In the stories of exorbitant costs and incompetence, teacher tenure laws have achieved mythic proportions. Judge Rolf Treu’s tentative decision in Vergara v. California may be the death knell for teacher tenure. But what will change as a result? A look to the past reveals that teacher tenure never really protected teachers and nor was it supposed to. Using history as a lens, this commentary explores the origination of tenure policies and the debates that surrounded them. This commentary argues that embedded in the tenure debates is a much larger problem that should concern us all.
In this brief reflection I seek to propose an alternative way of thinking about international rankings for universities, decoupling them from the logic of the market and instead linking them to the university’s mission as a space concerned with educating the public and producing knowledge for the common good. For this purpose, I draw from the example of the Universidad de Buenos Aires.
New teacher evaluation systems are being designed, implemented and piloted in many states. The goal of these new systems is to provide more accurate and objective information on teacher performance than current systems do. Ideally, these new systems provide information for accountability purposes but also for helping teachers improve their performance. Achieving these goals is not likely unless we change our approach to designing such systems from a political process and adopt an engineering perspective. Taking an engineering design approach can lead to solid designs for teacher evaluation systems, provide opportunities for improvement through monitoring and feedback, and create accountability for the design process because the information on teacher performance these systems do provide can be evaluated against the goals and intended uses that were specified.
Policy makers have recently proposed to evaluate teacher preparation programs in order to hold them accountable for the quality of the teachers they prepare. Although definitions of teacher quality vary depending on the stakeholder’s perspective, there is a growing consensus among policy makers that high quality teaching should have a positive impact on student achievement, but other factors matter as well. This article argues that teacher preparation programs are only one of several critical factors that contribute to teacher quality. Because programs must conform to state accreditation mandates and must also cooperate with surrounding school districts to provide high quality field placement settings, accountability for teacher quality should be shared by the universities, the state board of education and the schools. To effectively strengthen teacher quality, all institutions involved must develop a shared vision of high quality teaching and work collaboratively to achieve that goal.
Despite the relative prevalence of teacher education positions in university Education departments, relatively few doctoral programs prepare graduate students for teacher education work, specifically. As a result, new teacher educators often expend significant energy ‘on the job’ learning how to do the complex work involved in educating teachers. Increasingly, the creation of teacher-education focused doctoral programs has been held up as a promising approach for helping to regenerate teacher education. This commentary aims to share some of that promise, while also highlighting various factors that make creating and sustaining such programs so challenging.
Online teacher education coursework provides many advantages; however, online coursework has limitations for certain courses, mainly pertaining to safe selection, use, and disposal of chemicals. For example, science methods and science methods-like courses that teach inquiry methods require the use of chemicals for middle and secondary certification levels. One limitation, the development of understanding of safe and ethical practice and disposal of chemicals during inquiry instruction crosses into the grey area of nonfeasance or misfeasance, if chemicals are omitted. Avoiding the use and discussion of safe and ethical practice for any reason, while lawful, is an inappropriate omission that may place a university and university instructors in legal risk. Further, K-12 schools that hire certified teachers fresh out of a certification program expect a certain level of understanding of professional standards which are consistent with state and national standards and guidelines. The question, How might instructors of online science methods courses implement safe and ethical practice using chemicals when many students connect asynchronously, or via videoconferencing software from remote locations, is a troubling question.
The purpose of this commentary is to argue that a better way of addressing the centuries old criticisms about the ivory toweresque model is to stop complaining and engage with knowledge mobilization strategies (KM). Scholars engaging in knowledge mobilization seek to understand and increase the impact and usability of research by means of multi-dimensional, interactive strategies that target a wide range of stakeholders as an approach to meet the ethical obligation scholars have to ensuring the research produced in education is more accessible and ultimately impactful. We recognize, as well, the evolving tensions that this process will likely evoke in the quest to improving scholarly impact by making research more accessible and usable for the public.
In this commentary I argue that racism in sporting organizations and others is not only institutionalized, but has become the new normal that is now upheld through the newest anti affirmative action legislation.
Dr. Maxine Greene, distinguished philosopher, scholar, and professor emerita at Teachers College, Columbia University, passed away recently on May 29, 2014 at the age of 96. As a self-proclaimed existentialist, Greene served as an advocate for aesthetic education in American public schools for well more than half a century and remained committed to expanding creativity among children by encouraging them to imagine possibilities both within and beyond the classroom.
Powerful new historical scholarship documents the many connections between American higher education and the institution of slavery. This commentary argues that this new historical knowledge should be brought to bear on discussions of contemporary inequality and should prompt a reexamination of how schooling and labor and wage structures interact today.
“Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts.” –Albert Einstein
Methodological problems have plagued international test-score comparisons from the time they began 50 years ago. Since then the number and type of countries and other jurisdictions participating in the comparisons have increased, as have the methodological problems. At the same time, the results of the international comparisons have had an increasing impact on education policies throughout the world, despite the fact that the policy implications drawn from the comparisons are based on seriously flawed data. The commentary describes the intractable problems inherent in making valid comparisons of student achievement across countries and recommends an approach to reformulating the research.
The 2011 results of the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) and the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) propelled some scholars to call for new educational reforms to improve U.S. students’ score rankings. However, few seem to have noticed that U.S. students indeed ranked first on one measure: Sleepiness. U.S. students were reported to have the highest percentage of sleepiness in classrooms among all participating countries in TIMSS and PIRLS. Surprisingly, the prevalent sleep deprivation in U.S. students has largely been overlooked by educational researchers and policy makers. Drawing upon relevant literature, I argue that heavy media use may be one of the main reasons for sleepiness and, in turn, poor academic performance. Therefore, perhaps the top priority for improving U.S. students’ academic performance is not new educational reforms, but awareness of and interventions to counter the detrimental impact of heavy media use on sleep. After all, schools, however reformed, if occupied by sleepy students, are not likely to be effective.
Inside the Academy
, an online educational historiography, models the innovative use of technology to transmit educational research beyond academia. This is done by chronicling the personal and professional journeys of highly esteemed educational researchers and scholars through video interviews. In this study, researchers conducted an in-depth qualitative analysis of twelve honorees’ interview data. Analyses revealed that Inside the Academy has the potential to function as an accessible, relevant, research dissemination platform by providing policymakers, practitioners, pre-service teachers, graduate students, and others increased access to open source information and expert knowledge about foundational and contemporary educational philosophies, salient policy issues, and research-based practices of utmost prevalence in America’s public school system, and beyond.
Returning to David Berliner’s (2006) Our Impoverished View of Educational Research, this commentary reflects on what the author conceptualizes as an impoverished view of teacher education. Drawing on his experience working in teacher education and contextualized in Taubman’s (2000, 2009) analysis of educational audit culture, the author concludes that in the context of corporate reform discourses, teacher educators must reflect on the role of teacher education programs in the face of mounting threats to public education. Teacher education programs should serve as sites through which seemingly common sense discourses about education must be problematized. Further, both teacher educators and their students must critically reflect on their own assumptions and positionalities in order to clarify their values, which may not coincide with the values expressed in hegemonic education discourses.
Teaching is an inherently moral endeavor with moral purpose, and it takes place in classrooms inhabited by teachers who choose to be there for moral reasons. However, most teacher candidates do not come to their teacher education programs with a well-developed understanding of the moral work of teaching, and most leave without any concerted effort to develop that understanding. This article discusses the concerns that arise from this lack of attention to the moral work of teaching in teacher education, and it identifies hopeful approaches to helping teacher candidates find moral meaning and value in their future lives as teachers.
On March 23, Teachers College Record published a commentary by Deborah Schussler and Lisa Johnson of the National Council on Teacher Quality's classroom management report. The following is NCTQ's response to the commentary.
This commentary advocates for the promotion of economic literacy to help foster an active and engaged democratic citizenry.
In this era of big data analysis, there is a push to understand education on a large-scale, yet existing datasets provide only a blurry picture of students and schools. This commentary argues that there is a need to develop twenty-first century tools that can fully capture the nuanced population that constitutes the educational landscape of the United States.
In this commentary, we suggest that the contemporary publish-or-perish academic culture stands to negatively impact pre-tenure professors—particularly professors at R1 institutions. Indeed, we believe that the present overemphasis on publication, and its attending de-emphasis on teaching quality and meaningful service, provides rich soil for the cultivation of intellectual dereliction. To this end, we assert that the development of “intellectual virtue” ought to be a primary aim of doctoral and pre-tenure mentorship. Such virtues include intellectual honesty, conscientiousness, creativity, and open-mindedness. We conclude the piece with some remarks on cultivating intellectual virtue in the academy.
A recent National Council on Teacher Quality (NCTQ) report attempts to evaluate how well teacher education programs prepare graduates to manage classrooms effectively. Although the authors of the report attempt to use an empirically supported framework, what they label the “Big Five,” to systematically study a sample of teacher preparation programs, their framework and their study suffer from egregious assumptions and oversimplification. This commentary considers both the premise and the strategies of the NCTQ report and suggests our own “Big Five” in terms of misguided assumptions: relational irrelevance, dismissing context, distinguishing written versus enacted curriculum, focusing on “what” versus “how,” and ignoring systematic structures.
A dialogue between a proponent and opponent of Evidence Based Education Policy. Each position is stated forcefully and each reader must decide who has the best of the argument.
The Seventh Circuit ruled that university student inspectors did not violate a student's constitutional rights when they conducted a routine inspection of his dorm room and found marijuana. No warrant is required for routine health and safety inspections, the Seventh Circuit ruled.
Implementation is a challenging phase of education reform. In many locales, the rush is on to quickly implement the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). In some districts, textbooks and curriculum materials were delivered only days before school began. Many offered only minimal professional development to help teachers understand what kind of student learning the new standards aim for, and to develop new forms of instruction to support that learning. Despite these circumstances, teachers were still expected to teach the CCSS, and get students ready for new, more demanding assessments coming soon. In too many cases, there is little appreciation that the final, decisive implementation step is teachers planning, trying out, and revising new lessons. Week by week, in small incremental steps, change comes. Often progress is uneven, slower than anticipated, and runs afoul of “hurry-up” pressures that kill reforms before they are ever fully implemented. Evidence is mounting that incremental improvement is the best way to get lasting results –– in medicine, teaching, and industry. Even with robust support for incremental progress, it will take years of collaboration by teachers and administrators for the full benefits of CCSS to be realized. Red flags are up.
There has never been more federal and state support for school climate reform efforts in America. Paradoxically, most practitioners are not sure what school climate improvement means on day-to-day basis. This commentary details three factors that contribute to school climate reform being more of an idealized goal than an actual school improvement practice today: (i) confusion about what constitutes an effective school climate improvement process in general; (ii) confusion about how school climate reform is similar and/or different from PBIS; and, (iii) educational policies and accountability systems that actually discourage principals and superintendents from actively supporting school climate improvement efforts.
This commentary examines the neural bases of reading development, combining different scientific disciplines and making the case for educational neuroscience as a promising new field. It demonstrates how atypical reading impairment (Dyslexia) is a ‘model’ learning disability for bridging the gap between neuroscience and education. Next, it describes how experimental approaches in developmental cognitive neuroscience are applicable to educational neuroscience. Lastly, ideas for future research in educational neuroscience that have implications for the classroom are delineated.