Despite the unified Democratic Party and
teachers' union support for the re-election of President Barack Obama, a philosophical divide over how to
strengthen teaching quality in the United States remains.
Will
teaching and learning be improved through increased regulation, mandated
standards, standardized testing of students, and test-based teacher evaluation,
as the administration favors, or through more-rigorous selection, development,
quality control, and peer oversight of teachers, as favored by the unions?
What are the consequences of each approach for
what and how teachers teach and students learn?
A highly visible bipartisan political coalition
reached consensus, resulting initially in the No Child Left Behind Act and
subsequently in a reform agenda that consists of test-based teacher evaluation
and charter schools. With support from
the Bill & Melinda Gates and Eli and Edythe Broad foundations, this
agenda, which was initiated by the George W. Bush administration's NCLB testing
requirements, was strengthened by the Obama administration's Race to the Top,
among other initiatives.
Teachers'
unions and other education groups had little influence. The
non educator-driven reform movement has cast considerable doubt on teachers'
unions and teachers themselves.
Teachers' unions, on the other hand, argue that
the countries that currently lead the world in educational achievement do not
depend solely on standardized tests and their use to evaluate students and
teachers. The unions believe that
teachers should be held accountable for the performance of their students. The
controversy is over the mechanism of accountability and its
consequences.
In
many ways, the story began in Virginia, a state with a history of test-based
accountability that predates NCLB. In 1995, Virginia developed its Standards of
Learning, or SOL, which outlined academic expectations for K-12 students in the
major subject areas. The state then developed standardized
assessments aligned with the SOL, making it clear to educators and parents that
everyone—students, principals, and teachers—would be held accountable for their
performance. Within a very few years, classroom instruction shifted to ensure
optimal results on the SOL examinations. Teachers focused on what was to be
tested, spending less and less time on teaching real-world activities such as
writing, science experiments, reading for pleasure, and oral presentations.
Teachers,
and their unions, generally prefer accountability systems that recognize that
the best teaching prepares students for real-world performance—reading for knowledge
and understanding, mathematics for analyzing and problem-solving, history for
interpreting and citizenship, science for knowledge and experimentation, art
and music for personal expression and enjoyment, and writing for advocating and
communicating. Teachers prefer an accountability system that
does not limit and distort instruction, but that supports the development of
intellectual and practical skills and preparation for performance on real-world
tasks.
Key
to this form of professional accountability is ensuring that only caring,
competent, and qualified teachers are in the classroom. This is achieved by
demanding preparation programs, rigorous licensing processes, careful
induction, continuous professional development, meaningful supervision, and the
removal of incompetent personnel.
Both major teachers' unions have supported more
education and training for teachers. The National Education Association was
instrumental in founding the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher
Education, or NCATE, the accrediting agency for teacher preparation. Both
unions support upgrading teacher licensing and credentialing. The American
Federation of Teachers and the NEA were instrumental in creating the National
Board for Professional Teaching Standards, the private agency that offers
advanced certification.
Both
the AFT and the NEA now support programs in which labor and management
collaborate to improve or fire low-performing teachers. Both organizations
directly, and through their foundations, have supported many pilot projects,
commissions, and studies based on the idea that states should take steps to
strengthen professional accountability and engender confidence that those who
receive the title "teacher" merit public trust.
The
NEA, the AFT, NCATE, the NBPTS, and other organizations that share the vision
of teaching as a profession, however, have achieved only partial success. They
have created the mechanisms for professional accountability and quality
control, but have failed to advocate for and secure their universal
application. Other professions, such as law, medicine, physical therapy, and
psychotherapy, have advocated and secured nearly full control over preparation
and credentialing and, as a result, have engendered public confidence in the
capacity and quality of their practitioners.
The
NEA and the AFT have failed to use their advocacy, collective bargaining,
political and financial strength to advance their ideas about professional
accountability. Moreover, there is often a major disjuncture between the ideas
espoused by these national organizations and the actions taken by their
respective state and local organizations. Too often, the ideas advanced at the
national level fail in the maelstrom of state and local politics, where
long-term professional advancement is sacrificed for more immediate salary, job
security, retirement, and other benefits.
Because
both unions and their state and local affiliates have failed to advance
professional accountability as a universal expectation with state legislators,
a vacuum of quality control exists. And too many students fail.
There is an insufficient basis for public trust in teachers as a group,
particularly given the many problem-plagued urban and rural districts where
student achievement remains distressingly low. Into this breach, legislators
and others turn to test-based accountability—a seemingly objective and low-cost
means to ensure that some learning is occurring.
“Teachers’ unions are at a crossroads in their
history. Would a merger of the NEA and the AFT strengthen the profession?”
Teachers' unions are at a crossroads in their
history. Would a merger of the NEA and the AFT strengthen the profession? At
the state level, AFT and NEA mergers already constitute almost a million
teachers in Florida, Minnesota, Montana, and New York. Locals have merged in
San Antonio and Austin, Texas; Los Angeles; San Francisco; and Wichita, Kan.
NEA delegates rejected a complete merger with the
AFT a decade ago, despite the support of the national leadership of both
unions. Is the current assault on these organizations sufficiently threatening
to compel greater solidarity? The times have changed, and a substantial number
of teacher-organization leaders sense their vulnerability.
While
the Republican Party has generally favored the test-based reforms, there is a
split within the Democratic Party. It is well-known in Washington that the two
unions have not been enchanted with some of the education policies of the Obama
administration and its Department of Education.
Even prior to the 2012 election, however, there
were signs of a rapprochement between the administration and the unions. The
new district-focused Race to the Top program requires union sign-off on
proposals. The Education Department sponsored two labor-management conferences
that highlighted school systems in which effective collaboration was occurring
between districts and unions.
As a
concession to the unions, the department will seek to increase the influence of
"teacher voice" by involving educators in the shaping of national
policy. And the administration's proposed 2013 federal budget included $5
billion for a program labeled RESPECT—Recognizing,
Education, Success, Professional Excellence, and Collaborative Teaching.
Some thought these actions by the Obama
administration were a sop to allies in an election year. Others thought they
reflected the wisdom of experience. Perhaps
the lessons learned were that durable education reform, a true profession of
teaching, and real student learning will be achieved only with greater
cooperation with teachers and the organizations which represent them.
No comments:
Post a Comment