Teach for America vs. National Board Certification

If pressed to name my ultimate professional passion and goal—the thing I was put on earth to do—it might be something like “elevate the ideas and voices of excellent teachers.” Like many people in America, I think we can do a vastly better job of educating all our kids, across the socio-economic spectrum. We’re not going to get far with that goal until we upgrade our teaching force, however—skilled and dedicated boots on the ground.

Last week, I wrote about the experience of snooping through some internal TFA listserv messages about Linda Darling-Hammond and her prospective role in the Obama administration. That conversation was far more intelligent and even-handed than most education writers’ recent TFA-Defense pieces, like this little beauty, wherein Richard Whitmire claims that TFA corps members single-handedly thwarted the Darling-Hammond Secretarial bid, from their current "high-powered" positions.

It is possible to respect and admire both the Teach for America premise and TFA teachers and alums, without believing that TFA teachers somehow have special, magical insights into how to “fix” American schools, whatever that means. Whitmire asserts that there are now 14,400 TFA alums out there making a difference, changing the world, wielding the power and so on—all on the basis of their brief, but well-documented sojourns as barely trained educational missionaries in their own land.

Here’s another way to consider this. There are currently about 74,000 National Board Certified Teachers (NBCTs) in the United States. Their practice has been rigorously and scientifically vetted, with most of them having to go through two or more annual rounds of submitting valid evidence of standards-based teaching and high-level student learning. They have at least four years of experience by the time they’re selected—but most of them have a great deal more. NBCTs voluntarily spend 200-400 hours meticulously developing a portfolio of their work over time, to be adjudicated by assessors who don’t know them, and to whom they cannot make excuses. And then they sit for six on-demand content exams. They work in all kinds of schools, in every state in the union, facing a broad range of circumstances, problems and student needs.

National Board Certification may not be perfect, but it’s as good and reliable a benchmark as exists, right now, for identifying strong and efficacious teaching. Whether they certify or not, National Board candidates overwhelmingly say the process reveals new insights into effective practice. And—this is the foundation for my argument—nobody would pursue National Board Certification unless they were absolutely committed to a long-term career in teaching and education reform.

So—why aren’t we asking National Board Certified Teachers what they think about key policy issues, or who should be Secretary of Education? Shouldn’t we be asking for input from a pool of solid practitioners, who have demonstrated a personal willingness to be publicly accountable? What kind of pundit honors the views of two-year field medics over those of veteran physicians with long records of success and innovative practice? It’s a good question.

It might have something to do with the fact that teaching is a huge occupational cluster that has not developed a compelling national vision of its own professionalism. This is in distinct contrast to teachers’ professional behaviors and responsibilities in other, high-achieving nations. The National Board standards were supposed to help with that, but the general public—and a fair number of high-profile researchers, in fact—don’t understand the conceptual framework, intellectual tools or process of national certification for teachers.

Full disclosure: I worked with nine other NBCTs in developing a comprehensive policy brief analyzing current research on National Board Certification—and we were dismayed by the lack of impact NBCTs have had on policy creation, and how quick analysts were to attach national teacher certification to teacher union issues, once again lumping all three million teachers into the category of skilled technical workers rather than creative professionals. Whitmire positions TFA teachers as “not beholden to the system”—as if all other teachers were, in fact, part of an amorphous, not-well-hidden agreement to accept the status quo.

Then there is the unattractive fact that, according to Dan Lortie in the new edition of his classic Schoolteacher,

 "Teaching has attracted many persons who have undergone the uncertainties and deprivations of lower- and working-class life. It has provided a significant step up the social class ladder for many Americans."

It would be unbecoming for academics, policy-creators and opinion leaders to say, hey—why would we listen to low-rent scholars who went to fourth-tier state universities and don’t aspire to anything more prestigious than teaching? So they don’t. Instead, they suggest that it makes sense to endorse the winners of a best-and-brightest competition to obtain a two-year starter job in education. Many TFA recruits become competent, even highly capable, teachers. I want to hear what they have to say about educational change. But theirs is a limited perspective.

Listening to long-term exemplary teachers would represent a fundamental shift in the way we think about transforming American schools. Power to the teachers, right on.

And—Happy New Year.

Comments

[Josie]

Thanks for the post Nancy. Legends in their own minds capable of curing what ails schools in a single bound.

A lot of earnest well-meaning kids out to improve the world but not (yet)education experts. I would hate to see them used in the war against the actual reform of public education.

Interesting observation on the class issue too.

[Melissa B.]

I think I've complained about this before, but I think education needs to get rid of all the "crap"-ie, non-essential management (you could fire almost everyone in our central administration,save a bundle, and not miss them at all)-before we can focus on many of the problems at hand. Have a Happy 2009!

[John D]

I don't think it's an either or proposition. We need to listen to beginning teachers and experienced teachers. And, like it or not, we need to listen to recruits from the top third of college graduates to understand why we are unable to attract more of them to the teaching profession. We are fond of making international comparisons, but we don't want to address the fact that in countries where teaching is more respected, they draw from the pool of top college grads.

It's also worth noting that TFA has been around for 18 years now, and about a third of their alumni are teaching. That means that many of their teacher alumni are experienced teacherds, and some probably are also National Board Certified.

Maybe the real issue is that the National Board needs to do a better job of explaining to the media how NBCTs lead to better student outcomes?

[Nancy Flanagan]

Thanks to everyone for your comments. John, I agree with everything you wrote. The argument here has to do with media attraction to, even fawning over, a relatively small group of temporary teachers, assigning them influence and even wisdom--while ignoring the informed perspectives of accomplished veteran teachers.

One of the best teachers I know started as a TFA corps member in Houston, and is now teaching reading in my rural/sub-suburban school. She no longer sees herself as "TFA" although she did her two-year stint, because she is now a mainstream career teacher. She had zero interest in being a teacher until she actually tried it, and freely admits her tenure in Houston was pretty much disastrous. She got an advanced degree in childhood literacy, something she considered "beneath" her potential as a newly minted B.A.. She is the kind of person I would like to see as a result of lateral-entry programs like TFA.

I completely concur that NBPTS has done almost nothing to promote genuine leadership opportunities for its "corps members." One of NBPTS' original missions was to use the expertise of NBCTs to effect educational reform. It's much harder to do that than create standards or administer an assessment. In our report, we urged NBCTs not to wait for NBPTS to "elevate" their voices, but to reach for leadership opportunities themselves.

Including blogging, of course. If the media doesn't come to you--create your own outlet.

Thanks everyone.

[Melissa B.]

BTW, I've got 2 other things on my mind today. First off, don't forget Sx3 tomorrow...it's a stitch! And I've got a pretty good chance of snagging a superior blog award...thanking you in advance for your support!

[julie]

How many TFAs are NBPTS cert.? I bet you would be pleasantly surprised. We work our tails off as well.

I think the 2 groups overlap more than you might think. We all are one in the same. I know there are others that need a swift kick. I do not think it is the hardworking, humble TFAs that I know. Let's just celebrate OBAMA. Can you imagine otherwise?

[Nancy Flanagan]

Hi Julie. Thanks for commenting. If you read carefully through what I wrote (both the blog posts and the comments), it should be clear that I believe TFA and other "Fellows" program teachers are far less unified in their beliefs than Richard Whitmire indicates. Many of them, after working in actual schools, become articulate and persuasive advocates for productive change.

I admire and encourage all young teachers who think deeply and write about their practice and what they learn, working in challenging schools. And I'm sure that there are a number of TFA corps members who have achieved National Board Certification--they would certainly be great candidates.

My point was that there are demonstrably excellent teachers who are committed to teaching and education over the long haul--and their voices are not often heard. We cannot build an effective teaching force unless we bring the best possible teaching candidates into the profession, and keep them in the classroom long enough to develop working teams. It is the voices of the experts we should be listening to first.

[J.M. Holland]

"And—this is the foundation for my argument—nobody would pursue National Board Certification unless they were absolutely committed to a long-term career in teaching and education reform."

Nancy, statement really struck a chord for me. If becoming NBC teacher meant having a loud voice in policy then TFA's might consider staying. Well intentioned but inexperienced TFAers have a very loud voice. It is a joy to be young and expert. If your credibility is derived from being smart enough not to teach forever then you get policies that don't have the longevity of a career teacher that might actually work. Personally I think that TFA should be a five year commitment like the one in Miami for early childhood teachers.
http://www.wkkf.org/default.aspx?tabid=55&CID=3&ProjCID=168&ProjID=128&NID=28&LanguageID=0

[Nancy Flanagan]

Exactly, John.

When do we start building the professional, expert teaching force we need to make long-term fixes? I'm all for recruiting "best and brightest" types, as long as they're willing to commit to education (including direct contact with the classroom) for a period of time.

I am NOT endorsing the 30-year teaching career--which is also part of the problem with the way we see teaching. I am saying that the classroom is where change really happens, and when we put layers between actually teaching and policy-making, it's a disservice.

Thanks for stopping by.