve them there, are decreasing, and with charters replacing union teachers with non-union teachers, teacher aids and computers,you have to ask, “What is the end-game for requiring a teacher Bar exam?” is Randi just pandering to “reformers,” did she fail to really think this through –or is it something else?
Personally, I would prefer to see a master’s degree required of teachers, as in Finland, than one MORE high stakes test –because I don’t see states giving up all the other tests required of teachers. I’m not sure why Diane and Randi have not promoted that.
This just seems so hinky!
LikeLike
BTW, I would never expect to see a master’s degree required of teachers in the US, because that would be a game-changer for “reformers” promoting TFA et al, since most of their 5 week trained “teachers” are holding off on going to Grad School until after they complete their missionary temp teaching, so they can pursue more lucrative careers.
In fact, “reformers” deny the positive impacts of masters’ degrees on student learning, even after research came out last year indicating improved outcomes on the NAEP for students of teachers with master’s degrees compared to those with just bachelor’s degrees from 2005 – 2011: http://www.edweek.org/tsb/articles/2012/02/29/02effect.h05.html
LikeLike
I too am surprised to learn that some states don’t require a Masters in order to receive certification. Reformers are trying to change the college requirements and certification requirements around the country as well. If you can breathe and go to a “reform sponsored program” for a few weeks, you are ready to walk into a classroom. Having a Masters or passing a bar exam with flying colors are not enough to guarantee you will make a great teacher, but the fact people are willing to invest in this education says something about their future commitment.
LikeLike
I’ve worked in Teacher Education a long time and my understanding is that, currently, all states grant either initial or provisional certification for teachers with just a bachelor’s degree from an approved Teacher Ed program. Continuing education or professional development is required to maintain or renew certificates in virtually all states, but the only states that I know of which require that be an earned master’s degree are NY and MA. I believe there had been other states, such as OH and MD, which have since repealed their master’s degree requirement for cert renewal. I understand that CT is adding a master’s degree requirement for cert renewal in 2016.
These things change frequently, so I could have missed some current info. Please feel free to weigh in if this is incorrect or you have additional information about master’s degree requirements in different states.
LikeLike
CT has had a master’s degree requirement for many years. I got mine in the early 90’s.
LikeLike
Interesting. It could be that due to low starting salary, teachers can’t afford a Masters. NYS gives you 2 years to get it, but I think you can ask for an extension. Our salary increase are also tied to higher education. A Masters plus 30 above gets you maximum salary after 22 years.
LikeLike
Has it changed in CT since the 90s, or was it the BA + 30 requirement mentioned on page 2, where it says a related master’s degree will be required in 2016? http://www.sde.ct.gov/sde/lib/sde/pdf/cert/maintaining1109aw.pdf
LikeLike
In PA, teachers can remain Level I certified for a period of up to 6 years (I believe it used to be 5) before they either obtain a Level II certification or risk losing their PA certification altogether. Here are a few of the guidelines for PA Level II certification:
“Applicants for Level II Instructional certification must complete 24 semester credits beyond their bachelor’s degree before they are eligible for Level II certification. These credits must be earned at a four-year degree-granting college/university.
Community college credits and continuing education units (CEUs) are not accepted toward Level II certification. Credits must be earned at and appear as a passing grade on an official transcript by a state-approved, four-year college or university approved by that college’s state education agency for awarding the bachelor’s degree.
Pennsylvania Department of Education (PDE)-approved in-service credits count toward Level II certification, provided an official in-service letter with raised seal is submitted with the application.
Credits can be undergraduate level provided the credits were earned after the conferring of the initial bachelor’s degree at a four-year, degree-granting college.”
I remember my father having to complete a Masters degree in order to make his certification permanent. He also took CEUs which brought him a pay raise after 30 credits. It appears that PA no longer requires Masters level coursework, just coursework at accredited colleges or universities.
LikeLike