How TFA Thinks About Supporting New Teachers

I don't envy the folks who are in charge of studying and improving the training and support for TFA teachers, which has been criticized as the organization's glaring weakness (here, in the Kappan, and in Donna Foote's book, Relentless Pursuit). 

Click below to read more.

During a recent phone call with some of them, I learned three main things:  The organization is committed to focusing on student achievement above all other things (including, it seems, retention and long-term growth of teachers).  The organization feels like it can't do anything like lengthening the TFA commitment period for fear of not meeting recruitment targets and losing its most effective candidates. And it can't give teachers more intensive support from their mentors -- or more experienced mentors -- because it would cost too much (and might not make a difference). 

What seems unfortunate about this box that TFA seems to be working inside of is that, for starters, it's based on "significant progress" measures that may or not be meaningful or comparable.  It's like AYP on crack. And also that the organization isn't confident enough of its sparkly reputation and massive application numbers that it feels it can ask for more from its applicants without losing the best of them. 

The good news is that TFA is focused on student achievement and has continued to examine its outcomes and explore the benefits of different configurations of training and support.  Other teacher prep and support programs could learn from that.  And also, that other things -- teacher attributes and behaviors, if I understand correctly -- may be much more important to classroom effectiveness than any of the program elements that I'm so obsessed about.

Comments

[lightlyseasoned]

The strategy makes perfect sense. Why waste resources on the long-term development of teachers when the plan is only to have them in place for a few years? Send 'em in, use 'em up, and replace 'em. They're just fresh infantry.

The shame of it is that some of these individuals, if they weren't burned out by TFA's mismanagement of their talent, might find that teaching is their calling and become truly excellent teachers in 3 to 5 years.

[Mr. Ed]

Teach for America simply shifts the responsibility for teacher preparation away from the individual TFAers and TFA itself to certified, experienced teachers already in the building. As a teaching Department Chair (without additional pay or reduced workload) of a department with 40% TFAers, I devoted as much time teaching TFAers as I did my own students who deserved my attention more. It’s a lose-lose situation and, once again, it’s the “at-risk” students who pay, whiling away their time, waiting for these teachers to “get good”. And wait the majority of students will, because the majority of TFAers quit within two years, only to be replaced by new TFAers the next year. Teach for America’s mantra, “One day, all children in this nation will have the opportunity to attain an excellent education” reminds me of a tavern sign – “free beer tomorrow”. While you’re there, it’s never tomorrow.