The same thing seems to be said in education policy. We need to listen to teachers more. We need to work with schools to get better results. The paradigm has shifted from nationwide mandates to a more grassroots approach. And on paper Teach For America seems to engender this sort of thinking. In fact, the only way Teach for America comes anywhere near their mission statement is through this unspoken belief that if we send smart and successful kids into the education system, they will come out of it as potential stakeholders who will have a stronger grasp on the pulse of education later in life.
Too bad the reality is that these students go in as ignorant outsiders and leave as slightly less ignorant outsiders. Now to be fair, there are plenty of stellar recruits. For example, Teach For America has pushed to send people back to their old stomping grounds and the results are excellent. I've met amazing corp members (typically minorities), who go back to teach and were able to formulate sustainable solutions to problems that their schools faced. I also met clueless well intending corp members from big name West Coast schools, who hung out in NYC for two years and immediately jumped ship to Law school/Public Policy/ etc. with the belief that they were now qualified to fix the problems they saw.
What I hate more than the grad schoolers are the friends I see creating start ups. It's amazing to me that many of them feel they've experienced enough teaching in two years to adequately give expertise to other schools. They create consulting firms, websites, technology, bullshit programs they have no proof of impact for and take advantage of the poorest school districts or at the very least siphon funds from the ultra wealthy. And if any of them can create a big enough following, Teach for America will parade them on their Facebook page. It's hard to be critical of a program who's attempting to help kids, but when they're doing it poorly and receiving funding from schools, then the highest level of scrutiny is warranted.
Teach for America has always churned out a sea of ignorant reformers, they just usually took the road most traveled. Assistant Principals and Principals are saturated with Teach for America Alum who happened to be in the right place at the right time. News flash, failing schools have tons of overturn and while traditional teachers work hard to become good at teaching, the overachiever attitude that is so heavily recruited by TFA makes for the perfect candidate on paper to take administrative roles. The issue is a good administrator one does not make from looking like a good administrator. Yes, it's excellent to say you have a Harvard grad as your assistant principal, but I'd much rather have an incredibly experienced teacher who could actually provide solutions to the staff they'll have to oversee. Michelle Rhee is kind of the poster child for this. Her ineptitude has been chronicled extensively in Washington D.C. Fortunately, the media and I have no doubt, Teach For America, were on her side the entire way, creating a false image of success. However, data doesn't lie and the nature of her reform was not widely accepted at all. Yet we praise her as a fellow sister in the struggle for the Teach for America mission.
I just don't buy it anymore. Every friend I see make a new company or become an assistant principal/department head in their school makes me cringe. I am not even able to hold a candle to the amazing teachers and administrators at my school. The thought that I could go to another school and implement their incredibly high standards is arrogant and foolish. It doesn't surprise me that the narrative we see with Teach for America people in education is often one short lived. "Reformers" rush in with lofty goals and inexperience to create a false illusion of strong culture and results. Then they hastily ditch the project before the house of cards begins tumbling down on the communities who desperately believed in their shelter. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course, many. But we don't need Teach for America to facilitate exceptions.
I've noticed that my blogs end in this negative fashion and people have often accused me of not providing solutions. But the truth is I have no desire to provide a solution to Teach for America. I find the corp to be part of the problem. I think the people working in the corp should consider leaving. I've met so many amazing minority educators working to support Teach for America. Why? Coalesce and try to get funding. Then hire me. I'll give you my solutions to the problem then.
Note: The real reason so many minorities work for places we don't full believe in is cause we're broke. It's hard out there for us. I feel that, so please don't take the ending of my blogpost as me getting at you.
Too bad the reality is that these students go in as ignorant outsiders and leave as slightly less ignorant outsiders. Now to be fair, there are plenty of stellar recruits. For example, Teach For America has pushed to send people back to their old stomping grounds and the results are excellent. I've met amazing corp members (typically minorities), who go back to teach and were able to formulate sustainable solutions to problems that their schools faced. I also met clueless well intending corp members from big name West Coast schools, who hung out in NYC for two years and immediately jumped ship to Law school/Public Policy/ etc. with the belief that they were now qualified to fix the problems they saw.
What I hate more than the grad schoolers are the friends I see creating start ups. It's amazing to me that many of them feel they've experienced enough teaching in two years to adequately give expertise to other schools. They create consulting firms, websites, technology, bullshit programs they have no proof of impact for and take advantage of the poorest school districts or at the very least siphon funds from the ultra wealthy. And if any of them can create a big enough following, Teach for America will parade them on their Facebook page. It's hard to be critical of a program who's attempting to help kids, but when they're doing it poorly and receiving funding from schools, then the highest level of scrutiny is warranted.
Teach for America has always churned out a sea of ignorant reformers, they just usually took the road most traveled. Assistant Principals and Principals are saturated with Teach for America Alum who happened to be in the right place at the right time. News flash, failing schools have tons of overturn and while traditional teachers work hard to become good at teaching, the overachiever attitude that is so heavily recruited by TFA makes for the perfect candidate on paper to take administrative roles. The issue is a good administrator one does not make from looking like a good administrator. Yes, it's excellent to say you have a Harvard grad as your assistant principal, but I'd much rather have an incredibly experienced teacher who could actually provide solutions to the staff they'll have to oversee. Michelle Rhee is kind of the poster child for this. Her ineptitude has been chronicled extensively in Washington D.C. Fortunately, the media and I have no doubt, Teach For America, were on her side the entire way, creating a false image of success. However, data doesn't lie and the nature of her reform was not widely accepted at all. Yet we praise her as a fellow sister in the struggle for the Teach for America mission.
I just don't buy it anymore. Every friend I see make a new company or become an assistant principal/department head in their school makes me cringe. I am not even able to hold a candle to the amazing teachers and administrators at my school. The thought that I could go to another school and implement their incredibly high standards is arrogant and foolish. It doesn't surprise me that the narrative we see with Teach for America people in education is often one short lived. "Reformers" rush in with lofty goals and inexperience to create a false illusion of strong culture and results. Then they hastily ditch the project before the house of cards begins tumbling down on the communities who desperately believed in their shelter. Are there exceptions to the rule? Of course, many. But we don't need Teach for America to facilitate exceptions.
I've noticed that my blogs end in this negative fashion and people have often accused me of not providing solutions. But the truth is I have no desire to provide a solution to Teach for America. I find the corp to be part of the problem. I think the people working in the corp should consider leaving. I've met so many amazing minority educators working to support Teach for America. Why? Coalesce and try to get funding. Then hire me. I'll give you my solutions to the problem then.
Note: The real reason so many minorities work for places we don't full believe in is cause we're broke. It's hard out there for us. I feel that, so please don't take the ending of my blogpost as me getting at you.
No comments:
Post a Comment