it's about the kids...
i promise my assigned blogposts are coming. but in an effort to procrastinate (i really think i am ADD). i have discovered an argument with which i am unfamiliar and for the most part, an argument with which i diasagree. [i was supposed to disagree with ben/someone affiliated with MTC but i love the program to much]
this clip shows Amy Wilkins of EdTrust ripping a new one for Dan Brown [blogger for HuffPo and TFA alum] on the issue of first year teachers placed in critical needs areas and the system that sends them there. should programs like MTC, TFA, various teacher fellowships place first year teachers [inexperienced nubes] in the worst possible environment, [i.e. the MS delta, the bronx, southside LA]? i honestly have not thought about this before today even though i've worked for TFA, i currently work for MTC, and i am interested in and research public education policy in MS and the US. do i have a biased altruistic view of these programs that results in my ignorance of the argument? to an extent yes. my personal experience and optimistic nature lead me to believe that one teacher, experienced or not, can dramatically impact the lives of students in their classrooms. the accounts, stories, and blogs of first and second year teachers' experiences give me hope about a broken system. the interaction with dedicated, passionate MTC/TFA/etc recruits/participants reinforces my belief in the inherent goodness of human nature [no matter the reason they joined the program]. but are these programs effectively and consistently hiring/employing enough of "that one teacher" to make a systemic and fundamental change in public education? yes and no. huh? yes, the teachers in these programs are without a doubt making change. there are a plethora of examples [Kira Orange-Jones, Michelle Rhee, Geoff Starron ]. unfortunately, this change rarely happens in the first or second year [the commitment for most of the programs]. that is understandable, expected even. i found some insight at SW's blog. "The first year of teaching is about surviving.The second year is about the kids." i like to think the third year, fourth year, twentieth year, will be about the kids. but Amy Wilkins feels like that first year is much too valuable, and frankly i don't disagree. "You are teaching the most challenging kids there are to teach and they need the most skilled and experienced teachers." almost a DUH moment. i do however disagree with her scathing "you had no business in that school [classroom]" these kids simply, in most cases, DO NOT have access to skilled and experienced teachers. BUT possibly the most inspiring thing about these programs is that they DO provide to underprivileged students access to passionate, willing, intellectual, talented and diverse leaders who have dedicated themselves to a cause: the kids in critical needs areas. maybe east st. louis or southside chicago isn't really the most ideal place for the fresh harvard grad with zero teaching experience. but where else can we place these nubes? unfortunately in the MTC 1st year teachers are not placed in a good district with good classrooms and honestly that isn't the mission. we place these 1st years in places where no one wants to teach. in the absolut world as i like to say, we would place vetted, master teachers in the critical needs areas and the first years would get a taste of the idealistic educational experience where students value their teacher, don't disrupt the classroom, and strive to succeed. in a highly functioning system teachers should have to earn the right to teach in the delta. we've got a ways to go. but, amy wilkins, this is not what these programs are about... they are about the kids, kids in inner-city jackson and rural south dakota, who are not receiving a quality education via their state/federal government. and while their faults may exceed their successes, they are committed to improving the educational opportunities of their students. so please don't tell me that because i don't have 20 years experience in a successful connecticut public school district, that i don't belong in a classroom that desperately needs me.
this clip shows Amy Wilkins of EdTrust ripping a new one for Dan Brown [blogger for HuffPo and TFA alum] on the issue of first year teachers placed in critical needs areas and the system that sends them there. should programs like MTC, TFA, various teacher fellowships place first year teachers [inexperienced nubes] in the worst possible environment, [i.e. the MS delta, the bronx, southside LA]? i honestly have not thought about this before today even though i've worked for TFA, i currently work for MTC, and i am interested in and research public education policy in MS and the US. do i have a biased altruistic view of these programs that results in my ignorance of the argument? to an extent yes. my personal experience and optimistic nature lead me to believe that one teacher, experienced or not, can dramatically impact the lives of students in their classrooms. the accounts, stories, and blogs of first and second year teachers' experiences give me hope about a broken system. the interaction with dedicated, passionate MTC/TFA/etc recruits/participants reinforces my belief in the inherent goodness of human nature [no matter the reason they joined the program]. but are these programs effectively and consistently hiring/employing enough of "that one teacher" to make a systemic and fundamental change in public education? yes and no. huh? yes, the teachers in these programs are without a doubt making change. there are a plethora of examples [Kira Orange-Jones, Michelle Rhee, Geoff Starron ]. unfortunately, this change rarely happens in the first or second year [the commitment for most of the programs]. that is understandable, expected even. i found some insight at SW's blog. "The first year of teaching is about surviving.The second year is about the kids." i like to think the third year, fourth year, twentieth year, will be about the kids. but Amy Wilkins feels like that first year is much too valuable, and frankly i don't disagree. "You are teaching the most challenging kids there are to teach and they need the most skilled and experienced teachers." almost a DUH moment. i do however disagree with her scathing "you had no business in that school [classroom]" these kids simply, in most cases, DO NOT have access to skilled and experienced teachers. BUT possibly the most inspiring thing about these programs is that they DO provide to underprivileged students access to passionate, willing, intellectual, talented and diverse leaders who have dedicated themselves to a cause: the kids in critical needs areas. maybe east st. louis or southside chicago isn't really the most ideal place for the fresh harvard grad with zero teaching experience. but where else can we place these nubes? unfortunately in the MTC 1st year teachers are not placed in a good district with good classrooms and honestly that isn't the mission. we place these 1st years in places where no one wants to teach. in the absolut world as i like to say, we would place vetted, master teachers in the critical needs areas and the first years would get a taste of the idealistic educational experience where students value their teacher, don't disrupt the classroom, and strive to succeed. in a highly functioning system teachers should have to earn the right to teach in the delta. we've got a ways to go. but, amy wilkins, this is not what these programs are about... they are about the kids, kids in inner-city jackson and rural south dakota, who are not receiving a quality education via their state/federal government. and while their faults may exceed their successes, they are committed to improving the educational opportunities of their students. so please don't tell me that because i don't have 20 years experience in a successful connecticut public school district, that i don't belong in a classroom that desperately needs me.
My Groups
-
Mississippi Teacher Corps Updated: Oct 9, 2009
Neighborhood
Explore friends, family, friends & family, or entire neighborhood.
Comments
Interesting topic, and thanks for adding me to your friends. My personal opinion is that no program that only aspires to place teachers for two years at a time can ever address the enormity of the problem. These are effectively long-term subs, and no matter how good they may be as individuals, they can never be as effective as career teachers who come to know the community over a period of years. Yes, you will be more effective the second year, and even more effective the third, and the fourth, as so on. Really, you can talk about making a difference all you want, but that is purely at an individual level. "One child at a time" is pretty much the truth. And don't forget, you are talking about one teacher out of what, maybe 20+ different teachers a child has before high school graduation. In the worst of scenarios, no matter how good you are, you cannot outrun the harm done by 19 others.
I mean, I love MTC, but as a program, is it effective? Nope. It is a token effort and I personally wonder if such a program, being so insignificant to the scope of the problem and yet so noble, actually on the political level does more harm than good, by diverting attention from the problem to a feel-good pseudo-solution. It relegates education for the poor and under-served to the personal crusade of a few do-gooders, rather than draw mainstream attention to what ought to be a national guilty conscience.
Public education is a government enterprise, and the only real solution when government fails its duties is to fix it through political action. Almost certainly we lack the political will at the moment, but programs such as TFA and MTC have done nothing as far as I can tell to repair the real breach, which is a societal/governmental abdication of responsibility toward our most vulnerable children.
Should individual MTC and TFA teachers do what they do? Absolutely. You will make a difference, at the individual level. But we should never forget the big picture. And that requires -- even if it takes 100 years -- political change. There have always, throughout all of history, been a few caring citizens willing to help those less fortunate. It takes real activism to change the system so there is less misfortunate altogether.
Sorry for the long rant, but that's my two cents.