 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
• Search for more Kappan articles in the Publication Archives
• Join or start a discussion about this article in the
PDK Forum Quality Assurance What Must Be Done to Strengthen the Teaching Profession When high standards are important at every point in a teacher's career, when those high standards are not suspended in the face of teacher shortages, and when being an accomplished teacher is recognized and adequately rewarded, then we will have teacher quality assurance and vastly greater confidence that we are providing a quality education for all students, Mr. Shanker avers. RISING expectations about what all students should know and be able to do, breakthroughs in research on how children learn, and the increasing diversity of the student population have all put significant pressure on the knowledge and skills teachers must have to achieve the ambitious goal demanded of public education at the end of the 20th century. That goal is to ensure that children of all backgrounds master a demanding core curriculum and other material that will prepare them to assume their civic and social responsibilities in a democratic society, compete in the global economy, and benefit from opportunities for postsecondary education. Unless and until there is a commitment to enhance the quality and professionalism of America's teaching force, it is unlikely that we will achieve this national goal any time soon. Many of the attributes that characterize a profession are not hallmarks of today's teaching profession. To be considered a true profession, an occupation must have a distinct body of knowledge -- acknowledged by practitioner and consumer alike -- that undergirds the profession and forms the basis for delivering high-quality services to clients; define for itself the nature of the training required of those who wish to enter the field; require rigorous training to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to practice the profession; control the standards for entry into the profession; have its practitioners be a major voice in determining their working conditions; have its practitioners exercise independent judgment about client needs to ensure that those needs are met; evaluate the performance of practitioners and remove from the profession those whose performance falls below standards; require that practitioners continue to learn about advances in the field; induct its members into the profession in a systematic and rigorous fashion; and have the respect of the larger society. If teaching is to become a true profession, we must establish high standards for entry into teacher training programs and deliver high-quality preservice education to prospective practitioners. We must set and maintain high and rigorous standards for entry into the profession and evaluate practitioners according to those standards. We must provide support for weak teachers and, when necessary, counsel poor teachers out of the profession. We must become a major participant in the decisions that affect the working and learning environment of the school -- for example, decisions regarding budget, hiring, curriculum, student placement, assessment, and instructional strategies. "Quality assurance" in teaching depends upon developing such capacities in the teaching profession: To achieve this goal will require changes in the recruitment of teachers, in the manner in which they are trained (both in preservice programs and in professional development programs), and in the policies and practices relating to induction, licensure, and the granting of tenure. It will also require changes in the way schools are organized and in the reward structures available to teachers. Attracting Well-Prepared Students Although many bright, well-prepared individuals choose to be teachers, it is also the case that the field attracts poorly prepared students. Why? Unlike other countries, where entry into university training is based on passing examinations with demanding content, in this country a high school diploma is virtually all that is required for entry into college, and, until quite recently, was all that was necessary to enter many teacher training programs. In countries such as France, Germany, and Japan, where, on average, youngsters outperform American students, entry into the university is much more demanding and requires the acquisition and demonstration of considerable knowledge. In France, for example, high school students must pass a comprehensive set of exams to graduate and receive the baccalaureate diploma.1 This diploma is a prerequisite for entry into college, and a college degree is a prerequisite for teaching. So, even before college, would-be teachers in other countries are rigorously educated and tested in subject matter, whereas in the u.s. subject-matter exams are not generally required either for graduation from high school or for entry into college.2 However, there is a growing trend toward requiring testing for entry into teacher education programs. That's the good news. The bad news is that the tests do not require deep knowledge of content. One widely used entry examination, Praxis 1 (or its rival clones produced by such organizations as the National Evaluation System), is simply a basic literacy and numeracy test that an average 10th-grader should be able to pass. While such tests ensure that illiterates aren't aIlowed to teach, they do not ensure quality. Nor do they serve as magnets to attract well-educated individuals into teaching. In fact, low standards of entry are apt to discourage many intellectually serious and well-prepared students from entering teacher education programs. Rigorous tests in the core subject areas of English, mathematics, science, and social studies should be prerequisites for entering teacher training in the same way that medical schools use demanding entrance tests of reading, mathematics, biology, chemistry, physics, and problem solving as prerequisites to selection for training in medicine. Delivering High-Quality Preservice Training For the past decade, teacher education has been subject to much scrutiny. Many teacher education programs have been described as fragmented, superficial, lacking in substance, and outdated, with teacher education students rarely experiencing the kind of challenging instruction that we would want them to be able to offer when they are given an opportunity to teach. Much ink has been spilled over the fact that a four-year undergraduate education provides precious little time to educate prospective teachers deeply both in the discipline that they will teach and in the knowledge and skills of their craft. Often concern for depth of knowledge in a discipline is given short shrift by the college of education because the responsibility for exposing students to such knowledge lies in the departments of liberal arts and sciences. Unfortunately, those other departments do not usually see the education of education majors as a serious responsibility. And, unlike medicine, where medical students as part of their training must pass rigorous examinations in the "disciplines" related to practice -- anatomy, physiology, biochemistry, and the like -- there are no such rigorous examinations of content knowledge for teacher candidates. Nor, for that matter, are there exams for clinical practice in teaching comparable to those given to medical school students. In addition to shortcomings in the education of teachers in their discipline, teacher education itself is notorious for presenting knowledge in a piecemeal and disconnected manner. Theory is unrelated to practice; content knowledge is disconnected from teaching methods; instructional practices are unrelated to learning and development. And perhaps most ironic of all, expert teachers are not as a rule the "teachers of teachers." Instead, academics, many of whom fled the classroom from lack of interest or ability, instruct teacher candidates in "best practice." It is not unheard of for professors of education to give didactic lectures about "hands-on instruction" and cooperative group learning and to distribute printed instructions to demonstrate the use of manipulatives in children's learning. There have been attempts to change the sorry state of teacher education. In particular, efforts have been made to improve the education of teachers through the creation of professional development schools and other school/university partnerships. These are promising developments, but they are not sufficient. More attention must be paid as well to teachers' mastering difficult subject matter. Accrediting bodies must develop clearly defined standards for what it means to know the content of each discipline for which teachers will be licensed. And teacher candidates must pass exacting examinations in that content, if we are to enhance teacher professionalism and provide quality assurance to the public. Rigorous Licensing Requirements For Entry into the Profession Until a decade or so ago, teacher licensure was based almost entirely on "seat diplomas." State departments defined licensure by the number of credits taken by teacher candidates in required subject areas. Furthermore, licensure was in many states a lifetime award. There have been several changes since then, most notably, a shift to teacher testing as well as credit-counting for granting licenses; the development of a multi-tiered licensing system, with an initial entry-level requirement (temporary license) and the successful completion of several years of teaching required before a "permanent" license is granted; and the requirement for license renewal, usuaIly through accumulation of credits earned through inservice training or other professional development activities. Many states now also require a master's degree or its equivalent in course credits for permanent licensure. However, the content of the courses necessary to earn a master's degree usually is not well defined, and, given their other responsibilities, teachers often take courses for an advanced degree that are offered at a convenient hour or location, rather than courses that might most directly improve the quality of their teaching or enhance their professionalism. Although the vast majority of states now require that prospective teachers take an examination to demonstrate mastery of the content they will teach, these examinations are entirely insufficient to ensure that America will have a teaching force with deep knowledge of subject matter. Not only is the content assessed relatively unchallenging, but, even more important, the standards used to declare that teachers have mastered the content are ridiculously low.3 If we want to make sure that teachers have the same kind of expertise that we require of other vital professionals, then there must be serious exams of teacher knowledge. One cannot teach what one does not know well. Supply and Demand Should Not Define Quality There are those who argue that the high academic. standards I have described are impractical. They point out that the standards that are already in place, weak as they are, are often ignored. During periodic teacher shortages, for example, entry requirements are often lowered. Furthermore, many teachers are now assigned to teach subjects for which they are not licensed.4 The remedy that teachers usually offer is to pay all teachers higher salaries. Then, the argument goes, we can be sure to attract a sufficient number of teachers in areas of shortage. This hasn't worked in the past, because salaries have never been raised high enough. And if we are looking for across-the-board raises, they probably never will be. Administrators often take a quite different approach: if they cannot find enough qualified teachers of music or science or mathematics, they hire the unqualified. The absurdity of this solution is obvious when you transpose it to other professions. Would it be okay to have a biologist work as a family practitioner in areas where no doctors are available? Or what about having an osteopath substitute for an opthaImologist in a hospital that didn't have an eye specialist on staff? The fact that this kind of thing is considered acceptable in teaching victimizes both the teachers and their students, and it cheapens the profession in the eyes of the public. Rather than lower standards in the face of a shortage, we need to do what it takes to attract enough teachers who do meet the standards. One way might be to pay extra for qualified teachers in shortage areas. Another approach might be to allow qualified teachers to work a longer day for more pay. It is not a good idea to ask a teacher to teach an extra load, but the choice is between having students taught by teachers who have met high standards in the field or by those who have not. We might also think about reorganizing the school year into trimesters or quarters and then ask teachers in shortage areas whether they are willing to teach an extra term. Or we might ask them to teach larger classes and support the overload with aides and other staff members who can perform classroom tasks that require less training. Since professionals act in the interest of their clients, teachers and their organizations need to deal with shortages in a way that is more satisfactory than allowing policy makers and administrators to continue the practice of covering classes with anyone who is willing and available. Teachers and their organizations must work to develop policies that encourage the long-term development of a high-quality teacher work force, by exposing instances when unqualified individuals are assigned to teach out of field, by lobbying for the development of incentive structures to attract qualified teachers, and by designing teaching situations that make qualified teachers available to all students. Professional Practice and Induction Although the evidence indicates that best practice for preparing teachers rests on a rigorous liberal arts and science education with a strong emphasis on subject matter, teachers also need knowledge of child development, of group dynamics, and of school and classroom organization as they relate to the academic goals of schooling. Preservice clinical experiences should afford an in-depth introduction to the profession, including extended exposure to the classrooms of good, experienced teachers who can and do model best practice. Students are not transformed into teachers -- or surgeons -- the minute the ink dries on their diplomas. Instead, they must learn through a continuing process of discovering what works and what does not, of observing experts, and of discussing teaching dilemmas with their peers. If we look at countries with high-achieving school systems, we find not only that beginning teachers have solid backgrounds in the liberal arts, deep expertise in their subject areas, and some background in pedagogy, but also that they are inducted into the profession in a systematic way. Once they start teaching, they are able to develop and perfect their skills by relying heavily on the expertise of their more experienced colleagues. As they become more expert, they assume more responsibility in the classroom. It is only in recent years and in a few places that anything resembling an induction system for new teachers has been put in place in the U.S. The customary way here has been a "sink or swim" technique. New teachers get their teaching assignments -- often including classes or students that more experienced teachers are glad to avoid -- and they are told, "You're on your own." To guarantee quality in the teacher work force, a serious, high-quality induction process for beginning teachers must be instituted in America. Professional Peer Review and Teacher Evaluation A decade ago, frustrated by inadequate evaluation systems and the absence of good professional development models, the Toledo Federation of Teachers decided to take the lead in building professionalism. The union and the superintendent together selected a number of teachers that they agreed were outstanding. These teachers set standards by which novice teachers were to be trained and assessed, and they took charge of the training and assessment They were tougher than administrators had been, but, unlike most administrators, they also offered practical assistance to the new teachers. In addition, they set up and administered an intervention program to help more experienced teachers who were having trouble. Interventions lasted until the teacher no longer needed help or the individual was counseled into another line of work. The universal adoption of peer intervention programs that help weak teachers gain the skills they need or, if that is not possible, lead to their removal from teaching would do a great deal to raise the status of the profession. Instead, most teachers are subject to a ritualistic evaluation process based on simplistic or unarticulated standards of best practice. These assessments are usually carried out by administrators who know little about exemplary teaching, and the process does little to ensure quality or to improve teaching practice. Not only are school districts generally lax about initial assessments of teachers and unwilling to institute systems of early peer review and evaluation, but they also ask the wrong question when teachers become eligible for tenure. They usually ask, "Is he competent?" What they should ask is, "Does this teacher show promise of making substantial contributions to the education of youngsters? Does he perform at high professional standards?" Rigorous, teacher-established professional standards (such as those developed by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards), peer review, and peer intervention would go a long way toward providing quality assurance and enhancing the profession. Continuing Professional Development The sums most school districts in the U.S. invest in continuing teacher development are paltry compared to what American business invests in the continuing education of its employees and what other countries invest in teacher development. Furthermore, the dollars that are spent are generally not wisely invested. They go mostly for one-shot workshops devoted to the reform of the month, chosen by others and unconnected to the needs of students and teachers. For professional development to be effective, it must offer serious intellectual content, take explicit account of the various contexts of teaching and experiences of teachers, offer support for informed dissent, be ongoing and embedded in the purposes and practices of schooling, help teachers to change within an environment that is often hostile to change, and involve teachers in defining the purposes and activities that take place in-the name of professional development.5 The typical school setting also does not provide opportunities for teachers to talk with one another about what students are learning and how to improve the way they teach. Many teachers have almost no opportunity to observe other teachers or even to use video equipment so that they can observe and criticize their own practice. In high-performance businesses and workplaces, workers meet to analyze specific work-related problems and come up with solutions. They are able to talk about how policies or practices might be changed so that goals might be met. This process of examining practice works in schools, too. In Japan, teachers spend time making common lesson plans and talking about various methods for teaching difficult concepts. Then, after a lesson, teachers discuss what worked and what did not so that they can do a better job next time.6 Teachers here need similar time during the workday to focus on the problems of teaching and learning, to figure out how to deal with specific subject matter that is difficult for students, to plan lessons and examine their effect, to engage in ongoing experimentation aimed at specific improvements, and to observe and learn from one another. Then teachers won't be forced to fumble around by themselves to get answers. There would be a process to fix collectively what goes wrong. Such a process would benefit teachers and students alike. How Can We Ensure Quality and Enhance the Teaching Profession? We can greatly improve teacher quality and enhance the teaching profession if teachers and their organizations:
Teaching can be respected as a genuine profession when there is evidence that teachers are experts in their subject matter and do a good job of inducting students into that expertise. This requires a strong preservice program and rigorous licensure standards, accompanied by effective teacher induction programs. It also requires that quality be maintained through peer review and intervention programs and ongoing professional development. When high standards are important at every point in a teacher's career, when those high standards are not suspended in the face of teacher shortages, and when being an accomplished teacher is recognized and adequately rewarded, then we will have teacher quality assurance and vastly greater confidence of providing, a quality education for all students. 1. See, for example, Organization of the French Educational System Leading to the French Baccalaureate (Washington, D.C.: Embassy of France, 1991); and Paul Gagnon, French Secondary Education (New York: College Entrance Examination Board, November 1981). The baccalauréat tests are both written and oral. Written exams can last up to four days. 2. The AFT report Making Standards Count (1996) indicates that only 17 states require that students take exit exams to graduate from high school. VIrtually all of those exams are tests of basic literacy. 3. For example, Praxis 2 is a set of widely used content examinations published by the Educational Testing Service. The brochure for the Multiple Subjects Assessment for Teachers: Content Knowledge indicates that the test is a two-hour examination that includes 120 multiple-choice questions. Fifty-six percent of the questions cover knowledge of the core disciplines. The remaining questions assess knowledge of the visual and performing arts, physical education, and human development. Examination of the sample questions in the brochure for this assessment reveals it to be much less rigorous in content than the French baccalauréat required of French students who wish to graduate from high school and enroll in a university. What is more, the performance level on such tests required for licensure is too often set unconscionably low. 4. See, for example, What Matters Most: Teaching and America's Future (New York: National Commission on Teaching and America's Future, 1996); and Schools and Staffing Survey -- Teacher Supply, Teacher Qualifications, and Teacher Turnover: 1990-1991 (Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Statistics, 1995). 5. See, for example, Judith Warren Little, "Teachers' Professional Development in a Climate of Educational Reform," Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Summer 1993, pp. 129-51. 6. Harold Stevenson and James Stigler, Why Our Students Are Failing and What We Can Learn from Japanese and Chinese Education (New York: Summit Books, 1992).
ALBERT SHANKER is president of the American Federation of Teachers, Washington, D.C.
|
|
|
