A Future Worthy of Teaching for America

Abstract

THE vision Megan Hopkins offers for the future design of Teach for America (TFA) combines the appeal of TFA--a pathway into teaching for able college graduates who are willing to work in high-need schools--with recognition that to serve their students well, such schools must have highly skilled teachers who are able to address a wide range of learning needs from their first days on the job. The idea of a teaching residency, which couples strong training and mentoring with well-supported pathways into urban teaching, could allow TFA to capitalize on its existing strengths and contribute more effectively to a better future for both low-income students and the schools that serve them. The teaching residency also provides an important vehicle for the nation to begin working on the critical problem of teaching quality for our most underserved students. In the long run, this idea may be a stepping stone to a system that ultimately provides the stable, high-quality learning environments children need and deserve. THE FUNDAMENTAL PROBLEM Megan Hopkins has identified the critical need for the well-prepared teachers who are crucial to this nation's future. Substantial evidence supports this point. Recent studies indicate that the low rankings of the U.S. on international assessments are primarily a function of dramatic inequalities in educational opportunity for low-income students and students of color--especially their inadequate access to well-qualified teachers. Although the U.S. has slid to 25th place out of 30 OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries in mathematics achievement and 21st in science, (1) these statistics mask the existence of two Americas. White and Asian students score above the OECD average in all areas of science, while African American and Hispanic students score far below. (2) This is largely because, in contrast to European and Asian nations that fund schools centrally and equally, the wealthiest school districts in the U.S. spend 10 times as much as the poorest. Within states it is not uncommon for wealthy suburbs to spend twice what central cities, serving much needier students, can afford. Poor rural areas spend even less. (3) These differences translate into differential salaries and working conditions for teachers and dramatically different learning conditions for students. Teachers working in wealthy districts can earn substantially more than those working in poor ones, (4) and they work with much smaller classes, luxurious facilities, plentiful books and computers, and a variety of specialists and supports for teaching. These teachers, who often have had the highest-quality preparation available, receive ongoing support for enhancing their skills and become increasingly effective over the course of their careers. Meanwhile, in poorer districts, teachers who earn much less have to spend more of their own resources buying books, paper, and other materials for their students--and they often receive little mentoring or support to improve their own knowledge and skills, despite the extensive challenges presented by their students, who are more likely to live in poverty, be new English learners, and have a range of special needs. In this arena of American life, as in so many others, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, creating a vicious cycle for children and their teachers who do not have supported opportunities to learn. These disparate opportunities--most pronounced in schools serving concentrations of low-income students of color--have been documented in school finance lawsuits across the country. (5) Analysts consistently find that the most inequitably distributed resource--and the one most predictive of student achievement--is the quality of teachers. (6) Many schools serving the most vulnerable students have been staffed by a steady parade of untrained, inexperienced, and temporary teachers, (7) and studies show that these teachers' lack of training and experience significantly accounts for students' higher failure rates on high-stakes tests. …