Budget, curriculum, class size — none has a greater effect on a student than her teacher. Given this, politicians might be expected to do all in their power to ensure that America’s teachers are excellent. For decades, they have done the opposite. The trouble begins long before a teacher enters the classroom. In Singapore, which recently came second in an international ranking of 15-year-olds’ skill in maths (America was 31st), the teacher-training programme accepts only students in the top 30 percent of their academic cohort. In America, most teachers are mediocre students. Only 23 percent of new teachers are in the top third of college graduates.
.gif)
Union rules make it extremely hard to fire teachers who turn out to be bad at their jobs. Younger teachers are usually the first to be given pink slips, even though seniority does not necessarily ensure quality. In 2009 Indiana and Florida fired young staff who had been nominated ‘teachers of the year’.
But the debate over bad teachers ignores an equally big problem: there has been little effort to identify good ones, let alone reward them. A survey by the New Teacher Project (NTP), a non-profit organisation, found that school districts labelled more than 99 percent of their teachers “satisfactory”.
However America is slowly changing its way of recruiting, training and rewarding teachers. Last year 12 percent of seniors at Ivy League colleges applied to Teach for America, which sends graduates to teach at tough schools for two years. NTP has a prestigious Fellows programme that recruits and certifies new teachers. The Academy of Urban School Leadership in Chicago trains teachers in a programme modelled after a medical residency — part traditional coursework, part training in a classroom.
Most difficult, however, is finding ways to evaluate teachers, rewarding the good and dismissing the bad. In 2009 Arne Duncan, Barack Obama’s education secretary, outlined his reforms in a speech to the National Education Association (NEA), America’s biggest union. “When inflexible seniority and rigid tenure rules that we designed put adults ahead of children,” Duncan insisted, “then we are not only putting kids at risk, we’re also putting the entire education system at risk.” Some members of the audience booed.
Duncan’s guidelines for Race to the Top, a $4.3 billion (Rs.19,350 crore) programme paid for with stimulus money, include rewards for states that evaluate teachers in new ways. As a result, some states have removed their ban on using test scores to judge teachers. Others have gone much further. Tennessee, which won a grant, now requires districts to create new evaluation systems, with at least half of the score based on students’ progress. In Colorado, Delaware and Rhode Island, teachers rated “ineffective” for two consecutive years can be sacked.
Despite this brewing battle, America has at least one model of peaceful change. In 2009 Hillsborough County, Florida, won a grant from the Gates Foundation to transform its way of evaluating, developing and rewarding teachers. Notably, the district is working productively with its union. “I want to be fair to my employees,” explains Mary Ellen Elia, Hillsborough’s superintendent. “I also want to have only good teachers in my classrooms.” Teachers will be judged on their pupils’ progress, as well as evaluations by a principal and peer. Teachers with high ratings, based on three years of data, will get higher salaries. Bad teachers will see their salaries shrink. A struggling teacher will receive further training. If she continues to be ineffective, Elia will act to remove her.
The biggest change may come with reauthorisation of the Elementary and Secondary Education (ESEA) Bill. Its most recent incarnation, No Child Left Behind, required that all teachers be “highly qualified”, state-certified and competent in the subjects they teach. Messrs Duncan and Obama want to value effective teachers, not “qualified” ones. Under their plan for ESEA, states will have to improve their evaluation systems. Grants will go to states and districts that develop innovative ways to train and/or reward good teachers.
Tough times for for-profits
Enrolment at institutions operated by one of the largest for-profit providers of higher education in the US has fallen by 42 percent over the past quarter. The Apollo Group, which also owns BPP University College in the UK, predicted that the slump was the start of a steep decline in enrolment over the next year.
It is a turbulent time for for-profit providers of education, following recent congressional hearings into allegations of sharp practices by the industry. The hearings were sparked by an investigation into recruitment tactics at Apollo’s flagship University of Phoenix, conducted by National Public Radio and ProPublica, a non-profit public interest news group.
Democrat Congressman Elijah E. Cummings described the findings of that investigation “disheartening at best and infuriating at worst”. A congressional inquiry then looked at 15 for-profit institutions, including the University of Phoenix. “Mystery shoppers” participating in the congressional probe reported that “deceptive or otherwise questionable statements” were given by every institution visited, on topics including employment prospects, graduation rates and costs.
In a briefing to investors, Gregory Cappelli, co-chief executive officer of Apollo Group, did not address the controversy directly but admitted that it was a “volatile time” for the education sector as a whole. He noted that there had been “many questions about the sector and its growth prospects and our position within the sector”. The fall in enrolment reflects a “period of transition” for Apollo, he added, citing changes in its enrolment processes, including the elimination of any link between enrolment and the evaluation or remuneration of staff.
The drop in enrolment appears to have affected Apollo’s financial position. The company reported a first-quarter income of $235 million (Rs.1,057 crore), a drop of 2 percent on the preceding year. The figures reflect a trend among US for-profit providers. Strayer Education has seen its new student enrolment drop by 20 percent, while DeVry University has reported a 5 percent fall in enrolment.
(Excerpted and adapted from The Economist & Times Higher Education)