Teacher preparation

by desertjim

Last week I asked what the priorities should be for federal aid to education. The first priority that came out of that discussion was the need to upgrade the teaching profession and improve teacher training. This gives me a new question for this week. Cool - this is just like my favorite kind of inquiry driven science class.

The various paths to the classroom all seem to produce not only excellent but also average and sub-par teachers. How are we to decide which method is best? A recent article (cited in the Carnival of Education this week) speaks very disparagingly of the short-term alternative certification route offered by Teach for America. Yet a June 25, 2008 article in the Chicago Tribune (Chicago schools make gains in hiring better grade of teachers) includes the hiring of 1,200 alternatively certified teachers as one factor in improving teacher quality.

That same Tribune article says that teacher quality in Chicago Public Schools is improving. This improvement was measured by checking scores on the ACT, the Illinois Basic Skills Test and by performance in college. (I know - there needs to be another discussion about whether those criteria actually tell us anything about teacher quality - maybe next week.)

What is the best way to increase the quality of teachers in the public schools? Are teachers best prepared by becoming subject matter experts first and then taking courses in pedagogy? Should the philosophy of education or courses on classroom management be stressed? Are the relatively short alternative certification programs a better way to develop excellent teachers than the “normal” route taught in what used to be called Normal schools?

So, a new question for our readers - what is the best way to improve teacher quality?

Labels: