The nation's colleges of education are doing a "mediocre job" of preparing teachers for "the realities of the 21st-century classroom" and need "revolutionary change—not evolutionary tinkering," Secretary of Education Arne Duncan will say in a speech on Thursday at Columbia University's Teachers College.
In a prepared text of his speech, the secretary accuses colleges of using their schools of education as "cash cows" and "profit centers" to finance "prestigious but underenrolled graduate departments like physics—while doing little to invest in rigorous educational research and well-run clinical testing." He calls on colleges to make student outcomes "the overarching mission that propels all their efforts."
He also criticizes states and the federal government for approving weak teacher-training programs and licensing examinations for teachers, and for failing to provide enough support for programs that provide mentors for teachers.
Good teacher-training programs, according to the secretary, are "coherent, up-to-date," and "research-based." They should also provide students with subject mastery, prepare them to teach "diverse pupils in high-needs settings," and use data "to inform instruction."
More than half the nation's teachers graduate from a school of education. The U.S. Department of Education estimates that 220,000 students graduate from a teachers college every year.
The secretary's remarks echo criticism leveled by a former president of Teachers College, Arthur Levine, in a series of reports produced by the Education Schools Project.
Mr. Duncan also emphasized improving teacher-training programs in comments he made two weeks ago at the University of Virginia. In that speech, he praised the teaching profession but criticized the nation's colleges of education, calling them the "neglected stepchild" of higher education.
Comments
1. v8573254 - October 22, 2009 at 09:31 am
He's right about some things. The State exams are a joke, at least the one in IL is. Some of the M.A. and M.Ed. programs are not very rigorous, and particpans complain when they are. Classroom teachers, however intelligent - and many are - disdain (strong word, but only slightly exaggeraed), research. "Practical" is a favorite compliment for workshops and courses.
2. cwinton - October 22, 2009 at 10:23 am
Remember the old saw: those who can do, those who can't teach, and those who can't teach, teach teachers? Education programs have been a bit of a joke at every institution I've been associated with, characterized by inflated student GPAs, irrelevance, redundancy, and instructors with little or no comprehension of what is required for a teacher to perform well in today's public school classroom. Heaven forbid there be any expectation that students pursue actual disciplinary content. I once had a dean of education admit to me that if a student could schedule the courses, the lack of expectation would allow completion of their masters program in one summer term. It was a bit of a shock that this did not seem to embarrass him. During the period my wife was pursuing graduate work in education, I was repeatedly amused, and she was disgusted, by how little effort many of the supposedly advanced coures she took required. And then of course, there are the recertification "courses" blatently promoted as vacation opportunities. Putting more money into education programs would be throwing good money after bad without sweeping reform of both personnel and structure. Too often "research based" is simply a code word for inflicting yet another ill planned educational fad on the teachers in the field. I think the evidence of the past 50 years pretty conclusively demonstrates how little good the plethora of "research based" initiatives in K-12 education have accomplished. The Secretary is correct that sweeping changes are needed, but I'm not sure the right audience is a Teachers College that has been part of the problem.
3. chandlermedlib - October 22, 2009 at 08:17 pm
cwinton, which institutions have you been associated with and what is your field?
4. joekling - October 27, 2009 at 07:28 am
Graduate school/professional education is not the issue, it is just the closest target. Our education system suffers from the fact that it is a patchwork, archaic structure of funding, governance, and delivery. We in the United States have a 19th century education system (agricultural year, common branches k-6 certification, local governance and funding, unspecialized administration, rigid local district attendance rules in large cities) charged with educating children for the 21st century. Even if every criticism of Schools of Education were completely accurate, the the problems Mr. Duncan is charged with addressing do not lie with the Schools of Education. Mr. Duncan should talk about the real and difficult issues of American schooling before taking the easy road of attacking Schools of Education.