Tim Slekar is a teacher educator and a fearless firebrand, known for his work @the chalkface and for some very pointed videos. He recently became dean of teacher education at a college in the Midwest. His college president asked for his opinion of the recent report of the National Council on Teacher Quality, which lacerated teacher education in America by reviewing course catalogues and reading lists, not by personal campus visits.
Tim gave the president his candid opinion. Read what happened. It will surprise you.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Bravo, Tim Slekar and the president of his university. Now, I hope that administrator can be urged successfully to reach out to colleagues at other institutions. Can’t win this war on an isolated basis.
LikeLike
I went through something similar. Our VP posted a question on a university blog regarding the NCTQ report the day it hit the press. I provided a link to Darling-Hammond’s cogent response. He was fine with that and thanked me. Case closed.
LikeLike
Teacher Ed,
Can you give us the link to Darling-Hammond’s response? I would like to read it.
LikeLike
Sure, Robert. Here you go, “Why the NCTQ teacher prep ratings are nonsense” by Linda Darling-Hammond:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/06/18/why-the-nctq-teacher-prep-ratings-are-nonsense/
LikeLike
The letter from Kate Walsh of NCTQ is damning evidence of their true mission. Bullying, threats, self-important hubris, and subterfuge do not create credulity, followers, or cooperation, Ms. Walsh. Instead they prove your critics’ revelations of your hidden agenda and show why all institutions need to protect their integrity from your dastardly goals. GO AWAY. We aren’t buying what you are selling and we will make sure everyone knows all about your false flag operation, no matter how many corporate sponsors and media stooges you have on your side.
Well done, Tim Slekar!
LikeLike
Bullying and threats. That’s what I noticed, too. What a disgraceful way to try to get support. And it says a lot about an institution when it deasl with administrators that way.
LikeLike
This is a good news-bad news situation. Kudos to Tim and his college president; the bad news is that some heads of colleges and universities are unaware of NCTQ’s methodology and purpose. A quick search of the Chronicle for High Ed’s site on NCTQ had only two results. Do higher eds have one must read resource where this message can be spread?
LikeLike
I think it was you, Diane Ravitch, who wrote in your review in the New York Review of Books of a book on education in Finland, that education programs in Finland accept the highest qualified candidates from colleges and focus on teaching “apprenticeships” rather than theoretical courses.
Let us not close our minds to the problem of teacher preparation in the U.S. and how it may be improved. It is not, and should not be, a “sacred cow” beyond criticism.
LikeLike
So you are arguing that calling out the NCTQ for what it is, a political propaganda organization, is closing our minds to the problem of teacher preparation, Professor Gruder? Really?
No one has called for ignoring teacher preparation, including Tim Slekar and Dianne Ravitch. A straw man argument from you?
As a matter of fact, as I’m sure you know, Linda Darling-Hammond has devoted much of her career to that very subject and she is an internationally recognized expert on teacher preparation, unlike the political operatives of the NCTQ. Her critique of their “report” stands on its own.
No one has attempted to claim that teacher preparation programs are a “sacred cow” but you and the NCTQ. Defending the junk science and spurious report of NCTQ harms your credibility in the extreme as an academic.
LikeLike
Ms. Gruder,
You forgot to use the phrase “status quo” in
describing the other side…
… as in “the corrupt defenders of a failed
status quo.”
Get with it!
LikeLike
You are allegedly a professor of history if the Google search is correct, and therefore you are not really qualified to speak on teacher preparation.
LikeLike
Dr G,
Why do you seem so sure that I am poorly prepared to teach?
You do not seem to be a professor of education, nor part of any school system, so on what do you base your repeated stance that teacher preparedness (intelligence?) is a large problem in the US.
Thank you,
LikeLike
Perhaps you might ask that of Diane Ravitch, since she favorably compared the Finnish system of teacher preparation to that in the U.S.
Vivian Gruder
LikeLike
Vivian Gruder,
Finland does NOT dismiss the importance of teacher education. Students apply to enter teacher colleges at the end of high school. The 8 teacher preparation institutions are selective. Only one of ten applicants is accepted. In addition to studying liberal arts subjects, future teachers study pedagogy, theory, and conduct research about education. They practice teach. Preparing to become a teacher takes five years. Then and only then may they become teachers. Once they become teachers, they have wide latitude about what and how to teach, as most curriculum decisions are made in each school. The national curriculum provides guidelines, but does not intrude upon the professionalism of teachers.
LikeLike
Way to dodge , Dr. G.
I want to know why YOU seem to keep posting that I and my colleagues are idiots, unprepared…whatever.
Please explain why unprepared teachers are theBIG PROBLEM in our schools.
Thank you
LikeLike
Please stop this practice of putting words in my mouth. I have been arguing that the curricula needs greater substance–and especially for those students whose families do not provide them with adequate intellectual and cultural grounding (as so many of you have been. Indicating). And I believe that teacher preparation should have greater emphasis on subject content.
I presume you are a teacher as well as others who have done similarly . It puts you and them as teachers in a bad light as poor readers, not grasping or exaggerating what you read. Do you what that impression to be made? So read and argue with care.
LikeLike
Are the people on NCTQ degrees in teaching or law? Maybe they should use their global expertise to grade snack foods.
LikeLike
Tim Slekar is a hero, a true hero.
The irony here is that presidents and deans of universities are presumed to be real intellectuals who come equipped with a passion to lead with discussion and questioning, debate with diverse views, research and vetting. I understand they also maintain the solvency of the instituion they work for, and I by no means minimize that.
Still, these responses from Kate Walsh seemingly reflected knee jerk, almost glib thinking and an absence of critical thought:
Kate Walsh: “I am urging you to take a leadership role on this critical issue and work with us to provide the data we need to rate your institution’s teacher preparation programs for the second edition of the Review, scheduled for release in June 2014. By doing so, you will help ensure that the public gets the information it deserves about the publicly-approved programs preparing public school teachers.”
My feedback: The public deserves a survey that has substantial empiricism built into its experimental design. The public serves to know who is sponsoring the survey and what their collective agenda appears to be. I don’t see evidence of Ms. Walsh pushing for that.
Kate Walsh: “Outside of higher education, the Review is getting broad and generally positive coverage, with over 800 stories in the media since its release. Institutions which chose not to cooperate have gotten little support for their stance, as the attached editorials from the Washington Post and Pittsburgh Post Gazette illustrate.”
My feedback: Institutions that have not cooperated are questioning the methods used. They see the surface deep means by which the information is being gathered and portrayed to the public. And the media that reports on them is corporate media, one that is mostly attached to the private sector reform of education. Ms. Walsh has clearly connecte4d some but not nearly enough of the dots to put that much credence in the Washington Post, which, BTW, has vested financial interests in test design companies.
That’s not to say that our teacher preparation programs are not subject to review and reform, but the change must be a product of the people in the trenches, not politicians.
Kate Walsh: “Most importantly, the ratings are already beginning to penetrate consumer thinking, given our two partnerships, first with U.S. News & World Report and now with SearchSoft . . . ”
My feedback: Really, Ms. Kate? Consumer thinking is also shaped by truth and substance, and not just the unctuous selling of an ideology that is really not aimed at equity, justince, and fairness in the brain wiring humans who “consume” primary, secondary, and higher education. Did you really think this through? Did you discuss this survey with your faculty? With the president of your university? Or did you simply take at face value what you might have heard from your colleagues and outsiders who same in to present to you?
Now, Ms. Walsh’s response is by no means an indication that she is unfit for her position. But given Tim Slekar’s response, I think she has some competition. . .. Tim, are your seeking a promotion? . . . . . .
LikeLike
To Chris,
Can you contain your snide comments?
The comment to which I responded was about teacher preparation. That is a legitimate and serious issue that deserves a serious response on its merits. I have so far not read in any blog or comment so far any discussion of deficiencies in teacher preparation as currently practiced and proposals to change and improve it.
I strongly support the criticisms of privatization, vouchers and charters which are draining public financing from public schools. But negative criticism is not sufficient. This blog, the comments, and the Network for Public Education need to focus as well, and more, on measures needed to overcome student deficiencies whatever their origin, and certainly that includes poverty in its economic, social and cultural manifestations. But more attention has to be paid as well to the deficiencies in the curricula that is taught in public schools, such as the critique of E.D. Hirsch, and the deficiencies in teacher preparation in this country. As well, the completely inadequate salaries paid to public school teachers which dissuade many college graduate from becoming teachers.
Vivian R. Gruder
LikeLike
What deficiencies in particular are you referring to?
I’m sure there are some deficiencies in teacher preparation, but merely decrying our lack of attention to them without explaining what they are isn’t helpful.
LikeLike
To Jim:
I refer to the emphasis on abstract methodology/skill courses. Diana Ravitch has herself pointed out these deficiencies in contrast to the Finnish system which emphasizes rigorous selection of candidates to teacher training programs, intellectual content,and teacher “apprenticeship.”
I might add that I know of several intelligent college graduates who were highly critical of the education courses offered in graduate schools of education, and for that reason some refused to take the program.
To Chris:
I said nothing about the NCTQ report, nor did I ever write the words that Diane Ravitch is “defending the status quo.” So please read carefully and do not put words in my mouth.
Susannunes’s comments merit no response. If she is a teacher, then let her demonstrate that she can be open-minded and able to engage in adult argumentation.
Why not have a serious discussion of E.D. Hirsch’s views on curriculum? How does his “core knowledge” curriculum differ from the “common core” curriculum? What are its benefits and/or deficiencies?
Vivian R. Gruder
LikeLike
Dr. Gruder,
Hirsch’s Core Knowledge is a content-based, grade-by-grade curriculum that spells out what all children are supported to learn each year.
The Common Core standards is a skill-based set of directives that refers to content and offers examples of the kinds of texts that might be read, but requires no content.
Diane Ravitch
LikeLike
Dear Diana, May I call you Diane? We met and corresponded a few times in years past.
I presume, from your criticisms of the core curriculum, that you would be favorable to the core knowledge curriculum. From my experience as a student in public schools many years back, and as a teacher of public school students at a public university, I believe the curriculum has to be made much more rigorous, with much more focus on knowledge of different subject matters. I have in mind in particular high schools. And since Albert Shanker argued for a more uniform national curriculum, I have favored that goal as well. But devoid of excessive testing with short answer questions. And from my teaching experience, I am also aware that the results of student tests are not tests of teacher effectiveness; grades usually range from Bs to D’s, with a few As and Fs. These are reasons why I wish there were more attention paid to curriculum, as well as to improvements in teacher preparation as you discussed the matter in your NYR article.
Sincerely, Vivian
Sent from my iPad
LikeLike
Dear Vivian,
I admire the Finnish approach, which is similar to what is found in the best private schools. Teachers are well educated and respected. So is teacher experience. The national standards are extremely broad and non-prescriptive. Teachers have professional autonomy and wide latitude about what to teach and how to teach, within. The context of a national curriculum that assures that all children study and engage in the arts, study history and write essays, learn science and have lab time, learn a foreign language, etc.
Teachers are not evaluated by student test score. Standardized tests are almost never given. In many cases, never.
LikeLike
1) “Rigorous selection of candidates to teacher training programs” isn’t something that can be artificially created. The demand for teaching positions has to exceed the supply of teaching positions for such a thing to occur; and for THAT to occur, teaching has to be a desirable profession, which means all the “reforms” of the last fourteen years need to be reversed.
2) This blog entry has to do with NCTQ. Are you defending them as a legitimate organization, rather than a propaganda tool?
LikeLike
Hey, Folks, Why don’t we talk about the programs that NCTQ did NOT evaluate, such as Relay, Match and ABCTE, which “reformers” support and want to see rapidly expanded across the nation? Those programs are the key to understanding the kinds of teacher prep that NCQT and its corporate sponsors promote, as they seek to dismantle traditional Teacher Ed:
ABCTE, Relay and Match are graduate level programs. They award master’s degrees and lead to state certification entitlement. Designed by charter school management organizations, Relay and Match train teachers in ONE pedagogy, the military style drill sergeant approach, as implemented at KIPP, Uncommon Schools, Achievement First and Match charters. Raising student test scores is a major focus of all of these programs. Relay and Match “professors” are mostly charter school teachers and administrators –who do not have doctorates.
Let’s look at gatekeeping and the entrance bar for teachers, since a primary focus of NCTQ critiques has been on GPA and GRE requirements for graduate school acceptance in Education programs. I think it would be difficult to argue that all of these graduate programs emphasize “rigorous selection of candidates.”
The GRE is not indicated as a requirement for entrance to any of these programs. For Relay, which has already expanded to three states since first accredited last year, the entrance requirements depend on location. Match’s program in MA and Relay’s NJ program say nothing about a minimum GPA. The Relay NY program says they have a minimum GPA of 3.0 or 2.75 with “a third letter of recommendation.” Only Relay’s New Orleans program mentions a set minimum GPA of 3,0 and it’s geared towards the primarily TFA “teachers” working in NOLA. (TFA requires a minimum 2.5 GPA –which is lower than many traditional Teacher Ed programs.) .
All of these “graduate schools” have a requirement that the student already have a job working full time as a teacher, so you can see how they are geared towards TFAers, TNTP etc., many of whom are their current employees (No conflict of interest there, right???).
ABCTE is a self-paced correspondence course that is completely online and based on the Common Core. They have no professors and they say nothing about minimum GPA or GRE entrance requirements.
I’d take my three different Education School degree programs over these any day –one of which was a very flexible non-traditional program which didn’t require that I take ANY formal courses, but I chose to do so anyways because I got so much out of them.
LikeLike
Are you defending the NCTQ report, in all its unscientific, non-empirical glory or are you agreeing with its findings that teacher preparation programs in colleges and universities around the country are total failures with only a handful of exceptions?
If you want to highlight teacher preparation programs as in need of reform that is one thing. Defending this egregious astroturf organization and its false research is quite another.
It sounds like you and I might agree on many things but your comment indicated that Diane is “defending the status quo” in teacher preparation programs, and, by association, Tim Slekar and the other commenters on this blog.
Here is a link, easily found by using the search engine of this site, to just a few of the postings Diane has made about teacher preparation, including the amazing work of Linda Darling-Hammond and her team at Stanford:
https://dianeravitch.net/?s=linda+darling-hammond
LikeLike
Thanks Chris for the link back to Diane’s post on Stanford’s Darling-Hammond. Hope everyone uses this link to read her letter and the entire flawed report.
I have spent much of my educational research career with process of data collection (not including my classroom teaching experience in higher ed which I mention here on occasion). I urge everyone to read this Stanford experts comments on the deformed data collection and other inaccuracies that the NCTQ report proffers.
From their complaints about universities withholding information
because they will not agree to the base payment of $400 for hundreds of hours of work to comply with the irrational requests of this for-profit organization, to the selection of so few graduate schools of education in so few locales, the whole thing presents a distorted and false report. In addition, it is far from showing actual outcomes based on professionally accepted data collection methods.
LikeLike
I am interested in your allusion to E.D.Hirsch. Are you endorsing his critique of high school curricula? Do you have time to expand on that one point just a bit for us?
LikeLike
You are trying to argue out of both sides of your mouth, and you are lying out of both sides. Stop it.
LikeLike
You are trying to sound “oh so intellectual,” but you are very transparent. Take the privatization b.s. elsewhere.
LikeLike
Several months ago I got a crisp ten dollar bill in the mail to fill out a 40 page survey. Questions like, how often do you travel by private aircraft? NCTQ should go with that approach, a ten dollar endowment to each college to lure them to answer an endless array of vague queries.
LikeLike
TC, NCTQ is actually offering students payment to submit the materials they receive in teacher education classes, (assignments, syllabi, etc).
LikeLike
I am not seeking a promotion (but thanks for the suggestion). I am simply making sure that NCTQ does not receive any legitimacy at my institution (Edgewood College in Madison, WI). The idea of taking the interchange with my president to a blog was to simply share with others ONE way that Teacher Education Leaders (Deans, etc) should be on the front line protecting the profession.
As for the idea that my defense of the profession was an endorsement of teacher preparation programs as beyond critique is just silly. We all need critique to improve but that critique must come in the form of self evaluation, program driven assessment and reflection not from bullying.
NCTQ’s “review” is just a technique to defame teacher preparation dedicated to helping future teachers understand the depth of socio-political factors that merge with issues of child development. Look at what they(NCTQ) fear by looking at their indicators. NCTQ does not want a profession. They do not want teacher education that looks beyond simple pedagogy and subject matter expertise. The idea that a teacher education program like we have at Edgewood that is based on our mission and values (truth, compassion, justice, and partnership) frightens NCTQ and other reformers. The idea that teacher education programs help future teachers understand that the current economic policies are what is really at the heart of the OPPORTUNITY Gap frightens reformers. This is why NCTQ exists. They are just another tool of the reformers looking to dismantle critical education devoted to helping children become actively engaged citizens in a democracy.
LikeLike
And Tim, the idea of engaged civic participants and active citizenry is not something NCTQ sees as congruent with becoming a qualified worker that will uphold the United States’s desire to be a leading global economic force.
The truth is, most of this reform movement will produce neither . . . .
LikeLike
The last thing “reformers” want is a larger population of educated voters, which explains the decrease in civics courses over the years, GOP voter suppression behind the push for voter IDs and the Democrats’ elimination of democracy in education: Paul Weyrich – “I don’t want everybody to vote” (Goo Goo)
LikeLike
Apparently there is some confusion about available information. Just to help out a very little bit…
There is this thing called the “internet” and on it you can find, well, what follows is called a “link” and if you “click” on it you will find out a thing or two about what is arguably the most dreadfully inadequate teacher preparation organization in the USA. You may have even read about it in the newspapers: Teach For America.
Link: http://garyrubinstein.teachforus.org
Lots and lots of discussion, including some sharp exchanges between commenters on quite a number of “blog postings” [“google” the term] about teacher training and what it should consist of and how long it should be and who should do it and…
Well, you get the idea—and that’s just for starters! I don’t think there should be any problems after this…
“A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five.” [Groucho Marx]
🙂
LikeLike
Let us remember that E.D. HIrsch is an English Professor who deigned himself fit to decide the curriculum in SIX content areas, Language and Literature, History and Geography, Visual Arts, Music, Math and Science, for every grade from K-8, as indicated in each of his books, “What Your (Kindergartner, 1st Grader, 8th Grader, etc.) Needs to Know.” And he does not believe in developmentally appropriate practice. Talk about out of field…
LikeLike
This is a perfect example of ad hominem attack and close-mindedness. Why the choice of the verb “deigned” except to denigrate E.D. Hirsch? He is no intellectual slouch, and his effort to raise the quality of curricula should be respected, and if criticized then with a certain respect.
Above all, the criticism should deal with the contents of his curricula. What does he believe should be taught and learned in any particular grade? Give some concrete examples of what might be good or bad in his proposals. Does his program allow for a degree of teacher autonomy within the prescribed requirements? Every course and class has to transmit a certain body of knowledge, but that doesn’t foreclose some latitude for teacher choice within those bounds. Don’t damn his core knowledge program outright because he is a professor of English, and presumably not of education.
This manner of thinking reminds me of a student in an M.A. history course I taught–she was a teacher–who criticized me for correcting her prose in an essay assignment because I was a teacher of history, not of English, as if proper English is not required outside of an English course.
Let’s get rid of these picayune categorizations. As if an educator who does not have a degree in Education has nothing of merit to say about education.
LikeLike
Vivian,
Have you read Noel Wilson’s “Educational Standards and the Problem of Error”?
If so, what are your thoughts about this seminal work?
Thanks,
Duane
LikeLike
I am wondering whether Diane’s favored Finnish system teachers know the content of Hirsch’s curriculum. If so, that is a further boost for our emulating them. If not, and they still produce the results they do, then we shall have to investigate further.
LikeLike
Vivian, As someone who spent a lot of time teaching in Special Ed classrooms in the 70s, implementing the behavioral approach when that was accepted practice, after I went to general ed in the 80s, I fell for the shock doctrine of A Nation at Risk. Determined to make sure my low income Kindergarten students found success in school, Hirsch’s Core Knowledge seemed like a good fit for me. So, I was an early supporter and adopter.
That turned out to be a disastrous mistake. I feel that I already wasted too many years of my professional life on Hirsch, so I don’t want to spend anymore time on this. Suffice it to say that I really regret accepting at face value so much of what he prescribed. I should probably apologize to many students, too, for having tried to ram a lot of facts down the throats of young children, which were meaningless to them and developmentally inappropriate, such as expecting 5 year olds to read maps and memorize the 7 continents, when they were unfamiliar with the bird’s eye view, didn’t know how to read a floor plan or even know their own addresses, neighborhood and city.
Harlan, There’s a lot of information (and indoctrination) specific to the US, so I can’t imagine how that would work in Finland.
LikeLike
Other Spaces,
My suspsicion is that Finland has academic content like any other system (they’d have to), but they put a lot more value into developmental and cogntive psychology and behaviors of children. . . .they delve into the student’s psyche and adjust instruction and possible content accordingly.
In the U.S., we adapt instruction without necessarily adapting content and skills base. The CCSS addresses neither to any significant extent.
It would be a great research paper . . . to see what the Finnish do.
LikeLike
More rigorous, elite teacher education is ananthem to the reformer’s goals. To make preparation programs more competitive, about half of current programs must close. This would lead to a modicum of stability and autonomy for teachers, less to bludgeon them with threats. Colleges would never do it because they would lose a revenue stream. Reformers want temporary call center staff, think a pre-school teacher with no stakes in the system. When they get burned out or randomly culled by the ‘metrics’, new fodder can replace them, which is the real labor market at large in this country.
Canada, which has competitive entrants into teacher programs is not immune to the reformer’s deformation either. Quality teachers, whatever that is, is precluded by the reformer’s goals.
LikeLike
To Duane Swacker,
No, I have not read that book. Sorry.
How is it germane to this discussion?
LikeLike
Robert Rendo and others interested in the Finnish method of public education…..Late last year I was invited to a lunch honoring the Director of Finnish Education. This took place at the Bel Air home of the Finnish Ambassador. It was a good lunch and my seatmate was LAUSD Asst. Supt. Jaime Aquino. The Director spoke at great length and showed a film on the topic. The points that stuck with me are :
1. Teachers in Finland have as much respect, and a similar pay scale, as doctors, lawyers, and other highly trained professionals.
2. Every teacher is a union member.
3. There are about 75,000 lower, middle and high school students in all of Finland.
4. Almost every student speaks Finnish and so there is little need to worry about language diversity.
He gave away a book he had written, and a DVD, which further expanded on their process. I am certain that If you call your own Finnish Embassy, they can get this material for you.
How joyful it must be to teach in a nation that respects teachers and pays them fairly. A nation comprised mainly of Caucasian Finns with similar ethnic and historical roots.
How different than just about any school district in the US.
In LA, we have over 600,000 students speaking around 190 languages (according to Supt. Deasy), and of those about 18% are homeless, and over half live at or below the poverty line. In Finland, where almost all are Middle Class, parents are involved in student learning, unlike the US, and LA where most inner city parents either work 2 – 3 minimum wage jobs, or only mothers on welfare are head of household (since the rules say they cannot have a man in the house), and then there is the group who are incarcerated or are on drugs.
I am pretty fed up with the comparison to Finland. It is like comparing an electric guitar to a prehistoric tomtom…way beyond apples and oranges. Let’s get off this ridiculous comparison.
LikeLike
Years ago, a similar argument was made regarding the lack of applicability of the amazing work of preschoolers involved in in-depth investigations in Reggio Emilia, Italy, due to our differing cultures. However, North American educators developed a version that has been very effective here, The Project Approach: http://www.projectapproach.org/project_approach.php
LikeLike
Ellen Lubic,
Thank you for sharing your experiences.
It is a ridiculous comparison, but it has opened up a critical Pandora’s Box of debate over individualism and “ownership rights” vs. collectivism and the common good. Finland is not purely a socialistic state, but its proportions of those two mindests are vastly different than ours.
Therein lies a key difference between the two societies . . .
Ellen, never give up hope. . . . keep on fighting the good fight with the rest of us and spend time passing the torch to future generations. . . .
LikeLike
The problems in the U.S. are certainly greater and more complex. You are correct. But that should not lead to throwing out the baby with the bath water. What I mean is that despite differences, there remains the necessity for adequate instruction and that requires curricula of substance. Students must learn.
LikeLike
Excuse me for returning to the central theme- the NCTQ. I caution all to watch for the radical shift created by a contest. With the experience of RTTT in our minds we should remember that In the 1980’s (if I remember correctly), US News and World Reports graded and published rankings of each high school by the number of Advanced Placement (AP) courses the average student took. NOT by the average score on the AP test, mind you, or even whether or not students in the course sat for the test. This created a flurry of changes in high school programming, with many, many high schools creating large numbers of AP courses where none had existed before. Relatively few kids took the tests in comparison with previous years. All in the name of appearing to do better on the USN&WR measuring scale. As we now know, this was a ruse! Beware the creators and their backers!
LikeLike
Vivain Gruder,
My alma mater for my masters was CUNY in Flushing.
I am not aware of anyone here not supporting the notion that students must learn and instruction must be adequate. I would even think that most in this forum feel instruction should be excellent, not just adequate.
One of the major components that separates us from Finland is the way both nations define and measure “excellence”. . . That’s one of the devils in the details. Nevermind how education gets paid for.
And, of course, given the commerical interests and vast empire of higher education, I would not be surprised if American colleges on the whole are not as selective and rigorous as Finland’s system is.
Many colleges here are selective and rigorous, but we need to have a much more sound way of ascertaining that information. NCTQ lacks the quality scholarship and very intellectualism it crticizes schools of education for not having.
Necessity for adequate instruction and curricula of substance, as you have stated, are critical, indispensable components. I agree with you.
But alone, they will not have their full effect if all or most of the other building blocks of public eduacation are being destroyed. One of the main causes or perhaps symptoms of the mess education is in today is because people exactly like you have not been permitted to populate the round tables of policy and legislation. You are in the minority in that regard.
If we had mostly Vivan Gruders and Stephen Krashens and Linda Darling Hammonds and Diane Ravitches and actual dedicated reputable classroom teachers at the policy round table, the American landscape would look a lot different today and for the better . . . . .
Examining teacher preparation is critical because it is part and parcel of teacher quality. .. . but the quality of such examination is also to be rightfully scrutinized.
LikeLike
MSU is starting a fight with NCTQ. I’m proud of their Dean!
http://edwp.educ.msu.edu/dean/2013/nctq-valiantly-tries-to-defend-its-methodology-by-attacking-msu/
LikeLike