Hiring New Teachers: What Do School Districts Look For?

Abstract

What qualities do Canadian school administrators seek in prospective teachers? In this study, part of a larger survey investigation of school district hiring preferences in a Western Canadian province, we sought to answer this question. Educational institutions and organizations are encountering sustained social and economic pressures for demonstrable accountability in providing educational services. The two provincial teacher education institutions in this study jointly solicited school divisions' views on how well faculties were preparing preservice teachers. School division administrators in charge of hiring teachers responded to a survey to determine their satisfaction with and preference for teacher education graduates from the two universities. We sought to identify the broader hiring criteria administrators use to assess prospective teachers seeking employment in their school divisions. Background What criteria do hiring personnel apply in selecting good teachers? Are these selection standards common across school districts? What skills and attributes of prospective teachers do they consider to be more or less important? The majority of current school district administrators have progressed through the educational ranks from teacher to director while enrolled in graduate education. They have had considerable experience with the theory and practice of the instructional and the administrative components of schooling. When they address the question What is a good teacher? they draw on their background of teaching, supervising, and study. A review of the literature on effective teaching indicates that many educators--practitioners and researchers--view the practical and relevant routines of day-to-day teaching as equally or more important than the theoretical or philosophical aspects of education (Ralph, 1994b). Many educational administrators avoid being entrapped in what some call the paradigm wars (Gage, 1989; Oberle, 1991; Ralph, 1994a), a phrase that dichotomizes educational philosophies and concepts as either/or issues. Many current administrators, teachers, and theorists sidestep the fruitless debate about effective teaching being either entirely within the positivistic, linear skills, technical/rational (direct instruction) paradigm or entirely within the phenomenological interpretist (teaching for understanding) perspective. Instead, they view effective teaching as a complex process of reflective practice, whereby the professional teacher plans, prepares, and orchestrates in a sensible, sensitive fashion a variety of methods, materials, and motivating experiences meeting students' learning needs (Darling-Hammond & Sclan, 1992; Eby, 1992; Ralph, 1994a). The reflective teaching literature of the past decade consistently emphasizes what expert teachers have long practiced: continual, careful consideration of contextual factors and basic moral principles (e.g., caring, success, accountability) in making sound judgments about teaching and learning events (Bullough, 1987; Cruikshank, 1990; Dewey, 1938; Schon, 1987). Such teachers competently select and utilize the fundamental skills of generic teaching; they consistently model and nurture in students attributes such as love of learning, critical and creative thinking, aesthetic appreciation, curiosity, and problem-solving abilities (Eby, 1992; Posner, 1995; Sergiovanni, 1984). Reflective teachers who actively apply elements of systematic decision making can integrate their observations, interpretations, and analyses of classroom events within their daily practice (Eby, 1992). To be highly analytical but ineffectual in practical matters is not a satisfactory balance, any more than the reverse would be (Pollard & Tann, 1987, p. 7). Effective educators are not easily influenced by educational fads and fashions of school reform. For example, they recognize that the current standards movement in education in several countries is not a new trend (Eisner, 1995). …